Game of the Month SGs - Discussion Thread.

[mad-bax]

The GOTM SG games seem to be quite popular, and so I have decided that I will try to run them periodically.
In an effort to make the games as accessible as possible I am opening this discussion thread so that people that might like to play can voice their opinions and help me to set up the kinds of game that people want, rather than just the games that I want.

I would appreciate some feedback, and have listed some discussion points below, but there is no need to restrict yourselves to these.

1. How often should a new game be started?

2. Who should pick the teams and how?

3. Should teams be able to stay together and even have custom team names? If yes, then would a league table be a good idea?

4. Should games be exactly duplicated, or should they be changed with different playable civ, starting locations, respun resources etc?

5. Should victory conditions be specified? Would it be too extreme to specify a game as always war or 5 city challenge for example? We could even say that a game had to be played as either 5CC or AW and let the individual teams decide which they want to do... and which will give them the best score.

6. What rules should be used?

7. How will the game to be played be chosen.. by poll or by me or should we just play them in order from GOTM 1 up or something else?

8. How can we get more people playing? Should we make the games easier, or can we apply a handicap in some way? Maybe the GOTM staff would help promote the comptetition.

9. Would a game converted to C3C be interesting, and are there enough people interested with the software?

10. Finally, who should run it? I'm willing to do it, but I fully accept that I might not be the best person for the job. I won't take offense.

I've been thinking about this quite a lot recently and have some views of my own, but other people will have better ideas. I just want to know what they are please.

 

[denyd]

1. How often should a new game be started?
About 1 per month otherwise we’ll never get caught up . If you were to start the next one on March 15th, that would be about the time that the current one would be reaching the longer turn phase and a new one would have the new game buzz going for it. Most games (Not counting GOTM 24 PTW team) seem to run about 2 months.

2. Who should pick the teams and how?
Random draw is fine with a little tinkering for balance, but allow a group to stay together (or apart) if they request

3. Should teams be able to stay together and even have custom team names? If yes, then would a league table be a good idea?
If a group of people want to be a permanent team and that should be ok, but a league might be more commitment than many players are willing to make.

4. Should games be exactly duplicated, or should they be changed with different playable civ, starting locations, respun resources etc?
Resource relocation would be good to add flavor (and cancel some of the past knowledge), but switching Civ defeats the comparisons to past results.

5. Should victory conditions be specified? Would it be too extreme to specify a game as always war or 5 city challenge for example? We could even say that a game had to be played as either 5CC or AW and let the individual teams decide which they want to do... and which will give them the best score.
Normally no, however certain games lend themselves to a type of victory that forcing another would ruin the flavor (imagine a Mongol culture victory )

6. What rules should be used?
Either the GOTM rules in place when the game was originally played or todays rules. RBCIV are ok for penalties (similar to the current SG GOTM). As for victory determination, for the pre-Jason games, use the Firaxis score with a earliest victory special award.

7. How will the game to be played be chosen.. by poll or by me or should we just play them in order from GOTM 1 up or something else?
By poll is fine or starting at the beginning of the Cracker era and moving both directions (1 game forward and 1 backward)

8. How can we get more people playing? Should we make the games easier, or can we apply a handicap in some way? Maybe the GOTM staff would help promote the comptetition.
I think having the thread in both the GOTM & SG forums would help. Also try posting on the spoiler thread from the original game. That might stir some interest in players who have drifted away.

9. Would a game converted to C3C be interesting, and are there enough people interested with the software?
I think this would also be a way of drawing in new players. Using C3C would complicate the scoring and require team alignment based on version, but the more players involved, the more fun it is.

10. Finally, who should run it? I'm willing to do it, but I fully accept that I might not be the best person for the job. I won't take offense.
I think anyone brave enough to take on this task should be commended and be supported by all those playing.

 

[a space oddity]

1. How often should a new game be started?
It makes sense to start 1 every month I guess, but their always be overlap in that case since none will finish within the month.
So my guesstimate would be 1 per 1,5 month would be the maximum.

2. Who should pick the teams and how?
It comes down to whether you sign up as individual or as team. Things can get very complicated when there's a mix.
I for one would like to see teams sign up.

3. Should teams be able to stay together and even have custom team names? If yes, then would a league table be a good idea?
So my answer to this is Yes and yes. Team should be free to switch players if someone is not able to play for some reason.

