Time Crunch - GOTQ?

[Iver-P]

I've been away from Civ Fanatics for a while but decided to try GOTM 39 with the intent of submitting. Well here we are, early morning of Feb 15 and I'm still pretty far from a finish. I've played much more than I should have during this month. (And who doesn't?) No milking here, just playing through the game.

My point / request:
How about a "Game Of The Quarter" or some sort of monthly "Short Game"?

It wouldn't need to have the "formality" of the GOTM. I play for fun, and am not so tuned into the high levels of compition. (Says he who has never been out of the lower third of the global rating.) But it is nice to be able to compare my game with others and discuss strategy.

My game play has truely improved since I've been involved here. I look forward to popping in now and then. I just don't have time to devote to finishing the GOTM as it stands.

 

[Ambiorix]

I'm in the same position.
Actually, it could be done with a minimal amount of work for the staff :
1. allow games to be submitted after the deadline has been expired.
2. to the results page, add a table at the bottom listing 'players out of competition'.

Not really a 'game of the quarter', but close enough to it, I'd say.
It's up to the late submitters to not read the spoilers of course, and to not re-open threads that have been 'dead' for a considerable time.

 

[denyd]

I always thought it would be a good idea for a GOTQ, maybe on a larger map to add some flavor to the game.

The other option is quick games. Cracker did a couple of these where he would setup a particular scenario (Mongol special units or Invasion of Japan) and challenge the players to attain a specific goal.

One other thing you might be interested in is the HOF games. There is no deadline so a game can be played over several months. You do lose the ability to compare similar games since everyone has a unique setup.

 

[civ_steve]

I've always liked the idea of a GOTQ ... but then again, I would get very depressed if I wasn't able to finish it, too!! I am so far from finishing Gotm39, it just aint going to happen this month.

You also have the option to just submit the QSC part of the game, up to turn 80 (1000 BC.) These are scored and posted as well, so you could get a sense of competition with them.

 

[nikof]

I think this is a great idea, I have a fair bit of trouble finishing GOTMs on time. Fast domination/conquest isn't my favourite way to play, and I seem to just be a bit slow. Oh yeah, and the 10-month-old baby factor.

I like Ambiorix's suggestion - I've done this with one previous GOTM already, just to see for myself.

 

[Methos]

Just curious, does it matter if we submit the QSC but don't finish the game? I also am unable to finish GOTM39 and spent too much time on it and am unsure about COTM9. I figure to forget both games and just start GOTM40 so that way I have a full month to attempt to finish it.

 

[dmanakho]

I think it is a good idea..
But remember Ainwood and Co do it at their free time...
I bet there is no much time left to moderate one more kind of a game...
But... If think if someone wants to be in charge of GOTQ then that person should work with GOTM staff put himsef/herself in charge and make it happen...

Similar to what Mad-Bax did to SGOTMs although i don't know exactly how he started.
Hey, If you guys really want it you can always find out.

 

[OneFastWarrior]

@ Methos I believe the answer to your question is yes you can submit a QSC even if you don't finish your XOTM. Just as long as you submit it by the due date.

@ everyone else. I also would have liked to do a GOTQ or even 1 huge map GOTY. I think this has been brought up in the past. But You would have to get people to buy into it. I personnaly think the gotm staff is great for everything they do and if they wanted to do something like this, then they would be even greater.

I just try to play when I can and hope I can finish games on time. But if not, They are still fun.

 

[Methos]

I am very happy with the current game setup and wish to thank all of the GOTM staff for their contribution.

My game play has truely improved since I've been involved here. I look forward to popping in now and then. I just don't have time to devote to finishing the GOTM as it stands.

I would have to agree with you on both parts. My game is definitely improving due to this website as well as the XOTM games. It seems funny to think that one month isn’t enough time for a single game but unfortunately I fall into this category as well. Real life (family and career) don’t always allow time for a lengthy game. I typically only play on weekends.

Though I like the idea of a XOTQ or XOTY I would also suggest not asking the current XOTM staff to further commit their time. They are doing a great job and by taking their time up with another game it could cause the current games to be less as appealing. I would rather they focus their attention on the current games rather than fracture it between multiple games.

Instead I second the suggestion of others starting up their own version of the game and committing their time to the task. Unfortunately I cannot.

 

[tao]

I'm in the same position.
Actually, it could be done with a minimal amount of work for the staff :
1. allow games to be submitted after the deadline has been expired.
2. to the results page, add a table at the bottom listing 'players out of competition'.

If you just want to compare how you played, you always may use the calculator to rate your game. But of course you don't appear in the results page.

 

[Jove]

I like the idea of a gotq, but I too am loath to pressure the staff to do anything in addition to what they already do. I like the CFC plenty well as it is, I greatly appreciate the staff's current efforts (not that anything to the contrary has been said), and would hate to see anybody burn out.

Just my two cents.

 

[Karasu]

Well, if there is interest, then why not discuss it... I mean, some wandering staff member may think of raising the point with The Boss™ -without promising anything, of course.

It would be helpful, in fact, to have a better idea of the kind of game that would best suit those who can't complete a standard game in one month -would that be a 'quick game', a full game? A short game to be played within a loose time limit, or other things?

 

[Ambiorix]

I didn't know about the calculator before. With the calculator in place, I don't think the staff should do anything additionally.

If a 'COTQ' would be organized still, I'd prefer a full game with a loose time limit over a quickie.

