BOTM Gauntlet #1

[LowtherCastle]

I just don't value the eptathlon in a way that "cheapening" concerns me. There are plenty of excellent players out there who win awards with excellent games. A player who might get a wayward fastest-finish award "for free" isn't likely to get the entire eptathlon that way. I see more people getting awards as good for the community. I think the best players are bored now that they have gotten the eptathlon. Some don't even play any more.

I also understand that the BOTM is brand new and you guys have busted your butt to get it all tied together, especially with Firaxis pulling up lame. I wouldn't worry about it. The important thing is that people have fun. We will. In particular, I wouldn't worry about making any unofficial awards official. That's just the guys daring each other to stand on their heads and drink the enitre beer.

 

[Ronnie1]

I can drink that beer standing on my head, and a second one if it's available!

 

[DaviddesJ]

Do you not see that this runs a real risk of cheapening the eptathlon?

If that's a problem for you, then you can adjust the eptathlon rules. But I don't think it's a good reason to oppose people playing the GOTM however they choose.

Personally (and of course this is just my opinion) I think you're taking the prizes a bit too seriously.

 

[Ronnie1]

I see all the discussion and interest as a sign that the GOTM community is alive and well and looking to make GOTM even better.

I think the GOTM staff has been phenomenal. My suggestion to the staff is to encourage this type of activity as this type of evolution is natural and good. If it works great. If the staff can then support even better! If the staff have more and better ideas - great - lets discuss.

I am definitely NOT in the elite class, but I would like to ditto these two sentiments.

 

[ainwood]

If that's a problem for you, then you can adjust the eptathlon rules.

Maybe, but it would be better to do it proactively with some thought & discussion rather than reactively.

Personally (and of course this is just my opinion) I think you're taking the prizes a bit too seriously.

Perhaps I am, but its more than just the awards. If enough people play this, then a non-optimal victory condition will also affect the global rankings etc - and considering that people want to be able to retire to protect global ranking points, it suggests that people care about them.

Actually, by commenting and trying to defend my position in this thread, it may seem that I am taking the entire thing too seriously, and making far too big a deal out of a relatively minor issue. Let me state my view in a couple of short points:

1.) I'm not too rapt about people just starting up new competitions without at least having the courtesy to mention it to the staff. I don't want fractured events that adversely impact each other, and the implications should be considered before anything gains momentum.
2.) However, I am keen to continuously improve things. If a critical mass of people really want a competition like this, I'd like to put things in place to formalise it.


In short, I'm not anti this at all. I just see knock-on issues that I think need to be considered - think first, then do.

If people think that things have been discussed to death in the past and gone nowhere, then I apologise for not responding / following through etc. But we have been busy with things like getting the BOTM running, and real life has been.... busy to say the least.

 

[Obormot]

OK, I'm sorry that I didn't contact the GOTM staff in advance.

My idea was starting an informal challenge. I don't see it as a separate parallel tournament, of course, it is just a different way of playing the GOTM. There were similar challenges started before, by different players, the only difference here is that I was a little bit more serious, starting a separate thread, writing down the rules (or "rules" ), etc.

I do realise the propblem about cheapening the awards. But I don't think it is a huge problem. The awards exist to make the game more fun for the players. In my opinion, the game will become overall more fun with a VC of the month feature. People who want more competition will play for the chosen VC, people who don't want competition will play for a different VC.

I also think that the challenge may increase the interest in GOTM attracting new players, and increase the average skill level. It is always fun to watch close races, and I also intend to do post-game analysis of different game, making it easier to learn. So overall it may even lead to more competition for all the awards.

Ultimately, the only way to see if this was a good idea or not, is to try it out. I intend to run these challenges for the first few BOTMs, and then we'll either stop it, or make it official, depending on what the GOTM staff and the players decide.

 

[Frederiksberg]

I guess that this challenge was started because there was no indication that the GOTM staff was interested in discussing the issues brought up here and maybe make official changes. Personally I would welcome if a VC of the month feature could be accommodated in the official GOTM award and ranking system. Whether it's challenger or not has less importance IMO - it's the single VC that makes things interesting because it increases the competition and the possibilities for comparing games.