4. Should games be exactly duplicated, or should they be changed with different playable civ, starting locations, respun resources etc?
We are seeing some of the drawbacks of well documented game being replayed. It's not a very fair comparison to the original players. So, yeah some resuffling is a pretty good idea. I liked was was done to GotM24.

5. Should victory conditions be specified? Would it be too extreme to specify a game as always war or 5 city challenge for example? We could even say that a game had to be played as either 5CC or AW and let the individual teams decide which they want to do... and which will give them the best score.
Hmm, we might alternate. For lurkers it's a good read to see the different teams handle the same kind of challenge. And in other games how the same map can be played in different ways.

6. What rules should be used?
I'm an RBCiv rule fan. With some exceptions (ship chaining... )

7. How will the game to be played be chosen.. by poll or by me or should we just play them in order from GOTM 1 up or something else?
To save the organiser the hassle I'd say fixed sequence or chosen. Polls are an unnecessary complication. (Players might say I'll only play when this or that game is chosen )

8. How can we get more people playing? Should we make the games easier, or can we apply a handicap in some way? Maybe the GOTM staff would help promote the comptetition.
Somehow I don't think this will be a problem... Just a steady stream of games will do the trick.

9. Would a game converted to C3C be interesting, and are there enough people interested with the software?
Like Denyd says, this could draw more people in. Complicated on scoring though since there are some major differences (the new traits for starters, MGL/SGL etc etc )

10. Finally, who should run it? I'm willing to do it, but I fully accept that I might not be the best person for the job. I won't take offense.
Hey folks we got a volunteer. [dance]

 

[TedJackson]

Same old faces

1. How often should a new game be started?
Probably the most difficult question on the list. I'd like the answer to be as simple as "When the current game ends" but that's problematic as we know On the other hand I think fixing a schedule raises it's own problems. So I'll pass on this one.

2. Who should pick the teams and how?
Another knotty one and it's tied to the teams question later on. I think a lot depends on how competitive we want to be with this.

Personally I use these SGs to get to play GotMs that I couldn't finish because I didn't have enough time. The competetive aspect doesn't really mean much to me so I haven't a strong view on this.

3. Should teams be able to stay together and even have custom team names? If yes, then would a league table be a good idea?
Notwithstanding my answer above this could be a fun thing. Again it depends on the competitiveness of the players.

4. Should games be exactly duplicated, or should they be changed with different playable civ, starting locations, respun resources etc?
I would be happy if the relative disposition of resources & luxuries were to remain balanced but the actual locations changed. The same applies to the start position. The civ we play as isn't perhaps so important except for "specials" like the Mongol Hordes.

Map knowledge, on the other hand, is more difficult to deal with. I've yet to play one of these SGs where I've actually played the original GotM so the problem hasn't arisen for me.

Reworking the map is a non-trivial exercise and probably beyond the scope of of what we can reasonably achieve at the moment so I suggest we take the map "As is" and simply relocate resources and luxuries.

5. Should victory conditions be specified? Would it be too extreme to specify a game as always war or 5 city challenge for example? We could even say that a game had to be played as either 5CC or AW and let the individual teams decide which they want to do... and which will give them the best score.
I'd rather leave this as loose as possible. That way different teams may come up with different plans/strategies for the same map and it would be more interesting to see how those strategies develop in -game.

6. What rules should be used?
I'm firmly in the RBCiv camp

7. How will the game to be played be chosen.. by poll or by me or should we just play them in order from GOTM 1 up or something else?
I have no strong preference but would expect polls to be too argumentative & time consuming. So you choose or pick a starting point and carry on from there.

8. How can we get more people playing? Should we make the games easier, or can we apply a handicap in some way? Maybe the GOTM staff would help promote the comptetition.
I think having the thread in both the GOTM & SG forums would help. Also try posting on the spoiler thread from the original game. That might stir some interest in players who have drifted away.
Should we get more people playing? Who are our target audience? GotM players who don't play SGs? SG players who don't play GotM? Or some other group of Civ players?

I think that if we want to encourage more players then one thing we ought to do is publish the results in the GotM and SG forums. Perhaps we could get a mod to sticky the results post for a week or so.

