Quick Start Challenge for GOTM13
- Thread starter cracker
- Start date
cracker
Gil Favor's Sidekick
Moonsinger,
I think the scoring system will give you zero points for a great leader that you are holding on to, but you are correct that you should get points for an army. I'll have to test some numbers to see what the point value of an ancient age army would be. The real greatest value in having an ancient age army is in doing something with it.
There is no greater point value for unit experience at this time but that has been discussed.
I think the scoring system will give you zero points for a great leader that you are holding on to, but you are correct that you should get points for an army. I'll have to test some numbers to see what the point value of an ancient age army would be. The real greatest value in having an ancient age army is in doing something with it.
There is no greater point value for unit experience at this time but that has been discussed.
I have to disagree on giving points for a GL or an Army actually...
I really feel it's down to luck whether you get a GL at all, scoring should not reward luck, but skill.
However having experienced units should be taken into account as that reflects the "value" of your civilization in way. In the early ages, if you just 5 or 6 military units and half of those are Elite, makes a huge difference with 5 or 6 regulars...
I really appreciate the QSC initiative and I hope everyone will keep a good log as it will be interesting to compare tactics and improve ourselves.
I have no time to complete a full GOTM as I play only a few hours a week but QSC is perfect for me.
However I feel some civfans might have time to try all possible tactics to maximize a QSC score by exploiting the tricks of the scoring system instead of just playing a "normal" GOTM game.
But I guess we will find this out after a few challenges and I trust Cracker to build a scoring system that does not allow for such "cheating" of the spirit of the game.
Thanks Cracker for a great idea !
I really feel it's down to luck whether you get a GL at all, scoring should not reward luck, but skill.
However having experienced units should be taken into account as that reflects the "value" of your civilization in way. In the early ages, if you just 5 or 6 military units and half of those are Elite, makes a huge difference with 5 or 6 regulars...
I really appreciate the QSC initiative and I hope everyone will keep a good log as it will be interesting to compare tactics and improve ourselves.
I have no time to complete a full GOTM as I play only a few hours a week but QSC is perfect for me.
However I feel some civfans might have time to try all possible tactics to maximize a QSC score by exploiting the tricks of the scoring system instead of just playing a "normal" GOTM game.
But I guess we will find this out after a few challenges and I trust Cracker to build a scoring system that does not allow for such "cheating" of the spirit of the game.
Thanks Cracker for a great idea !
Since we could use the GL to rush a Great Wonder that could be worth at least 300 points, if we don't give points to the Army that was created by the GL, it would be unfair!
cracker
Gil Favor's Sidekick
Moonsinger and Skyfish,
Your points have been noted and both sides of the debate have been raised. This QSC competition is run sort of as a benign despotism so we have to weigh the points that might be awarded in terms of the choices they might encourage someone to make. The finally scoring decision will ultimately on this issue will have more to do with "behavioral guidance" than it will have any relationship to fairness.
The two major factors that can impact QSC scoring in terms of raw luck are goody hut results and the possibility of GL production. The GL factor can actually overwhelm the results, so this may result in all the GL QSC games getting set aside into a separate category that rates the game in terms of how the GL usage fits into the player's overall strategy of the game.
Building a three warrior army might earn you a 400 point short sightedness penalty.
On the cheating issue, I am sure we will have some people try to exploit the system, but I assure you that helm has a firm hand on the wheel of the ship and that public humiliation is a powerful tool.
Civ3 is a game of good mechanical decisions and that will show up very prominently in the QSC format. We will adapt the scoring system to filter out luck from the equation whenever possible.
Your points have been noted and both sides of the debate have been raised. This QSC competition is run sort of as a benign despotism so we have to weigh the points that might be awarded in terms of the choices they might encourage someone to make. The finally scoring decision will ultimately on this issue will have more to do with "behavioral guidance" than it will have any relationship to fairness.
The two major factors that can impact QSC scoring in terms of raw luck are goody hut results and the possibility of GL production. The GL factor can actually overwhelm the results, so this may result in all the GL QSC games getting set aside into a separate category that rates the game in terms of how the GL usage fits into the player's overall strategy of the game.
Building a three warrior army might earn you a 400 point short sightedness penalty.