I agree that the single VC feature will make it much easier to get the Eptathlon award but that could be fixed to some extent by requiring that you win at least one (or more) VC of the month competitions before you get the Eptathlon. BOTM will introduce a new VC so the Eptathlon has to be adjusted anyway. The fact that this challenge uses the challenger save could also skew the rankings somewhat because players choosing the contender save will get higher rankings. Contender players will also have a better shot at the medals. This could be fixed by removing the challenger save entirely - I don't think it adds much value anyway.

 

[da_Vinci]

I am going to assume that ainwood has invited us to continue the discussion from the "I'm dying to know ... is BTS GOTM starting next week?" thread

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=246805

in this thread now ...

Then there is the question of how that opens up "free awards" to the rest of the field. This creates four "polymorphisms" (to borrow a term from genetics) of the awards: won on contender, won on contender when that VC was gauntlet, won on challenger, and won on challenger when that VC was gauntlet.

Do we need four polymorphic epthathlons? If we have enough in the challenger division, do we want separate awards in each division? Not saying yes to either, just putting the questions on the table.

And not that I am ready for challenger, but those changes also affect the chances of the contender players (maybe to our benefit).

The difference between challenger & contender is not that high, so if the challenge becomes popular, it will split only the players into two parts, not four. I think it is a good idea to a certain extent, because the players are already naturally split into two groups, by their attitude towards the game.

It appears that Obormot feels that winning a VC is of similar difficulty on challenger or contender, and that only whether it is the gauntlet VC or not changes its difficulty.

Might I suggest that while that may be true for elite players, I doubt it is true for us mere mortals. If it is really not that different, then what is the point of the challenger save in the first place?

But let's assume Obormot's point. There continues to be the usual eptathlon (plus or minus the cow ... another point to decide), but now there is the potential for a "gauntlet eptathlon" (or perhaps a "gauntlet pentathlon" sans cow): all five VC won playing challenger save when that VC was the gauntlet VC. A gauntlet VC will also count toward someone's regular eptathlon.

But how do we avoid "free awards" (the "number one in a field of one phenomenon)?

This is a bit off topic but in regards to "Free awards", maybe there just needs to be a minimum players finishing with the appropriate Victory Condition for a given award to be available.

The mimimum could be applied to granting the award, or to having that award qualify for eptathlon. On first blush, I am leaning toward the latter.

What minimum? I am thinking not less than 3, not more than 5.

But what we really want is not to have a mediocre game that wins by default become an epthathlon qualifying game. So a great game, even if the only one of that VC, ought to qualify. But is there any objective way to judge that? Maybe has to be within ?% of the mean or median speed for that VC on that diff level? Which can't be done for first BOTM, so maybe not possible?

dV

 

[Frederiksberg]

It appears that Obormot feels that winning a VC is of similar difficulty on challenger or contender, and that only whether it is the gauntlet VC or not changes its difficulty.

Might I suggest that while that may be true for elite players, I doubt it is true for us mere mortals. If it is really not that different, then what is the point of the challenger save in the first place?

The Challenger Save does seem pretty pointless. That's why I end all my post by saying that "The Challenger Save must be destroyed". It's a trick I borrowed from Cato the Elder .

But let's assume Obormot's point. There continues to be the usual eptathlon (plus or minus the cow ... another point to decide), but now there is the potential for a "gauntlet eptathlon" (or perhaps a "gauntlet pentathlon" sans cow): all five VC won playing challenger save when that VC was the gauntlet VC. A gauntlet VC will also count toward someone's regular eptathlon.

But how do we avoid "free awards" (the "number one in a field of one phenomenon)?

We avoid free awards by limiting the number of awards. Instead of making a "super" Eptathlon I would rather suggest that the existing Eptathlon is extended with the requirement that at least one of the speed awards are also a gauntlet award.