 

[Renata]

The staff has had some discussion towards allowing retired games to be submitted (as non-eligible for awards), but I'm not sure it's been implemented yet. Alan, you out there?

At any rate, even though it's not what you're looking for in this thread, I thought I'd mention it as a future option when you can't finish. No more having to force an artificial loss just to get your name in lights.

Renata

 

[Iver-P]

It would be helpful, in fact, to have a better idea of the kind of game that would best suit those who can't complete a standard game in one month -would that be a 'quick game', a full game? A short game to be played within a loose time limit, or other things?

I realize of course the the GOTM format is the most popular and successful format here. It is well established and time proven. I join others in commending and thanking the staff for all their hard work.

Having the Jason Score calculator available indeed makes it easier for people like me to compare our scores with the pack - Thanks again.

But now to the question at hand: What kind of game variation would be most appealing to me since I can't usually (ever?) finish a GOTM on time?

My original idea of a GOTQ would be fine, or a late submission (not elegable for awards) would be OK too. But as I have pondered the issue, I think the most enjoyable for me would be quick games, perhaps with a specific task or goal. I think this format would be most helpful in developing my skills and would provide wonderful opportunities for discussion. CIV offers such varied approaches to the same goal, it would be interesting to see the different tactics players select.

So there you go - my two cents worth.

 

[denyd]

I would think that what might work best is to have the GOTM that are scheduled for the first month of each quarter serve the dual purpose of GOTM & GOTQ. Have a map more suited to a larger scale game (possibly on a large size panagea/continents map). Then players have the option of submitting at the end of the month or before the end of the quarter. That way the staff would not have to come up with a pair of maps and slower players would have 3 months to complete and submit the game.

 

[AlanH]

@Denyd: People always have the option of submitting earlier than the close date but you'll need to explain to me how we would score it twice, once at a month and then again at three months. Who would qualify for the Global Rankings ... in which game pairings? Would we need two such games - one Classic and one C3C?

Also, with a game running for 3 months, and spoiler discussions spread out over that period or delayed for weeks, I suspect the spoilers would be very disjointed. Look at how the interest falls off in Succession games when they go on longer than six weeks. And we have enough trouble with impatient players unable to wait 5 days to post.

I fail to deliver games. Less so recently, but GOTM 39 was a no show and 40 might be also. But having more time would not make them more likely to happen. I lose interest and momentum in a game after a month, so I'd rather pick up a new one than try to sustain interest and attention for an old one.

 

[Methos]

This isn’t directly related to the topic of a XOTQ or XOTY, but I did feel it might be of help.

As the stop time was coming for the end of GOTM39 I was no where near being completed. I had also started COTM9 and had at least made it to the QSC point and entered my submission. The problem was I was rushing to finish both in time and wasn’t sure if I could make it.

Around this time the pre-discussion came out for GOTM40 and I learned it was on Regent level, a level I felt I should be able to handle. Realizing I could rush both GOTM39 and COTM9 I should still have a couple of weeks left to play the GOTM40. To be honest I hated this idea.

Realizing that by rushing both games I would be making way more mistakes than usual I instead decided to just drop both games and relax until GOTM40 came out, thereby allowing me an entire month to play the game. This has worked out great! Not only have I been able to play a more relaxed game I have been able to take my time and still believe I may finish in time for COTM10.

I made it to the prerequisites for the first spoiler the day before it came out. I have a good start right now on the Industrial Age and believe I could possibly finish the game this weekend. BTW, I tend to only play on the weekends though I have played about an hour at least once during the week.

This may not work for everyone but it sure has helped me. By dropping both games and allowing myself the full month I am enjoying the game much more and don’t feel rushed. Just thought I would mention it, as it has sure helped me.

 

[AlanH]

The staff has had some discussion towards allowing retired games to be submitted (as non-eligible for awards), but I'm not sure it's been implemented yet. Alan, you out there?

At any rate, even though it's not what you're looking for in this thread, I thought I'd mention it as a future option when you can't finish. No more having to force an artificial loss just to get your name in lights.

Renata

Sorry, I missed this post, and only just spotted it

Yes, I've suggested that we could have a third option in the drop down menu on the submission page to allow you to submit a retired game.

You'd get a score equivalent to a loss at that date, and you wouldn't be eligible for an ambulance award (the only awards given to lost games). I haven't been able to spot any clever way a player could exploit this - it's really no different from committing suicide and submitting a conquest loss.

The benefits are that you can at least register a score for that month in the global rankings, and not completely waste your hours of playing time, you don't have to submit yourself to a humiliating destruction by the AI, and we may get a better idea of how many people are in this Time Crunch.

Thoughts?

 

[Methos]

You'd get a score equivalent to a loss at that date, and you wouldn't be eligible for an ambulance award (the only awards given to lost games).

<snip>

Thoughts?

I'm not very knowledgeable about the scoring system so am unsure exactly what you mean by the underlined statement above. (Obviously the underlining is mine).

My own thoughts would be to add a condition under the victory or loss table that states 'victory (expired)' or 'loss (expired)' or something similar. Make all expired tags uneligible for any awards (win or lose). This may be exactly what you stated though I was unsure. I thought it would be nice for those who played on after the close time to at least have this score still shown as a victory (if they won) rather than shown as a loss. Adding the expired tag to it would show that it was not completed within the closing date.