1. We have added the ability to collapse/expand forum categories and widgets on forum home.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Photobucket has changed its policy concerning hotlinking images and now requires an account with a $399.00 annual fee to allow hotlink. More information is available at: this link.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. All Civ avatars are brought back and available for selection in the Avatar Gallery! There are 945 avatars total.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. To make the site more secure, we have installed SSL certificates and enabled HTTPS for both the main site and forums.
    Dismiss Notice
  5. Civ6 is released! Order now! (Amazon US | Amazon UK | Amazon CA | Amazon DE | Amazon FR)
    Dismiss Notice
  6. Dismiss Notice
  7. Forum account upgrades are available for ad-free browsing.
    Dismiss Notice

Discussion on Game Difficulty Classes, Structure of Civ3 GOTM/COTM

Discussion in 'Civ3 - Game of the Month' started by civ_steve, Feb 5, 2012.

  1. civ_steve

    civ_steve Chieftain Retired Moderator GOTM Staff

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2002
    Messages:
    3,866
    Location:
    formerly Santa Clarita, California
    Yes, I know. It's a fine balance between making a slight change to the Open save to make things a little more difficult, vs making the game a struggle to win for the best players. We've had several rounds of discussions in the past on this topic; perhaps it's time to reopen the issue.

    (Edit - moved to form new discussion thread)
     
  2. Più Freddo

    Più Freddo From space, earth is blue

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Messages:
    1,533
    Location:
    Vienna, Austria
    I have seen that harder challenges have made often-time predator players play open lately and wish like Tricky that some players who ought to but never do play predator actually would.

    How about removing the open class? With so few players we don't seem to need three different classes.
     
  3. Megalou

    Megalou Thez worlds are not enuf

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2002
    Messages:
    1,315
    Location:
    Sweden
    The idea of making the games harder is good but there is also the question of score and winning date. I'm against the handicap "extra nearby luxury" because it infallably affects score and winning date. I can abide other handicaps if there is only a remote chance that they won't affect the result negatively to a great extent.

    A Civ3 game gets less and less fun for every turn that is played, so I don't feel compelled to make myself play 10 extra turns between eg 800-900 AD just because there is an option to do so. So please, no "nearby luxury" handicap for Open class if you want me to choose predator.
     
  4. tR1cKy

    tR1cKy taking over the world

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2003
    Messages:
    1,947
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Perusia, Roman Empire
    Another possibility would be to leave things as they are (i.e. any handicap goes) but with the predator class getting a small score bonus, say 10%, as what happens in reverse with the conquest class.

    This way you can either have it easy and bear the lack of bonus or face the extra challenge for the extra reward.
     
  5. Più Freddo

    Più Freddo From space, earth is blue

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Messages:
    1,533
    Location:
    Vienna, Austria
    Indeed. I was thinking keeping the concept of a few rule changes to make the game more interesting, not necessarily harder, from the predator class and make everyone play them. Just to simplify things.
     
  6. Megalou

    Megalou Thez worlds are not enuf

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2002
    Messages:
    1,315
    Location:
    Sweden
    That's fine by me. I don't fancy the 10% score increase suggestion since it may "compromise" the sacred All Time Fastest and Highest table.
     
  7. Più Freddo

    Più Freddo From space, earth is blue

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Messages:
    1,533
    Location:
    Vienna, Austria
    It also puts the focus of the competition in the wrong place. It shouldn't be about selecting the best <score factor>/<difficulty> combination.
     
  8. tR1cKy

    tR1cKy taking over the world

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2003
    Messages:
    1,947
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Perusia, Roman Empire
    Methinks the competition has already gone there. I mean, my suspect is that at least some people stick in the open class exactly for that reason.

    But then, removing the open class altogether seems equally good to me. With 20 players on average and one game master, is it worth it to keep 3 versions of the game running?
     
  9. Lanzelot

    Lanzelot Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2007
    Messages:
    5,332
    Location:
    Heidelberg
    Another idea that I got from the German "Spiel des Monats" (= "Game of the Month") site: they start a game every month, but you have two months to complete it. This increased participation because it allows more of the "occasional" contributers to submit.
    Especially over the last year or so I quite often had the problem that I was not able to finish a game I had started. (And sometimes I didn't even start one, because I was not sure whether I would have the time to finish it and was afraid that the effort would be "wasted"...)
    With a two-month period many people could probably submit at least every other game (and if a game goes unexpectedly quick, you can even start the next one right away, and again have two month in case time is getting tight.)

    (Of course that means, that people have to wait two months, before they can get the results, but we already do that today anyway, don't we... :mischief:)
     
  10. CKS

    CKS Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    1,829
    I'm against removing the open class. At emperor and above, I don't need any extra obstacles. If we want to go down to 2 versions, hardly anyone plays the conquest version (I found one submission in the 6 games I checked).

