Playing a GOTM the way Civ should be played.

[jeffelammar]

Anyway, the game is what it is, and in any competition, you agree to rules, and then do the best you can within those rules. If you don't like those rules, look for alternate competitions, or take the satisfaction (but not the score) of playing by your own rules!

I agree completely that you have to accept the rules of the competition. I just think that it is also valid to go out and propose changes or variants. GOTM has been great to me. It has allowed me to become a much better civ player. The people here are great. So I am just saying that periodic variations would be nice to mix things up a bit.

Which leads me to your last point... I think most of the better players are as good as they are because they study the game, the situation, AND the rules, and then develop strategies to get the most out of the situation. If there are new rules, most would very quickly develop optimal games that fit within those rules. And then others would learn from them, and improve as well. To me, that's part of the challenge of the game, especially in SGs but also here, is to watch and learn from the really good players, to see what they see in a situation and the thought process they use to overcome it.

Agreed. When I said the pack, I meant to imply that the elite would probably remain elite, even with the new rules. I think the middle of the pack would shuffle greatly, as I feel that some of these strategies are more of a crutch or checklist than a true understanding of how to analyze the situation. Going with an RCP or even an OCP exploits bugs and takes away skill in analyizing city locations. Many players plan every one of their games around the Horseman --> Cavalry upgrade.

I would just like to see a variant on the rules every few GOTMs.
I think it would cause the elite to innovate and the rest of us could learn some new tricks.

 

[Justus II]

I agree completely that some more variety would be good. I actually liked the "target Victory Conditions" they were doing last fall, when they were trying to adapt the GOTM to coincide with the tournament. It made it interesting to change your approach. (GOTM 24? is still my only diplomatic victory!). I also agree removing many of these exploits/tactics off the table would make for a better game, and would force many players to develop new tactics, which is a good thing.

And most definitely, GOTM has been very good to me. I think over the past year or so I have become a much better player, due in large part to the GOTM and the QSC. (hint, hint!)

 

[dojoboy]

It is all very well accusing players of following a formula, but it isn't that easy to do: I certainly can't conquer as quick as the best players despite trying to follow the formula.

This is so true. While I do prefer using a "civilization" approach to the game, I am well aware that I currently lack the stamina, focus, and creativity to pull off the types of victories by our elite players, even our second & third tier players. The vast majority of these players can approach a game the very same way I do and shatter my score.

 

[AlanH]

If I'm wrong I'll play GOTM32 without upgrading a single unit, if I'm right than you do. How does that sound?

I'm prepared to keep the score on who's right and wrong, but as I have privileged informaiton I can't possibly bet myself

 

[civ_steve]

If I were a betting civer (and I'm not), I would put my money on a certain Histograpic - 100K Culture pair of games as being 1 and 2.

 

[Bolka]

Grazzit, I understand very well your reaction.
I have played Civ since the very first version, and played a lot on every possible version that came out since then. My way of playing was, at least in the beginning, more like one would play Sim City: build something I am proud of and I can look at and feel like it is nice. This is why I would follow most of the rules you have described.

When I started playing the Gotm I was surprised to see the level of achievements the best players are achieving, and that it involves treating our civilization as a tool to get there.

I didn't really mind, as no one forces me to play the GotM that way, and you can enjoy all the advantages of the GotM no matter how you decide to play it.

As far as I am concerned , I quickly realized that to play it more competitively is a cool challenge, and what I learned from others allowed me to win in difficulty levels I couldn't win before, levels at which the AI is cheating in its own way, to compensate the deficiencies of its system.

Overall I think the rules of what is acceptable and what is not as defined by the GotM team is very reasonable to allow everyone to play and compare in a fair manner.

There is no perfect way to balance the human/AI competition, the Civ developpement team had to work around that by implementing strong cheats for the AI to still present a challenge for seasonned players. If the AI uses cheat, why not use what is allowed to the limit? And if one doesn't agree to that, then he can still only play in the lower dificulty levels.

My 2 cents...

 

[AlanH]

If I were a betting civer (and I'm not), I would put my money on a certain Histograpic - 100K Culture pair of games as being 1 and 2.

Ahah! But in which order?

 

[civ_steve]

Ahah! But in which order?

I haven't studied the Jason scoring system in detail which is ultimately where the GOTM score is eventually determined. Some of the submitted Histographic games in the past have exceeded Jason assumptions for top score. Also (going from memory) I believe the Histographic player I have in mind reached Domination limit earlier than the 100K player. And there are considerable other concerns that confront a serious 100K attempt. So (with some hesitation) I'd predict the Histographic for #1 and the 100K for #2. (Looking forward to seeing the results posted ... on June 2nd, right? )

 

[AlanH]

The 7th is our target. You'll have to ask the boss if you want them earlier

 

[samildanach]

Results! ...Bah! Who needs them! I dislike the staff rushing the results out so quickly. It cuts down on the time I have for posturing and pleasantly deluding myself - that this time I will own Sir Pleb and the rest of the big guns.
With the new automation I get the cold, unforgiving truth, in black and white within days, which verifiably and unequivocally states that I am....... thick.
In the old days before automation, this terrible news was dulled by the months I had to wait for results and GPR updates. And I could dismiss it as an anomaly because other GOTM disasters had similarly faded from memory. But now there is no mistaking the pattern of crapness that has emerged, even to one of my hamster like attention span.
Indignity is heaped on indignity as once again it appears I will be getting a good view of Alans ass on the results table.

