Beyond the Sword: GOTM Implementation Issues

[MarkM]

So BTS is an expansion of the basic Civ 4, rather than an expansion to Warlords, right? But it will include great wall, trebs, etc from warlords I assume.

Not sure what you mean. If it includes great wall, trebs, generals, etc, doesn't that mean it IS an expansion to warlords? (functionally spekaing -- as far as installation it'll just require vanilla, not warlods). I interpret it as an extension of warlords (itself an extension of vanilla):

Sam Gibson wants answers concerning Sid Meier's Civilization IV: Beyond the Sword, addressing Alex Mantzaris, Lead Designer and Programmer at Firaxis Games on the new expansion.

How will the new expansion tie in with Warlords and will it include any of the code from that expansion?

Beyond the Sword will include some of the code from Warlords - specifically the stuff that impacts the core game functionality. The assets and code from the scenarios in Warlords will not be included.

That means that there will be a group of players who will own vanilla and BTS but not WL. Perhaps there will be a group of players who will own Vanilla and WL but not BTS.

Let's be realistic:

1) Of people already owning warlords and playing GOTM, how many are NOT going to buy BTS eventually, assuming it's even half of what it's touted to be? Anyone at all??? <crickets chirping?>

2) Of those that DON'T already own warlords, and haven't bothered to buy it yet, how many would suddenly buy NOW (and not also buy BTS) if the only thing warlord has that BTS does not is some (rather mediocre) scenarios? <more crickets chirping?>


Personally I'm already starting to think I should try to dump my warlords on fleabay for maybe $10 before it becomes totally worthless ...

 

[da_Vinci]

Not sure what you mean. If it includes great wall, trebs, generals, etc, doesn't that mean it IS an expansion to warlords? (functionally spekaing -- as far as installation it'll just require vanilla, not warlods).

What I meant by expansion to Vanilla was that I assume Warlords is not required to be installed for BTS to work. If it includes all of the new features of Warlords ... the Great Generals, unique buildings, the new civs, the new units, plus its own additional features, then it would seem to make warlords obsolete, as you are suggesting.

The Cossacks game series by cdv (with CSC as the marketer?) started with European Wars, then had Art of War as an add on, and then Back to War which introduced the oxymoronic concept of the "stand alone add-on": you could play Back to War without ever owning the first two in the series. That pretty much obsoleted the first two versions as all improvements and patches to the first two versions were included in Back to War.

Similarly, if BTS includes the Warlords features and does not require Warlords to play, then it will obsolete Warlords, and it will probably make sense for XOTM to eventually evolve to Vanilla and BTS (GOTM and BOTM?)

dV

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Similarly, if BTS includes the Warlords features and does not require Warlords to play, then it will obsolete Warlords, and it will probably make sense for XOTM to eventually evolve to Vanilla and BTS (GOTM and BOTM?)

Hmmm. 'Beyond of the Month'. Hmmm.

SOTM (Sword of the Month)?

(Except I'd very quickly end up changing the T to D and pronouncing it 'sod 'em')

 

[da_Vinci]

Hmmm. 'Beyond of the Month'. Hmmm.

I guess that gives an advantage to the Real Ms. Beyond players.

"BTS of the month" was more what I has in mind with BOTM. ainwood could then write stuff like "Cactus Pete is once again at the top of the BOTM"

dV

 

[Pious_Pete]

Good points. We'll check submissions to see how many people are playing both vanilla & warlords.

I think that the number of contributions to each competition must be a key point when discussing the options, so I quickly reviewed the number of entries in the published results, and the figures are as follows:-

GOTM18 98. .. .. .. .. .WOTM8 79
GOTM17 106 . .. .. .. .. .WOTM7 59
GOTM16 133 . .. .. .. .. .WOTM6 83
GOTM15 83 . .. .. .. .. .WOTM5 104
GOTM14 107 . .. .. .. .. .WOTM4 85
GOTM13 117 . .. .. .. .. .WOTM3 45
GOTM12 148 . .. .. .. .. .WOTM2 60
GOTM11 124 . .. .. .. .. .WOTM1 148
GOTM10 177
GOTM9 189
GOTM8 261
GOTM7 317
GOTM6 276
GOTM5 389
GOTM4 208
GOTM3 290
GOTM2 386
GOTM1 623​

 

[Pious_Pete]

I know I am repeating a number of points made earlier, but I don´t believe that dropping vanilla GOTM is a desirable course of action.

There will be people who - for whatever reason - do not have access to either of the expansion packs; there ought to be a GOTM which caters for this crowd.

Also, based on the figures in my earlier post, it would seem that significantly more people play GOTM than WOTM. (44% more to be precise over the last 8 months).

If GOTM was removed, perhaps some of these would switch to WOTM, but I´m far from convinced that this would be the case.

Whilst I would agree that Warlords is the "better" game, it is nonetheless the case Warlords and Vanilla are essentially the same game. (I basically see WOTM as an opportunity to have a second competitive game in the month).

