Beyond the Sword: GOTM Implementation Issues

[socralynnek]

Alan, I have another explanation proposition for people downloading WOTM but not submitting:

-people who don't own Warlords yet but download them to play when they have Warlords/BTS

Probbly not really many people as they could just download it later...

 

[AlanH]

I hope people aren't expecting to be able to play WOTM starts in BtS. I can pretty well guarantee that they won't work, as BtS will certainly require its own version of the HoF Mod.

I think your classification is included in my fourth one

 

[MarkM]

As I learn more about BTS -- particularly Friday chat topics -- I'm more and more inclined to just say that we just suspend this whole question from a final decision until BTS has been out for at least a couple months. They've changed so much (forts, colonies, corporations, all that) that this is starting to look like a different game (hopefully they didn't break it). If that's the case (it's broken, or it's a completely different game), WOTM may have to stay as the ultimate "civ" GOTM, even though BTS incorportates all the core game changes of Warlords.

I dunno, too hard to tell at this point. Should start getting an idea in August. They're so ambitious that it could take a while (multiple patches) to get all the bugs ironed out, just like the vanilla release.

 

[culdeus]

When will you decide if you will keep doing vanilla GOTMs? This will impact my decision on whether to buy BTS more than any other thing.

 

[AlanH]

It's flattering that your buying decisions are so driven by the GOTMs.

I can't see us dropping vanilla in the short to medium term. After BTS appears, we'll need time to get a HoF Mod to run with it, work out how it plays, and set up the submission systems to handle it, but even then, the general flavour of the debate here is that we should retain vanilla games to support those who don't want the mods. It *is* still the most popular version, by any measure!

That only leaves the question how we divide up the games between the three flavours of Civ4, which is still under debate. Note that we supported all three flavours of Civ3 until a year ago, and even now we support the two distinctly different versions, PtW and C3C.

 

[da_Vinci]

It's flattering that your buying decisions are so driven by the GOTMs.

Although I would have purchased Warlords eventually, the specific timing of my purchase of it was influcenced by needing it for SGOTM 04.

That only leaves the question how we divide up the games between the three flavours of Civ4, which is still under debate. Note that we supported all three flavours of Civ3 until a year ago, and even now we support the two distinctly different versions, PtW and C3C.

Which raises two questions:

First, how did you cycle the three Civ III versions? Would that make sense in Civ IV?

Second, what led to the dropping of Vanilla in Civ III? I suppose after BtS comes out, we can expect a price drop in Warlords, and combined Vanilla+Warlords Packs for the original price of one. Over time, I can see in interest in Vanilla waning, especially if newcomers to the game start by having both in a combined package.

dV

 

[AlanH]

We have only ever provided two Civ3 games a month.

Because vanilla Civ3 and Play the World (PtW) were very similar, mainly just adding new civs and units, Cracker was able to provide a mod pack that enhanced vanilla sufficiently that we could run one game a month, using a few amendments to PtW rules as well. We had different start files for the two versions, but they used the same map and generally produced comparable results. We called that the "Classic" game.

A second game was introduced for Conquests, some time after that was released. Once Conquests and PtW became available for Mac players, we dropped the vanilla mod pack last year, and were able then to provide Classic games for out-of-the-box PtW, with the Conquests games continuing. So, still two games a month.

That wouldn't be possible with any two of the three varieties of Civ4 as far as I know, as they all have distinct game play characteristics. Results from different Civ4 versions couldn't be compared. The scale of the differences between them is more like the differences between PtW and Conquests in Civ3 terms, where we simply had to run two different games each month.

Whatever decisions we make about supporting the three versions now, I'm sure they will need to be reviewed as time goes on and the mix of players of each, and the ways they are sold evolve.

 

[culdeus]

.
I can't see us dropping vanilla in the short to medium term. After BTS appears, we'll need time to get a HoF Mod to run with it, work out how it plays, and set up the submission systems to handle it...........
.

Honestly, if you got someone to draw up a good email I bet firaxis would leak you a full release to get this going for the launch. This is a pretty big core user group and they might be keen to support them in this way.

