Quick Start Challenge for GOTM13

[cracker]

With GOTM13 due to release in the next 24 hours, it is time to reveale the opportunity for everyone to play the early game as their best possible game and submit it as a Quick Start Challenge.

The objective of the quick start challenge format is to have you play your game to create your best and most powerful position by 1000 BC and then compare how you accomplished this feat with other players.

There is a special scoring system that gives your credit for everything you do in the game. Every unit, every building, every city, every citizens, every unit of food, every gold coin in your treasury, every tech, contacts, embassies: all of these elemenst increase your quick start score.

There will be a lot of discussion after the fact for the Quick Start Challenges because one of the key features of the game play format is for each player to keep a simple early timeline that should accompany you submitted save file for 1000BC.

You can play the same GOTM and submit it as a quick start and then play that GOTM out until the end and submit it to the GOTM ranking. SO you get two competition opportunities for playing one game.

A numebr of people have already played GOTM11 and GOTM12 in this format to test the process and we will have some examples posted in the next week.

For now you can find out more information on Quick Start Challenges by visiting the webpages at:

Quick Start Challenge Pages

Good luck to all players in the QSC for GOTM13.

The skills that you hone in a quick start challenge will transfer directly to PTW once the bugs in that game are worked out and patched in the time frame after Christmas. SO now is the time to really polish your quick start skills and prepare to kill the impatient non-players who will wallow in the initial release bugs of PTW will the real players continue to refine their gameplay here in the GOTM forum.

 

[Grotius]

What's the due date for the Quick Start Challenge? Same as for the GOTM?

 

[cracker]

Yes the due date is the same but there is a slightly different submission process.

My suggestion is for you to submit the QSC as soon as you get to 1000BC and have your timeline ready. This will help avoid confusion and mistakes because later you can submit the completed game to the correct format.

Also, we will try and hold off on any spoilers of any kind related to the QSC formats until at least after the 15th.

I am working on some tools to help promote comparison and discussion of the differences that may appear in the QSC games but we will have to see how these evolve as more people participate.

 

[col]

OK count me in.
Phil M's thrown down the gauntlet....

 

[Karasu]

Seems like a great idea, I'll give it a try even though I may just not be good enough...

 

[Yndy]

I'll submit even though I'll get a lousy scoring whatever method you will use. Still, I may prove the opposite of what you are trying to determine here, that is how you can win with a lousy set of first moves (and I mean losing two of your first 3 cities including the capital - ouch).

 

[cracker]

Here's a link to an excel file that includes a scoring worksheet for quick start challenges.

The worksheet calculates the actual tech values for the various ancient age techs on different map sizes and difficulty levels so even if you do not use it to help with your QSC you may find it helpful to assist you in evaluateing some tech research and trade issues.

http://www.civfanatics.net/uploads2/timeline.zip

 

[ProPain]

nice spreadsheet cracker. Do I understand correctly that cum value is the cumulative value of a tech and it's necesarry predecessor? (in other words cum value of iron working= raw value (bronze working+iron working)

Also wondering: are the raw value points exactly reflecting the relative values of the techs from the AI point of view. In other words does the AI think iron working is twice as valuable as bronze working and will it use this relation during trade agreements?

 

[cracker]

Propain,

I think I understand that you have the "cum value" correct.

The intent here is to give an even heavier weight to those techs that build on techs you already have.

I am not yet the ultimate expert on tech research (but I'm working on it as usual). My general take on tech research is that extreme penetration of the tech tree is more value than making broad progress uniformly across the base of the tree. Depending on how well you match your big picture strategy to your terrain position, build plan, and tech research sequence you will usually be in a stronger position if you can get quickly one of the techs on right hand side of the tree rather than getting all the techs on the left hand side of the tree. (just an early thought process)

The score worksheet should give you the raw value for the tech and I am pretty sure this is the base value used by the AI players. Yes, the AI has a different cost but I think they compare the costs consistently within their framework by either using just their cost or just your cost. SO this essentially yields the same results from either perspective.

How the AI values techs is not just based on the cost of the tech and the number of known civs that hold that tech. Tehse are the first steps but there are some much bigger distortion factors that we (I +others) have not fully quantified yet. These factors could include:

wonders (whether they have already been built or not)
resources revealed
special abilities
new units
and hardcoded distortion factors

a clear example is Nationalism which the AI's value at 2 to 3 times what it would cost to research (you will have to wait until you see some upcoming SOTDs to put this in perspective).

But back to the subject of Quick Starts: the idea in the scoring formula is to push you to extremes of reaching for penetration vertically into the right hand techs by having each tech cummulatively add in the value of all its pre-requisites again and again.