On the cheating issue, I am sure we will have some people try to exploit the system, but I assure you that helm has a firm hand on the wheel of the ship and that public humiliation is a powerful tool.
Civ3 is a game of good mechanical decisions and that will show up very prominently in the QSC format. We will adapt the scoring system to filter out luck from the equation whenever possible.
planetfall
Emperor
FYI I played 30 turns in QSC GOTM13 but not interested in finished game. So why posting?
Well I created a log tool that you might find helpful. Attached is a zip file:
Contents:
1. a 100 turn blank log file: octo_log.
{octo == eight, eighty turns in civ3 == 1000bc}
2. sample completed log file: octo_log_gotm_13b
3. sample save which goes with the completed log file. 13b_2590.sav. This is the first 30 turns of GOTM13.
I will try other GOTM but not GOTM13.
Enjoy.
-- PF
Well I created a log tool that you might find helpful. Attached is a zip file:
Contents:
1. a 100 turn blank log file: octo_log.
{octo == eight, eighty turns in civ3 == 1000bc}
2. sample completed log file: octo_log_gotm_13b
3. sample save which goes with the completed log file. 13b_2590.sav. This is the first 30 turns of GOTM13.
I will try other GOTM but not GOTM13.
Enjoy.
-- PF
cracker
Gil Favor's Sidekick
I asked the mods to remove the link to your zip file Planetfall because we really want to avoid spoiler information on the QSCs particularly on a thread that is not intended to be a spoiler. This was complicated by the fact the you wrapped the spoiler in with something that other people might have considered of value.
As an example, I havenot even looked at the GOTM13 startposition yet and have been avoiding the spoiler thread until I get through with some admin stuff.
See if you can at least play the QSC up until 1000BC and thens ubmit the timeline and the save to the quick start email address on the webpages. 30 turns of play will not give you very much of a basis for comparison.
Good luck,
As an example, I havenot even looked at the GOTM13 startposition yet and have been avoiding the spoiler thread until I get through with some admin stuff.
See if you can at least play the QSC up until 1000BC and thens ubmit the timeline and the save to the quick start email address on the webpages. 30 turns of play will not give you very much of a basis for comparison.
Good luck,
planetfall
Emperor
Cracker,
Split apart "spoiled info". Here is zip with only the blank QSC log file to use with any QSC game.
If moderators can move previous post to spoilers thread that would be best.
It was interesting to note that toggling to the log file and completing the sections each turn did two things:
1. slowed down play, surprise, and
2. gave me fresh insight into what is happening with play.
Again, enjoy.
-- PF
Split apart "spoiled info". Here is zip with only the blank QSC log file to use with any QSC game.
If moderators can move previous post to spoilers thread that would be best.
It was interesting to note that toggling to the log file and completing the sections each turn did two things:
1. slowed down play, surprise, and
2. gave me fresh insight into what is happening with play.
Again, enjoy.
-- PF
planetfall
Emperor
I understand but my test was not of GOTM 13 but rather of the process of logging QSC data and playing the game. Before I submitted a potential log file, I wanted some game play experience.
Right now GOTM 13 was not where I enjoy playing. 1- difficulty level is current level, but only completed one game at this level. 2- close packing of civs forces more early warfare and I enjoy building at least 4-5 cities before meeting other civs. Neither AI or I get early quick knock out 1-2 city empire option. 3- No new play options. I need to explore PTW before GOTM.
I like the idea of a QSC but will pass on GOTM13 and wait for next GOTM.
-- PF
To Cracker:
It seems that all my concerns have been discussed else where before. Is there a thread or a webpage for these discussions? I really hate to bring up topic that already been discussed.
I assume you guys already thought about the Golden Age too. If it has been discussed, please forgive me and ignore the rest of this post.
------------
The Golden Age would also be another factor that the QSC should consider. For example, in the GOTM13, you could trigger the early Golden Age around 2000 BC or sooner. Therefore, by trigger the Golden Age 20 turns before 1000BC, you would end up with the best possible score for the QSC but realistically, it is not the move that most of us going to make.
