Future SGOTMs

We need to do some planning for future SGOTMs. The most important question is whether we continue to support all three Civ3 versions. At one extreme we can continue as we are. At the other we could focus on a single version - Conquests would be the logical one to use.

Here are the issues I see:

In favour of reducing the number of versions:

- We are currently running two competitions for C3C and Classic. Several times, for one reason or another, the Classic competition has subdivided into two - vanilla and PtW. This increasingly means we are seeing just two teams vying for an award, and those players are not exposed to competition against the others.

- With the arrival of Civ4 we can assume there will be a reduction in the number of players in this competition, particularly when we start a Civ4 SGOTM (note that's 'when', not 'if').

- The requirement to support vanilla for Mac players should reduce now that Civ3 Complete for Mac has hit the streets, at least in some parts of the world

- C3C offers a wider range of scenario design options, eg. with locked alliances/wars, and more civs to play. PtW and C3C both have extra victory options.

- Producing three different versions of the starting save increases the chances of something going wrong and being missed. Extreme variants can stress-test the differences between the versions as we have seen, and play testing them all thoroughly is not practical.

In favour of retaining multiple versions:

- Some players may not have another version, or may not want to play it.

- can't think of any others

So. I've added a poll to this thread and encourage you to tell us what you want. It's your competition

NOTE: The poll is multiple choice. Check all versions you want us to support. And please feel free to discuss this and any other points re the future direction of Civ3 SGOTM here.

I think it is best to keep it the way it is until everyone has the option to play

I don't own C3C (yet?), but the reasons AlanH gives are convincing. We should avoid splitting into too many sub-factions. Even if this means spending a little money on a software.

classical_hero said:

I think it is best to keep it the way it is until everyone has the option to play

Click to expand...

That may never happen if they choose not to buy it.

Is your position that, as long as at least one player doesn't have C3C, we have to keep the other versions going? That player could be in a team of one

I voted for C3C. In the past I have always played Vanilla because I felt it was important to support a version everyone could play. With the introduction of C3C for MAC, which I assume is as compatible as Vanilla has been, I think it makes the staff's work much simpler to go with that format. It also brings us all into a single competition which can be better compared and discussed.

C3C is not my favorite version as I think PTW plays better. However, the change to C3C makes the most sense to me from the standpoint of competition and support.

Looking forward to a Civ4 SGOTM!!

What the viking said.

I voted for
Btw, when the next SGOTM will start?

With the advent of CivIV, supporting 3 versions of CivIII (4 if you count the MAC version) seems unnecessarily cumbersome. leif erikson made what would have been a good point, that there would still have to be a separate class for MAC users, but if C3C is now available for the MAC, there wouldn't even be a reason for WIN/MAC divisions.

By all accounts, CivIV sales have been excellent, which probably means that C3C (and combined versions) will be available cheaply. (As an example, a local store has about a dozen copies of CivII available for $5 each).

All of which adds up to my support for having only one class of CivIII games in the future.

I voted C3C + Vanilla for the universality, but I personnally would only play C3C.

As for the direction this will be taking, if you wanted input on game types, mods, variants, etc., I believe there are still many avenues that are fresh and open for future games. I believe one factor of the SGOTM success is the variants, which are as odd as they come. Mixing classic (AW, here in #9) to relatively new (SS loss, here again) ones makes for appreciable out-of-the-box mind-boggling head scratching.

If we go for a universal C3C game, IMO, there could be an 'added' challenge for some teams up to it, not unlike in the first SGOTM's where you could choose a variant (XCC, AW) to increase difficulty. This would make for 2 competitions again, but no respectable team that knows it should be in one category would pick the other, and it would probably open the laurels competition to every team. It could also be a 'taunting' thing: us idiots could choose an extra variant (defiant, silent, XCC, XC/landmassC, AAC, you name it) and dare Wacken to follow in (just an example here).

Whatever happens, know that few idiots can resist the virility of the H and that you will most surely see us again, and again ...

Can't see why C3C wouldn't be enough since Mac issue is solved.
SGOTM players, from what I've seen seem to be quite dedicated folk.
Not much to ask that everybody gets a C3C, who hasn't got it yet.

I went for only, for most of the -only arguments outlined above.

I voted since some might not have conquests. PTW should be eliminated since it's slightly different than vanilla and not quite or we could just do

My vote goes to C3C for reasons already mentioned by previous posters, and to make it easier for the staff to organize this competition.

I hope that enough players will keep participating in a civ3 SGOTM competition in the future so that organising this competion is worthwhile for the staff anyway.

My current machine will not run C3C, so I am forced to vote PTW/Vanilla, but I think that C3C is the best solution.

In time (two SGOTMs ?) this should take care of itself.

Workaround

On the next SGOTM, state at the outset that PTW/Vanilla players may not be able to participate unless certain conditions are met. These conditions would be fairly clear cut; say, at least four Classic teams (2 PTW and 2 Vanilla) with at least 4 players per team.

Also, ask the Classic players what versions they can play, not what they want to play. Depending on the response, their choice may not be available.

Ask the Conquest players if they would be willing to play a Classic game if only a few players were needed. These would be used to complete a team, not create a team.

Two Scenarios

One
Assume six players (captian and five others) are needed per team. In the Classics are four teams: PTW1, PTW2, Van1 and Van2. There are 20 players, 12 PTW and 8 Vanilla. Two PTW players would need to be switched to Vanilla.

Two
Same team set up, but only 18 players; 10 PTW and 8 Vanilla. Two Conquest players, who agreed to help, would need to be switched to Vanilla.

Downside
Easy enough of an idea to state and explain, but adds more work to team selection.

I know, i have said it before, but this really is gonna be the last (s)gotm i am playing.

I voted for C3C only, mostly taking into account that the C3C competition has been drawing more teams and there's enough differences between PTW and Vanilla that the competition there is not as well defined, and mostly I suspect that the number of participants will drop making it difficult to have a good competition with all 3 versions available. Between the 3 versions I actually enjoy playing PTW the most, but to keep a viable competition, C3C would be the best choice to carry forward.

If everyone has the ability to play because Macs no have it, then we should only go for that option.

AlanH said:

That may never happen if they choose not to buy it.

Is your position that, as long as at least one player doesn't have C3C, we have to keep the other versions going? That player could be in a team of one

Click to expand...

I did say the option. So if they have the option to buy then we should only be playing that.

So far only 3 people out of the 33 voters didn't vote for C3C, and there's just one post indicating that one of those players *can't* run C3C.

So the odds are stacking in favour of a C3C-only competition in future (sorry CB - what's the problem with your PC?). If there are more players out there who would play a PtW or Vanilla SGOTM, and can't, or don't want to, play a C3C one, you need to make your requirements known.

classical_hero said:

I did say the option. So if they have the option to buy then we should only be playing that.

Click to expand...

Sorry, my first post indicated that the Mac players do now have that option, so I didn't read your reply as relating to them. Everyone has the option of playing C3C if (a) they can afford the software and (b) they have access to good enough hardware.

The issue is now whether those people who don't currently play C3C would obtain it, and/or have suitable equipment to play it, and/or want to play it.

Re. a C-IV-only SGOTM, I suspect there are many more players who don't currently have it, and/or can't play it because of equipment problems, and/or don't want to play it, because it is more different from Civ3 than the Civ3 variants are from each other. It'll also be PC-only for several more months.