Poll: WOTM: Thumbs up or thumbs down

The WOTM stands forlornly at the gallows, noose applied, trap door waiting to be sprung ...

The linked post suggests that WOTM is a thing of the past, unless there is a sentiment to save it from oblivion:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=6267035&postcount=17

So, a simple poll to start: If you want to see some portion of our 24 yearly games continue as warlords, vote yes to stay the execution of WOTM.

If you do not want any future XOTM to be warlords, vote no and release the trap door.

Once we know if there is interest or not in keeping Warlords, the proportions of games of each type can be polled later.

dV

My god, you got to be kiddin' !!! I hope the gallows' made of thick wood, cause I'm going to hang there in sympathy with the poor bast@rd. Next to Lexad

Only Domination left - mutter mutter...

I don't have Warlords, just vanilla and BtS. But if others want to continue with the WOTMs, that's fine with me.

p.s. I didn't vote yes or no in the poll as my official vote would be "whatever the community wants to do."

Definitely 100% keep warlords. I'm fine with not having it regularly (not the 8-8-8) but I'd strongly support still having it.

Erkon said:

My god, you got to be kiddin' !!! I hope the gallows' made of thick wood, cause I'm going to hang there in sympathy with the poor bast@rd. Next to Lexad

Only Domination left - mutter mutter...

Click to expand...

I'm not THAT desperate, sorry But you'll have my sympathy

I'd rather play more BtS games than Warlords, but then again I'd rather play more Warlords games than Vanilla, so better 8/8/8 than 12/12. The game Sid wanted to make and all that. But I don't feel strong enough either way to bother voting.

I honestly don't see the point of playing Warlords now that we've got BtS, which includes everything in Warlords and adds a lot of good stuff!

wwassme said:

p.s. I didn't vote yes or no in the poll as my official vote would be "whatever the community wants to do."

Click to expand...

But YOU are in the community too, so if you don't vote, the result will not be representitive of the community. If you don't vote, you actually vote for "whatever the rest of the community wants to do".

Roland Ehnström;6271201 said:

I honestly don't see the point of playing Warlords now that we've got BtS, which includes everything in Warlords and adds a lot of good stuff!

Click to expand...

Some people live in countries where Bts is not available yet. I prefer Bts, over the others, but I prefer Warlords over Vanilla.

Personally, I see no reason to keep the WotM.

Niklas said:

I'd rather play more BtS games than Warlords, but then again I'd rather play more Warlords games than Vanilla, so better 8/8/8 than 12/12. The game Sid wanted to make and all that. But I don't feel strong enough either way to bother voting.

Click to expand...

If the trend in the poll continues, then the next one will likey be a choice between (V/W/B):

8/8/8

6/6/12

12/6/6 (seems unlikey to be popular)

7/7/10

any other ideas?

dV

perhaps 12/6/12, dV? with the WOTMs being every other month, or two month affairs?

azzaman333 said:

Personally, I see no reason to keep the WotM.

Click to expand...

The current "plan" appears to be 12 vanilla, 12 BtS per year ... do you prefer that to 8/8/8 or even 6/6/12? Or do you prefer vanilla to Warlords?

dV

any other ideas?

Click to expand...

12/6/12, or if that is too much workload for the staff, 8/4/12 would be my preference. Those with Warlords are that way still able to play all the GotM, plus the occasional WotM, plus Vanilla only players aren't left out. BotM should not be less than 1 per month though IMO, since that would harm participation I suspect.

Thrallia said:

perhaps 12/6/12, dV? with the WOTMs being every other month, or two month affairs?

Click to expand...

Seems my idea was stolen in the crosspost.

da_Vinci said:

The current "plan" appears to be 12 vanilla, 12 BtS per year ... do you prefer that to 8/8/8 or even 6/6/12? Or do you prefer vanilla to Warlords?

dV

Click to expand...

I think vanilla should get a preference over warlords because those with warlords can still play vanilla, but those with only vanilla can't play warlords. Personally I don't really like either and would be fine with dropping them both, but that would make some people kinda angry.

Thrallia said:

perhaps 12/6/12, dV? with the WOTMs being every other month, or two month affairs?

Click to expand...

If more than two XOTM per month is an option (at least for some months), then a whole host of options opens up of course. I suppose if 12/12/12 is feasible, then no one has any less playing opportunity than they have now, but that is 50% more staff work Which is why I did not head there immediately.

