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

[civ_steve]

These are very mild challenges.

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)

 

[Più Freddo]

perhaps it's time to reopen the issue.

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.

 

[Megalou]

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.

 

[tR1cKy]

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.

 

[Più Freddo]

A Civ3 game gets less and less fun for every turn that is played

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.

 

[Megalou]

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.

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.

 

[Più Freddo]

I don't fancy the 10% score increase suggestion since it may "compromise" the sacred All Time Fastest and Highest table.

It also puts the focus of the competition in the wrong place. It shouldn't be about selecting the best <score factor>/<difficulty> combination.

 

[tR1cKy]

It also puts the focus of the competition in the wrong place. It shouldn't be about selecting the best <score factor>/<difficulty> combination.

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?

 

[Lanzelot]

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... )

 

[CKS]

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?

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.

 

[tR1cKy]

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).

This wouldn't solve the problem of top-notch players seeking the best victory condition possible by sticking to the open class.

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.

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.

I'm in favor of Lanzelot's two month suggestion.

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 (j/k)

 

[Megalou]

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...

 

[Più Freddo]

This wouldn't solve the problem of top-notch players seeking the best victory condition possible by sticking to the open class.

I don't know why you regard this as a problem. If they don't want glory and honor, then let them do without.

 

[Più Freddo]

they start a game every month, but you have two months to complete it.

Sounds great. Would have increased my contributions in the past.

 

[Garvarg]

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

 

[EvilConqueror]

If we were to lose one of the three starts, I would say lose the Open game.

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.

 

[Più Freddo]

But we want to attract new players. The Conquest Class could persuade a new player to dare take the plunge.

 

[EvilConqueror]

But we want to attract new players. The Conquest Class could persuade a new player to dare take the plunge.

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.

 

[The Professor]

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.

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.

 

[Lanzelot]

A possible compromise: Conquest class games for Emperor or above, just open and predator games for lower levels?

Good idea!