Unconquered Sun
Emperor
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2006
- Messages
- 1,462
That's a surprise. Even on Warlord difficulty level submissions are only about 10% of downloads.
Proposed 2-tier GOTM System
- Thread starter da_Vinci
- Start date
da_Vinci
Gypsy Prince
No. The scale was changed by factor of ten; the numbers are correct and should not be multiplied by ten.
I think it probably has occured that the same person downloads more than once. In fact, I KNOW this to be true at least in one case.
When I download a game as a save, my computer (still) truncates the filename extension. If I can find that file again and rename it (and remember that I need the extension *.CivBeyondSwordSave not *.civbeyondswordsave or *Civ4BeyondSwordSavedGame or whatever else I might think of), then fine. Otherwise, if I rename it incorrectly on download, I haven't figured out how to change the extension (only add another extension), so its easier to just download again with a new attempt at the right extension.
Mostly, if I remember to have the disk in the drive, I can just open directly from the save (except SGOTM's for some reason). But it can happen that I have downloaded the same game more than once (all occuring before I even can open the file). Though my submission percentage is surely better than 10% of my downloads
.I would also bet that a lot of people have downloaded games only to find out they don't have the right HOF mod or Civ version to play it, then just give up.
If you had like a plug-and-play type interface with Civ version/HOF mod version... one mouseclick installs both trouble free --- and make big huge guarantees to all noobs that doing so won't affect the way their game plays the way they play now(or your money back), you'd get more participation. Most people have probably struggled a little (or a lot) to get Civ4 and expansions to work at all, especially the MP crowd with firewalls etc. Having done that, and not really understood all that they were doing, its a little scary putting mods that might make it not work... and give an unfounded fear that they won't be able to use their game in the same way (unmodded) as before without major tinkering.
And I'm sorry, but nobody is going to RTFM, so it needs to be SIMPLE to particpate. Move all the "Help me" posts to a special tech support thread so folks don't get scared off (and delete them after every 2 months so it doesn't look like tech support is the most popular thread, which it could well be
). And everybody stop using acronyms like RTFM because a lot of people just won't know WTH we are saying, and it makes it look like a closed clique.Looking at the downloads, though, even if, say 50% download without playing, this still means that approx only 1 out of 5 played games gets played to the end and submit them.
Also however the difficulty level, the ration DL / submit is almost always the same !!!!
IMHO it is because most middle players want to enjoy a game, and do not feel the competitive aspct of it being interesting / rewarding enough, or simply feel no chance of getting an award.
Most probably, these players want to play a good game and simply to reloads of former saves, like most players of mid level do (including me ....).
So I come back to my simple idea : give a progression award of some kind to players who show improvement of play. This might motivate some not to click the "load game" button while in play ...
Also however the difficulty level, the ration DL / submit is almost always the same !!!!
IMHO it is because most middle players want to enjoy a game, and do not feel the competitive aspct of it being interesting / rewarding enough, or simply feel no chance of getting an award.
Most probably, these players want to play a good game and simply to reloads of former saves, like most players of mid level do (including me ....).
So I come back to my simple idea : give a progression award of some kind to players who show improvement of play. This might motivate some not to click the "load game" button while in play ...
mtt9999
Builder of Dreams
One disadvantage of switching to a two-tiered system is the learning curve. I believe one of the overall goals is to improve players gameplay. That occurs by not only playing, but reading threads. If, as is essentially proposed, that the good players are seperate from the mediocre ones, we must use the same threads to discuss the game.
da_Vinci
Gypsy Prince
That is one potential advantage of a split difficulty map ... The top players playing the high diff save are talking about how they started out with the same start as the developing players. While various aspects of the game become less comparable over time, the QSC-oid first turns "competition" that some have proposed might be sufficiently comparable despite different diff levels.
Unless a lot of folks plan playing all 4 "proposed" BOTM a month, maybe three BOTM ... one high, one low, one split difficulty ... might be useful. Or have that third game osccilate between split diff (high/low) and a non-split moderate diff (in months where the other two are high and low), where that might attract both levels of players.
dV
da_Vinci
Gypsy Prince
Is there any way to play these downloaded saves without the HOF mod, if one has no intention of submitting? (Not the worldbuilders, the competiton saves)
Maybe a look at how many downloads of the HOF mod, if that is available, will tell us something about downloads of saves where submitting might be a possiblity, and downloads with no intention of submitting?
Is the HOF mod considered to be the barrier? I guess it is for those using BUG or other mods ...
dV
Maybe a look at how many downloads of the HOF mod, if that is available, will tell us something about downloads of saves where submitting might be a possiblity, and downloads with no intention of submitting?
Is the HOF mod considered to be the barrier? I guess it is for those using BUG or other mods ...
dV
You cannot play the game without the HoF Mod unless you play the World Builder. The World Builder is only available after the competition closes.
EDIT - We have had a look into BUG. Not sure where that will go, but we are learning about it...