So another question is whether enough folks would play three games a month for that effort to be worthwhile? (Oh gawd! another poll? ) From the point of view of competition and awards, we don't want to dillute the competition over too many games I suppose.

dV

I think that 12/12/12 is probably not feasible at this juncture...partly from a staff point of view, and partly from the point of view of how many people would play both WOTM and BOTM. I personally couldn't play all 3 games even if I didn't have new responsibilities as a staff member(although, I was very vocal about wanting all 3 before becoming a staff member)

Doing 3 games a month might be feasible once DynamicSpirit and I are as fully versed in the staff work as Ainwood, Alan, and Gyathaar are, but I'm still not sure we'd have the critical mass of players playing each game. It was decided that WOTM would be most likely to lose critical mass upon the launch of the BOTM, and that the issue would be revisited in a few months.

Perhaps we'll test the waters again in awhile, and see how it goes...

I prefer 12-0-12 since I don't have Warlords. But I won't vote, since I don't think I should deprive others from their fun.

jesusin said:

I prefer 12-0-12 since I don't have Warlords. But I won't vote, since I don't think I should deprive others from their fun.

Click to expand...

But by all means vote! One purpose of the poll is to get some measure of how many folks are happy with no WOTM.

dV

Thrallia said:

I think that 12/12/12 is probably not feasible at this juncture...partly from a staff point of view, and partly from the point of view of how many people would play both WOTM and BOTM. I personally couldn't play all 3 games even if I didn't have new responsibilities as a staff member(although, I was very vocal about wanting all 3 before becoming a staff member)

Click to expand...

I think more than 2 game a months has participation dilution issues that we would want to consider before going that route (consider recent discussions of "cheapening" the epthathlon).

Thrallia said:

Doing 3 games a month might be feasible once DynamicSpirit and I are as fully versed in the staff work as Ainwood, Alan, and Gyathaar are, but I'm still not sure we'd have the critical mass of players playing each game. It was decided that WOTM would be most likely to lose critical mass upon the launch of the BOTM, and that the issue would be revisited in a few months.

Perhaps we'll test the waters again in awhile, and see how it goes...

Click to expand...

I would have to review some of the prior polling on this subject, but I am not certain that we have definitively tested the waters the first time yet. Is the staff's "decision" (or presumption?) that WOTM would lose critical mass after BOTM based on data?

I think that maintaining GOTM makes sense as the entry level for new civers. So I would not support dropping that. And since Alan clarified that global rankings could accomodate any mix of the three versions (a "best of" set being a group of consecutive games without a version duplication), the notion of spreading all three versions across 24 yearly games is workable.

It might well be that for the non-BtS games, warlords is preferred over vanilla (current poll and posts so far show that). Which might well make a 12/0/12 pattern a least favorite choice. 8/8/8 is balanced, but likely there is more demand for BtS than that. So then 6/6/12 or maybe 8/4/12 would be better patterns than 12/0/12.

As vanilla only new purchases dry up, the rationale for keeping GOTM might fade (or have it less often), at which point maybe WOTM makes a comeback? So why not keep one WOTM each quarter? The more I think of it, the more 8/4/12 looks like the best blend (and I think superior to 12/0/12): still a reasonable number of vanilla games, warlords replaces some of the vanilla games, and still one BtS a month.

So keep an open mind ... to run 8/4/12 you don't have to decide until February ...

dV

da_Vinci said:

I would have to review some of the prior polling on this subject, but I am not certain that we have definitively tested the waters the first time yet. Is the staff's "decision" (or presumption?) that WOTM would lose critical mass after BOTM based on data?

I think that maintaining GOTM makes sense as the entry level for new civers. So I would not support dropping that. And since Alan clarified that global rankings could accomodate any mix of the three versions (a "best of" set being a group of consecutive games without a version duplication), the notion of spreading all three versions across 24 yearly games is workable.

It might well be that for the non-BtS games, warlords is preferred over vanilla (current poll and posts so far show that). Which might well make a 12/0/12 pattern a least favorite choice. 8/8/8 is balanced, but likely there is more demand for BtS than that. So then 6/6/12 or maybe 8/4/12 would be better patterns than 12/0/12.

As vanilla only new purchases dry up, the rationale for keeping GOTM might fade (or have it less often), at which point maybe WOTM makes a comeback? So why not keep one WOTM each quarter? The more I think of it, the more 8/4/12 looks like the best blend (and I think superior to 12/0/12): still a reasonable number of vanilla games, warlords replaces some of the vanilla games, and still one BtS a month.

So keep an open mind ... to run 8/4/12 you don't have to decide until February ...

dV

Click to expand...

I think part of the reason was based on my poll from a few months ago that suggested that nearly all players that owned Warlords also owned(or planned to buy soonish) BtS. That and the fact that the GOTM is basically available as an entry game into the GOTM, as new players generally only have vanilla, and there were more players who only had vanilla and BtS than only had vanilla and warlords led us to believe that the WOTM was the correct game to replace at this time. In the future this may change though, as usual, little is set in stone