 

[AlanH]

That almost sounds like you want me to say we'll be moving to BTS just to give you an excuse to pre-order it?

 

[cabert]

That almost sounds like you want me to say we'll be moving to BTS just to give you an excuse to pre-order it?

He suggest you could ask firaxis or 2K for a free and before release copy.
If their marketing service isn't run by monkeys, I think you will get it (or at least someone with windows and some modding abilities could get it).

I'd like a good reason to preorder too .

 

[AlanH]

A copy of BtS would be little use to me as I don't run a Windows PC.

 

[Thrallia]

lol I got a good reason today...I received a surprise, very late christmas present of 30 bucks from my cousin today. I think that I'll be using that on BtS

 

[culdeus]

That almost sounds like you want me to say we'll be moving to BTS just to give you an excuse to pre-order it?

Oh well, I pre-ordered it anyways.

So please get a BGOTM going SVP

 

[Piko]

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

Let me think here, when first joining a GOTM. I've played with 3 now but not submitted...mind you one i could have submitted and didnt, and one i left unfinished, because i didnt understand the exact meaning of a "reload".

However, the third one i tried, was not with a plan to submit, but more to see how well i coped with the settings and a change of strategy, and if i wanted to (though i didnt need to) i could reload the game over and over and over and compare what score i got with those who submitted. I think there is an underestimate of the download and play ratio compared to download and submit.

There are many reasons someone wouldnt submit:

1) They die.
2) They want to practise and reload and compare scores.
3) They are bored and just want to try a new tactic on a map with a decent capital.
4) They score too low and don't want to look bad.
5) They score too high (but not high enough to be happy) and would lose their adventure class access (because they think only way they could get an award is with this option).

I expect they are the main reasons? Most newbies would struggle to get a decent score on anything above noble, I play monarch typically but i've been playing civ since the original? I watch newbies play and struggle on noble and could see why the just wanna play the game but not submit because they simply can't compete.

 

[AlanH]

Scoring low is no sin, and it gets you some Global Ranking points. Some points are better than no points.

5) They score too high (but not high enough to be happy) and would lose their adventure class access (because they think only way they could get an award is with this option).

To clarify - there are no awards available for Adventurer class. If you want the awards you have to step up to Contender.

 

[da_Vinci]

Scoring low is no sin, and it gets you some Global Ranking points. Some points are better than no points.

The other benefit to submitting a loss, or at least posting a spoiler about it, is that you almost certainly will get some useful advice. I think Adama is the best example of someone who had gotten their "money's worth" out of the community regarding advice.

My first GOTM was #10, on immortal and I was at best prince level if that at the time. So I got crushed, of course. Submitted game and spoilers, and JerichoHill sent me some basic advice, and I ended up wining GOTM 11 on monarch (at adventurer) with that advice. A 21st century win, so nothing fabulous, but a win. So playing and submitting losses might just be the best way for new or struggling players to improve!

dV

 

[Harbourboy]

If I didn't submit my losing GOTM games, I would never be able to submit anything! By submitting my losing games, I help make everyone else look good. I see that as doing my bit for the community.

 

[Tosti11]

If I didn't submit my losing GOTM games, I would never be able to submit anything! By submitting my losing games, I help make everyone else look good. I see that as doing my bit for the community.

I will second this! 0-2 in my short GOTM career and looking like 0-3 with GOTM 20 at immortal level.

 

[Thrallia]

I started out 0-5 before I finally won a game, I won the Germany Monarch Archi. game, then somehow won the next game, the first Immortal GOTM. Since then I've gone slightly over .500, but I've won more than I've lost in the WOTMs.

 

[Seidrik_The_Gray]

I don't play Vanilla anymore. It feels like playing JV Highschool soccer after a couple years of Varsity College Soccer. It's just too easy. The AI is a wimp, etc...I've evolved and will evolve again once BtS is out. Admittedly, I also only play modded versions of Civ anymore (except the occasional GOTM/WOTM).

I can see that there is a huge fan base for Vanilla Civ 4, however, so I would agree with those, who would accept getting rid of WOTM in favore of BtSOTM and GOTMs.

My 2 coppers and a lint ball.