9. Would a game converted to C3C be interesting, and are there enough people interested with the software?
As has been said before, it might draw in new players but gives additional headaches. I think Gramphos' Multitool now supports saving as BIQ buut I'd have to check to be certain. I think it might be worth trying the idea out and see where it leads (although I'm not as convinced about C3C as some people )

10. Finally, who should run it? I'm willing to do it, but I fully accept that I might not be the best person for the job. I won't take offense.
What's that old saying.... ah, yes: "One volunteer is worth ten pressed men"

But that puts all the onus on you. Which I don't feel is particularly fair. So if I can all chip in a bit of help, when needed, then feel free to ask.

I've played Devil's Advocate a little bit here but I'd really like to see these games continue.


Ted

 

[ainwood]

If you asked really nicely, then a GOTM admin might just convert the original BIC / BIX to BIQ or a C3C save for you.

 

[mad-bax]

Ainwood. Thanks very much for your offer. I don't know when the next game will start, or which game it will be. As soon as I do then I will PM you. Again, thanks.

 

[akots]

Originally posted by ainwood
If you asked really nicely, then a GOTM admin might just convert the original BIC / BIX to BIQ or a C3C save for you.

Please, oh, Noble Admin, is it possible to dig out BIC for GOTM14? There are SGs going on and I would like to try to play it in C3C in parallel. The save loads into C3C but the resulting game is PTW/C3C hybrid. For example, tech tree and upgrade costs are from C3C. Research limit is 40 turns and scientists/taxmen make 1 science/trade each instead of 3/2. And some other nonsense. Initial idea was to compare this old GOTM playability in C3C in terms of scoring as well and other things. So, please... I'll write a verse in your honor. Oh, thanks in advance.

 

[ainwood]

GOTM 14 may be a struggle! I belive that it was a random map, rather than a scenario. Hence it doesn't have a BIC file that can be readily converted.

It may be possible to recreate the BIC file from the Sav file, but I would need to write a utility to do that, which would be a bit too time consuming. One day I might, bit sorry, can't do it yet.

 

[Karasu]

You know I am all for it.

We started discussing this topic in the staff thread too, so we will hopefully be able to use some of the GoTM infrastructure as the thing develops.

My take on these points.

1. How often should a new game be started?
I would say a couple of months -we saw in SG24 that some teams tend to take longer than others to complete the game
Besides, this SG was born to give an extra chance at playing to those who cannot finish their GOTM in one month, and I'd like to keep this approach: however, a deadline is necessary to keep track of the games, as well as for the competitive side of the event.

2. Who should pick the teams and how?
This is a big point. I think it would be easier to keep it free, as space pointed out -at least at the beginning.
If we end up with some form of team and/or player ranking, we can think of some restrictions on team formation based on those.

3. Should teams be able to stay together and even have custom team names? If yes, then would a league table be a good idea?
I would keep the possibility to change teams from game to game, but I definitely agree that a league table is a good idea.

4. Should games be exactly duplicated, or should they be changed with different playable civ, starting locations, respun resources etc?
As the others have said. With some reshuffling of resources and luxuries, or other modifications to be decided case by case. I would not in general like to change civs, especially for the later GOTMs that were more or less 'designed' for the specific civ, but that's not necessarily true -SG 24 was great fun with the Oda.
"Heavy" use of map knowledge would be diluted if several team members have not played that GOTM previously, and might be in any case spotted in the team thread.


5. Should victory conditions be specified? Would it be too extreme to specify a game as always war or 5 city challenge for example? We could even say that a game had to be played as either 5CC or AW and let the individual teams decide which they want to do... and which will give them the best score.
I'd rather go for variety: it may be nice to have games with a target victory condition, others with some restrictions or special rules, others completely free. We may want to have a poll for this.

6. What rules should be used?
I'd say GOTM rules as a minimum. Beyond that, I have no strong opinion.

7. How will the game to be played be chosen.. by poll or by me or should we just play them in order from GOTM 1 up or something else?
I'd find it more interesting to start from the modded GOTMs, say from 16 onwards -as I have understood, they would also be easier to 'translate' in C3C format.
Other than that, it probably is not that relevant. Let's just pick one and start from there: we will always have several to choose from

8. How can we get more people playing? Should we make the games easier, or can we apply a handicap in some way? Maybe the GOTM staff would help promote the competition.
I agree with Ted: posting in these two forums is a good start indeed. I'd wait a bit before thinking of further modifications.

9. Would a game converted to C3C be interesting, and are there enough people interested with the software?
Might be. It could also provide some interesting information on how the scores compare, although the C3C games would probably stay out of the "league table" (whatever it turns out to be).