In this GOTM13, I would normally wait until I build at least a dozen cities and get this civ into Monarchy which I expect to happen around 1000BC before I trigger the Golden Age. Therefore, in the end, I may end up with the better score for the GOTM but an average score for the QSC. It seems to me that what is best for QSC may not be best for GOTM. Therefore, at this moment, I will play the game as I would normally play and don't pay too much attention to the QSC. My guess is that those who do well in the GOTM would get a lower score than those who intent to play only until 1000BC.
It seems that all my concerns have been discussed else where before. Is there a thread or a webpage for these discussions? I really hate to bring up topic that already been discussed.
I assume you guys already thought about the Golden Age too. If it has been discussed, please forgive me and ignore the rest of this post.
------------
The Golden Age would also be another factor that the QSC should consider. For example, in the GOTM13, you could trigger the early Golden Age around 2000 BC or sooner. Therefore, by trigger the Golden Age 20 turns before 1000BC, you would end up with the best possible score for the QSC but realistically, it is not the move that most of us going to make.
In this GOTM13, I would normally wait until I build at least a dozen cities and get this civ into Monarchy which I expect to happen around 1000BC before I trigger the Golden Age. Therefore, in the end, I may end up with the better score for the GOTM but an average score for the QSC. It seems to me that what is best for QSC may not be best for GOTM. Therefore, at this moment, I will play the game as I would normally play and don't pay too much attention to the QSC. My guess is that those who do well in the GOTM would get a lower score than those who intent to play only until 1000BC.
cracker
Gil Favor's Sidekick
Moonsinger,
If you play the best overall starting play sequence I guarantee you will be well recognized rewarded.
This is an evolving genre, so I am sure new things will emerge that need to be accounted for. Don't sweat the little things until we all get a few attempts at this under our belts.
The early GA thing has not been discussed yet. Most of the discussions were in PMs and emails over the past eight weeks. Some very good inputs have been received to help get the foundation going but beyond that, these first several QC games will see some evolution.
If you play the best overall starting play sequence I guarantee you will be well recognized rewarded.
This is an evolving genre, so I am sure new things will emerge that need to be accounted for. Don't sweat the little things until we all get a few attempts at this under our belts.
The early GA thing has not been discussed yet. Most of the discussions were in PMs and emails over the past eight weeks. Some very good inputs have been received to help get the foundation going but beyond that, these first several QC games will see some evolution.
Cracker,
Ok, I will submit my game within a few day. I played for about two hours last night and got around to 2000BC. Keepping note of everything is a lot more time consuming than I thought. Here is a sample of my note:
2000BC:
Warrior #1 NW+N+open hut & got XYZ
Worker #2 I
Worker #1 E (current loc=3 square SE of ABC)
Worker #3 R
....
As you see, it is a little bit out of hand after I have a half dozen JWarriors exploring and workers working in the field. I hope that after I load up the game tonight, I would be able to figure out which one I called Warrior #1 and which one is my Worker #99?
j/k
Btw, I note my location as N,S,E,W. Warrior #1 NW+N= move warrior #1 to the North West square then move to the North square. I guess I'm developing a new writing skill after all.
Ok, I will submit my game within a few day. I played for about two hours last night and got around to 2000BC. Keepping note of everything is a lot more time consuming than I thought. Here is a sample of my note:
2000BC:
Warrior #1 NW+N+open hut & got XYZ
Worker #2 I
Worker #1 E (current loc=3 square SE of ABC)
Worker #3 R
....
As you see, it is a little bit out of hand after I have a half dozen JWarriors exploring and workers working in the field. I hope that after I load up the game tonight, I would be able to figure out which one I called Warrior #1 and which one is my Worker #99?
j/kBtw, I note my location as N,S,E,W. Warrior #1 NW+N= move warrior #1 to the North West square then move to the North square. I guess I'm developing a new writing skill after all.
I also found that keeping the log really slowed me down, but sometimes, for me, slowing down helps me actually think about what I'm about to do and whether I might be better served by doing something else.
This was a new difficulty level for me, so I was quite a bit more conservative than I would have been at Regent level.
Also, if Firaxis gets the gamesave compatibility thing worked out, we could rename our units using PTW. Unfortunately, I accidentally loaded up in PTW on day 2 and crashed 4 turns in. And the PtW quicksaves are not compatible with Civ vanilla.
So I had to restart in vanilla Civ and replay 4 turns.
