GOTM Competitive Balance

Jastrow said:

Honestly, I dont remember for sure if I played one or two early on, but I dont think so....

Actually, I just went back and checked, and my very first GOTM was a win on Monarch, so no, I nerver qualified for adventurer. This was GOTM3, which I would point out was an incredibly easy monarch game... 175 wins from 290 submissions... I scored some 90K in a 1640AD domination victory, and did not make the top 50!

Click to expand...

lol that was my first GOTM as well, and I got creamed while playing the adventurer save

As far as my comfort level, I now consider myself a monarch player, because I fairly regularly win at Monarch, but have yet to win at Emperor(and only 1 win at Immortal), as long as I ignore my HOF emperor, immortal, and deity wins(kinda cheesy advanced start wins...)

I have only ever won 2 out of the 12 or so GOTMs I have entered. Therefore, you can conclude that I am either stupid, or getting beaten up every time I play is not a deterrent to entering.

I find just about every GOTM to be far too difficult for me, but that's OK.

jesusin said:

I would like all GOTM to be 1 or 2 levels about my level.
That way, I would always struggle and fail. Then I would compare my fruitless efforts to the bright strategies of the winners and learn a lot.

Imagine my happiness the day I would win a game... that would be sweet.

Click to expand...

'Fruitless' is a bit strong. But I echo this sentiment. I've played dozens of Civ3 GOTM games, and most of them are hazy memories. But the handful of games that were really difficult, I will never forget.

Well I'd say my "competetive" level is Prince, as I can pretty much (unless it's a horrid start) beat Noble, but I've only recently started playing Prince and have so far only fully won a single game. Played several where I started well, then got bogged down and horribly behind so threw those games out.

Just for grins, I downloaded the "adventurer" save for this month's GOTM with Mansa on Emperor difficulty and played around with a few map regens. My reaction was pretty much - as I saw the AI somehow build 6 cities in the time it took me to get my second.

So yes, I'd love to see perhaps another GOTM "division" or what-not for us lower level players.

Trynthlas said:

Well I'd say my "competetive" level is Prince, as I can pretty much (unless it's a horrid start) beat Noble, but I've only recently started playing Prince and have so far only fully won a single game. Played several where I started well, then got bogged down and horribly behind so threw those games out.

Just for grins, I downloaded the "adventurer" save for this month's GOTM with Mansa on Emperor difficulty and played around with a few map regens. My reaction was pretty much - as I saw the AI somehow build 6 cities in the time it took me to get my second.

So yes, I'd love to see perhaps another GOTM "division" or what-not for us lower level players.

Click to expand...

This might represent a large number of Civ players, or players new to Civ. They have to "wait" until they develop skills enough to take on the current GOTM difficulty levels with some hope of success. But playing GOTM might be the best way to develop those skills. Catch 22.

How many players new to Civ, who are "scared off" by current GOTM difficulty levels, lose interest in the game an go elsewhere, might become regular Civ'ers if they could partake of a "division II" GOTM at levels more appropriate to the newcomer?

dV

Well, my argument in favor of a "division II" for the GOTMs would be that there comes a point where the difficulty level is simply too far above one's playing ability that they simply won't learn anything from it. So from my perspective, I shouldn't even bother with this month's game, since in all likelihood (unless something very odd happens) I'll just be slaughtered.

I wouldn't say that it could prevent someone from being/becoming a regular player of the game or lose interest, because I imagine many many people will just enjoy playing SP games on their level by themselves. However, the (to newer or lower-level players) insane difficulty for the GOTMs as they stand now does indeed shut off that aspect of the Civ community to us because it becomes not just "too hard" (challenges are good) but simply unapproachable and an exercise in futility.

There are, of course, other avenues to learn and improve in order to get to the needed level to participate, such as browsing the many educational games posted around the forums, playing SGs at slightly lower difficulties with more experienced players, and so on. However, the GOTM playing field suffers, I think, due to the lack of an avenue for newer players to enter.

(ps - going to cross-post this on another thread in this forum since I think it is relevant to both topics)

Trynthlas,



You said:

"Just for grins, I downloaded the "adventurer" save for this month's GOTM with Mansa on Emperor difficulty and played around with a few map regens. My reaction was pretty much - as I saw the AI somehow build 6 cities in the time it took me to get my second."

Why? Did you wait to long to build your 2nd city? Did the AI overexpand and make itself vulnerable? Did you chose the wrong builds for that start in your capital? Did you miss-place your capital? Were you really far behind, or is that pace normal and recoverable? Etc...

How many of these questions can you accurately answer? My guess is from your posting, none of them.

