This forum is dying

[gozpel]

Without any follow-ups on anything atm, concerning GOTM or MP I found it easier to skip the QSC last game. Since I don't get any updating at all on QSC I see no need to put in the time and effort into that area.

I then look into the forums and see a decreasing effort from members. Of course the limited up-dating is a main reason and summer-breaks are all and forgotten, but we are really getting close to X-mas now. But is the death of a forum a way to find the way?

Is it possible for us lay-men to help out in any ways?

Like somne crunching some data or fixing stuff. I don't know what the GOTM- crew needs, but I'm fairly sure they short of time!

My ideal world of civving would be with a living community, even in Medal play and where everyone had their say. But cracker decided to not use medalplay as a discussion, so in that sense it really appeals more players to that game?


Information is good! But the crackerotomy philosophy says that we players doesn't need to know anything. And that we just play on, on awesome games and here I can sit and complain?


The games and the work behind them are superiour.

I tho, want them stats.

Or I go somewhere else....

 

[Offa]

I agree that it is frustrating to wait so long for results. As with so much in life, this would be helped by more information. In particular an indication of the likely date of publication of results would be appreciated.

I have given up hope with the qsc. This is a pity as it was very good to play the qsc on months where playing the full game was not practical.

 

[cracker]

Just be patient. all thing come to those who wait.

Ainwood is working feverishly in the background on the key tool that we need.

This approach is an example where you may be sucking the life blood out of the patient by failing to focus on your key task. Play ann enjoy the games. Don't get so wrapped up in the details that you lose sight of the fact that these are games for your entertainment.

Screaming and whining and flopping on the floor wears out your clothes and messes up your hair, and the chicks don't dig it.

 

[ControlFreak]

What were the disadvantages of using the old method/scoring process until Ainwood was done so that he didn't feel the "wait" of the world on his shoulders?

If the issue was the vast number of entries, it sounds like there are many who would like to help number crunching. I, too offer my services as a data entry person.

If the issue was a desired change to the scoring process, maybe the cart got put before the horse? I was happy enough with the old score and the timely delivery of the presentation to ignore the desired scoring changes until Ainwood could finish.

(Not trying to delay the process any more. Feel free to ignore my questions.)

 

[Txurce]

Originally posted by gozpel
The games and the work behind them are superiour.

I tho, want them stats.

Or I go somewhere else....

Gozpel, I don't follow your logic. The games are superior, but if you don't get some stats soon, you'll go somewhere else? Where are you going to go? Who else keeps the sort of stats you're talking about? And stats or no stats, why would you quit playing a "superior game"?

My understanding of the situation is that we are on hold until a scoring and checking utility is shipshape, because our traditional game checkers are stretched thin. This job can't easily be passed out because it involves more than just checking scores - it includes examining reloads and overall gameplay, using software that's not freely available. It's why I can't help speed things up, even though I have the time and the desire. I'm as eager as anyone to have the scores posted - my game took off in this period - but I think it's worth making an effort to be patient, knowing that the staff members involved with scoring are doing their best. Anything less, given those staffers' efforts, risks seeming ungrateful.

 

[gozpel]

Originally posted by Txurce


Gozpel, I don't follow your logic.

That's ok Txurce, not many do

I didn't mean I leave the games, just the discussion. The games are great fun and I wouldn't miss them for the world, but what I really miss is the type of discussion that was on here when I started play GOTM 20. The next game was my first qsc and I lifted my games 21-22 to a new level. But I have yet to find out how good I did in those games.

I wasn't aware that the lack of updating was because of a new tool and I understand that the staff wants it to be perfect. So I will stop rolling on the floor and clawing my eyes out and even stop whinging.

I even decided to start playing Predator, so I don't have to cry foul over the different research rates between games. I probably have rocks in my head, but at least that is an option I could decide on. If I fall off the wagon because of this, I can only blame myself.

I visit these forums almost every day and see the same few battlers and I miss quite a few of the "old" ones. Perhaps I will try to learn being patient or maybe I take myself someplace else. Not necessarily to a discussion about Civilization.

 

[Txurce]

Gozpel, we're in the same boat, both with regard to why we can't wait for the scoring updates, and having moved up to Predator. I don't think we're going to have to wait much longer. By the way, I like the "clawing my eyes out" metaphor - cracker should add that one to his repertory!

 

[ainwood]

The utility is coming..... I'm adding to it all the time, but with a bit of checking, it should at least be to a state where at the bare-minimum we can get the results out soonish.

Re the old process - It would probably take around 5-10 minutes per QSC game, with around 80 submissions per month - just far too much time to do manually.

You can blame the delay in the results fairly and squarely on me: I underestimated the amount of work required for the utility, and had real-life issues to work on as well.

However, please be patient....

 

[LKendter]

Once the results come out the QSC should come back to life. However, I suspect I am not the only one who has found himself going light on the QSC report due to the inactivity.

QSC results show up, and my QSC will go back to full reports.

 

[Dianthus]

Originally posted by ainwood
The utility is coming..... I'm adding to it all the time, but with a bit of checking, it should at least be to a state where at the bare-minimum we can get the results out soonish.

You can blame the delay in the results fairly and squarely on me: I underestimated the amount of work required for the utility, and had real-life issues to work on as well.

However, please be patient....

Hey Ainwood, I just tryed to PM you but you mailbox seems to be full! Anyway, this was what I was trying to say :

Hi Ainwood,

I see you've been working on a utility to extract the QSC stats. I've messed around with this recently while improving my .SAV file reading code. I've managed to read all of the stats required for the QSC scoring process to produce a .csv file equivalent to the 1st tab of the published scoring .xls file. If you need a hand with anything just ask. I could even send you the code, it's standard C++ and should compile on any compiler fairly easily.

Dianthus.

 

[ainwood]

Originally posted by Dianthus

Hey Ainwood, I just tryed to PM you but you mailbox seems to be full! Anyway, this was what I was trying to say :

Darn MacOS style - never tells you when your PM box is full! Maybe XIII could ask TF to add that feature

Hi Ainwood,

I see you've been working on a utility to extract the QSC stats. I've messed around with this recently while improving my .SAV file reading code. I've managed to read all of the stats required for the QSC scoring process to produce a .csv file equivalent to the 1st tab of the published scoring .xls file. If you need a hand with anything just ask. I could even send you the code, it's standard C++ and should compile on any compiler fairly easily.

Dianthus.

Thanks for the offer!

My program is in VB - I've written classes for each of the save file sections, and have all the info there. At the moment its just a matter of fixing the bugs etc. I was having a bit of trouble with PTW and CIV3 BIC having different indexes into the BIC BLDG, TECH and PRTO sections, but have now resolved that.

I have a basic understanding of C++. Perhaps we can share info?