Fortunately, I had my log and was able to replicate exactly what I had done.
Unfortunately, it seems as though the Random Seed is different from Civ to PtW, so instead of getting an Elite at one point, I lost a Vet.
This was my first attempt at a GotM or anything similar and it is a lot of fun. Hopefully I didn't stink too badly.
This was a new difficulty level for me, so I was quite a bit more conservative than I would have been at Regent level.
Also, if Firaxis gets the gamesave compatibility thing worked out, we could rename our units using PTW. Unfortunately, I accidentally loaded up in PTW on day 2 and crashed 4 turns in. And the PtW quicksaves are not compatible with Civ vanilla.
So I had to restart in vanilla Civ and replay 4 turns.
Fortunately, I had my log and was able to replicate exactly what I had done.
Unfortunately, it seems as though the Random Seed is different from Civ to PtW, so instead of getting an Elite at one point, I lost a Vet.
This was my first attempt at a GotM or anything similar and it is a lot of fun. Hopefully I didn't stink too badly.
Points and no points for Leaders. Since it is luck based you shouldn't get any? I think you should. Alot of stuff is based on "luck" in the game. Like what you get out of a hut, how the battle go (ok it is modified but still you get the occational upset).
So if you get lucky and score a great leader (which I didn't) you should get a few extra points for that ... I think...
So if you get lucky and score a great leader (which I didn't) you should get a few extra points for that ... I think...
zagnut
Monarch
I think we should cut cracker and his crew a little slack. This QSC is just in its infant stage. These guys are developing it as you read this. Certainly suggestions like Moonsinger and Skyfish made, where both sides of an issue are presented, are very valuable, but let's not beat it to death.
Let's get our submissions in and let cracker digest them. I am sure he will then come back with an improved QSC next month.
I know I sure learned a lot about the starting sequence from his Opening Plays post. That and having to log my moves, even though they were not as detailed as Moonsinger's, certainly raised my awareness of what I was doing and made me think more carefully. I don't know whether it will show up in the scoring, but I know I am a much better player than I was a couple of weeks ago. Thanks, cracker.
Let's get our submissions in and let cracker digest them. I am sure he will then come back with an improved QSC next month.
I know I sure learned a lot about the starting sequence from his Opening Plays post. That and having to log my moves, even though they were not as detailed as Moonsinger's, certainly raised my awareness of what I was doing and made me think more carefully. I don't know whether it will show up in the scoring, but I know I am a much better player than I was a couple of weeks ago. Thanks, cracker.
Phillip_martin
Make it so.
Here Here.
I always plunge headlong into my games without much thought to opening strategy. I am currently 15 turns off 1000BC in a better position than if I had played normally. Not great but better.
The analysis should be fun.
I always plunge headlong into my games without much thought to opening strategy. I am currently 15 turns off 1000BC in a better position than if I had played normally. Not great but better.
The analysis should be fun.
*%&###@%!!!!
I DID find it a good idea, though!
Well, I started with the best intentions, with Notepad and Excel in backgroud, with a few paper sheets and a pen, duly taking note of the most important events and units' movements.
And this is the problem: I was so concentrated on taking notes that I actually did not focus on the game... So I quit. Shame on me!
But I'm not giving up. I'll try it again either in the Tournament on in the next GOTM -hopefully the other activities that are now subtracting time from Civ3 will have slowed down a bit too...
I DID find it a good idea, though!
Well, I started with the best intentions, with Notepad and Excel in backgroud, with a few paper sheets and a pen, duly taking note of the most important events and units' movements.
And this is the problem: I was so concentrated on taking notes that I actually did not focus on the game... So I quit. Shame on me!
But I'm not giving up. I'll try it again either in the Tournament on in the next GOTM -hopefully the other activities that are now subtracting time from Civ3 will have slowed down a bit too...
Ronald
Emperor
Hi cracker,
I don't care much about the scoring system of the QSC, but I am very interested to compare my timeline with the other people.
How and when are you planning to post them?
Thanks for this interesting initiative.
Ronald
I don't care much about the scoring system of the QSC, but I am very interested to compare my timeline with the other people.
How and when are you planning to post them?
Thanks for this interesting initiative.
Ronald
Similar threads
