GOTM / COTM too difficult?

[civ_steve]

If you want to see how many people won or lost a GOTM, AlanH put up some charts to show you.

- Go to gotm.civfanatics.net
- Click on 'Statistics' in upper left section (BTW Staff, Statistics button doesn't show up when looking at a particular Game description)
- Choose 'Victory Conditions' for display type, and select Display

You should see a bar graph displaying the relative size of submitted Victories by type and of submitted losses. (up to GOTM32)

Deity games were 7, 14, 20, 26. 25 was a Demi-God level. GOTM7 and 14 were randomly generated Deity maps, and 85-90% of submitted games were losses. GOTM20 and 26 were modded maps, with very strong opening positions, and submitted losses were less than 50% for GOTM20, and looks like less than 30% for GOTM26.

Once the GOTM began using modded games, the Emperor, DemiGod and Deity level games have provided strong opening positions for the human player, giving a benefit to all the participants. In that respect they're not true Deity level games, etc, but a 90% loss rate is kind of harsh, and doing this allows the players to experience the higher levels. (So how about Sid level with a HOF type opening position?!?)

Regarding the DemiGod extra Settler - many people feel that the Predator level, which often has an extra Settler for the AI, has an advantage. The AI gets more early cities, so it researches faster; properly used, this allows a faster research game, so Diplo and Spaceship victories are reached earlier. Also, the AI seems to start building Wonders at a given # of cities; the extra Settler means they start Wonder building a bit earlier so that city is not adding shields to the general empire, and this creates more opportunities for Wonder poaching later. (In other words, the extra Settler can be seen as an opportunity, not an impediment.)

 

[al_thor]

I relish the challenge of a Demigod COTM. However, I normally play Emporer, sometimes Demigod anyway, so it wasn't that daunting for me. But, I never play Archipeligo maps - I like to conquer but I don't like all of the extra micro-management of all those transports and support ships, so the Archi map had me a little worried.

I will say one thing - the advent of the Currough has changed the strategy of Archi maps - big time! The AI does not use them - Humans do (or SHOULD). Before the middle of the AA, I knew all 7 other civs, but they only knew 1 or 2 others each. This is a HUGE advantage for the human. Nearing the end of the AA, I am Technologically Advanced. I don't expect to stay this way, and it will take alot of work to keep abreast of the AI once they have all met, but by then I hope to have secured a formidable empire which will give me other options to stay in the race.

I guess what I'm saying in regards to the difficulty level of the COTM/GOTM, is that there is always SOME advantage (in this case the Archi map combined with the AI's non-usage of curroughs) that can be exploited by the player. Add in the advantage of the human mind and a little experience with the AI's tendancies, and it's not all that bad to play at Demigod.

 

[Longasc]

I assume you agree that 90% loss percentage is too high? The developement of modded maps with strong opening positions is really a step forward and decreases difficulty and maybe even enhances the gaming experience. I think the general developement is right!

I did not check the statistics, should look up the number of players.

But I am nearly sure: DEITY level will make a lot of players quit even trying right at the moment they read DEITY. Even if the starting position is superior for the player and whatever.

 

[Longasc]

I agree with you, al thor, the Byzantine GOTM is really doable, but i do not want to spoil anything more.

But you and I cannot speak for those who play Monarch, I know you play Emperor and Demigod really well, I downloaded one of your games some time ago, it was the one where a Galley cut your iron supply...

 

[al_thor]

civ_steve - good post. I did not know about those historical numbers.

Longasc & civ_steve - yeah, 90% loss is a little high. Must have been some fun reading the feedbacks on the forums for that GOTM!
Still, I 'll bet alot of the participants learned at least SOMETHING, and some learned a great deal.
I have to agree that the starting position plays a huge part in the 'playability' of the higher level games. Put me on a river with 2 cows, some BG and a couple of hills, and I'll try any level!

 

[al_thor]

Longasc - yeah, I remember that game - I was Netherlands at Demigod level. I finally ended up winning that with a Space Race victory. It was a great game - 4 or 5 nukes per turn were flying between other rival civs while I was peacfully building my ship, supplying others with Alum/Plutonium to build their war machines.

