News: Game of the month for Civ V - feedback appreciated

[Tabarnak]

The AI can react differently for same players's conditions and setup. Someone can deal with 3-4 RAs broken with same military size because he's facing a twice larger AI than another player.

Putting equality is not an easy task. But personnally if you really want some decent equality you need to at least eliminate instant broke features like RAs(or replace it by a %). RAs are so strong after all. No more finger crossing each time you end your turn.

 

[DaveMcW]

Ok I'll try again.

If you remove ruins, you severely nerf early scouting strategies. It becomes a race to see who can scout the least. A race which is easier to win with prior map knowledge.

 

[Tabarnak]

Ruins aren't the main problem. Good point Dave.

 

[Monthar]

The problem is not that there are ruins. The problem is that what the ruins gives isn't locked in when the map is generated. So everyone playing from the same initial save has a different set of ruins.

 

[gozpel]

The problem is not that there are ruins. The problem is that what the ruins gives isn't locked in when the map is generated. So everyone playing from the same initial save has a different set of ruins.

I don't feel that statement is right.

Your warrior finds a ruin on t2, he learns a tech. Stop the warrior from grabbing that hut, you will get different gifts for every turn you have him wait. If your warrior stray a bit before hitting the ruin, he will get the second on on "the list" as if had been waiting a turn.

Add a scout to it, and you can have the ruin giving the warrior an upgrade, while if the scout is close enough he can catch it before the warrior and become a Scarcher.

You can abuse this by building the scout and then trying to pop it with the warrior until the upgrade happens, but "reload" so your scout can pop it instead. A scarcher is the most valuable in my games.

How to abuse it further, just start the game anew or even better play it on your old computer, until you know what is around.

I stopped playing GOTM with Civ3, when 9 ppl decided to waste 7 turns to find a better place to settle. I settled on turn 0 or maybe 1, but I still got a great score.

We can outcheat these creators of GOTM as much as we want, but the thing is: It's a competition of fair play. If we can't play by fair rules, stick to single games and be happy.

 

[FeiLing]

I don't feel that statement is right.

Your warrior finds a ruin on t2, he learns a tech. Stop the warrior from grabbing that hut, you will get different gifts for every turn you have him wait. If your warrior stray a bit before hitting the ruin, he will get the second on on "the list" as if had been waiting a turn.

That's exactly what Monthar just said/meant. If ruins were pre-defined and the turn on takes them wouldn't matter, it would probably be much better/fairer.
(And Upgrade ruins that can't upgrade a unit further (as well as Tech ruins that can't grant you any new tech) would have to be turned into the same bonus every time, like for e.g. 90 gold (instead of being random))).

Add a scout to it, and you can have the ruin giving the warrior an upgrade, while if the scout is close enough he can catch it before the warrior and become a Scarcher.

You can abuse this by building the scout and then trying to pop it with the warrior until the upgrade happens, but "reload" so your scout can pop it instead.

No you can't, as it is against the rules.

I stopped playing GOTM with Civ3, when 9 ppl decided to waste 7 turns to find a better place to settle. I settled on turn 0 or maybe 1, but I still got a great score.

That's interesting. No one would wander around for more than 2-3 turns without knowing the map (aka cheating). I'd be very suspicious if I found someone doing this (okay, checking every (winners-)replay with the replay facility is quite some work).

I do hope however that the people who run the GotMs and Gauntlets have their tools automatically check for at least the replaying of turns, as that seems to be easy to identify from the send in replays.

One unrelated question to said people:

"Please keep all save game files until your game has been accepted. We may ask for additional saves to verify your submission."

I saved all the autosaves from my previous month submitted games and just noticed they take up nearly 2 GB. Is it save to delete them as soon as my games show up as "Accepted" or when they say "Published" or am I supposed to even keep it longer? Wording suggest "accepted" but I just wanna make sure

 

[gozpel]

FeiLing: No you can't, as it is against the rules.

What rules? On my Mega-computer I play on now, or the really old one that sits in the corner collecting dust? Of course if I wanted to cheat, I use the old one the get a head start and I'm sure some of the newcomers "great" scores comes out of this.

I refuse to play it that way, if I even restart with a crash before, it feels like fail.

I'm gonna find you the Ottoman play on Civ3, I never won a gold but still a few minor stuff to keep me entertained. But this was so silly, even the big dude at this time did it...and probably made a few others follow. But the BIG dude then, never found him cheating really, very nice reports and everything.

So even a scumbag can look like a GOD!

 

[gozpel]

Unfortunately, all files from then seem to have dissapeared.

The main guy, winning all the time was SirPleb. He decided it's better to move for 7 turns to build a great city. He won the game and another 8 rattlers followed him, (by reading posts mayhaps?)

I settled and still won a culture badge.

Insanity, why cheat to get popular, if you just leave the game right after?

And for SirPleb, he always had a grand explanation on how doing stuff, and everything worked.

But when he moved for 7 turns, shut up and play something you can win without cheating!

 

[leif erikson]

I am having a bit of a difficult time understanding some of this.