EDIT - We have had a look into BUG. Not sure where that will go, but we are learning about it...
da_Vinci
Gypsy Prince
You cannot play the game without the HoF Mod unless you play the World Builder. The World Builder is only available after the competition closes.
EDIT - We have had a look into BUG. Not sure where that will go, but we are learning about it...
So all of these downloads are presumably folks with the HOF mod? Do HOF mod download statistics bear that out?
dV
I don't have those stats, but how would you expect them to correlate? You only have to download the HoF Mod once, and then you can play as many xOTMs as you like.
Re. the multiple downloads per player, it looks as if you should multiply the downloads I have given by 2/3 to get the numbers of distinct individuals. Some of that may be due to download accelerators, which request two download connections, and merge the two partial files.
Re. the multiple downloads per player, it looks as if you should multiply the downloads I have given by 2/3 to get the numbers of distinct individuals. Some of that may be due to download accelerators, which request two download connections, and merge the two partial files.
ngraner42
Ultrarunner
I just want to mention that I love the more games idea. Being able to attempt deity, get crushed, and not have to wait 2 weeks for a new game is super.
da_Vinci
Gypsy Prince
For example, almost 2000 downloads of BOTM 1. So I would expect to see 2000 downloads of that corresponding HOF mod, at least. If it has ever only been downloaded 1000 times, then you have to wonder why 2000 downloads of the game ... duplicate counts, or some other issue? Something of a data validation step.
If you see the 2000+ you expect, that is not particularly informative.
dV
wwassme
Warlord
My 2 cents:
From the stats, it looks like a lot of people download, but don't submit. The most likely reason for that is they don't complete the game (or lose and don't want to submit a loss). Failure to complete is most likely to occur if: (1) the level is too hard, the player is going to lose and gives up; or (2) if the level is too easy and the player gets bored. Either system of having two difficulty levels for the same save or having several different saves per month with a range of difficulty levels increases the chances of a player finding at least one game per month that fits their preferred difficulty level, keeps the game interesting for them and increases the chance of completion and submission.
Having more games does potentially reduce comparability if fewer players play and submit each individual game. That is hard to predict though because that effect would be offset by more players submitting games and commenting in the spoiler threads. As a practical matter, it is difficult to compare games anyway once you get beyond the initial turns, which is why I'd be in favor of setting the first spoiler cutoff earlier than 500 A.D. The farther you get into a game, the less like anyone else's game it is (particularly with respect to different victory types). I'd be in favor of a game designer "recommended" VC, so that people who have comparison of their game to others as their primary goal can more easily do so.
For me, I'm unlikely to play more than two games per month (GOTM and BOTM, I don't have Warlords) due to RL time constraints. I sometimes struggle to get two games a month completed (I sometimes do and sometimes don't submit incomplete games or losses). I'm certainly in favor of more choices as to which two games I play. I'm in favor of more games as opposed to different difficulty levels of the same game for those situations where I flame out early in a game and would then have the option of playing a different game. Further, more games per month would allow for a wider choice among map types, leaders, game speeds, and specialty games such as Always War, No Tech Trading, etc.
As a Monarch/Emperor level player, I'm fine with playing any difficulty level. Lower than that and I try for a top speed or score. Higher than that, I try to stretch myself and have the goal of surviving to the end. While it would be nice to win an award sometime (so far I have one green ambulance), I don't play for that as I don't have time for the more intensive game analysis and micro-managing it would take for me to really compete for an award. I look more at my global ranking, which is fairly high merely because I am a solid, but not spectacular, player but finish and submit at least one game each month and at my relative finish in score and speed in each game.
Regarding Medals and Awards, I'm fine with whatever the consensus is on how to manage those. I don't know where the happy medium is on having enough incentives to encourage people to play for them versus having so many awards that they are meaningless.
Regarding staff load, I think it would be fine to have a mix of custom designed maps and randomly generated maps without significant editing, although which type a particular game is should probably be disclosed.
From the stats, it looks like a lot of people download, but don't submit. The most likely reason for that is they don't complete the game (or lose and don't want to submit a loss). Failure to complete is most likely to occur if: (1) the level is too hard, the player is going to lose and gives up; or (2) if the level is too easy and the player gets bored. Either system of having two difficulty levels for the same save or having several different saves per month with a range of difficulty levels increases the chances of a player finding at least one game per month that fits their preferred difficulty level, keeps the game interesting for them and increases the chance of completion and submission.
Having more games does potentially reduce comparability if fewer players play and submit each individual game. That is hard to predict though because that effect would be offset by more players submitting games and commenting in the spoiler threads. As a practical matter, it is difficult to compare games anyway once you get beyond the initial turns, which is why I'd be in favor of setting the first spoiler cutoff earlier than 500 A.D. The farther you get into a game, the less like anyone else's game it is (particularly with respect to different victory types). I'd be in favor of a game designer "recommended" VC, so that people who have comparison of their game to others as their primary goal can more easily do so.
