DaviddesJ
Deity
For GOTM21, it's here (scroll to bottom of page):
http://gotm.civfanatics.net/games/gotm21_features.shtml
Frequently Asked Questions - (FAQ)
- Thread starter Phillip_martin
- Start date
For GOTM21, it's here (scroll to bottom of page):
http://gotm.civfanatics.net/games/gotm21_features.shtml
hotrod0823
Deity
It is a bit slower due to the map size and the number of civs. It does get a bit faster and there is another thread with some more info on game speed.
Hotrod
waylander
Chieftain
DaviddesJ,
Thanks, that helps alot.
Waylander
Thanks, that helps alot.
Waylander
Reddwarfian
E're now! Whats all this?
My Mac doesn't read the .exe file.
I have Mac OS 9.2, if that helps...
I have Mac OS 9.2, if that helps...
In fact, it reads but doesn't understand them.
No. What really helps is reading this thread where cracker gives us Macintosh people the download link .
Reddwarfian
E're now! Whats all this?
Oops.
Must've missed that...
Must've missed that...
ssharlow
Chieftain
I didn't see anything like this elsewhere, so I'm asking here, let me know if I missed this.
I'd be really curious what it takes to "build" a GOTM. For example, the next two are listed as Vikings and Arabs - what stage are they in - maps done already, someone building new "stuff", testing etc. Without getting into spoilers, I'm curious how long ago GOTM21 was started and what type of development cycle was used, how many people involved, etc.
These are really "fun" (even if I don't do that well compared to some), and I wonder how much work went into something that I will obsess over large chunks of the month.
ssharlow
I'd be really curious what it takes to "build" a GOTM. For example, the next two are listed as Vikings and Arabs - what stage are they in - maps done already, someone building new "stuff", testing etc. Without getting into spoilers, I'm curious how long ago GOTM21 was started and what type of development cycle was used, how many people involved, etc.
These are really "fun" (even if I don't do that well compared to some), and I wonder how much work went into something that I will obsess over large chunks of the month.
ssharlow
cracker
Gil Favor's Sidekick
SSharlow,
Hopefully we will have more time for some technical discussion of what goes into building the maps and game setups in the future. Now that we are getting a fairly large pool of players that have played on the maps, some technical discussions will be lots of fun and provide lots of great inputs to the process.
I can tell you that the games and maps take shape over a several month period. One of the biggest differences between the old way and the new way of doing things is that we track all the map conditions and then make certain that the games you see will provide some variety and excitement through different challenges.
Some examples of things that are being tracked include:
nearest neighbor civ rivals
intermediate neighbor civ rivals
distant civ rivals
average terrain character of the start position (about 6 different variables)
Average usable terrain per civ
Average powerful terrain per civ (no water, desert, mtns, jungle)
Minimum expected contatc crossing distances
(and a whole host of other factors)
Some people complain that they like the simplicity of just a randomly generated map, but I tend to totally disagree with that statement when we have 300-600 people playing the game. Wasting a month of play of a randomly diysfunctional game setup that has nothing to do with a game concept is just not a responsible approach in my book (nothing wrong with it for personal games of games for 5 or 6 people, but we are talking about a different scale here).
One of the things we look at also in the traits of the UU and the historic and designed character traits of the Civ in terms of build priorities and special abilities. Yes, the human can ignore the build priorities but these give hints as to how an immersive concept game can be generated. In GOTM games in 2002, the randomly chosen games resulted in worthless UU and trait conditions in over 50% of the games and we wanted to reduce the level of these effects.
One thing we are finding is that Low difficulty level games do not provide much in the way of interesting interactions. Not that we want the games to be "harder" we just want the other players to not be Jello.
An example of process can be found in the Gotm20 Spain map setup which was actually laid out before Gotm18 and Gotm19 were defined. The Gotm18 and Gotm19 games were designed to emphasize key game elements that would be critical in Gotm20 without making the games boring and repetitive. Knowing that Gotm20 would be Deity level several months in advance, we did not want to introduce fundamentally new game play strategies at the toughest levels.
