SGOTM4 A New Beginning - Maintenance Thread

[RowAndLive]

Today the window is held back by two teams, so you'd like it to be defined by the third slowest team. Next week it may be three, or four. Would you then ask for it to be changed again?

No. I just ask for it to be back the way that it was. If you want to keep some restriction on the finish, then perhaps only display scores below 4000 points (or some other appropriate number). That way you still have the opportunity to learn from the whole game except the finish.

 

[AlanH]

Just my personal opinion: It was much better when we could see all current scores

Better for who? Let's ask Team Smackster whether they enjoyed watching others - yes, Xteam was one of them - knocking themselves out very specifically to beat the target date that was set early on in SGOTM3. I don't usually get to see SirPleb's date in GOTM until I've gone past it.

 

[dcstevez]

The graph is basically irrelevant now. I enjoyed being to able to check how our team was doing in comparison to other teams and it was reassuring to know that we were staying right in the middle of the pack. This is my first SGOTM so I don't really understand the spoiler problem but it seem like there should be some alternative to allow the "leaderboard" to remain up to date (or closer to it) without it being a spoiler.

 

[mad-bax]

The downloads page will remain censored for now. The graphs are fun, and I miss them too already, but it was not just unfair, but demonstrably unfair before. You only have to read the spoilers for SGOTM3 from when Smacksters team won their variant game. Many of the other variant teams changed tactics to enable them to beat the posted score.

The new system will be monitored for some time and then we can discuss it again.

The congratulations page is up for SGOTM3 BTW. Go look at the sexy new graphics by Misfit.

 

[grs]

I understand the intention of the change, I just do not agree. You can't keep anyone from downloading the other's team saves or reading their threads. You trust the players and I like that, but you think we abuse the limited knowledge we get from the score graph - strange.

 

[AlanH]

You trust the players and I like that, but you think we abuse the limited knowledge we get from the score graph - strange.

Xteam took advantage of the information from the results page in SGOTM3 , I know 'cos I was there. If we hadn't known Smackster's date and victory condition, both published and visible for many turns before we finished, I very much doubt if we'd have found that extra push to complete one turn ahead of them. But why do you say it was an abuse?

At that time it was legitimate information, publicly available, so there was no "abuse" in using it. To do the equivalent now we would have to cheat, because we'd have to read a thread we're barred from, or look at another team's save, which - althugh MB may not have said so - is clearly not allowed.

 

[klarius]

The piece of information that really pushed us some in Xteam was the final date and victory condition (deduced by Jason and confirmed by a lurker's comment from a Smackster team member in our thread).
The final scores could just be left off the tables.
We did some guessing also from the intermediate curves, but that wasn't so important. At least I had the impression that nobody believed me, when I tried to deduce from the curve that we still could win the gold.

The same problem with final date could occur in this game, even when limiting it to the date of the slowest few.
20k teams could know exactly what time to beat, though they can not do much about it then.

 

[AlanH]

@klarius: I believed and agreed with your deduction that Smackster were going for domination. It was clear from their high scoring trajectory. I also agreed that we therefore had the best chance of gold if we went for Conquest. Sorry if I didn't make my agreement clear at the time

The earlier score information was therefore important as it persuaded us to put down the foundations for a fast conquest victory, ignoring territory and growth. Once we knew the date we needed we were able to build on those foundations, and you succeeded in hitting the target. I think the earlier score curve was valuable information, as well as the final date.

 

[fbouthil]

I may be because my team is one of the fastest teams (Bede), but I agree with hiding the score to the slow teams. The previous graph would favor the slow teams. If you are stuck with a dilemna of risking something or not, you could stop the game entirely, wait for the other teams to play more turns than you and then base your decision on how the other teams did.

I must admit I am learning a lot by discussing with my teammates. I do not see how looking at the score of other teams helps that much, unless you go read the team thread (which I did a lot in SGOTM3 because I was not playing).

 

[WackenOpenAir]

I liked the graphs, every day i watched to see how my team (offa) was doing in comparison to team smackster. It was fun to watch even though i know the firaxis score is pretty insignificant in 5cc until victory is achieved.

For reasons explained enough in this thread, I think it is good to at least hide the finish date of a team until all other teams have passed it or finished before it. The firaxis scores themselves are less important though, certainly in this 5cc game, but also in other sgotm.

 

[mad-bax]

Well, this months deliberate mistake was.....

Persia can build MDI in the PTW version of the game. Same stats as immortals of course, but costing 10g more. Thanks to Tarkeel for the catch and for informing me by PM.

The saves can be fixed, but with everybody at different points in the game it wouldn't really acheive much, so I'll leave it.