For me, I'm unlikely to play more than two games per month (GOTM and BOTM, I don't have Warlords) due to RL time constraints. I sometimes struggle to get two games a month completed (I sometimes do and sometimes don't submit incomplete games or losses). I'm certainly in favor of more choices as to which two games I play. I'm in favor of more games as opposed to different difficulty levels of the same game for those situations where I flame out early in a game and would then have the option of playing a different game. Further, more games per month would allow for a wider choice among map types, leaders, game speeds, and specialty games such as Always War, No Tech Trading, etc.
As a Monarch/Emperor level player, I'm fine with playing any difficulty level. Lower than that and I try for a top speed or score. Higher than that, I try to stretch myself and have the goal of surviving to the end. While it would be nice to win an award sometime (so far I have one green ambulance), I don't play for that as I don't have time for the more intensive game analysis and micro-managing it would take for me to really compete for an award. I look more at my global ranking, which is fairly high merely because I am a solid, but not spectacular, player but finish and submit at least one game each month and at my relative finish in score and speed in each game.
Regarding Medals and Awards, I'm fine with whatever the consensus is on how to manage those. I don't know where the happy medium is on having enough incentives to encourage people to play for them versus having so many awards that they are meaningless.
Regarding staff load, I think it would be fine to have a mix of custom designed maps and randomly generated maps without significant editing, although which type a particular game is should probably be disclosed.
Unconquered Sun
Emperor
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2006
- Messages
- 1,462
Graphs don't show any correlation between difficulty and download-submit ratio. Surely more than 10% of the players can beat warlords difficulty.
The only explanation is most players don't finish games. The only positive change I can think of is adding an intermediate submit date, say 500 AD.
The only explanation is most players don't finish games. The only positive change I can think of is adding an intermediate submit date, say 500 AD.
Ronnie1
Deity
But how do you compare incomplete submissions? I completely agree that we would see more submissions, but the comparability of those submissions would be difficult at best.
I was not around for any of the Civ3 QSC's....but that sounds like a more feasible option to me.
nbcman
King
- Joined
- May 10, 2007
- Messages
- 896
my 2 
Regarding the download to submission ratio-I have downloaded multiple xOTM games but I rarely submit. Frequently I'll start the game and either run out of time to finish it or I'll start having issues in the late game since the laptop that I play Civ on can't handle larger maps (standard+) that well. I realize that I won't be able to finish the game but I will start the game to see how my start (up to the 1st or 2nd spoiler) compares to others.
Regarding the download to submission ratio-I have downloaded multiple xOTM games but I rarely submit. Frequently I'll start the game and either run out of time to finish it or I'll start having issues in the late game since the laptop that I play Civ on can't handle larger maps (standard+) that well. I realize that I won't be able to finish the game but I will start the game to see how my start (up to the 1st or 2nd spoiler) compares to others.
There's any number of explanations. For example, that downloaders value having a map that has been quality-tested, but do not value submitting their games. This may simply mean that they don't feel a need to compare themselves with what they might see as an obsessive community of micromanagers and microoptimisers; it might mean they don't like some of the requirements to be able to submit -- for instance, some of the casual downloaders might prefer "not submitting" to [what they might see as] ruining their fun by playing out a silly accidental mistake rather than reversing it. Or it might simply mean they can't be bothered to find the submission form. It might even just mean they don't have a username on the forum and don't care to register.
Jet082
Chieftain
I posted more in the poll thread, but I want to say a little here.
As you can tell, I'm new to the community. I have to say, I'm hugely in favor of the 2-tier system. As it stands now, the competition and community is too intimidating for a newbie (someone like me) to really participate. I would love some system that allows me to play competitively at my skill level (which should improve my skill anyhow) and feel like I have a chance at perhaps placing well.
A player, if they wish to improve their skill, could play both games offered during the month. They could play at their skill level (say tier 2) and then, afterwards, try the tier 1 game to see how different it is. Now, obviously they could only submit the tier 2 game, but it would be good to the player to learn since that is a desired outcome as well.
The 2-tier system has a lot of potential for increasing membership to the community. I love the idea of a game of the month, but only if it's something I can participate in.
As you can tell, I'm new to the community. I have to say, I'm hugely in favor of the 2-tier system. As it stands now, the competition and community is too intimidating for a newbie (someone like me) to really participate. I would love some system that allows me to play competitively at my skill level (which should improve my skill anyhow) and feel like I have a chance at perhaps placing well.
A player, if they wish to improve their skill, could play both games offered during the month. They could play at their skill level (say tier 2) and then, afterwards, try the tier 1 game to see how different it is. Now, obviously they could only submit the tier 2 game, but it would be good to the player to learn since that is a desired outcome as well.
The 2-tier system has a lot of potential for increasing membership to the community. I love the idea of a game of the month, but only if it's something I can participate in.
Similar threads
- Sticky