Simplicity, beauty, .... what can I say? How is your breakfast dV .

 

[Balbes]

Instead of making a "super" Eptathlon I would rather suggest that the existing Eptathlon is extended with the requirement that at least one of the speed awards are also a gauntlet award.

An elegant idea. I like it.

 

[da_Vinci]

I agree that the single VC feature will make it much easier to get the Eptathlon award but that could be fixed to some extent by requiring that you win at least one (or more) VC of the month competitions before you get the Eptathlon. BOTM will introduce a new VC so the Eptathlon has to be adjusted anyway. The fact that this challenge uses the challenger save could also skew the rankings somewhat because players choosing the contender save will get higher rankings. Contender players will also have a better shot at the medals. This could be fixed by removing the challenger save entirely - I don't think it adds much value anyway.

Hmm ... new VC? I really had better double-click that BtS icon soon!

I keep thinking that the elites playing the gauntlet already have eptathlons ... but those are not BOTM eptathlons. Still, I think that the gauntlet pentathlon (sans cow, +1 for new VC?) is a good idea ... something for the elites to shoot for after they get the "basic eptathlon".

And if there is the gauntlet "somethingthon" then the regular "somethingthon" could be left the same, may with the addition of the minimum competitor idea of Denniz (but maybe waive that on deity?). Maybe all that is doing is making that award go from impossible to possible (not easy) for mere mortals?

Secondly, we do have reservations about the balance for the competition. If this generates some kind of split between the challenger & the regular (adventurer & contender) players, then it may distort things like the (official) awards (in particular, it may devalue the eptathlon), and the global rankings (in particular, the speed rankings).

Its not surprising to us as an idea; it is surprising to us that something that could have knock-on implications on things like global rankings, fastest-finish rankings (which was a community-lead idea that we officially adopted - see we do listen) & eptathlons was set-up independently of the staff, without contacting us to try and get support before starting it.

Three issues of concern: fastest finish awards, global rankings (esp speed), eptathlon.

1. Fastest finish. As some (most? all?) of the best players all go for a single VC, the best time for other VC may not be as impressive. Well, this could happen if by chance none of the top go for a VC in current system, but is almost guaranteed under a gauntlet VC system. Also, if a near top player sees this as their opportunity to pick up that VC for their eptathlon, then maybe the other VC do not suffer so much. Perhaps as long as the individual speed awards are still a competition among good mortal players (if the immortals are chasing gauntlets), then while it is easier for the good mortal to get one, it is still a battle against the other good mortals. So not a gift, and maybe on balance, more incentive for the good mortals to compete.

2. Global rankings. These are rather distorted in the current condition, I think. There is a huge premium on participation. I have a 9-8 record in the showing games, and no win higher than monarch, yet rank in the top 50. All due to playing both games every month, and getting at least one win most months. Players better than I who play less often are ranked lower.

And particular approaches favor various rankings. Dom for score, others for speed (sacrificing score). And if you want to optimize both if not contending for either medals or award, the "domination diplo" (dominatin pop, near domination land, back door diplo) give decent score and speed points for the rankings.

Not saying there is a better system, but that no system is perfect. Impact of a gauntlet: the gaunlet players, who otherwise would have several 100 speed point games across several VC, have one 100 point game (and lots of 90's ) Some mere mortals now get 100 points. But other than the gauntlet players taking a small hit, the mortals are still placing the same relative to each other. So at worst I see a small ranking penalty for playing the gauntlet. I don't see the global rankings being turned on its head.

Do you not see that this runs a real risk of cheapening the eptathlon? The 'winner' of this will get an eptathlon (well almost, aside from the cow) that will have been earned going against a group of people who specifically set-out to compete in the same victory conditions at the same time. There may be other people who aim to get an eptathlon by purposely going for other victory conditions, as there will be less competition.

Will these people be viewed as having achieved equally by the community?

