GOTM 51 - pregame discussion

[pdathert]

@ tR1cky and AlanH - thanks very much for the help, v helpful, now everything is clear.

@ Iroumen - welcome to the boat sailor!

sounds like AlanH has answered your problem in his subsequent post, i.e. if you install conquests and use the PTW version you don't need to install a patch.

 

[Niklas]

@Niklas

I see you haven't got the conquest award. Maybe a small competition for that one in this game? open class.

And here I was hoping I'd be alone to go for it.
I gladly accept your challenge, and I'll play open if you do.

The only possible caveat is that I'm still in the middle of GOTM50, and if I run hopelessly out of time for that milking run (still have hope), and then if I decide to bail out to a conquest victory, and then if I should find that no one else has posted a faster conquest win in the spoiler thread (unlikely), then I will probably go for a milking run in this game instead. Although only 3 weeks to play for this one, maybe milking would be just plain stupid to try...

 

[lroumen]

If you have bought and installed a Conquests expansion pack then it should already include Play the World version 1.27f, which was already released by the time Conquests was put into CDs, so no update is required for PtW. In fact, if you do apply a PtW updater to it you will mess it up, because the "updater" actually reverts it to an earlier publisher release, and it will then expect a different CD to unlock it (Infogrames instead of Atari?). You will probably have to update Conquests to version 1.22, though.

Thanks for the clarifying information. Perhaps this could be added to the "first read page" because I didn't expect it to be an issue. It explains why my cd isn't recognised when I start up Ptw. I think the easiest fix for me is to just reinstall Civ completely and try to join the next GOTM then

Oh, I did glance at this month's GOTM. It's a very interesting map and I will play it just for comparison and to see whether I'm truely up for a GOTM challenge. I rarely play high difficulty levels due to the being novice and all.



@pdathert
Yep, seems like I'm ready for a game... next month that is.

 

[TruePurple]

In the pre-game discussion you can try to find some people competing in a variant with you as was done for example there was an Ancient Age units only Challenge in a COTm once, and similar.
But you see, some players here in this thread decided to make a Space Race challenge.But not all players have to play a variant.


For this, there is the SGOTM where there are variants mandatory.

If a variant can be established, but not all players in the cotm/gotm challenge have to play it, can we get a bonus to score for those who do, predatory style?

Granted its about the game itself too, but its nice to be able to compare performance and have the extra challenge reflected there in.

 

[AlanH]

There's no predator bonus, just bragging rights and enormous self-satisfaction

 

[TruePurple]

The points themselves are the bragging rights, so we couldn't have a xotm game where such conditions were required or part of the preditory conditions? Well I'd like to see such. Maybe you guys could consider it?

 

[tR1cKy]

I tossed the idea of a predator score bonus a few GOTMs ago, and it was rejected. If more people will support it, eventually the staff may reconsider it.

A predator bonus (but is should be small, such as 5%), would at least force the award-hunters to face tough opposition from those used to the extra difficulty of predator, instead of conveniently staying into the open class.

 

[Paul#42]

I tossed the idea of a predator score bonus a few GOTMs ago, and it was rejected. If more people will support it, eventually the staff may reconsider it.

A predator bonus (but is should be small, such as 5%), would at least force the award-hunters to face tough opposition from those used to the extra difficulty of predator, instead of conveniently staying into the open class.

You deny the fact that at least some predator conditions can be turned into advantage by skilled players. At least some of them don't hurt at all...

However leaving away a trait for example almost never results in a beenfit, so there are predator obstacles that really earn their name. But it's hard to evaluate them to a bonus.

 

[tR1cKy]

You deny the fact that at least some predator conditions can be turned into advantage by skilled players. At least some of them don't hurt at all...

You're right. Thanx for pointing it out. Yes, it depends. As example, an increased unit support level from monarch to emperor is likely to give some advantage to an expert player, while an increased unique unit cost (such as game 50) has a direct impact on how many units can be built or rushed, resulting in an overall penalty. The best thing to do would be to judge case by case.

 

[AlanH]

The best thing to do would be to judge case by case.

Do I understand that, as well as redesigning the overall Jason scoring system as some would have us do, you'd also like to have a different bonus scoring system, designed for variants and/or predators, for each game?

The last time anyone tryied to assign bonus values to variants was in an early SGOTM. MadBax didn't try that again

 

[PaperBeetle]

The points themselves are the bragging rights, so we couldn't have a xotm game where such conditions were required or part of the preditory conditions? Well I'd like to see such. Maybe you guys could consider it?

I've been thinking for a while that the bonuses & handicaps were a little unadventurous. I've no experience with the editor, so I'm not really sure what is possible, but how about...
- some victory conditions made easier or harder, e.g. predator: move the UN up a couple of techs, change 100k to 120k. conquest: increase the cpt of wonders, reduce the cost of SS parts.
- change the resource distribution. Specifically, the player's local area should be the same, but distant groups of luxuries could be more or less bountiful, distant civs could have their access to food/strategic resources changed.
- change the coastal tiles, i.e. predator games have longer distances for suicide galleys to cover, conquest games have 'spare' coast removed to bring the dom limit down a bit.