10. Finally, who should run it? I'm willing to do it, but I fully accept that I might not be the best person for the job. I won't take offense.
I am personally enthusiast of the idea and will support you in this initiative.

 

[mad-bax]

The way teams will be set up is tricky I think. Ideally the teams would be evenly matched. Initially this can be guestimated using peoples results for the last few games. But if these teams stay together and then Moonsinger, DaveMCW, Sir Pleb, Qitai and Bremp decide they want to form a team, then it would kill it. So for balance, it's easier to select the teams from scratch each game. This of course means you can't have a league. The way I would probably do it would be to add new players to existing teams until there are enough players for a new team to be born. The players in the existing teams would then be split into say 5 groups (based on past performance) and one player from each group would then be selected (somehow) to fill the new team. Would it work? Dunno.

I want the element of competion, but I would like the teams to be evenly matched, and give the opportunity for inexperienced players to play with some of the great players.

If you look at the teams that are playing now, you have to say that they are not really representative of the average standard of play, and I think it might be a frightening prospect for an inexperienced player to throw his hat in the ring. I want to get over this obstacle somehow.

Not that I'd object to a Moonsinger joining. I'm sure I could find a few players to join her and me in that particular team

 

[Karasu]

You can still show the team ranks game by game, to save the competitive spice.
This may also lead to some kind of hall of fame for the best team results (based on some sorts of criteria that I can't imagine right now...).

In addition, you could rank the single players based on their team results, regardless of what team they played in.
This kind of 'ranking' could be used to form new teams with a hope that they would be evenly matched. Or you can use the GOTM Global Ranking.

Or you can think of short 'seasons' of three or four SGs, to be played by the same teams.

These are just ideas, more to give inputs to this discussion than to propose a final solution. There are lots of drawbacks and unclear points.

There have been discussions on a Team Play event in the GoTM, more than a year ago IIRC. And there have been ideas to set out rules for forming teams (which for instance would have to include at least a novice player or such), playing longer or shorter leagues.

I think it all depends on how many people are really interested and on what meaning we want to give to this event -i.e., how much stress on the 'relaxed GOTM' feeling or on the competitive side, or how structured the thing should be.

I would personally like to start with something quite basic, and try to define things as we keep on playing and -hopefully- more people join the GOTM SG.

 

[cracker]

Originally posted by akots
Please, oh, Noble Admin, is it possible to dig out BIC for GOTM14? There are SGs going on and I would like to try to play it in C3C in parallel.

Akots,

This request does not reflect good basic judgement or a minimal undestanding of what is going on the games.

There were several very inappropriate posts by you in those SG threads and thsi would just encourage the bad bahevaior.

C3C is radically different and considerabley reduced in its difficulty. It would be terribly disruptive to have you try an play what you consider to be the same game when it is not and then throw in your comments just to detract from the play of other people.

You have the ability to play the game in Civ4v1.29 and you have the ability to play game in PTWv1.27. Why would you insist on creating work for the admins and then taking the most disruptive course of action possible?

 

[cracker]

Originally posted by akots
Please, oh, Noble Admin, is it possible to dig out BIC for GOTM14? There are SGs going on and I would like to try to play it in C3C in parallel.

Akots,

This request does not reflect good basic judgement or a minimal undestanding of what is going on the games.

There were several very inappropriate posts by you in those SG threads and thsi would just encourage the bad bahevaior.

C3C is radically different and considerabley reduced in its difficulty. It would be terribly disruptive to have you try an play what you consider to be the same game when it is not and then throw in your comments just to detract from the play of other people.

You have the ability to play the game in Civ4v1.29 and you have the ability to play game in PTWv1.27. Why would you insist on creating work for the admins and then taking the most disruptive course of action possible?

We should probably THOUGHTFLLY put this ill conceived concept to bed once and for all. Games that were created int v1.29 and PTW were not designed to be played in parallel in C3C. This option does not logically exist. There is nothing parallel about C3C in any form.

 

[Dianthus]

cracker, I think you're being a bit harsh. Akots has shown he has a good (if not excellent) understanding of the game. His language isn't the best, but his English is infinitely better than my Russian so I think we can forgive him for that.

Akots just wants to try playing the GOTM in C3C to see what the differences are. I'm sure he's not expecting it to be all that similar. He's also not asking the admins to do anything about supporting C3C either in GOTM or in these GOTM SG's, he's just asking if he can have access to the BICs so he can play them in C3C as well. This doesn't sound all that unreasonable to me!