This may be the biggest question. With the elite focused on one VC, it opens up other VC to be more easy to reach for the rest. There is a clear difference between a basic eptathlon and a gauntlet eptathlon under this condition. But rather than not have gauntlet, have the gauntlet epthathlon be official.

Only one additional speed award needs be added per game "The (VC) Golden Gauntlet" Collecting the Domination GG, the Conquest GG ... etc wins you the Gauntlet epthathlon. The GG also can be added to regular awards for a regular eptathlon.

If some of the best players are not playing now, hasn't that also made the eptathlon easier? Some players play some games, but not others, so different VC wins are more or less difficult depending on who was able to submit, who chased which VC, etc. Just like an Olympic gold medal is more or less difficult depending on who pulls a muscle in the semifinals.

To sum, I think the minimum competitor idea for a speed award to be eptathlon eligible solves the speed award issue. I think global rank is a non-issue, and having both basic and gauntlet eptathlons solves the devalued eptathlon issue.

Let the debate begin ...

dV

Addendum: Oh! I see the debate started without me! @ Frederiksberg: Like Bill Cosby said ... chocolate cake for breakfast! (Chocolate brownies, actually.)

Depends on whether the notion of two "divisions" (with an eptathlon in each division), or a single division, is one's preference. I think the two division idea makes sense. It recognizes reality.

Eventually, we will need that gauntlet eptathlon for the elites who are bored with their standard eptathlons ... unless by always playing the gauntlet their BTS eptathlon is a gauntlet eptathlon ... in which case how do we recognize its added value?

dV

 

[SteelHorse]

If people think that things have been discussed to death in the past and gone nowhere, then I apologise for not responding / following through etc. But we have been busy with things like getting the BOTM running, and real life has been.... busy to say the least.

Everyone is very appreciative of the effort the GOTM staff puts in. I have seen nothing but support. No need to apologize. And if we can help in anyway - just ask.

2.) However, I am keen to continuously improve things. If a critical mass of people really want a competition like this, I'd like to put things in place to formalise it.

This was one of a few suggestions for improving. Maybe sees how it goes before formalizing. Give it a couple of months. If there are only a handful playing at the end, it may not be worth it. If there is critical mass then go for it.

I for one, am not at a level where I can compete with the elite. To get there would likely require a lot more time playing then I could ever find. But I sure would like to watch and learn. If mortals win medals while the elite compete for higher honors my view would be that this is a good thing. It will create even more interest from the intermediate level players. I doubt the elite would have any issue with this.

 

[Thrallia]

hm...I didn't think the staff was silent on this issue...I thought I and DynamicSpirit and Alan posted multiple times in the thread where most stuff was discussed(when is BtSOTM coming out...or something like that) about the ramifications of any adjustments to the save levels, how to rejuvenate the Challenger class, etc.

We've also been having discussions for a few weeks about what changes are feasible or we think are good ideas. Just because we don't speak publicly or loudly about plans for change, doesn't mean we are ignoring you

 

[jesusin]

Ainwood, please, would you be so kind as to state in the saves available thread or here what are the official prizes we are compeing for. There is a new victory condition and I haven't seen anywhere an official statement of a new award. And what about the cow (is it finally dead)? Thank you.



About the discussion here, if anyone is interested in my opinion:
- I love the VC of the Month idea.
- I hate paralel competitions.
- I love comparing games. And comparing QSC.
- I hate contender/challenger versions, since it hurts comparability.

 

[AlanH]

There *is* a distinct new VC in BOTM. It's the Apostolic Palace Diplo victory, and it will be called "Religious" in the Results and the Awards tables. A Religious award will certainly be included in the requirements for the BoTM Eptathlon. I still have to create an award icon for it, so if anyone has any artistic flair, please feel free to propose one.

Staff are currently discussing the rest of the make-up of the BoTM Eptathlon. No one seems to like the Time award being a requirement, so I guess we are likely to remove it. Recent suggestions in these parts include replacing the Time/Cow requirement with a Gold Medal. That strikes me as a very good idea, but it is not a final decision yet.