 

[tR1cKy]

Do I understand that, as well as redesigning the overall Jason scoring system as some would have us do, you'd also like to have a different bonus scoring system, designed for variants and/or predators, for each game?

No. Clearly it would be unpratical. My suggestion was that, in some cases that need to be judged by the staff, the predator class could earn a little score bonus.

Example 1: increased unit support for the AS. This is hardly a disadvantage for the experienced player (the one who's supposed to play the predator class), and if exploited properly it could earn some advantage as well. No score bonus, then, unless the start position is particularly unfavourable, such as game 48 - Korea.

Example 2: increased cost of unique unit, as in game 50. This gives a penalty on the number of units that can be trained, rushed or upgraded through the whole game (or at least the part that really counts). In this case, a 5% - 10% bonus score could be justificated.

EDIT: to be more clear: let's say that you set up a GOTM. Then you decide the conquest class bonuses and the predator class disadvantages. Then, based on the nature of the disadvantages you have set up, you decide that the predator class for this GOTM will earn a X% score bonus. Simple as that.

 

[Paul#42]

I've been thinking for a while that the bonuses & handicaps were a little unadventurous. [...]

Now the first two obstacles are too tough as they directly influence the winning turn. You would forfeit your shot on the awards. Most players would refrain from that.
The third I consider much more appealing. Insert a coastal tile in the ocean every here and there makes some things easier but does not hinder the "big dogs" in terms of directly delaying their winning date. I like this. Maybe also some more jungle or march tiles here and there, a desert, a missing wheat...
But it leads to making games less comparable.

The obstacles I don't like (as I consider them nasty) are things like missing start techs or even traits. However I think they are the best...

Making the UU more expensive I did not rate nasty - you "get that money back" when you upgrade to cav in Gotm50

Greatest obstacle ever I consider not being able to upgrade horses to elephants. I liked the reasoning! And especially the reason how you can still upgrade Elephants to Cavs: "Put them on a good diet")
Nevertheless some daredevils still played Predator class in that Cotm 15 and made great results!

I don't think you should get another benefit from showing that you are a tough guy...

 

[tR1cKy]

Altering the map seems a bad idea to me, since it would make games less comparable. A wise choice of penalties, and possibly score bonuses, is in my opinion the best (and simplest) choice.

Making the UU more expensive I did not rate nasty - you "get that money back" when you upgrade to cav in Gotm50

Supposing you *get the tech*. Cavalry is very late in the medievals. I don't think many of the early winners will come even close to research it. In my game, i probably won't go past Gunpowder (and if i'll avoid it it would be even better).

 

[Redbad]

Cavalry is very late in the medievals. I don't think many of the early winners will come even close to research it.

 

[Paul#42]

Supposing you *get the tech*. Cavalry is very late in the medievals. I don't think many of the early winners will come even close to research it. In my game, i probably won't go past Gunpowder (and if i'll avoid it it would be even better).

Oops. Of course, I should look beyond my own 20k-nose...
Especially Ansars cry for not being upgraded...

 

[PaperBeetle]

Heheh, well I was just brainstorming, but actually I left out the craziest ideas. Let's add them back in to get things really stirred up.

- Add or remove extra AI civs.
- Turn a peninsula into an island or vice versa (but not the player's starting landmass).
- Disallow certain VCs altogether, e.g. diplo on hard levels, conquest on pangaea maps.
- A later start date! The predator save is from e.g. 3500bc, and the starting units have been idling for 10 turns.
- Play with three traits (for conquest class on high level games).
- No UUs (but where's the fun in that?)

So these ones aren't really serious, but as for the previous bunch:
I don't think there is anything wrong with a handicap which postpones a predator player's victory. I think many of our existing handicaps do that, and it isn't always rational to chose predator. In GOTM50 I was beaten to my VC by an open player, but I'm not bitter (well, I couldn't have beaten him anyway )
I don't see why making minor amendments to the map makes games less comparable than other bonuses/handicaps. In the Dutch COTM, the predator handicap was loss of the agricultural trait: very harsh, and it made the opening plays of different classes almost totally incomparable.

 

[tR1cKy]

Why not workers with 2 movement points? It would speed up the development of the terrain, thus making some games faster.

----

Back on topic:

My power supply has been replaced, and nothing else has been damaged, so i'm in time to finish game 50 and play game 51. I intend to settle E-SE on the golden hill, so to have the 2 successive cities at RCP 3.5 in golden hills too; i hope this will lead to build a nice ring at this distance, but i cannot tell now. Research will be a min run on Writing, then we'll see. If there's the urgent need of galleys, a fast run on Pottery -> Map Making is certainly possible. If contacts are already established, going for Literature at max speed could be better. If there are contacts and we're quite backwards (possible) a min run on Literature to build the Great Library seems worth trying.

 

[PaperBeetle]

Why not workers with 2 movement points? It would speed up the development of the terrain, thus making some games faster.

oooo that's a good one, especially as a predator handicap; the AI gets its land up to speed faster, but an aggressive player can take advantage of a better early road network.

 

[denyd]

Or as a Predator handicap replace settlers with a unit that cannot be built until a tech like construction. That will put the player way behind in both land and tech.