Possibilities for GOTM 5

stormerne

is just a
Retired Moderator
Joined
Jan 16, 2001
Messages
3,428
Location
the United States
I wonder if it's not too early to be thinking about what format GOTM 5 might take.
I suggest an easier level - like Prince - on a small map, with 7 civs and raging hordes.

------------------
<IMG SRC="http://www.anglo-saxon.demon.co.uk/stormerne/stormerne.gif" border=0>
 
I like the idea of a small map and 7 tribes. For the other parameters mentioned I have no opinion.

------------------
"There is no tiddle-taddle nor pibble-pabble in Pompey's camp."
 
Well I definitely agree that it should be Prince level, but I don't like small maps and on Prince I would prefer medium or large maps - I generally think that small maps should only be used on higher levels.

snipersmilie.gif


------------------
Veni Vidi Vici.

Coolbook:
Håkan Eriksson, Stormerne, vladmir_illych_lenin, Cunobelin Of Hippo, Bluemonday.
 
There is a serious point about the small map. I'll use myself as an example...

When we played GOTM 2 with King and a large map, I really didn't finish it. OK so I handed in my game, but I was playing it right up to zero hour. I certainly finished earlier than I needed for best score. And it still took me 50 hours to play! I could have done with another 15 hours to get a really good score.

Playing an easier level than king on a large map could mean that it would take people even longer to finish than GOTM 2. Certainly all the best players would get to a 255 city endgame and perfect and perfect... After all, you get a lot of extra turns at Prince level.

------------------
<IMG SRC="http://www.anglo-saxon.demon.co.uk/stormerne/stormerne.gif" border=0>
 
Well your probably right about the maps, it was also a quite selfish thing of me to wish for a large map. Actually after thinking about it, I think that we shold avoid large maps al together, since they take to long to play and we want as many participants as possible.

snipersmilie.gif


------------------
Veni Vidi Vici.

Coolbook:
Håkan Eriksson, Stormerne, vladmir_illych_lenin, Cunobelin Of Hippo, Bluemonday.
 
Agree about the large maps and playing time. I suppose a Deity game on a large map might work, but otherwise lets stick to medium or small, especially on lower levels.

I know this idea is unpopular among many of us, but I really enjoyed the one game TF started for us, leaving us with a question to answer right off the bat. I would like to see more things like that in the future (not every game, of course)
 
Thunderfall and I want to make the GOTM's a bit surprising and also variable. And since we've just had an accelerated startup...

------------------
<IMG SRC="http://home.hetnet.nl/~maartencl/tmp/MatrixBW.gif" border=0>
<FONT size="1">Studying chemistry means: having fun, drinking beer, having more fun, drinking more beer, hang above the toilet and have a good night sleep!

And each time Pedro says: "Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrggh", I feel so good!!!</FONT s>
 
7 Civs and a small map? Kinda leaves those who play an isolationist strategy out in the cold, eh? But I guess that's the whole point of a variable game of the month -- put us into situations we may not have tried lately (or ever).

------------------
No better friend, no worse enemy.
 
Originally posted by sulla:
7 Civs and a small map? Kinda leaves those who play an isolationist strategy out in the cold, eh? But I guess that's the whole point of a variable game of the month -- put us into situations we may not have tried lately (or ever).
Might be very funny indeed.
wink.gif


------------------
<IMG SRC="http://home.hetnet.nl/~maartencl/tmp/MatrixBW.gif" border=0>
<FONT size="1">Studying chemistry means: having fun, drinking beer, having more fun, drinking more beer, hang above the toilet and have a good night sleep!

And each time Pedro says: "Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrggh", I feel so good!!!</FONT s>
 
I'm for the small map idea too. Maybe in the summer--say July--we could do a large map, as many of us will have more time off. But the average GOTM should not be more than medium-size.

Btw, has anyone considered changing the GOTM numbering system to a date system? It will get hard to remember which game was which by the time we're on GOTM XXVII
 
Well when you look them up in the archive they say:

GotM1-February
GotM2-March
GotM3-April

And that is more or less like I have them on my computer, so I don't think that it's going to become a problem!!

snipersmilie.gif


------------------
Veni Vidi Vici.

Coolbook:
Håkan Eriksson, Stormerne, vladmir_illych_lenin, Cunobelin Of Hippo, Bluemonday.
 
