SGOTM 05 - Geezers

[The-Hawk]

I think a team has to find it's own style and the Geezers are the local pub style of players.

Our proud ambition "To become the best pub team in the world"

did i hear beer???

I can subscribe to this . While I appreciate the exploits of a team of stars like CFR, I certainly wouldn't want to be on it! Honestly, I have enough stress at work, I don't need to have it playing a game .

 

[erikthecelt]

A little organisation can go a long way. I think this is the time - in the gap between games - when we can make a few decisions on how we are going to play next time. Call it our pre-season training, if you like, and if that doesn't clash too much with being pub players.

Our proud ambition "To become the best pub team in the world"

Would someone like to load up a starting save to work some of this out?

FYI - I'm in IT too, but I leave the code to my sons and the youngsters at work I really am a Geezer

 

[markh]

Did I hear pub ? Cheers guys !

For me it is too much looking into the code of the game to check out how the AI is working or reacting. This would not be fun for me and as The-Hawk I am stressed enough at work, so I would not like to play in a team where pressure is put on me.

If someone wants to have a look into the code, fine, but I do not think this is necessary. This seems a little too ambitious and professional for me. Everybody should enjoy the game playing it. I guess that was what the developers had in mind when putting it on the shelves.

@erik : difficult to train without knowing what Gyathaar has for us next.

 

[Sam_Yeager]

I get the feeling that it may be a while before the next SGOTM as Alan seems to have been dodging the question of when the next one will be. Probably because Gyathaar first has to come with an idea and then generate a map. After that there's probably a couple of weeks for the signup.

That being the case we could always grab one of the old WOTMs and play it as a SG to see how we go. I'm suggesting an old WOTM as it seems likely that the next game will be warlords. These games are available as WB files so using a HOF mod is optional. This one might be a possibility.

EDIT: We don't necessarily have to finish it if we're still playing when the next SGOTM starts.

 

[erikthecelt]

Did I hear pub ? Cheers guys !

@erik : difficult to train without knowing what Gyathaar has for us next.

I was thinking more about the ways of organizing the team and the discussions than preparing for the next game. for myself, I did lots of prep work for the current GOTM and then forgot all about it when I started playing

A dry run can be helpful as my bad habits from HOF play tend to mess up any GOTM or WOTM game (With HOF it's too easy to regen the map and start over if you don't get an ideal start and Gyathaar always gives you a challenging start ).

 

[Harbourboy]

I agree that it is hard to shift between HoF and GOTM. They are so very different.

 

[AgedOne]

A couple of good habits that I think we should get ourselves into:

In the same way as we post a write-up after our turn finishes, we should post a short-term or tactical plan just before each turnset.
In this we should state:

The research path we are following (if a tech is likely to complete during the turn)
The builds we are going to make in each city
The military moves and objectives we are about to undertake
Worker activities
Any micromanagement that seems important​

On a less regular basis (not every turnset) we could do with a long-term strategic statement.
We can all discuss and input to this, but one of us could be the strategist - who coordinates the discussion and documents the way forward.

One thing we seem to have lacked is to have members of the team who have confidence in how to win from the current position. Someone who has seen it all before, and can say "Do this, this and this, and we will win from here".
I think we have guys with this knowledge and experience in the Geezers (not me! I'm the one who's saying "I never win from this kind of position") but we could do with this kind of confident statement being made from time to time.


What do you reckon, team?

 

[Sam_Yeager]

In the same way as we post a write-up after our turn finishes, we should post a short-term or tactical plan just before each turnset.
In this we should state:

The research path we are following (if a tech is likely to complete during the turn)
The builds we are going to make in each city
The military moves and objectives we are about to undertake
Worker activities
Any micromanagement that seems important​

You've obviously finished reading CFR's thread. I suggested something similar here. As I said in that post there are downsides with posting a plan for the turnset as it does delay the turnset whilst waiting for comments. Equally the point of posting a plan relies on a decent amount of timely feedback from other team members. At times I did feel that participation was somewhat lacking. Playing across timezones is obviously a problem but something that we just have to take into account.

Looking at your suggestions for what should be in the plan they do seem rather detailed. I would hope that in our new broad strategy mode that we will already know the research path. In terms of city builds I think we should be highlighting the key builds whilst doing our best to avoid builds in other cities. Military objectives is the key part rather than the exact military moves needed to accomplish them.

Following our discussions after this SGOTM I think we will already be making changes to how we play the next one. However we don't want to make the game too onerous otherwise we'll just lose the fun and enjoyment aspect of the game.

 

[AgedOne]

... there are downsides with posting a plan for the turnset as it does delay the turnset whilst waiting for comments. Equally the point of posting a plan relies on a decent amount of timely feedback from other team members. At times I did feel that participation was somewhat lacking. Playing across timezones is obviously a problem but something that we just have to take into account.