 

[Lexad]

Gold replacing cow would be great!

Concerning the Gauntlet and playermass bifurcation - well, these are the "bragging rights" mentioned at Challenger description in effect

 

[Obormot]

- I hate paralel competitions.

Please don't get me wrong, I never intended to start a paralel competition. The gauntlet is just an unofficial challenge inside the GOTM. The reasons for starting it are (1) increasing competition for those who want it, and (2) making it easier to compare games and learn.

- I hate contender/challenger versions, since it hurts comparability.

That is a good point, but this also depends on the challenger handicaps. Removing techs and altering the starting position does indeed hurt comparability, because contenders and challengers will have different starting sequences. But, for example, making the AI 1 level stronger in the challenger version, won't have such an effect.

 

[jesusin]

Please don't get me wrong, I never intended to start a paralel competition. The gauntlet is just an unofficial challenge inside the GOTM. The reasons for starting it are (1) increasing competition for those who want it, and (2) making it easier to compare games and learn.

Oh, I am sure your intentions are full of good-will and I agree that your competition would make the GOTM experience even more interesting. It's just that I would prefer to see this integrated by the staff in the competition. I am ready to wait a bit for this to happen. We all owe them so much!

There *is* a distinct new VC in BOTM. It's the Apostolic Palace Diplo victory, and it will be called "Religious" in the Results and the Awards tables. A Religious award will certainly be included in the requirements for the BoTM Eptathlon. I still have to create an award icon for it, so if anyone has any artistic flair, please feel free to propose one.

Staff are currently discussing the rest of the make-up of the BoTM Eptathlon. No one seems to like the Time award being a requirement, so I guess we are likely to remove it. Recent suggestions in these parts include replacing the Time/Cow requirement with a Gold Medal. That strikes me as a very good idea, but it is not a final decision yet.

Thank you very much for the clarification. For a number of reasons (my lack of cow in the GOTM Heptatlon, my want to know about the modern era in BTS...) a very painful idea had entered my mind: to play BOTM1 for the cow.

Your post has saved me such an ordeal , avoiding victory till 2050 AD is just against my ethics.

 

[Harok]

An interesting idea, my favorite part of the XOTMs is getting to compare against others that go for the same victory condition as me and this would make it so you get tons of games to compare against. Of course I also don't mind winning some of those fastest finish awards and this side competition means it will either be significantly easier to win them if you go for a different condition or extremely difficult if you go for the same one.

I'll probably play along when it suits the type of game I like to play and ignore it when it doesn't. For example I almost always go for the peaceful wins when the game involves continents and normal speed and warring wins when it is epic and all civs on the same landmass.

 

[Munro]

I think this is a fine idea for providing more competition and a next level of challenge for the elite players - and helping to make the the challenger save a bit more relevant...

(As it stands, folks chosing the challenger save will likely be by themselves for their chosen VC - which makes it a bit pointless, as Mutineer often complained).

It should also provide some welcome variety - presumably an incentive to try out some of those so called 'peaceful' victories I keep hearing about!

As for the award structure, I consider medals a fun and enjoyable incentive -and a valuable complement to the global rankings, which as dV points out, reflect participation as much as ability.

While the impact of this Guantlet is important, therefore, I'm not sure there is much risk of making these awards any less relevant. For aspiring players, fastest-finish awards may become more accessible (which should therefore increase competition at that level, since there is more possibility of winning) while the elite have something to play for chasing after the challenger save gauntlet VC....

This seems like a good thing, increasing participation at both levels - and the depth of field overall should benefit as a result.

Frederiksburg's suggestion to require at least one 'gauntlet' fastest finish in the eptathlon (and a gold medal to replace the cow... ) works very nicely to balance any potential cheapening of the eptathlon, if this gauntlet idea does take hold (and I hope that it does).

Anyway, I'm very impressed by the great work that the GOTM staff does here and look forward to a near era of BOTM!

Oh - and I would like to accept the gauntlet too! Domination sounds like a good place to start...