Originally posted by goodbye_mr_bond:
I'm for the small map idea too. Maybe in the summer--say July--we could do a large map, as many of us will have more time off. But the average GOTM should not be more than medium-size.
I think that has been made clear to us by the GOTM II, which just took too long for lots of us.
Originally posted by goodbye_mr_bond:
Btw, has anyone considered changing the GOTM numbering system to a date system? It will get hard to remember which game was which by the time we're on GOTM XXVII
Almost every time you see a number, it is usually followed by ", month". At least in the GOTM pages.

------------------
<IMG SRC="http://home.hetnet.nl/~maartencl/tmp/MatrixBW.gif" border=0>
<FONT size="1">Studying chemistry means: having fun, drinking beer, having more fun, drinking more beer, hang above the toilet and have a good night sleep!

And each time Pedro says: "Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrggh", I feel so good!!!</FONT s>
 
Originally posted by sulla:
7 Civs and a small map? Kinda leaves those who play an isolationist strategy out in the cold, eh? But I guess that's the whole point of a variable game of the month -- put us into situations we may not have tried lately (or ever).

Exactly!!! And it sounds kind of fun, too. Whatta ya say, Matrix?
 
Almost every time you see a number, it is usually followed by ", month". At least in the GOTM pages.

And only the most current GOTM is available for download in the rules and downloads page...

I don't want to say to much about the next GOTM, but it will not be on Deity level again for sure.
smile.gif
 
I doubt I'll even try to play if it's a large map at a low setting. I'm slow enough as it is.

Consider using some settings that people don't normally play like small land-mass, archipelago, flat map. It could be interesting to see a game where naval power was important. Some people may be in for a shock when they realize they have to maintain a navy to be successful (myself included!) <IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/wink.gif" border=0>

Or maybe you can do what Smash suggested in an earlier topic and use what he called a "zany" map layout (e.g., very wide, not very tall)


------------------
DEATH awaits you all...with nasty, big, pointy teeth.

[This message has been edited by TimTheEnchanter (edited May 21, 2001).]
 
I think that accelerated startups are the way forward not the ones done by the computer but hand done ones. Ie Matrix plays the first few turns until he comes to a decision where he thinks Hmmm this is interesting and saves the game there.
 
Yuk... no no no! Please no more accelerated startups.
frown.gif


Why impose someone else's idea of how to start the game?
Why let them choose city sites, expansion direction, first wonders and first techs?
The first turns of the game are crucial - they and can decide the whole game - and I am very likely to make significantly different choices to some people.

How will less experienced people learn how important these turns are if Matrix plays them for them?

Sure Thunderfall did a reasonable job in GOTM #2, but I hope that was the exception.

Please somebody tell me why the advantages of an accelerated startup outweigh the known disadvantages. Please somebody tell me what the advantages are at all!

[Nurse - I'm ready for my medication now...]

------------------
<IMG SRC="http://www.anglo-saxon.demon.co.uk/stormerne/stormerne.gif" border=0>
 
I greatly enjoyed the one accelerated start we did, for the following reasons: It was interesting and very informative to see how we all handled an identical situation--we can learn and evaluate different stratagies. It was interesting and informative to see how someone else started the game, city sites, wonders built/started, techs researched, etc. They may not have been my choices, but if someone else chose them, they must have had a good reason, so I'm forced to think about why. Doesn't mean I have to agree with those choices. A very small advantage so early in the game, but it does cut down a little bit the time to play, a major concern for some of us. We've had other games that forced us from our favorite strategies (last month's bloodlust was my first ever), accelerated start-up is just another way to force us all to deal with different strategies then we're used to. That doesn't mean we have to adopt those strategies, but we can learn from having to play them a bit. I think that is one of the underlaying reasons for GOTM in the first place, to learn different strategies, learn from each other, and improve all our games. I certainly do NOT want an accelerated start-up all the time, or even frequently, but an occasional game begun by Matrix or Thunderfall, or maybe you, Stormerne, and saved at a crucial juncture for all of us to deal with would be a very good thing which I am highly in favor of.
 
Perhaps you're right Leowind. There are good points about it as an occasional exercise. I apologise for my rash outburst which was directed primarily at the "way to go" comments immediately prior. My medication has taken effect...
smile.gif


------------------
<IMG SRC="http://www.anglo-saxon.demon.co.uk/stormerne/stormerne.gif" border=0>
 
Back
Top Bottom