Yes. We do suffer a bit from being The Truly International Geezers. Most times when it came to an evening when I was due to play, I could see that there was at most 2 of the team online to get advice from, and sometimes none. I'd like us to be in the position where we are all pretty confident about what we're going to be doing next, so the short-term plan would just be a confirmation - and allow anyone online at the time to be a second pair of eyes.

Looking at your suggestions for what should be in the plan they do seem rather detailed. I would hope that in our new broad strategy mode that we will already know the research path. In terms of city builds I think we should be highlighting the key builds whilst doing our best to avoid builds in other cities. Military objectives is the key part rather than the exact military moves needed to accomplish them.

Yes. I agree. It reads worse than I intended it to look.
For an example, this post from balbes: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=5977164&postcount=453
All of the major points are stated, but not going into fine detail.

I also wouldn't think we need this in a rigid fashion before every turn. Some turns are going to be quiet, and others more exciting.

Following our discussions after this SGOTM I think we will already be making changes to how we play the next one. However we don't want to make the game too onerous otherwise we'll just lose the fun and enjoyment aspect of the game.

I'm with you all the way. We aren't going to change the way we play. Wouldn't want to. If I had to count tiles every time I played, or be prepared to answer why I had wasted 3 , I'd lose interest and go play something else more fun.

 

[Harbourboy]

es. We do suffer a bit from being The Truly International Geezers. Most times when it came to an evening when I was due to play, I could see that there was at most 2 of the team online to get advice from, and sometimes none. I'd like us to be in the position where we are all pretty confident about what we're going to be doing next, so the short-term plan would just be a confirmation - and allow anyone online at the time to be a second pair of eyes.

You could look at this another way by saying that, because we were so international, no matter what time you decided to play, you could be sure that at least one of us was around for advice...........

 

[AgedOne]

You could look at this another way by saying that, because we were so international, no matter what time you decided to play, you could be sure that at least one of us was around for advice...........

Glass half full !

 

[erikthecelt]

Another suggestion for what might be usefull is to report afterwards how the strategic plan played out or was followed in the turn set. Forget reporting blow by blow activities and just stick to the main theme. Having the plan beside you during play and reporting back the build decisions, etc based on the plan would help staying focused.

 

[Sam_Yeager]

As we've got a lot of posts covering a number of different areas I thought I would try to gather the main ideas into one place. In addition it also includes one or two ideas that occurred to me whilst compiling the list as well as some ideas from other threads. Being realistic I'm sure I may have overlooked or overly simplified someone's suggestions.

Game Strategy and Management

1. If there's a suitable test game available then all team members should play it until at least the early ADs. This will help them to contibute more fully when the game strategy is discussed.
   
2. Decide on game victory condition.
   • what is our long term tech path?
   • What are critical builds?
   • What shouldn't we build?
   • What techs don't we need?
   • What types of units should we concentrate on?
   • Do we need defensive units, or only offensive?
   • Do we need a navy?
3. Estimate timescale for completion. (?)
   • Third place finish date has ranged from 1202 AD (257) - 1961 AD (571).
   • The vast majority of third place finishes were in the 300s (1544 AD - 1766 AD)
4. Identify a rolling list of short term objectives. (?)
   • Useful to check how well we are doing.
   • This is a continuing task throughout the game.
5. Regular review and refinement of overall strategy.
   • Is it still applicable?
   • How well are we following the aims of the strategy?
   • Does it need changing and if so how?

Game Playing

1. Post brief outline of goals for turnset.
   • Leave sufficient time for comments. 24 hours should be enough
   • Amend as necessary based on feedback
2. Give feedback in writeup on which goals were achieved.
3. Turn lengths
   • Adopt differing turn lengths depending on whether we are at war?
   • Report on progress part way through turnset if at war e.g. 5+5 system used by CFR?

Shamelessly plagiarised, and suitably edited, from the Murky Waters thread.

Ensure that you have read and understood the rules provided by the administrators (C-IV SGOTM Reference Thread) and try to follow any ongoing discussion at the SGOTM xx Maintenance Thread

The next player shall post a ”got it” within 72 hours of the upload of the previous game. Else the next available player has the right to post the ”got it”. This is a rule in addition to the guideline in the C-IV SGOTM Reference Thread. To ensure a smooth handover, please post the ”got it” within 48 hours. The rest of the team needs the in between 24 hours to solve whos next. It’s also good practice to wait 24 hours after the ”got it” before you play. Else, the difference in time zones and busy work days may prevent players from posting useful advice.

No-one is forced to play a turn set. You don’t need to announce the reason for skipping a turn set. Any players can swap turn sets. Please post as quick as possible to reduce unneccesary confusion and delays.