Whilst I prefer Warlords as a game, I nonetheless prefer GOTM as a competition. It is more fun knowing that you are pitting yourself against more competitors. And - not that I´ve ever won anything other than a red ambulance or low score awards - I presume that this would give more satisfaction if I ever did win one of the competitions.

In summary, I don´t believe that there could possibly be an excuse for dropping the most popular competition.

 

[Pious_Pete]

I would love it if we could run all three, on a 45-day cycle, so that there is a new game starting every 15 days, and we could allow 45 days to complete each game. That would substantially increase the number of games I would finish.

I don´t like the idea of a 45 day cycle for the games. It´s bad enough as it is at the moment having to wait for the results to come out. Having played two (or three) more competitions (plus HOF) before the results are published, I´ve usually forgotten what the game was all about, and this does detract from my pleasure. (For instance, in the last GOTM18 there was only one cultural entry with - with all due respect to Cat Behemoth - a very modest time. I usually go for a cultural win, but this time I submitted a spaceship victory, so feel a little peeved. I´m not complaining - I´m sure I changed my tactics for perfectly valid reasons - its just that can´t remember what it was all about, which is a shame).

Having to wait an extra 15 days would only make this worse.

 

[Pious_Pete]

I like that idea too, the only fear I have concerns the 45 day open period, as it is I barely remember games by the time the scores come out, I fear this might make it worse if I finish the game quickly. I told myself that the reason I want to play GOTM is to learn from comparing my strategies to others', but by the time the results come out it's just really hard to recall details anymore, so I haven't done a lot of that -- I get a lot out of reading the spoilers, but the replays are just too late.

O.K. This is essentially the same point that I was making.

 

[da_Vinci]

Do we know the number of persons who downloaded the save files for each XOTM? That might be a better measure of interest than the number of games submitted, if it differs substanitally from the submission number (if we know the download number, of course).

dV

 

[AlanH]

Yes, we count downloads ...

GOTM 11-18: 11,287 downloads, 916 submissions
WOTM 01-08: 9,830 downloads, 663 submissions

I'm not sure what this tells us, other than there are proportionally a lot more non-playing lurkers for Warlords than for vanilla. I think we are more interested in participation than spectators, though I guess some spectators may turn into players eventually.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Yes, we count downloads ...

GOTM 11-18: 11,287 downloads, 916 submissions
WOTM 01-08: 9,830 downloads, 663 submissions

I'm not sure what this tells us, other than there are proportionally a lot more non-playing lurkers for Warlords than for vanilla. I think we are more interested in participation than spectators, though I guess some spectators may turn into players eventually.

Warlords has a slightly higher drop-out rate amongst people who download intending to submit [because the better AI makes it a slightly harder game on balance, so more people find themselves heading for a loss, and people who are losing are less likely to complete or submit] ?

 

[Harbourboy]

I find those statistics to be staggering. Less than 10&#37; of people bother submitting their games? Why bother downloading then?

 

[AlanH]

Warlords has a slightly higher drop-out rate amongst people who download intending to submit ... ?

"Slightly" is a wonderful piece of British understatement

If the download-to-submit ratio for Warlords were the same as for vanilla we'd have 130 more submissions in those eight WOTMs. That's a 20% increase.

Less than 10% of people bother submitting their games? Why bother downloading then?

Quite a lot of it is multiple downloads per player per game. Often for multiple classes, but also duplicate copies. I'm not sure what that's all about

I'm sure they include:

- people who download intending to play but then don't; or, as DynamicSpirit suggests, they abort when they get a lousy result

- players who want to compare their performance with the submissions but don't want to stick to the GOTM rules

- players who want to dry run a few games before starting to submit

- people who hit a download link as a reflex action "because it's there"

- ... and other reasons I can't even guess at.

 

[dojoboy]

Yes, we count downloads ...
GOTM 11-18: 11,287 downloads, 916 submissions
WOTM 01-08: 9,830 downloads, 663 submissions

Although informative, I really don't feel a decision on how to proceed should come from these numbers. Obviously, if no one was submitting, that'd be one thing. But, CFC (Thunderfall and Co.) has always been inclusive. I should know being a Mac user. I remember when cracker and the GOTM staff went through great pains to make the files operable in Mac Civ3.

Likely, running GOTMs in all three for a couple months may give CFC an idea. But, it still will not be enough because more and more copies of BtS will be purchased every month. We may have to do with a little less customization of GOTM maps, etc. in order for the staff to have time to produce files.

As some have mentioned, I for one do not want to see longer periods to sumbit games.

 

[da_Vinci]

Quite a lot of it is multiple downloads per player per game. Often for multiple classes, but also duplicate copies. I'm not sure what that's all about

The submission number represents unique individuals, I assume (we are in trouble if it does not ), can the downloads be expressed as number of unique individuals who downloaded?

If it includes guest downloads, then perhaps not ... but then maybe the number of members who downloaded is a number of interest? If it is readily available, of course. I wouldn't spend a big effort to chase it.