 

[ProPain]

thanks for the quick reply.

somewhat of topic but I'm sure AI values techs different before and after an asociated wonder has been built. I experienced this once in a game I played where I was the first player to discover musical theory. I checked what the AI's would pay for the tech. They wanted to pay lotsa money but I didnt sell it because I wanted to built the wonder first. After completion of the JS cathedral (maybe 4/5 turns later) I was still the only one to have the tech but the price dropped to almost nothing. Should have made some screendumps but didnt. IIRC the prices went down from something like 1000 to a 100 gold.

Interesting to read your point about penetrating the tech tree. Recently I have been playing just the opposite way and sometimes researching a 'less advanced' tech first to get 'prices' to drop on the other techs and so discovering them relatively faster. I'm not performing a very methodical indepth research on the subject but trying to get a feel for matters.

Anyway, I will definitely enter the QSC cause I feel improving my play in the early stages of the game will finally open the door to winning deity...... I hope.......

 

[Karasu]

Originally posted by Yndy
I'll submit even though I'll get a lousy scoring whatever method you will use. Still, I may prove the opposite of what you are trying to determine here, that is how you can win with a lousy set of first moves (and I mean losing two of your first 3 cities including the capital - ouch).

Well put, Yndy!
I'll take your approach even farther, and demonstrate how agonizingly you can lose with a lousy sequence of initial moves!!

 

[Ronald]

Hi Cracker,

That's a very good initiative.
I tend to play the first moves too quickly. Keeping an accurate log forces me to slow down. If this will improve my decisions is another question
It will be very interesting to compare the different timelogs!

Thanks

Ronald

 

[flexo]

since i already finished my gotm13 when I saw this I had to do a remake ... funny how things never turn out the same ... I suuuucked in this one ... Russia had some form of freakin' miracle.

 

[col]

OK Have played up to 1000BC and have kept a timeline and a diary. Not great works of lierature but I hope they're OK. I tend to forget to enter stuff when the going gets exciting! I'll go back over some saves and fill in some more details. Just overtook Russia in the histograph before 1000BC!
Certainly could have improved but am generally satisfied with this start.
Am entering scores onto spreadsheet and will send soon

 

[ducki]

I just submitted my QSC, and I must say it was a lot of fun.
I'm only up to Regent, so trying to keep up with the AI was quite a challenge for me.

I really wish I could post it somewhere and get feedback, but I'll have to wait a while to avoid spoiling it for anyone.

Thanks for hosting this Challenge!

 

[Yndy]

cracker,

you mean we actually HAVE TO fill the timeline and submit it with the save or is it just suggested?

Because I'm already in 300BC and don't have anything but the 1000BC save. I don't believe I can fill the timeline even remotely accurate.

Please advise.

 

[cracker]

The timeline is technically optional, but you get a 25% scoring bonus for having a credible timeline. "Credible" is a fluid definition but the webpages give you a good idea of some things you should watch for.

This is an evloving genre, so as you see examples of what people do with their games and timelines you will get a better idea of how you can get the most benefit out of your timeline.

They key here is for you to play the game you want to play but then to have a format that lets us all compare notes to see if we can learn about how the game is played by comparing our opening moves and choices to the moves and choices of others.

I guarantee you that you will see some interesting differences and the timelines will be a key part of revealing the "tricks of the trade".

Yndy,

For your specific case, I would say you should look to see if you have any interim saves and then use you domestic advisor screen to open your existing cities and try to reconstruct the best timeline you can for the period up to 1000 BC. You can look at the city founded dates and the dates that structures were constructed in from the cultural advisor. Make sure you put a note at the bottom of your timeline and I will do my best to reconstruct any missing elements I can find by using "my magic wand". Hopefully not too many people will ask me to do this because it is can be time consuming. The fee for reconstructing your timeline for you is one box of white chocolate covered Christmas style oreos.

Good luck in the QSC and the overall GOTM,

 

[Moonsinger]

Can I submit the Quick Start Challenge without finishing the GOTM? I have never played the GOTM because I don't have enough time to finish it within the same month. However, getting to 1000BC won't take too long.

 

[cracker]

This is precisely the intent of the QSC. Many people will play the QSC without even trying to play the whole GOTM and hopefully a number of new people will try to play the GOTMs at higher difficulty levels because the QSC affords them an opportunity to set a short term goal that any civ player should be able to achieve on any difficulty level.

Originally posted by Moonsinger
... getting to 1000BC won't take too long.

Yup, even the ADD crew can play this one too.

 

[Moonsinger]

To cracker:

Thanks for the previous info. After I reviewing the QSC scoring system, I have just a few more questions:

Is there a point value for the strength of the unit? For example, an elite warrior should be worth a lot more than a regular warrior. Moreover, how many points do we get for the GL or the army? Since we may decide to use the GL for building an army instead of rushing a Great Wonder, I think the scoring system should also take that into account.