Please use smilies and emotes in your posts as much as possible. Jokes, humour, sarcasm and offensive language can and will be misinterpreted. Remember that written text is a poor method to convey feelings. Not everyone is native to the English language The differences in culture is also a source for misunderstanding. If you get upset by a post, please wait a few hours before you respond.

Don’t be afraid to post things that may appear stupid or evident. Each player have strengths and weaknesses. For example don't assume that everyone knows the difference between peace treaty and ceasefire. Don’t be afraid that other members will think you are stupid.

Issues where we cannot reach concensus is resolved by the active player. If you run into a situation where you need advice, please upload the save and let the rest of us take a look. Or post a quick request for advice. It’s better to delay the game a day than build a wonder in the wrong city. Don’t be afraid of making mistakes though. We all screw up once in a while (some of us more often than others though )

Don’t promote units until they are close to action (unless the promotion increases movement). If you are unsure of suitable promotions, don’t hesitate to bring that up for discussion. We all have very different experiences from promotions, for example barrage/CR for cats.

Don’t play intoxicated (from alcohol, drugs or smoke). Don’t play when you are too tired. Or when you have your kids/wife screaming at you

Try to keep track of the diplomatic events each turn, and visit each city regularly. It’s mandatory to check cities that grow or have a border expansion. Remember that the number of happy people will change due to changes in war weariness (WW), gained/lost resources etc. Keep track of specialists. We don’t want to pollute the great person pool.

Ensure that you have the autosave settings to 1. Please contact AlanH if your game crashes, even if you can repeat all your moves.

If you PM the team, please ensure everyone receives a copy.

Remember that a lot of players read what we post. Don't be rude or disrepectful to any player not on our team.

Try to run a test game or two before we start. Your experience may either confirm or contradict someone elses, and is therefore valuable.

 

[Harbourboy]

If we can commit to the game as well as we have committed to the post-mortem, we'll be rocking. But if my showing in GOTM29 is anything to go by, we will end up falling into our same old bad habits..........

 

[AgedOne]

If we can commit to the game as well as we have committed to the post-mortem, we'll be rocking. But if my showing in GOTM29 is anything to go by, we will end up falling into our same old bad habits..........

GOTM29 !! Time-travelling again Harbourboy? (If I can just get this sucker up to 88mph . . .)

I, too, have just been infuriating myself with the old ineptitude in a GOTM. Surely you can teach an old dog new tricks?

 

[Harbourboy]

Make that GOTM24. That one should have been easy but .... well, the spoiler thread is not up yet so I won't reveal how badly I did. Yet.

 

[erikthecelt]

Nice summary Sam. I'll be printing it and posting beside the PC for when we start to play.

 

[AgedOne]

@Sam_Yeager
Yes. Well summarised.
And that's a very useful post from Erkon from the MW thread. I'm sure they won't mind us Geezers borrowing their script. (it doesn't come with a curse, does it?)

 

[Sam_Yeager]

Nice summary Sam. I'll be printing it and posting beside the PC for when we start to play.

Umm, not all of that has been agreed yet erik. But hopefully it makes it easier to work out what ideas were proposed.

 

[The-Hawk]

From Erkon's post:

"Don’t promote units until they are close to action (unless the promotion increases movement)."

I have to say, I am not a big fan of this, especially in a succession game. Why? I think there is too great a risk that someone will forget to promote a unit before an AI attack, especially if that unit became eligible on a previous person's turn. I'd hate to lose a unit because it was attacked unpromoted.

I follow two principles when building units:
1) I build defenders to defend, and attackers to attack.
2) The best defense is a good offense. In my games, 99% of the units I build are meant to attack. Even if an AI is attacking me, I go on the offensive (to avoid pillaging). I almost never wait for an AI to attack me in a city.

These principles make my selection of promotions routine:

Defenders: If it is gonna defend, promote it with a defensive trait and fortify. Most cities have one defender which is an archer with city garrison. If I'm afraid of AI horsemen pillaging in a border town, I'll build throw in a spear or two with formation.

Attackers: Since the AI's mix stacks I think there are few opportunities to really take advantage of last minute promotions (e.g. You promote the unit to formation because there is an elephant on the top of the AI stack, then the AI brings a maceman up to the top instead. You try to attack with a different unit with shock, then the elephant comes to the top.). In fact, even if you can get a well matched attack (e.g. the elephant is alone), the next time you need the unit, it may be a complete mismatch (it may be up against a maceman). I tend to make my early offensive units generalists (combat or city raider). Later, I may build specialists based on my AI opponent's best unit (e.g. if they have rifles, I'll build some cavs with Pinch).

However, I understand common wisdom is to wait on promotions until you see your opponent. If the team prefers this style, I'll do my best to remember to wait. Also, if an AI is sending a stack our way, I'll try to remember to check and see if we have any unpromoted units sitting around.