 

[AlanH]

Sorry, Sam, I feel your pain . But we're both going to be left for dead by the returning prodigals

Once upon a time, when all the pros had left the field, I aspired to top-20-ness. Now I'll be lucky to hang on in there in the top 50

 

[Detlef Richter]

Sorry, Sam, I feel your pain . But we're both going to be left for dead by the returning prodigals

Once upon a time, when all the pros had left the field, I aspired to top-20-ness. Now I'll be lucky to hang on in there in the top 50

I can tell you, over place 100, the air is much better.

 

[samildanach]

Sorry, Sam, I feel your pain . But we're both going to be left for dead by the returning prodigals

Once upon a time, when all the pros had left the field, I aspired to top-20-ness. Now I'll be lucky to hang on in there in the top 50

Yes, what with the Red Dawn. And the return of the prodigals as you say. I've also noticed ProPains name on the submission list - it may be the same Propain who has been mashing v.good deity SP players in the CDZ.
Hmm...I agree it looks like it is going to be a very tough month.

 

[rodrigo_braz]

Here is my take on what Grazzit is saying. The game is meant to be a simulation of how Civs develop in reality, so that you can "recreate history" your own way. Each game is almost like reading a good novel, an alternate history of the world, with all the drama that entails.
Now the simulation is not perfect and allows exploits that could not happen in reality. This ends up being is like reading a book with a major plot flaw: just not much fun, if you see it as a story.
Now of course you don't have to do this. You can see it as a "max your score puzzle" thing. That's just a different take and valid on its own right, of course.

 

[akots]

With this last GOTM i noticed that one person won by 640ad, he did this by using every trick civ allows. ...

Dunno what you mean. I finished at 900AD and did not use any tricks. No pop-rushing, frequent resource connection-disconnection, ship chaining. Though moved the Palace to Zulu territory after building FP (did not help much). And did not break many treaties with the AI well at least not as much as they broke with me. Could have finished much earlier, probably around 750AD. And what is wrong with dense build at the start? It is the most reasonable thing to do.

Basically, I like RBCiv rules and try to play as close to them as possible. However, much of what you consider as "trick" in the starting post and subsequent discussions is allowed by the RBCiv rules as well. Then, I guess, you have to build your own website and teach people how to play "a fair game" there.

BTW, try multiplayer without AI. It is the greatest fun IMHO. Or join ISDG.

 

[Grazzit]

I realize that i am in the minority, its just MHO.

If those things are allowed in the rules you mentioned id consider them unfair if the computer did not know how to do it. Yes the computer is severly limited

I say this just because the game is not fun for me if a human can beat the AI 10 out of 10 times just by doing things the AI doesn't understand.

Almost anyone who plays here can get Cav first, upgrade their horseman and own the AI. Over and Over. No reason to build large powerfull cities, no reason to use combined arms.. Over by the early AD's.

If you add, pop rushing, city placement constriction, wacked AI trading, and so on.. it is just not fun

As you can tell I barely play civ anymore.. I would play against other players
but i don't like PBEM and its hard to find 3-5 people who will spend 2-10 hours a week playing a game at the same time. Add to that the problems with MP in civ and its just painful.

I am really hoping C4 is Civ 3 with minor improvments.. same graphics.. with a AI that has 4 years in development.. thats all Civ needs besides a few minor things..

PS.
Aircraft that are worth making
auto recon
huge map/turn optimization
government tweaks
a few more...

 

[AlanH]

the game is not fun for me if a human can beat the AI 10 out of 10 times just by doing things the AI doesn't understand.

This is where the misunderstanding lies in this thread. As played in GOTM-land Civ3 is a contest between human players, not between a player and the AI. As you say, most players here can beat the AI, but very few can beat the likes of SirPleb and Bremp and a few others. I'll continue to put my cities at the best locations I can find for them as I try to improve my performance in this human vs. human competition.

To address the city placement issue:

I think the maps you have seen around here recently with very dense city distributions were just a result of milking for score. Most of those cities were built after the players had already defeated the AI.

But if you want historical realism look at civic layout in most of the ancient world. You will find that villages were placed close enough for people to walk between them in a day. As transport improved, towns and cities were placed further apart, but the villages remain in most countries as a visible legacy of the way civilization evolved in closely spaced settlements. My Civ3 equivalent is a tendency to use 3-tile distances in my early placement, and I'm not going to use so-called OCP just because that's the non-optimum pattern that AI civs choose.

 

[akots]

You are very hard to please and obviously do not belong to CivFanatics because looks like you dislike the game as it was previously and it is now. IMHO, the only thing that might work is playing some SG with a decent company of RBC players or an insane variant. I know of a player who also complained all around the place of how bad the game is. Guess now he is more satisfied, at least I hope so.

And please stop insulting the GOTM players. You are doing this without even understanding the whole mechanism of the GOTM. Try play and get into the top 20 without using the major "exploits" lets say within a year of trying. Then, you might understand how tough the competition is here and why the rules make sense to everyone but a few people.