The final phase of game development invloves playe testing and balancing. I currently fill the map maker role and play each map up to the 1000bc level and then analyse how each of the civs develop. This can lead to altering some civ starting postions or altering some terrain bonus positions and resources or even giving the civs a unit bonus to try and get them to play out to the desired functional positions during the first 80 to 100 turns. Rome in Gotm19 was a good example of this process where it was determined that they had to have an altered settler progression to get then to play out as as strong as the human position even though they were on an isolated island continent all to themselves.
Generally by the time you see a game, it has 100 to 120 hours of play time on it in some form.
Preparing a game that will function well in PTW and Civ3v1.29 is also somewhat of a real challenge. PTW sucks down on the RNG at a much more frequent rate so it can randomly walk in a totally different direction from the base game even under identical start conditions.
Hopefully we will have more time for some technical discussion of what goes into building the maps and game setups in the future. Now that we are getting a fairly large pool of players that have played on the maps, some technical discussions will be lots of fun and provide lots of great inputs to the process.
I can tell you that the games and maps take shape over a several month period. One of the biggest differences between the old way and the new way of doing things is that we track all the map conditions and then make certain that the games you see will provide some variety and excitement through different challenges.
Some examples of things that are being tracked include:
nearest neighbor civ rivals
intermediate neighbor civ rivals
distant civ rivals
average terrain character of the start position (about 6 different variables)
Average usable terrain per civ
Average powerful terrain per civ (no water, desert, mtns, jungle)
Minimum expected contatc crossing distances
(and a whole host of other factors)
Some people complain that they like the simplicity of just a randomly generated map, but I tend to totally disagree with that statement when we have 300-600 people playing the game. Wasting a month of play of a randomly diysfunctional game setup that has nothing to do with a game concept is just not a responsible approach in my book (nothing wrong with it for personal games of games for 5 or 6 people, but we are talking about a different scale here).
One of the things we look at also in the traits of the UU and the historic and designed character traits of the Civ in terms of build priorities and special abilities. Yes, the human can ignore the build priorities but these give hints as to how an immersive concept game can be generated. In GOTM games in 2002, the randomly chosen games resulted in worthless UU and trait conditions in over 50% of the games and we wanted to reduce the level of these effects.
One thing we are finding is that Low difficulty level games do not provide much in the way of interesting interactions. Not that we want the games to be "harder" we just want the other players to not be Jello.
An example of process can be found in the Gotm20 Spain map setup which was actually laid out before Gotm18 and Gotm19 were defined. The Gotm18 and Gotm19 games were designed to emphasize key game elements that would be critical in Gotm20 without making the games boring and repetitive. Knowing that Gotm20 would be Deity level several months in advance, we did not want to introduce fundamentally new game play strategies at the toughest levels.
The final phase of game development invloves playe testing and balancing. I currently fill the map maker role and play each map up to the 1000bc level and then analyse how each of the civs develop. This can lead to altering some civ starting postions or altering some terrain bonus positions and resources or even giving the civs a unit bonus to try and get them to play out to the desired functional positions during the first 80 to 100 turns. Rome in Gotm19 was a good example of this process where it was determined that they had to have an altered settler progression to get then to play out as as strong as the human position even though they were on an isolated island continent all to themselves.
Generally by the time you see a game, it has 100 to 120 hours of play time on it in some form.
Preparing a game that will function well in PTW and Civ3v1.29 is also somewhat of a real challenge. PTW sucks down on the RNG at a much more frequent rate so it can randomly walk in a totally different direction from the base game even under identical start conditions.
Bit repetitive in the 3rd line with reusing Arizona. How about :
doner
loner
moaner
roamer
samildanach
Necrophile
I didnt know about this cracker. I felt that the RNG went out of its way to screw me in the current GoTM (1.21f Europe Open). I only upgraded for to 1.21f prior to this GoTM. I didn't have the persecution complex that I now seemed to have developed prior to this - I am thinking of sueing Atari for the years of therapy that lie ahead of me.
The problems with the RNG in my game didnt begin to really manifest themselves until after 10AD. How does the PTW RNG suck in your opinion, is there any difference in how much it sucks between versions and can you do anything to influence the effect it may be having on the later game?
