Future of Civ4 GOTMs

[justjohn]

I realize I'm late in answering, but I'll add my two cents nevertheless. I havn't submitted an xOTM game in ages, and all for the same reason, I simply cannot find the time to finish them. I play most of them until a point where I can judge the length of the game, and have tried to finish a few that I thought wouldn't be too long, but I cannot even remember last time I actually got around to finish an xOTM. I do enjoy the maps, though, as far as I have been able to play them, and I want to thank the staff for that. Which version to play is not particular important to me, I enjoy them all, but I always enjoy most the higher difficult level ones. Hence a change to more quick games and more regularly higher difficulty levels sounds good to me.
-jj

 

[MarleysGh0st]

Adding my late response to this thread...

Although I've been using the batch files to get around the problem with Windows 8, I'd still like to update to Windows 10, soon, and I'm not sure how I feel about the "signed driver" fix to get vanilla and Warlords to work with that. So I probably will limit myself to BOTM games in the near future. Lack of free time in my schedule has also been a factor, recently.

If we do go to a schedule with two BOTM games a month, I like the idea of having one be on a low difficulty level. The games that are immortal and above are still way out of my reach, so I rarely even try them.

 

[Jenarie]

Just seeing this thread made me a little sad. I haven't submitted nearly as many as I've started and I don't even start them all but I know I come here regularly and just love knowing they are here when I want them.

So although I have nothing really to add to this thread I'm going to start this BOTM and try to play it through and submit it no matter how horrible it may turn out just because that's the only way I can think to show support for something I really appreciate.

 

[Cactus Pete]

I, too, certainly an advocate for quicker games.

Hope we can keep it going.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Looking at the posts so far, it's obvious that there's a strong consensus for shorter games. I'm sure that will be noted by those of us who set the games in the coming months!

Just seeing this thread made me a little sad. I haven't submitted nearly as many as I've started and I don't even start them all but I know I come here regularly and just love knowing they are here when I want them.

So although I have nothing really to add to this thread I'm going to start this BOTM and try to play it through and submit it no matter how horrible it may turn out just because that's the only way I can think to show support for something I really appreciate.

Thanks for the support, Jenarie! Don't be too sad though - remember part of the point of this thread is to see what things we might change to make sure that GOTMs do carry on for a long time.

As a general point to everyone - do remember that you are unable to finish a game in time, you can submit it as a retired game. In the context of this thread, submitting a retired game has the obvious benefit that it means your participation in the game is logged, so we get a better idea of the numbers playing. And it makes the game results look better You're also welcome to submit a retired game if you don't wish to finish (for example because micromanagement in the late game is getting too tedious, or you're facing a conquest defeat that won't be much fun to play through).

 

[donsig]

I've been away from Civ for some months now but decided to play again this afternoon. In the past a good deal of my Civving was only playing the xotms. Unfortunately, it appears that I can no longer play Civ4 or Warlords due to some Microsoft update. Since there appears to be no free and easy way to rectify the situation it looks like any Civving I do will be BTS. There may be many others who totally give up on the older versions now.

I'm not sure whether I'll get back to Civving on a regular basis but if I do then I will certainly try any BOTMs out there. For me, I prefer easier games. As a mediocre player at best it really wasn't all that fun getting pounded in the xotms month after month.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Just to throw out another idea which I've been pondering about: As another way to avoid time issues, how would people feel if, once a competition had closed, submissions were left open for people to submit - for want of a better word - 'casual' games.

What I'm thinking is something like this: Casual games would not be part of the competition and would always be listed separately from - and clearly subordinate to - the actual competition results, although in roughly the same format. Obviously, they would be ineligible for competition medals and awards. There would be no time limit, and would not need to be your first attempt. And if you want to submit more than one 'casual' attempt at the same game, that's fine too. For example, you might submit a casual game if:

• After submitting your GOTM entry, you wanted to try replaying the game to try out a different strategy.
• You ran out of time in the competition and so had to submit a retired game, but you would still like to complete the game.
• You wanted to try playing an old game from a couple of years ago.
• You were curious to see if you could beat one of the awards from the actual competition, and if you do, you'd like to have it submitted and listed.

Also, if for any reason, your competition entry doesn't meet the competition criteria (such as a replay forced by a crash and no recent save), it would mean we could accept it as a casual game rather than rejecting it altogether.

Obviously, the lack of a time limit means any submitted casual game would always be open to being 'beaten' at a later date by someone else.

Thoughts? Would this be of interest to people?

Note that I'm writing this wearing my 'player' hat, not my 'staff' hat. It's a random idea from my head, not something remotely 'official'. It occurred to me because I quite like sometimes replaying old games.

 

[billybgame]

Just wanted to chime in, albeit later.

I have been coming around, and playing these or the HoF games for many years. It would be a terrible loss to have them not around anymore. So, good that it sounds like shouldn't be happening.

