G-III Papa

[Tone]

No entries for the last gauntlet. Let's see if this quick, bash 'um up style game interests you.

* Mapsize: Small
* Difficulty: Emperor
* Condition: Conquest

Yet again I offer another opportunity to knock one of my games off the top spot. However there are no open slots so you will have to earn your place on the table.

Good luck to all participants. Games due in by 15th July 2009

 

[Tone]

No entries for this one either. Perhaps it is time to reconsider what we want from this feature. Any views gratefully received.

 

[Spoonwood]

I kind of like the idea of us all competing on the same map, but unlike the XOTM competitions, it's a HoF type map... we have a river-grassland cow start, maybe with barbies on at a low level, and off or at sedentary at a high level. Minimum opponents would also fit, since a lot of HoF games seem to use min opponents (though of course notable exceptions exist, especially in space and diplomatic games), while XOTM competitions use max opponents. Then again, we couldn't write anything in the comment section until the update. I kind of liked the 5CC idea, but the month that happened (before I came along) it seemed like not too many players liked it.

Maybe every month should encourage everyone to write a suggested level, size, and VC for the next month. I probably won't have ideas that will attract players in general, but since I said that, I'll suggest Standard 20k Deity.

 

[CKS]

I didn't have my computer issues straightened out in time for the last one, or I'd have given it a try. I'm both lousy at and uninterested in conquest, so I skipped this one, but I will give something else a shot. I like 20K, but diety will probably only produce AI wins for me.

I'm thinking that selecting gauntlet settings isn't a big time-sink, so I'd like to see it stick around. Spoonwood's idea about asking for suggestions will probably encourage participation but discourage variety.

Can you submit a game for the gauntlet that isn't good enough for a spot on the HOF table?

 

[Bartleby]

It's a shame to see interest fading, but I have to admit I haven't felt the urge to play civ much lately.
I have games going again now though, but fast conquest doesn't appeal to me that much so I didn't try for this one.

 

[Tone]

I'm thinking that selecting gauntlet settings isn't a big time-sink, so I'd like to see it stick around.

You're totally correct. It is just that interest doesn't appear to be there anymore (four of the last six gauntlets have not had any entries) but of course it could just be that we are choosing unpopular catagories.

It's a shame to see interest fading, but I have to admit I haven't felt the urge to play civ much lately.

I couldn't agree more. I have really enjoyed taking part in the gauntlets and the discussions but I haven't particpated much since moving to Oman last year though so my views are not that important anymore. I do want to provide a competition under the HOF rules though but I just felt that with waning interest it was time to ask what people wanted.

Maybe every month should encourage everyone to write a suggested level, size, and VC for the next month. I probably won't have ideas that will attract players in general, but since I said that, I'll suggest Standard 20k Deity.

I'm happy with this. We could get a thread going a week or so before the update to receive suggestions and maybe then produce a vote.

Would having a bi-monthly competition be better or are people still happy with just having a month to complete the games? Any other possible changes? Please keep those opinions coming in.

Can you submit a game for the gauntlet that isn't good enough for a spot on the HOF table?

There are no additional rules for the gauntlets apart from the games must satisfy HOF conditions. This is how the competition started with Mistfit challenging Denniz to a game just in case you didn't know. I guess that the answer is therefore 'yes', but I reserve the right to change this when Marsden returns and we have a staff meeting!

 

[MinutiaRules]

Seems like interest is in the Apollo moon missions today. So how about Huge, SID, Spaceship?

 

[Bartleby]

Sid games tend to get a low uptake. I don't bother because it's just too much work (so much so that I've yet to finish a Sid game).

 

[Spoonwood]

My Huge Deity SS game took me 52 some hours (I have a slower computer). A Huge Sid game would take me much longer, and I suspect it would take longer for other players also.

 

[MinutiaRules]

Now that I think about it Huge/SID does sound like a bit much for just a months worth of time. I would be up for Standard/Deity/whatever or a 5CC though. Also something like the X-OTM idea sounds interesting too. My main problem last month was that by the time I figured out that I should be using PTW with the Aztecs I had used up too much time and I wasn't able to continue. In the sense of the X-OTMs perhaps more specification with the setup is in order? For example a civ trait (or traits) or even a civ is specified (or recommended???). Or the AI traits or tribes are specified (or recommended?)? Or something else to allow for not having to fuss around too much with the start? I understand that for a true HOF having full variability is a must but with a time constraint it can be too daunting.

 

[TheOverseer714]

Maybe go bi-monthly, or even quarterly. Having extra time allows more people to have more of a chance to play.

 

[Tone]

Having extra time allows more people to have more of a chance to play.

That why I raised it but is it actually an issue for people? It is rare for people to atually mention a lack of time to complete a single gauntlet entry so speak up if it is. Otherwise we'll keep to the monthly set up.

The GOTM idea is an interesting one but doesn't fit into the HOF system as we can only accept one game from each starting position. There were some 'International Friendlies' started originally by Tomoyo where people played from the same start position with an aim in mind. This was a few years ago now but you could search the Stories and Tales forum and maybe kick them off again.

Expanding upon my previous post, maybe all we need is a challenger and a seconder to set up a game rather than voting?

Keep the views coming in...

 

[Rustwork]

I haven't played a gauntlet yet, but i do participate in the HoF. I have looked at the recent challenges and chose not to play. The reason is the same reason i'm less involved in the HoF than i was: the best scores depend more and more on luck. Luck with huts, or luck with leaders. Some top scores are impossible without at least one SGL to get an early wonder. I looked at games on the tables for recent challenges and felt that i would be spending more time getting the "right" start than playing full games. The gaunlet is essentially a condensed version of the on-going HoF competition. If i don't win a particular gaunlet i can still compete for that place later and feel just as rewarded. for me the gaunlet needs its own competitive parameters. It should be something more than just a HoF game, so we aren't just competing for a rank in the tables. Place restrictions on how the game is won. i'm thinking of a model similar to succession games, but not played as a team. (enforcement of some rules may have to rely on an honor system). Otherwise 1cc, 5cc, minimum dom. limits, or other settings/restrictions implemented each month. Along with size, difficulty, and win con. The games would count for the HoF, but with the restrictions they would likely not be the best games.

 

[Spoonwood]

Expanding upon my previous post, maybe all we need is a challenger and a seconder to set up a game rather than voting?

I like that idea.

 

[RFHolloway]

What do you think would be the easiest settings to get a top 3 place on the hall of fame? Perhaps that may spark some debate and challenges?

 

[Tone]

Looks like we have a gauntlet for this month, set up by Spoonwood. Here's the link.