 

[akots]

Originally posted by cracker
... We should probably THOUGHTFLLY put this ill conceived concept to bed once and for all. ...

OK, got the message. I thought it might increase interest in GOTM and SG. Well, at least it was of interest for me. If you think the opposite, it would be better to rely on your judgement.

Originally posted by cracker
... There were several very inappropriate posts by you in those SG threads and thsi would just encourage the bad bahevaior. ...

If you could be please more specific to indicate how exactly did these posts violate the forum rules. Otherwise please enlighten me on how these were inappropriate and encouraging bad behavior so that it is not repeated. I have no intention of posting something inappropriate or something that encourages bad behavior. However not pretending to be a good boy never intended to do any harm.

 

[akots]

Originally posted by ainwood
... GOTM 14 may be a struggle! I belive that it was a random map, rather than a scenario. Hence it doesn't have a BIC file that can be readily converted. ...

Thanks for info and sorry for asking. It's probably not worth the hassle in this case.

 

[ainwood]

Originally posted by Dianthus
cracker, I think you're being a bit harsh. Akots has shown he has a good (if not excellent) understanding of the game. His language isn't the best, but his English is infinitely better than my Russian so I think we can forgive him for that.

Akots just wants to try playing the GOTM in C3C to see what the differences are. I'm sure he's not expecting it to be all that similar. He's also not asking the admins to do anything about supporting C3C either in GOTM or in these GOTM SG's, he's just asking if he can have access to the BICs so he can play them in C3C as well. This doesn't sound all that unreasonable to me!

I tend to agree - the issues can be managed.

It would actually be an interesting concept for two succession games to be played in parallel - one in (say) PTW, the other in Conquests. To avoid any disruption, the spoilers could be closed for contribution to those not playing. Has the possibility of allowing a more balanced comparison of the two game engines.

Slightly OT, Conquests is still undergoing some major tweaks. I'd be disinclined to be trying any comparisons just yet.


FYI, as Karasu sort-of eluded to, this idea of succession GOTMs has been knocked around occasionally in the GOTM staff forum. First and foremost, the main requirement is that the succession games do not detract / spoil the single player games. There are various methods to manage this, which need a bit of fleshing out. We haven't really even touched on any rankings etc, but I'm more inclined to consider it a 'for interest only' component until we see how it all works out.

 

[samildanach]

GOTM 14 has a certain status that may have attracted some players to the SGs. Me for one. Which makes me doubt their appeal.
I'm quite happy that you have chosen to volunteer MB, although, I liked the trash talk preceding GOTM 14 which you squished. But I appreciate that some players may not like that sort of stuff.
I would like there to be a competitive element but with that there needs to be strict rules of civility imposed within the individual teams such as teams being penalised for brow beating or ridiculing weaker players.
As far as team selection goes, this really only means anything if the consensus is to go competitive as opposed to comparitive. If it was decided that the SGs should be competitive I would be in favour of a draft from the pool of interested players.

 

[mad-bax]

Thanks to everyone for their input so far.

I am beginning to turn my attention to the next SG, and would like to discuss some of the options available to us.

The last two SG's have been quite intense games at the more difficult end of the spectrum. I think it might be a good idea to back off the difficulty a little but add an optional element of difficulty for those teams that would prefer that. I hope this will encourage players to join who have been daunted by the previous games.

My proposal would therefore be to begin the next SG in the first week of April, well after the start of GOTM30. I would like to select one of the Regent level games, but offer a 25% score bonus to those teams that play it under Always War variant rules.

If there is enough interest, I will try to form a C3C team and will discuss with Ainwood if and how this might be impemented.

My aim for this game is to gain enough new players to form a 4th team.

If feedgack is positive I'll go ahead and set it up.

 

[Karasu]

Sounds good.

That would mean choosing from:
- GOTM 1 - Persia - Small map - 5 rivals - restless barb
- GOTM 3 - China - Standard map - 8 rivals - raging barb
- GOTM 10 - France - Standard map - 7 rivals - restless barb

I would start from the first at this point.
The combination of Persia, the small map and Regent level should attract some players, and make for a nice quick game.
It also lends itself well to the AW variant.

In any case, the other games will be fine too.
So, yes, let's go!