Yeah, I only mentioned the Curroughs on the Archi map because that's common knowledge from the Announcement thread. I'm not trying to spoil anyone's COTM03.

 

[AlanH]

Longasc & civ_steve - yeah, 90% loss is a little high. Must have been some fun reading the feedbacks on the forums for that GOTM!
Still, I 'll bet alot of the participants learned at least SOMETHING, and some learned a great deal.

I believe the whole community has taken several steps up the learning curve since those games were first played. Techniques that were novel or unheard of then are common knowledge now. A bunch of teams recently replayed GOTM 14 as a SG, and as a result of the pioneering work of people like Bamspeedy and others, the SG teams were routinely using settler pumps, rings, and active defence, and were largely able to complete the game successfully. Sure, there was probably some prior knowledge bing deployed as well, but I think if a comparable game were set now as an unknown map, there would be a higher success rate than 10%.

 

[Denniz]

I would keep things as they are. There is so much information to help someone to improve their game that just trying to use some of them should allow a player to reach monarch level fairly quickly. Getting to emperor is more of a challenge and requires dedication. It is supposed to be a competition, after all. As long as I think I can do better I will keep trying. I would imagine if I was getting 10,000+ points every time, I would start to lose interest. I think that's why we see some of the best player trying varients in GOTM games.

 

[denyd]

Al_Thor: You can read about the GOTM 14 game in Bamspeedy's Babylon Settlers in the War Academy and as AlanH mentioned the recent SG replay. Teams A & B played very well and won a very difficult with relative ease. However team C pulled a rabbit out of a hat for marvelous come from behind victory (cavalry & cannon against infantry & tanks to take the Great Library and move to the modern age for a spaceship win)

 

[ainwood]

Well, I am taking this all on board, and it seems there are a wide variety of opinions.

What I think might be the 'best' option is to keep things loosely as they are in terms of difficulty ranging. This basically means we will mainly run between regent to emperor, with the odd-game on warlord and the odd game on deity / demigod. At this stage, Sid won't be played.

Because there are some player who may not want to try the tough games, it might be best to keep the Classic & Conquests game out-of-sync, so that there is always at least one lesser-difficulty game going each month. Doesn't really help Civ/PTW/Mac-only players, but from the feedback from them in this thread, I think they are reasonably happy.

I'm not really keen on starting separate competitions, because it just makes too many games each month to have a 'comparable' global ranking etc, because then it starts becoming a case of who has the most time on their hands. whilst a game where the 'conquest' class is at an actual lower difficulty might be possible, I'm not overly keen on it, but may consider it. As for making the predator game at a higher level, I am against this because there will be some cases where this will actually disadvantage the open players (tech speed, ai expansion etc) - it becomes too difficult to fdraw meaningful comparisons.

 

[King Of America]

I think the "off-synch" idea is good for those of us who have Conquests. Keeping the average of the games somewhere in the Monarch range will be helpful to players like me without, I hope, boring the better players. (Without going into the gory details, let's just say I will have time enough for two games this month...)

 

[Demiurge]

To those who aren't quite ready for the challenge of the higher level GOTM/COTMs, I urge patience and perserverance. You soon will be.

I joined in July, 2003, when I first was introduced to Civ. I still didn't know that you could load troops in galleys and was trying to figure out what those little boxes were all over the AI's terrain. Through reading and re-reading articles, and following the GOTM competition, I gradually grasped some of the fundamental aspects of gameplay and worked myself up to monarch level. By July, 2004 I had managed to accomplish the unthinkable a year ago, I was now enjoying the challenges offered at emporer level for random games. Playing the SGOTM has allowed me to grasp some of the finer aspects of the game and I posted my highest finish in GOTM32 at 14. Probably a bit of a fluke in that some players who are undoubtably my betters ranked below me, but never-the-less, major improvement in a little over a year. Thank you GOTM staff, my SGOTM team and all those who participate.

I think my drive to get better is in large part due to the fact that the GOTM games are a mixed bag of difficulty levels. That and my desire to actually compete in a GOTM. I never would have improved as much as I have if not for the challenges offered and the high level of play in the GOTM competition. I don't believe Ainwood has given us a deity in the GOTM yet, but I look forward to the challenge of being pushed beyond my comfort level. After all, that's how I got to where I am today. By keeping all the GOTM/COTMs at say monarch or below for example, the staff would effectively be stifling the growth of the entire community instead of nurturing it as they do now.