    We could remove the predator save, and make the predator challenge be X turns of pressing enter before starting, and then count turns from when they were allowed to start for the Jason score. That would allow us to have only one version of the save. ;)

    I'm in favor of Lanzelot's two month suggestion. Frankly, I'm short on time, and I'd be happy if we started a PTW game 6 times a year and a Conquests game 6 times a year and had two months for each. We went to two games each month when conquests came out, because not everyone could play it, but that isn't an issue now. Perhaps a single game each month would be sufficient. (Or maybe a Conquests game each month and a PTW game every other month, if we don't want to cut that many games.) Either way, two months per game would help.
     
  11. tR1cKy

    tR1cKy taking over the world

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2003
    Messages:
    1,947
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Perusia, Roman Empire
    This wouldn't solve the problem of top-notch players seeking the best victory condition possible by sticking to the open class.

    Not sure about this. In order to work, 'X' must be very small, or else nobody, including myself, would play predator, because a predator player would have no chance of getting a victory or an award.

    I'm ok in playing with extra obstacles as long as i feel to have at least a possibility to score a top nonetheless, but if obstacles are too hard, then why competing at all? One can just download the game and play it just for its own amusement.

    Me too actually. I agree that giving players more time could possibly boost the number of submissions. For sure, it would give some relief to Steve that is getting notorious for his delays :p (j/k)
     
  12. Megalou

    Megalou Thez worlds are not enuf

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2002
    Messages:
    1,315
    Location:
    Sweden
    There is no reason to remove the PTW games just because PTW is older. Some things are better in Conquests but PTW is arguably better balanced thanks to the not-so-overpowering armies.

    Perhaps the 6+6 games solution is good but perhaps participation will be lower. What if someone plays a one week game and has to wait 3 weeks for the next one. Perhaps this person will forget about the site. On the other hand, PTW participation is pretty low as it is. I don't know...
     
  13. Più Freddo

    Più Freddo From space, earth is blue

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Messages:
    1,533
    Location:
    Vienna, Austria
    I don't know why you regard this as a problem. If they don't want glory and honor, then let them do without.
     
  14. Più Freddo

    Più Freddo From space, earth is blue

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Messages:
    1,533
    Location:
    Vienna, Austria
    Sounds great. Would have increased my contributions in the past.
     
  15. Garvarg

    Garvarg Playing with fire

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2002
    Messages:
    317
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario,Canada
    Personally I always play the open game.
    Why? The only reason I have is to say it is out of habit.

    I really do not want any special treatment so I wont play the Conquest version, but the only reason I have have stayed away from the Predator version goes back to there being 50 to 100 submissions each game.

    I had no hope of getting any awards or medals, but I didn't like being in the bottom 50 either, so no extra challenges. How much do these challenges add, 10 extra turns?
    If we were to lose one of the three starts, I would say lose the Open game.

    To stand on my word, I will play Predator for the next two games.
    Yeah, I know whoop dee doo, but I want to prove my point, instead of just offering lip service to the debate.

    Garvarg
     
  16. EvilConqueror

    EvilConqueror Warlord

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2007
    Messages:
    455
    Location:
    USA
    I'd say lose the Conquest Class games since you can't win any awards or medals if you play that version and it is the least played version by far. Open Class is the most commonly played so I don't think that version should be removed.
     
  17. Più Freddo

    Più Freddo From space, earth is blue

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Messages:
    1,533
    Location:
    Vienna, Austria
    But we want to attract new players. The Conquest Class could persuade a new player to dare take the plunge.
     
  18. EvilConqueror

    EvilConqueror Warlord

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2007
    Messages:
    455
    Location:
    USA
    Yes, I suppose it could. Though, I don't think many new players would be discouraged from taking part if Open Class and Predator Class were the only two options. I think the difficulty level of the current game is a more important consideration than the presence of bonuses. Even with bonuses, a new player is going to have a tough time with the higher difficulty levels.

    If Conquest Class and Predator Class are the only two options, I think participation is going to end up going down. On the one hand, I doubt many of the members currently playing Open Class are going to want to play Conquest Class since it won't be as much of a challenge and they won't be able to compete for awards or medals. On the other hand, the extra obstacles that come with Predator Class may be discouraging to some.

    I like the current system. Conquest Class for newer players. Open Class for the majority. Predator Class for those who want an extra challenge. If any one of these categories is removed, there is a good chance that the GOTM's will be less appealing to some members.
     
  19. The Professor

    The Professor Emperor

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2007
    Messages:
    260
    Location:
    at my desk
    A possible compromise: Conquest class games for Emperor or above, just open and predator games for lower levels?

    I am also in favor of a two-month window. There's a lot of games that I start, but I am no where near finishing in one month.
     
  20. Lanzelot

    Lanzelot Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2007
    Messages:
    5,332
    Location:
    Heidelberg
    Good idea!
     

Share This Page