That's a hard one. Everyone playing, as a minimum, should make sure their auto-save interval is set at 1 (default is 5), so if you do crash, you are only going back to the same turn.
Planning SGOTM 09
- Thread starter AlanH
- Start date
That's a hard one. Everyone playing, as a minimum, should make sure their auto-save interval is set at 1 (default is 5), so if you do crash, you are only going back to the same turn.
Thata's already a requirement. I'm more concerned that repeated crashing destroys the fun of the game. If that's widespread issue we need to find a way to reduce it as a problem.
Large maps should be avoided. I won't even bother trying to play a Huge map beyond about 500AD. I think its mainly graphics issues that cause my crashes.
JerichoHill
Bedrock of Knowledge
Yeah, that is partly how I solved my issues. I had a heck of a time with game crashes for about a year until I cleaned up my computer, got a new graphics card, and set graphics options pretty low. No problems so far in 09
"How do you suggest that we deal with that? Limit the games to quick, small ones, or ask that players ensure that they have adequate hardware and up to date drivers?" Neither . . . just noting a negative aspect of BTS games. Can always restart and replay the turn. (BTW, my hardware is supposed to be adequate. Are there specified drivers necessary for BTS?)
PaulisKhan
Physicist
Scale the map size to the expected game duration would be one way to minimise problems, without greatly affecting gameplay or design(?)
Lightning fast conquest/religo/cultural games could be on larger maps,
late game space/points/time could be on smaller maps.
Lightning fast conquest/religo/cultural games could be on larger maps,
late game space/points/time could be on smaller maps.
greatbeyond
King
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2002
- Messages
- 987
Don't let the AI build lots of units, kill them early.
No hardware problems here!
BTS or any variant is fine with me. Is it time for an AW game with a victory condition of something other than Conquest or Domination?
No hardware problems here!
BTS or any variant is fine with me. Is it time for an AW game with a victory condition of something other than Conquest or Domination?
You just need to ensure that you have the latest graphics drivers for your hardware, whatever you are playing. BtS doesn't have any special requirements.
I would be very surprised if BtS is any more demanding than the other Civ4 variants, game conditions being equal. It's mostly just extra game logic, units and civs. As far as I know, the underlying graphics engine is unchanged. If BtS provokes your system to crash more than vanilla and Warlords then I would guess it's down to playing "bigger" games in BtS - more units or more cities or bigger maps.
"If BtS provokes your system to crash more than vanilla and Warlords then I would guess it's down to playing "bigger" games in BtS - more units or more cities or bigger maps."
Okay, that's consistent with my experience, as I've only had Civ crash (several times) towards the end of the last SGOTM.
Okay, that's consistent with my experience, as I've only had Civ crash (several times) towards the end of the last SGOTM.
BLubmuz
HoF Quattromaster
BtS or Warlords, Vanilla is a pain.
Some variant e.g. a team with an AI or the wonder score would be appreciated.
Some variant e.g. a team with an AI or the wonder score would be appreciated.
LowtherCastle
Deity
- Joined
- May 18, 2005
- Messages
- 23,631
events add to the fun. Don't you guy have any fun over there?events must die forever!
Maybe. My thinking is that the longer the game, the more the randomness evens out and the more the randomness, the harder the game. Thus, the more the randomness, the more likely the best teams will rise to the top.
What do you say, LtC, to the argument that a particularly good or bad random event early in the game has a disproportionate effect? Such an event is no more likely to be evened out than to be replicated (in kind not, of course, exactly replicated).
LowtherCastle
Deity
- Joined
- May 18, 2005
- Messages
- 23,631
What event do you have in mind, for example?
JerichoHill
Bedrock of Knowledge
There is always inherent randomness present once a game starts anyways. I dont see random events being overpowering
PaulisKhan
Physicist
Two equal teams, one gets hit repeatedly by slave revolts (-1 pop even if you have the cash), the other gets the free golden age quest. I know who my money is on.
It's not over the course of a single game that events balance out, because late game events have propertionaly less impact than early game events. It's over the course of many many games that the balancing out occurs (comes out as a net positive), but since succession games typically take 2-4 months each, you're not going to see that averaging out occur in a reasonable timeframe.
Events aren't going to prevent a good team from beating a bad team, but they certainly can impact which good team wins. For a typical HoF/Gauntlet challenge, events are fine because if a string of uncontrollable bad luck happens, you can just try again, but for something like this or a GoTM there's only one shot.
I'm a huge fan of events, but for a competition in this format I think they're a negative.
Sam_Yeager
Another Original Geezer
PaulisKhan said:
However there is also other randomness in the game. Although goody huts are removed from the immediate vicinity of the player it is still possible for a team to pop a tech from one e.g. CRC (or whatever they were calling themselves at the time) popped Mining IIRC in the Tokugawa game. In the Tokugawa game another team lost their second city to barbs that came from a goody hut. Geezers suffered an early DoW from Elizabeth in the deity game which completely derailed our early wonder builds. I'm sure other teams can point to good or bad results from goody huts in the early game.
I would certainly argue that all goody huts should be banned if events are banned.
Dynamic
But not hurry
I agree with this statement.
Similar threads