Goody huts have been an issue for every version of the game because, depending upon what you receive, it can be unbalancing. In Civ4 GOTM, huts are generally removed from the immediate player start area or from the game all together. In Civ5, we have played with them on because that is what the community seems to want. If this is an issue, we can start a thread to discuss that issue.

For those who cheat to get better scores, from my perspective, they only cheat themselves. There is no value to their win. What it does do is cheapen the skills of the community and that is why we have sought mods to assist us in identifying cheating, to make it better for the community.

Why we are bringing Civ3 into this discussion is beyond me. That is a long time ago now. And for the record, SirPleb was a great player, not only for his skill but also because he was generous in sharing his knowledge to help other players become better. That is tribute to a true CivFanatics.

 

[Neuro]

Unfortunately, all files from then seem to have dissapeared.

The main guy, winning all the time was SirPleb. He decided it's better to move for 7 turns to build a great city. He won the game and another 8 rattlers followed him, (by reading posts mayhaps?)

I settled and still won a culture badge.

Insanity, why cheat to get popular, if you just leave the game right after?

And for SirPleb, he always had a grand explanation on how doing stuff, and everything worked.

But when he moved for 7 turns, shut up and play something you can win without cheating!

As someone who played a lot of Civ3, there were times when looking for great city location was justified. If you started in a lousy spot you wanted to move to a river. Also, IIRC the odds of popping a free settler from a goody hut was much higher when you had no cities, so one tactic was to explore for a few turns before settling your city, hoping for a free settler from goody hut.

I have no idea what all this has to do with Civ5 though. They are different games.

 

[Attaturk]

CiV reloading. A bug I keep hitting on occasion, is that if I refuse a friend request. (Not sure if it matters if I pressed escape or used the mouse to hit close), I can no longer trade with anyone. It does not show me the left pane allowing to select what I want to get to trade. I can only accept the terms AI offers, never change them or formulate an offer.

If I hit that, I save and reload. Anyone else is hitting this bug?

 

[Ribannah]

Quite a few players still listed as prize winners in the Civ3 GOTM later admitted to cheating, as did someone who helped run the competition (!). Also, one big issue back then was a mod that revealed more of the map than you could normally see. There were various bug exploits to get free techs and gold. And the scoring formula changed frequently, sometimes even mid-game. I never used any of these exploits, but they were all allowed, while other, normal things like playing a game in short sessions weren't, and could get you falsely branded as a cheater. To summarize, the competition was one big mess.

Luck, like from ruins, is a different matter. I don't mind a luck factor in a game, but the purpose of the GOTM is to compare your game to what other players make of it. That whole purpose gets lost when the difference in the beginning of the game is so great just because you popped a ruins on turn 2 to get a map and they did so on turn 3 for 20 culture. Or they got barb camps and you survivors. Being the one to get the huge edge is just as unfun.

Removing the ruins does not eliminate the need to explore, on the contrary it increases the skill needed to explore efficiently. From hunting ruins, which can sit anywhere, the priority shifts to finding the rivals, city states, natural wonders, and the lay of the land.

 

[FeiLing]

Without ruins however it's really boring. And it does change the game, because I don't need a scout or 3 for discovering the world and natural wonders. Please never remove ruins from these games - instead just make them predefined (if that ever becomes a possibility) (so it doesn't matter at which turn you take it, outcome and map is the same for everybody).

 

[Ribannah]

As someone who played a lot of Civ3, there were times when looking for great city location was justified. If you started in a lousy spot you wanted to move to a river. Also, IIRC the odds of popping a free settler from a goody hut was much higher when you had no cities, so one tactic was to explore for a few turns before settling your city, hoping for a free settler from goody hut.

I have no idea what all this has to do with Civ5 though. They are different games.

It has to do with staying comparable.

In Civ3 I've once moved 3 turns to cross a desert, but that was it.

One frequent prize winner was primarily known for their ability to quickly expand without building any military units. The AI never attacked the unprotected cities. Various attempts to copy the exact opening game failed. When other players tried the same strategy, their cities soon got taken. Naturally, this made a big difference.

 

[leif erikson]

I do not think the Civ3 discussions are helpful. Please stick to the Civ5 discussion.

 

[Ribannah]

Without ruins however it's really boring. And it does change the game, because I don't need a scout or 3 for discovering the world and natural wonders. Please never remove ruins from these games - instead just make them predefined (if that ever becomes a possibility) (so it doesn't matter at which turn you take it, outcome and map is the same for everybody).

You might want two though, while others use one or none. It becomes a planning decision, which is a good change IMHO and adds depth to the opening game, not boredom.

 

[tomaalimosh]

When will you have another OCC for GOTM? I play OCC a lot and would love to see another one on GOTM. Mix things up a little.

 

[leif erikson]

Thanks for the suggestion.

Considered making the last one OCC.

 

[metalmadt]

Haven't play Civ V or GOTM in a while but I was wondering why you were still in TSGOTM instead of GOTM?

I hope Gods and King will send me back into CivV

 

[leif erikson]

Essentially, Firaxis has not yet released the game code so no HoF type Mod can be built for the competition.