Then you say,

"there comes a point where the difficulty level is simply too far above one's playing ability that they simply won't learn anything from it. So from my perspective, I shouldn't even bother with this month's game, since in all likelihood (unless something very odd happens) I'll just be slaughtered."

While that statement is true for private games you play, I dont beleive it is true in GOTM... The reason it is true in private games is that you cannot answer the example questions I poseted above (and many similar). If you could answer those, then you would indeed have learned alot from the game.

But, in the GOTM format, you can still learn. Lets say you download this game of the month, and play it for a bit... Even if you only played it until the same point, and decided that it was now hopeless... You can retire and submit the save, and then write a short spoiler on what you did. Compare that to the other spoilers being written (several of which will detail exactly what they built, which techs were researched what year and where each city was founded, etc...), and see what the differences are between them and you. When you do see difference that you dont understand, ask the person why he did something different then you did. Most people will be more than happy to explain, and you should be able to learn quite a bit from that.

Now, certainly, playing in one GOTM at immortal if you are a noble player is NOT going to teach you to beat immortal, but you might well learn, for example, what mistakes you made on your way to 3 cities (the first growth statge). If so, then the next game, you will do a lot better at that stage... YOu will then likely make other mistake in the next stage (first millitary action or economical consolidation), but comparing spoilers in that game, you will learn about that phase.

So, I would argue that, as long as you partake activily in the subsequent discussions, you can indeed learn something from playing games at any level.

Jastrow said:

But, in the GOTM format, you can still learn. Lets say you download this game of the month, and play it for a bit... Even if you only played it until the same point, and decided that it was now hopeless... You can retire and submit the save, and then write a short spoiler on what you did. Compare that to the other spoilers being written (several of which will detail exactly what they built, which techs were researched what year and where each city was founded, etc...), and see what the differences are between them and you. When you do see difference that you dont understand, ask the person why he did something different then you did. Most people will be more than happy to explain, and you should be able to learn quite a bit from that.

Now, certainly, playing in one GOTM at immortal if you are a noble player is NOT going to teach you to beat immortal, but you might well learn, for example, what mistakes you made on your way to 3 cities (the first growth statge). If so, then the next game, you will do a lot better at that stage... YOu will then likely make other mistake in the next stage (first millitary action or economical consolidation), but comparing spoilers in that game, you will learn about that phase.

So, I would argue that, as long as you partake activily in the subsequent discussions, you can indeed learn something from playing games at any level.

Click to expand...

No question that there is a path to learning in the current system. A first GOTM immortal loss, posted spoiler, and advice from JerichoHill led to my second GOTM being a monarch win at adventurer in my case, so I have lived that route.

But you have to be willing to take that initial pounding. And if my second game had also been a loss, and the next one, when would frustration have set in?

So we are not saying there is no entry path to GOTM for begining players currently, but whether there might be a fesible path that is more attractive (more fun, or less frustrating). Of course, if being expansive is not a goal of the GOTM, then some aspects of the discussion are moot. Is our goal instead to be protective? mischief: )

Also, remember that the tier system seeks to not only satisfy entry level players, but to meet the needs of the elite players as well (the value of three tiers).

dV

@Jastrow - Well, effectively I was playing the 'Contender' level (since a regen doesn't keep the extra unit and worker), so the game would be a regular vanilla Emperor level game.

I won't go into the 3 regens I tried out (one of which I quit due to being isolated) as to not stray too far off topic here, but instead I'll make my post short

I will take your advice for myself, being of the adventuresome type who has no issue with inflicting much pain and suffering on my poor ego due to getting smashed in a game , and play this month's game on Emperor (at contender, in fact, since I would agree with another post I read that starting with a worker is effectively cheating, rather than just a handicap) and see what I can learn. However, I think there are many players in the community who may not be as eager to jump into things as myself, and will avoid the GOTM competition as untouchable for their ability - so I still stand in support of a second (or second and third) "division" for the different difficulty levels.

Trynthlas,

Glad you decided to give it a go. Good luck, and I look forward to your first spoiler. I am confident you will learn something.

Just to be clear, I should state that my post should not be taken as an argument against tiers... I am rather neutral on that issue. My point was only that you can learn something at any level in GOTM format.

da_Vinci said:

No question that there is a path to learning in the current system. A first GOTM immortal loss, posted spoiler, and advice from JerichoHill led to my second GOTM being a monarch win at adventurer in my case, so I have lived that route.

But you have to be willing to take that initial pounding. And if my second game had also been a loss, and the next one, when would frustration have set in?

So we are not saying there is no entry path to GOTM for begining players currently, but whether there might be a fesible path that is more attractive (more fun, or less frustrating). Of course, if being expansive is not a goal of the GOTM, then some aspects of the discussion are moot. Is our goal instead to be protective? mischief: )

Also, remember that the tier system seeks to not only satisfy entry level players, but to meet the needs of the elite players as well (the value of three tiers).

dV

Click to expand...