Having said that, I do get into other games, etc, that draw my interest away, but, so far, always come back from time to time, to check and see if any games interest me.

Also, I do not believe I've tried anything but BTS for a long while. So, I may need to see if I can still even play Vanilla or Warlord.

Lastly, I like the idea of more lower difficulty games. I've never really gotten into the higher difficulty games, finding them far too gimmicky to try to compete or win. So, the dual idea might be interesting. Though I'm not sure that's going to increase entries, being you may split groups of players.

One thing mentioned that I have often forgotten. When trying many harder difficulty games, I too have neglected to submit, if I lost or retired in frustration. So, I will try better at that.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I've now posted a poll here so you can vote for whatever changes you want.

 

[Daijin7]

I love it very much to have the GOTMs around, though I rarely have the time to finish them. I'd miss them a lot.
I play only Vanilla, because I prefer to dig deeper in one game's mechanics than to adapt to new ones like in espionage in BOTM. But probably I'd do so, if vanilla would not be offered any more.

I like very much the idea of "casual game" submissions.

I prefer playing between Prince and Immortal. Below and above is usually less fun.

 

[Cat Behemoth]

I voted "Yes" for non-standart starts. But I hope this starts will not be absolute resourceless, as for example GOTM 119, when desire to play has expired too fast.

 

[Zulyin]

I, for one, play only BTS and don't have much interest in playing vanilla and warlords. BTS seems just better to me and playing the other 2 feels like I'm playing an "incomplete" game.

I'd prefer if there was 2 BOTM per month, while still have 1 month to complete each.

 

[ngraner42]

I have not been able to play like I used to, but I would really like to continue to see 2 games per month. I think small maps would be a good idea. I used them to do the EQM and found that they are more fun (much less city management busy work). Small maps would give me a better chance to get back into regular play.

 

[whb]

A few random ideas

- for the low-participation games, don't require the HOF mod. I realise that's controversial, but a complicated set-up (not sure what it is for Vanilla, but for BTS on Steam it involves downloading a special "unpatched" version of the game, not being put off by the scare-boxes on the mod screen about Windows 7 and Vista and the lack of mention of Windows 10, installing the mod, finding the BTS exe and setting it to run as administrator. I suspect the conversion rate from "ooh, I might give that a try" to actually getting set up is lower than it could be

- maybe switch to a Dropbox approach to deter reloading? (Share your saves folder, and it should be apparent from the change log of the autosaves directory if anyone cheated -- autosaves should always go forward in time!) Anyone can play, but only if your saves folder is verifiable can you win a medal.

- for some games, show the high-score table immediately on submission minus the top five. Give people a target to hit, but hide the top few so an early high-score doesn't deter people from trying

- eventually (though this isn't likely) I'd like the same rules but a lighter weight client and server -- vector 2d rather than 3d. But that would require Firaxis open sourcing the game rules and AI. (The rest is fairly quick to whip up, in open source terms)

 

[Noble Zarkon]

Appreciate your perspective and I am going to update the instructions for the Mod but what you suggest would entail a lot of manual effort for the GOTM staff and leave them without their current tools so I'm not convinced it's viable.

 

[Noble Zarkon]

btw the whole code HAS been released - one of the reasons we need the Mod to ensure we are all playing the same game!

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I also appreciate the ideas - there are a few in there that I hadn't thought of myself.

The fact that it is so complicated to set up games to play GOTMs is something that I've privately thought must be putting people off playing - so I do agree with you there. It had therefore occurred to me to start looking at the HOF mod to see if it can be made easier to use (for example, a single installer file that does everything required to make a patched installed version of Civ ready for playing GOTMs). However, the vote in the parallel thread on what people want seems to indicate there isn't much demand for making it easier to set up to play GOTMs - which I have to admit I find somewhat puzzling.

I'm not sure it'd be possible to avoid requiring the HOF mod, because the HOF mod also prevents people from modding Civ to give themselves an unfair advantage (for example, without the HOF mod, a player could theoretically mod civ on their own machine to ensure that in any battles, the human player always wins - which would clearly make a mockery of the competition!). The HOF mod prevents that sort of thing by simply refusing to load if the game's assets have been changed on the player's machine - that 'modified assets' dialog that occasionally confuses people.

 

[Deckhand]

However, the vote in the parallel thread on what people want seems to indicate there isn't much demand for making it easier to set up to play GOTMs - which I have to admit I find somewhat puzzling.

Perhaps because voters are already playing xOTMs and it is not (or longer is) an issue for them.

 

[kcd_swede]

Perhaps because voters are already playing xOTMs and it is not (or longer is) an issue for them.

...at least until the next OS patch from Bill Gate's & Co.

 

[Daijin7]

> but for BTS on Steam

Does BTS need Steam to work?
I am definitely not going to use Steam in any way. Than BTS will be a nogo for me.