I agree with this 100%
SGOTM 21 Pre-Announcement Discussion Thread
- Thread starter Deckhand
- Start date
I agree with this 100%
TalladegaKnight
King
OCC space? Raging barbs, pre settled cap maybe?
OCC domination is fun too, but far too much randomness based on AI partner.
OCC domination is fun too, but far too much randomness based on AI partner.
And if in occ we get certain number of settlers, woukd it be possible to settle more than 1 city? I also think some unusual option or rules can be fun, fe no settlers or workers allowed so we will be forced to take everything for ai's. Other strange rules - cannot have a monopoly tech or must have max half of cities of largest ai etc
LowtherCastle
Deity
- Joined
- May 18, 2005
- Messages
- 23,756
OCC does not inherently prevent choice. SGOTM07 was deity OCC. The top two teams won by diplomatic and domination, respectively, and it was a nail-biter. Variety and choice lie in the game design. Gyathaar is an SG design guru. All serious map designers should study his ideas and techniques.
TalladegaKnight
King
True. At the very least, you could place resources in spots to encourage different city spots.
Mix it up some. Try new things. OCC games are a blast. Less micro more playing.Yep occ would be awesomeSpoiler :
yea, this was my first SG...way back in 2008. It was an ingenious game design.
OCC was the trigger that made me join the SG games. 14 teams, so participation increased from the previous SG.
...and it was Deity!
I'm not convinced yet.
And remember that an increase in numbers could still be attributed to the release of BtS. That was 2nd half of 2007 if I recall correctly. Not everyone buys games when they come out, so add a few month to that, add the waiting time until a new sgotm starts and you are in 2008.
Don't forget that new toys are always more fun and that memory is never precise. Good things in the past look better than they were and bad things look worse than they were.
And last but not least: If the game design was glorious, isn't that what made the difference in quality? Don't you think that great map maker could have done other good maps as well?
If I hear that game x+1 has many participants, I think that game x was good. Because at the start of x+1 no one can really know if it will be good, yet. All they know is if the last one seemed like fun and so they want to play the next one.
And remember that an increase in numbers could still be attributed to the release of BtS. That was 2nd half of 2007 if I recall correctly. Not everyone buys games when they come out, so add a few month to that, add the waiting time until a new sgotm starts and you are in 2008.
Don't forget that new toys are always more fun and that memory is never precise. Good things in the past look better than they were and bad things look worse than they were.
And last but not least: If the game design was glorious, isn't that what made the difference in quality? Don't you think that great map maker could have done other good maps as well?
The opposite seems true to me. You have way less things to do so each tiny step is more important. Seems like the definition of a micro oriented game..? Maybe I'm wrong and you can explain it to me?
Keep the suggestions coming. Just remember that SGOTM21 is in play test. Your suggestions may result in tweaks. Other ideas will need to wait for another SG or xOTM.
Thanks.
Thanks.
ChrisShaffer
Board gamer
No comment on the attractiveness or success of a OCC SGOTM, but I do note that the one referenced was a Vanilla game.
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=270451
I don't really remember it well, to be honest, but apparently I was on Smurkz at the time.
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=271903
And I really ought to remember it, since we go laurels.
http://gotm.civfanatics.net/submit/...=score&startdate=-4000&enddate=1620#main_form
Remember SGOTM04 where the goal was to lose a space race victory to Gandhi?
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=270451
I don't really remember it well, to be honest, but apparently I was on Smurkz at the time.
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=271903
And I really ought to remember it, since we go laurels.
http://gotm.civfanatics.net/submit/...=score&startdate=-4000&enddate=1620#main_form
Remember SGOTM04 where the goal was to lose a space race victory to Gandhi?
That is an interesting idea for a way to take people out of their comfort zones... make an sgotm in vanilla or warlords expansion. However, that would probably do the opposite of attracting more players.
Noble Zarkon
Elite Quattromaster - Immortal (BTS)
Super Moderator
Hall of Fame Staff
GOTM Staff
Supporter
Yeah I had to play Warlords for my Emperor EQM recently and I definitely would skip a SGOTM that wasn't BTS, the game is poorer and the interface is awful.
Noble Zarkon
Elite Quattromaster - Immortal (BTS)
Super Moderator
Hall of Fame Staff
GOTM Staff
Supporter
Well the one city would be microed to death but given there's only one there are a fairly small, finite number of options the absolute time spent on it would be less.
TalladegaKnight
King
I can't add any more. With one city and fewer workers, the amount of decisions are not as great. My OCC games always move quickly.
The one city is uber important, but play testing will help with that aspect.
Think you have to remember that playing SGOTM is a learning experience for many players. That game was a Deity game and so players came to try it to learn from a team member that may have had deity experience. It is as much about learning as it is about playing. Although as Civ4 has matured, it seems to have become more about competition.