I seem to recall that my first submitted victory was my 7th GOTM...and I had only won 1 before that, and I didn't get around to finishing it until after it had closed. So by the time my 8th GOTM came around, my personal record was 2-5. My submitted record was something like 1-4. Most players probably aren't willing to take a pounding of that magnitude(winning once in half a year of playing GOTMs), and all of those starts were adventurer starts, so I would agree that for newer or less experienced players there needs to be a better way of introducing them to the GOTM and helping them improve their skills. My main problem with a tiered level system is comparability between games. In my opinion, right now all 3 saves are comparable for the most part. How would that change by changing the system?

Most players probably aren't willing to take a pounding of that magnitude

Click to expand...

Lightweights. My record is something like 2-12 and you don't hear me crying about it being so hard that I'm going to give up.

Thrallia said:

My main problem with a tiered level system is comparability between games. In my opinion, right now all 3 saves are comparable for the most part. How would that change by changing the system?

Click to expand...

How are the games that comparable when the adventurer gets added benefits like a worker, additional techs, etc? I could understand end game tactics could be compaired but novice players aren't likely to make it that far.

I am going to download the adventurer save for GOTM 25 tonight so I will give it a try and see what happens. This will be my first GOTM game.

Morpheus11,

Glad you are giving it a try. I encourage you to keep notes (or use autolog), and write a detailed spoiler of how you start in the first spoiler thread, and then participate in the discussion (no matter how good or badly your start goes). I really think you will be pleasently surprised as to how quickly you can actually learn and improove by comparing your play to others, and importantly, by asking questions whenever you dont understand why others decisions differed from your own.

morpheus11 said:

How are the games that comparable when the adventurer gets added benefits like a worker, additional techs, etc? I could understand end game tactics could be compaired but novice players aren't likely to make it that far.

I am going to download the adventurer save for GOTM 25 tonight so I will give it a try and see what happens. This will be my first GOTM game.

Click to expand...

I believe I answer how it is comparable in this post

To enhance on it though...I don't consider an addition of a worker/techs, etc to make the game incomparable. The bonus usually gives you what is usually the first build(worker) and a couple of the more commonly picked initial techs(if any). It is a good advantage for the player, but not one that changes the game too much for comparison. Within 50-100 turns, most contender level players have probably made up the difference from the beginning, and from about 50 turns in(25-35 on normal speed), it is almost exactly the same game...you just got a headstart because you felt you needed it.

just to hit the nail once more, I played a few of the first GotMs (I missed the n°1, but played n°2) and got crushed painfully.
No submission (couldn't end the game in time, and it was a shamefull loss anyway), but I read the spoilers.
To be honest, I was so late in playing that the results where already out when I finished playing.
So I simply looked for a spoiler by the best scorer.
It was hendrickszoon, and he had written a very detailed spoiler.
I tried the game again, trying to follow his strat and got my first prince win (don't laugh, it was 2 years ago ). After that, I simply never lost another prince game. Sure, if it had been immortal, I would have had a tougher time.

But it's still the steepest learning curve I could get.

Well, I have played and finished GOTM 25. I won't post any spoilers here, but I will say that I was done within the first 50-75 turns of the game even with "advantage" of the adventurer start. I will be sure to take a look at spoilers and try to learn something from this slaughter.

Thrallia said:

Within 50-100 turns, most contender level players have probably made up the difference from the beginning, and from about 50 turns in(25-35 on normal speed), it is almost exactly the same game...you just got a headstart because you felt you needed it.

Click to expand...

But, when players are beaten within this time there doesn't give much to compare. I understand that I am in the minority that can't compete at Monarch and above (right now I am not sure I could survive 100 turns on Prince) so I would never suggest that the current GOTM system play more games closer to my level. But, without something for me to play and compare my game with (I would at least like to get out of the ancient age) it will be hard for me to improve and participate in the current system.

After playing GOTM 25 I almost felt like the worker was more of a hinderance than a help. That could be b/c I didn't know how to use him correctly.

morpheus - as someone who still is challenged by Prince, I feel (not quite done yet with the game) that GOTM25 with even the contender save was far less of an arse-whooping than I expected. I've played to past 1700 AD and hopefully will finish the game (win or lose..probably still lose) tonight.

Trynthlas ~ I am afraid you are above me. This game was so far above me that I won't be trying Emporer GOTMs again. I will try Monarch at least once, but this GOTM was so painful that I lost sleep trying to figure out my errors. I guess that is part of the problem with being a perfectionist.

By the way I posted my summary in the spoiler thread for those who would like to take part in my destruction.