DaviddesJ
Deity
If one of the things the GOTMs are supposed to do is challenge players, then the challenge of dealing with "dysfunctional" (i.e., difficult) game starts is (or should be) part of that. If we can't have "difficult" starts because it's too hard on the beginning players, I hope we can find ways to make the Predator games, at least, more difficult. Even if this might require in some cases more significant changes between Open and Predator (e.g., map changes).
DaviddesJ
Deity
All he's saying is that there are more things in PTW that cause it to use up random numbers, thus more likelihood that a player will do something that causes their game to follow a different course than someone else's game. He's not saying that the random numbers are "better" or "worse"; that doesn't make sense. Just that the designer has less ability to predict what will happen, in PTW.
I don't think this is so bad, myself.
cracker
Gil Favor's Sidekick
I didn't mean sucks as in bad sucks. I meant "sucks down on" as in "hogs all the milkshake through the straw" because in PTW the RNG draws from the stack are alot more frequent and can have a multiplicative effect. There is a lot more stupid RNG driven barbarian, explration, and general AI bozo behavior in PTW. It just makes the process of balancing a game for comparison even harder.
It also slows down the game cycles because the AI and the barbs are doing more random things godd, bad, and ugly.
In an individual player game this randomness is not bad at all but from a standpoint of a game that has hundreds of players we do not want events that are truly random. We want each individual player to perceive that they are random but we really want the outcomes to be fixed. If player A is going the get a settler from a hut we want all players to get a settler from that hut (if they do not meet the blocking criteria). If player C gets an 8 turn anarchy then we want all players to draw an 8 turn anarchy. If player Z draws steam power as the industrial age free science tech then we want all players to draw Steam Power.
The choice of which outcome occurs could still be randomly generated but then just preset for all players in the game this is not that technical of a concept.
Also, the barb randomness and diplomacy giggle randomness should not draw from the same deck of cards as the hut and combat event randomness. These are just some fundamental design basics.
samildanach
Necrophile
Thanks for clearing that up. I jumped to the conclusion that the RNG was somehow loaded in PTW. As I said, years of therapy
cracker
Gil Favor's Sidekick
I doubt we will head in this map variant direction because it causes irreconcilable differences in play beyond where I think we should go.
Also, you not assume that you will not see difficult start positions. Difficult exists in different forms. There are conflicts that must be resolved and issues that must be addressed that may not be instantly apparent in grass vs desert vs jungle.
You may need to have more faith in the general level of expertise in the background of the process.
What you probably will not see is games where the inherent values of the UU and the Civ traits and historic presence as defined in the scope of the game will have no value. You would not see an Iroquois or Egypt game on an archipelago without horses. You will probably not see start positions alot like Gotm14-Babylon on Deity. You will probably not see England or the Vikings on a Pangaea map. You probably will not see Deity level games without a river in city position 1, 2, or 3.
DaviddesJ
Deity
I think for the purposes of discussion and community, it's actually better to have a broader variety of random events. Then people can discuss and compare their different outcomes, and how those affected their games. If several different players had different random events, I can compare their games to mine and see how it affected them, and I learn more than if every game went exactly the same as mine.
I agree that one player popping a settler from a hut on turn 2, while another gets barbarians, is probably too much divergence right off the bat. But trying to make sure that everyone gets the same random tech in 800AD is unnecessary, in my opinion. Anyway, it can't be done, so I suppose it's mostly moot.
DaviddesJ
Deity
It's not a question of expertise. It's mostly a question of difficulty and challenge. It seems that, for the foreseeable future, all GOTMs at all levels will be constructed so that the experienced players will all surely win. The only tension comes from figuring out whether we can win by 600AD or whether we'll have to go to 800AD. Or creating artificial difficulties for ourselves, like OCC.
My feeling is that, at the Predator level, there's an opportunity to have more difficult games, for players who want that. Games that might be a challenge to win. I think random deity games can be fairly challenging, with unfavorable starts. So I know it's possible. Maybe it just doesn't fit within your vision of the GOTM. I understand that GOTM can't be all things to all people.