I think that we can conclude that Vanilla is more subscribed than Warlords. The question of whether Vanilla is more popular depends on semantics a bit. I would use popular to mean which is prefered among those who own both, a harder question to answer. My guess is Warlords wins that one, but I could be wrong.

Maybe the ultimate question is how many play WOTM but not GOTM? And if it is a large enough number, what is the reason? If just a matter of time, then replacing WOTM with BOTM at some point may not adversely affect them. But if they just don't like Vanilla, and would play both WOTM and BOTM, then the loss of WOTM would affect them negatively.

I'm sure they include:

- players who want to dry run a few games before starting to submit

I do hope you mean dry run a few OLD games before starting the CURRENT one to submit! Because dry running the current game before starting the play for submission is, of course, verboten! (Just don't want any newcomers to get the wrong idea )

The old dry run downloads could be weeded out by excluding games downloaded after the submission deadline for that game (if easy to do).

dV

 

[AlanH]

The submission number represents unique individuals, I assume (we are in trouble if it does not ), can the downloads be expressed as number of unique individuals who downloaded?

If it includes guest downloads, then perhaps not ... but then maybe the number of members who downloaded is a number of interest? If it is readily available, of course. I wouldn't spend a big effort to chase it.

I'm not gong to try to extract that number ... way too many unknowns.

I do hope you mean dry run a few OLD games before starting the CURRENT one to submit! Because dry running the current game before starting the play for submission is, of course, verboten! (Just don't want any newcomers to get the wrong idea )

I actually meant they may choose to dry-run current games prior to submitting FUTURE games, since I think the majority of downloads are during the current game. We'd probably catch them if they are submitted later.

The old dry run downloads could be weeded out by excluding games downloaded after the submission deadline for that game (if easy to do).

1238 GOTM downloads and 1811 WOTM downloads after the game deadline. So approx. twice as many WOTM by proportion.

 

[Conquistador 63]

If it is not too much trouble for the staff, I'd vote for keeping 3 games/month at least for a while, and reevaluate this option a few months later (based on submission figures).

My reasoning behind this suggestion is that the expansion packs aren't readily available all around the world. IIRC, Warlords showed up here only 3 or 4 months later, a few days before the deadline of a marathon-speed game.

 

[=FC=Gorgon]

I'm one of those who downloads but only submits about 25% of the time. Like some others, I too am busy with family, job, pets, etc, etc and sometimes don't even finish a game in time. But I do value the gotm of the month series. I'd rather play a 'designed' game like a gotm then start up game 'fresh'.

I would also agree that having a 3 gotm for 3-4 months tops would be a good idea. But so much depends on how much of Warlords is included in BTS. I guess we'll find that out pretty quickly once BTS is out though. In short, I think it would be best to ultimately have just 2 gotms: vanilla and WL/BTS. Whether WL or BTS is thrown out or they rotate would depend on the particulars of BTS.

Just my $0.02,
Gorgon

 

[cabert]

"Slightly" is a wonderful piece of British understatement

If the download-to-submit ratio for Warlords were the same as for vanilla we'd have 130 more submissions in those eight WOTMs. That's a 20% increase.

Is it significant? I don't think so.
Different games, different figures.
It's interesting to see the numbers for each game, I'm sure there are a lot more DLed/submitted games for prince level than for emperor level.
This is irrelevent to WL or vanilla or BTS IMHO.

Quite a lot of it is multiple downloads per player per game. Often for multiple classes, but also duplicate copies. I'm not sure what that's all about

Let's hope there isn't a massive fraud...

I'm sure they include:

- people who download intending to play but then don't; or, as DynamicSpirit suggests, they abort when they get a lousy result

- players who want to compare their performance with the submissions but don't want to stick to the GOTM rules

- players who want to dry run a few games before starting to submit

- people who hit a download link as a reflex action "because it's there"

- ... and other reasons I can't even guess at.

I'm (like FC Gorgon) one of those submitting only a handful of games although DLing most of them.
These days I only try WotM, because the CD is in the tray .
For 2/3 of the games, I try to play it fast (kids, wife, dogs and job...), then when I feel I'll lose I dumb it.
Like FC Gorgon, I appreciate a designed map more than a totally random one. I don't necessarily play to compare results. I still submit the game if I win, but I never milk for score, nor try really hard towards any award.
I guess I should, since it's a competition, but I just cannot spend the time.
My submitted/DLed ratio is like 20%. 50% if you only count warlords, since I simply never submitted a vanilla GotM.

 

[Tosti11]

I have only played GOTM 18 and GOTM 19. submitted both of them, both losses. I don't have much time to play and really enjoy the pre-game discussions and the threads. i feel i get so much more out of the few games i get to play a month because everyone is playing the same game, going for each VC, and the skill levels are all different. I have only played vanilla, with the intention of playing it for six months and getting Warlords, playing that for six months and getting BTS. For the two GOTM's i have played, i have easily had enough time to play and submit my games with more than half the time left before the deadline. With that in mind i would either like to see all three games a month (and risk running out of time, but getting to play more games and thus learn more) or just vanilla and BTS because ultimately those are the two i would end up playing.