 

[King Of America]

Demiurge: I agree with you 100%.

To clarify what I meant--I think it would be good if the average of each month's COTM/GOTM pair was in the Monarch range--i.e., one game at Demigod and the other at Monarch (or Regent). Truthfully, I wouldn't complain if games never went below Monarch.

 

[Demiurge]

Doesn't really help Civ/PTW/Mac-only players, but from the feedback from them in this thread, I think they are reasonably happy.

Considering the insignificance of Mac-players in the eyes of the software companies, I've learned to not look a gift horse in the mouth. We're easy to please.

 

[Sir Clive]

Perhaps I have a possible solution to the players who are not ready for the higher levels, start a GOTM jr competition. This level of play would be for those players who find Regent level or below a real challenge.

I'd be up for this . I played the first Conquests GOTM and finished plum last. I struggle at Monarch and above and so have no interest in playing anything above at the moment. It's all very well people saying that you learn more playing at higher levels, but I would like to take things gradually. That's why I started my first ever SG (from which I am learning a hell of a lot) recently at Monarch .

I will read the posts from Emperor / Demigid / Deity / Sid games with interest since they may be educational but for the moment there is no point in me taking part in any of them since I will probably be toast before we even hit 0 AD

 

[Darkness]

Not me! I'm still playing Chieftain from time to time. My goal is to take out Darkness's top Chieftain score some day.

I didn't score that high, Moonsinger, so I think that 'some day' you're talking about will actually be rather soon...

 

[Caldazar]

This is my first post on this forum, so 'Hi all'

When I first saw the difficult-level this round of COTM my heart stopped, for a while. Even though I'm only comfortable playing versus Monarch AI, I managed to enjoy this round quite a lot. I learned a lot, and the most important thing was that I didn't just play, I actually had to think what my next move should to be. Without saying to much, I lost this round... but it encouraged me to try another round against Monarch AI and slaughter them... with the new skills that I had achieved during this round. For the first time I was actually superior.

I'm looking forward to next round of COTM and wish to give my thanks to Ainwood. Great games! Though, let me slaughter them next time please

 

[alamo]

Welcome to the forum!

Sounds like you're the poster child for the GOTM, except you're already at Monarch?

It took me a few hundred games to get to an almost-surely win on Monarch. Nothing like a certain other players who declare victory at the opening screen, though.

Nobody will complain about a good challenge, but having several thrashings in a row is not fun. I get attention-challenged after 12 hours. A 24 hour loss is a major bummer.

BTW, how did you got a join date of Dec 2001

 

[solenoozerec]

I managed to enjoy this round quite a lot...
...I'm looking forward to next round of COTM and which to give my thanks to Ainwood. Great games! Though, let me slaughter them next time please

I just want to say that I agree with this.. I do not understand the point of this thread.. I will loose my last cities in COTM3 in a few turns in the middle of MA. Despite of that I think the game was very enjoyable and full of surprises both pleasant and unpleasant. No complaints.

 

[Caldazar]

Welcome to the forum!

Sounds like you're the poster child for the GOTM, except you're already at Monarch?

It took me a few hundred games to get to an almost-surely win on Monarch. Nothing like a certain other players who declare victory at the opening screen, though.

Nobody will complain about a good challenge, but having several thrashings in a row is not fun. I get attention-challenged after 12 hours. A 24 hour loss is a major bummer.

BTW, how did you got a join date of Dec 2001

Thanks! Well, I haven't been visiting this site activly until the new COTM series. I don't know why... but when the new game of the month appeared I decided to give it a go. Not sorry that I did

I do agree that it isn't funny to get overruned by the enemy, but that didn't happen this time for me. I placed my town closest to the indian border very carefully. I think I generated 7 leaders throughout the game there. I even learned that you can get a leader from a unit that already has generated a leader. I didn't think that was possible, don't ask me why.
Though I don't like to be sooo diplomatic as I had to be in this game. I really had to attack the target that already was targeted by the major civilizations. Normally, when I play myself... I find it funny to side with the little guy and help him from getting eradicated

Cheers...