Bam-Bam
Hammerhead
I have to agree with a whole lot of what both DaviddesJ AND cracker are saying. The concept of a rough ride in a game--when even the best of players are in danger of losing the game via a rough start, cramped quarters, lack of resources, etc. makes a whole lot of sense to me.
Problem is, because of the rampant popularity of the GOTM, and the fact that it carries scoring and global rankings with it, means that many of the best players, to whom the ranking and scoring matter (not saying that this is the ONLY pursuit for them--and not trying to imply that I know all of their motivations either ), will not necessarily want to participate in a game whose outcome (win or lose) is greatly in question. The choice of playing a more difficult game does not provide any benefit to scoring or player rankings. It is merely "excellence is its own reward" That has drawn many a player so far, and I hope it continues.
Cracker has a formidible task--trying to balance the playability for the masses, cater the newcomers and less experienced, and provide a challenging game for the top players. One game cannot be all things to all people. I tend to disagree with some of the parts of the GOTM, and (if I could just get games done in time
) would participate more. I personnally do not care about the scoring--not my bag, man. I limit myself in the use of some tactics--that is a choice. Nuff said.
On the random nature--I agree that trying to force the same random tech is a loser IMO. I am somewhat put off by synching up what huts give, because they can make such a huge difference. I like how the "great sucking sound" of PTW on the PRNG can make in comparing games, and the subsequent conversations of "You mean [insert civ here] managed to do that--they were toast in my game". I do agree that PTW does tend to use the PRNG too much, and could use some separation between different types of dice rolls. I also wouldn't mind a game engine that did not rely on so many pseudo-random things....ah well...starting to get OT here.
There are other comparative games where the pursuit of very difficult games is encouraged---and that particular gathering is sufficiantly small that this works. DaviddesJ, perhaps you could venture there and see how it suits?
Problem is, because of the rampant popularity of the GOTM, and the fact that it carries scoring and global rankings with it, means that many of the best players, to whom the ranking and scoring matter (not saying that this is the ONLY pursuit for them--and not trying to imply that I know all of their motivations either
), will not necessarily want to participate in a game whose outcome (win or lose) is greatly in question. The choice of playing a more difficult game does not provide any benefit to scoring or player rankings. It is merely "excellence is its own reward" That has drawn many a player so far, and I hope it continues.Cracker has a formidible task--trying to balance the playability for the masses, cater the newcomers and less experienced, and provide a challenging game for the top players. One game cannot be all things to all people. I tend to disagree with some of the parts of the GOTM, and (if I could just get games done in time
) would participate more. I personnally do not care about the scoring--not my bag, man. I limit myself in the use of some tactics--that is a choice. Nuff said.On the random nature--I agree that trying to force the same random tech is a loser IMO. I am somewhat put off by synching up what huts give, because they can make such a huge difference. I like how the "great sucking sound" of PTW on the PRNG can make in comparing games, and the subsequent conversations of "You mean [insert civ here] managed to do that--they were toast in my game". I do agree that PTW does tend to use the PRNG too much, and could use some separation between different types of dice rolls. I also wouldn't mind a game engine that did not rely on so many pseudo-random things....ah well...starting to get OT here.
There are other comparative games where the pursuit of very difficult games is encouraged---and that particular gathering is sufficiantly small that this works. DaviddesJ, perhaps you could venture there and see how it suits?
rabies
Happy Dad
...again, I agree with Bam Bam here. I know what he is referring to and have shadowed 3 of those games for fun (though I don't post/interact with the active players). They are incredibly fun, and are quite challenging indeed. When I need a fix on a challenging game, or something a bit out of the ordinary, I download one of those games.
As for the GOTM, I rather enjoy the level it is currently at. In the 4 games I have participated in so far (including 21), I have never had any fear that I would 'lose' per se, but I am constantly criticizing how well I am handling things in my game...and thinking aloud the whole time how Sir Pleb is probably doing everything 40 turns faster..
For me, this is the fun of the GOTM.
Originally posted by rabies
...and thinking aloud the whole time how Sir Pleb is probably doing everything 40 turns faster..
I would love to see a match between Cartouch Bee and SirPleb, but saidly Cartouch Bee no longer play GOTM.