1.29f is not affected by this lash up.

 

[gozpel]

The limited graphs sucks!

I just log on a work computer and read the darn threads and make precious decisions in the namesake of our team

That was a joke, I don't even have a job!

I can't possibly see, how anyone can outscore an other team by just looking at a graph. We do well...at least we did until the fog cursed us all.

I played the other games with different crews, but I couldn't detect any stuff that deterred us in any directions regarding the graphs. If one team or more did so, it's pretty clear to me that they found another way to find "facts". Anyone that knows me, can say I'm a fair and honest player and I believe my team-mates are as well.

Of course with this valiant approach to the game, I consider all teams fair.

So as a middle way here, why not let the darn graph stand to at least 500AD? After that we can hide whatever and especially finish dates. Not that anyone will win it before that anyways, with the 5 city limit.

We want more fun that waiting for our turn. For the first time "my" team seem to do something right and you take away the fun of gloating?

Shame.

 

[mad-bax]

Hehe... I'm tempted to open a poll. I am willing to be persuaded that another solution would be better.

 

[tao]

Hehe... I'm tempted to open a poll. I am willing to be persuaded that another solution would be better.

Please define "better".

Would it be "better" to have complete secrecy between the different teams (e.g. password-protected threads, no public posts at all)?

I don't think so. For me, "better" also means more fun, more entertaining. Therefore I propose to publish scores more than you currently do.

 

[mad-bax]

OK.... So lets define some of the options for the poll.

1. Put it back the way it was.
2. Just leave out the data from the teams final submission from the table.
3. Allow teams to decide for themselves whether they want their data included.
4. Keep the new system.
5. Show data up to a specific date and then censor it after that.

What else?

For me, we have two obligations to fulfill. To make the games as enjoyable as possible, and to protect teams from being victimised because of the data that is published. Although it was me that asked for these changes, I agree that the current page is draconian, but I felt forced to act as I could see the same situation repeating itself. At the moment I lean towards option 2, but I want to hear the views of the playing community before I relax the current restrictions.

 

[AlanH]

Interesting! The extension of this logic is that we can't enjoy GOTM/COTM without a similar graph?

 

[tao]

Interesting! The extension of this logic is that we can't enjoy GOTM/COTM without a similar graph?

I don't think so. In GOTM/COTM you have a much larger number of competitors, 3 medals, 7 different trophies, lots of information in the spoiler threads (and qsc). It would trivialize SGOTM to just reduce it to the 2 laurels. The graphs add fun and inspire those lagging behind.

Teams that don't want to give too much information to possible competitors just have to play "a little bit" slower. IMHO it is enough to not post the last 2 results of the leading teams.

 

[Wotan]

I don't think so. In GOTM/COTM you have a much larger number of competitors, 3 medals, 7 different trophies, lots of information in the spoiler threads (and qsc). It would trivialize SGOTM to just reduce it to the 2 laurels. The graphs add fun and inspire those lagging behind.

But that information is not available until you have passed the timeframe the spoiler address. Never do you have info in a Gotm that will allow what Klarius was able to do in SGOTM3, and that was too much info not to constitute spoiler info, so as you might have guessed I am for not disclosing team progress:

Well, I like a good challenge.
But this was really tough.
I spent over 3 hours on planning before I even moved a unit.
Then I had the plan ready that would allow finishing every civ in 7 turns, if the RNG would give every city on the first try (sometimes with very few cavs attacking).
So there was only one turn slack and I needed it on the Aztecs.

EDIT: Maybe open up spoiler graphs similar to gotm cutoffs. AA-MA-IA. first graph available after team enters medieval, second after entering industrial and third after submitting a finished game.

 

[MOTH]

The way it is right now, the slowest team is the one who gets to see the spoiler info in the graphs for at least the next 20 turns and can try and do what they need to catch the team with that earliest win on the graph.

What I would like to see is that a team can look at their position backwards. You will be able to see where you compare with other teams to that point, but won't be able to see the spoiler info in of those teams ahead of you. If this is done with a referrer check from the team thread then the lurkers can see the whole graph by going into the thread for the team with the latest save.

 

[WackenOpenAir]

Only leaving out the finish date won't do much good i think. If a fast team all of a sudden doesn't proceed in date anymore for 2 weeks, i think the finish date is obvious enough.

Best would be to have every team see information of other teams up to 20 turns before the date they currently reached. This is probably the most work to implement, and probably still requires some trust in the players although of course you can see what IP visited what site, but you probably don't want to be checking that continuously.

So i'd vote either leave the new system, or make it so every team can see up to 20 turns before their current date.
So you can see another teams finish date once you passed it by 20 turns. No way you can beat there score then.