What difficulty do you think GOTM should be at?

[LaRo]

As we can see, most of the GOTM should be regent or monarch.

We can afford only one GOTM per month because most of the players are fanatics like me and will want to play both GOTM.

Plus, Two GOTM would bring more works for Matrix.

The formula we use now is find to me (even is GOTM higher than regent are a big challenge to me, I'll learn.)

 

[Zirnike]

Doesn't the game alter score based on your level? I can't remember right now, but I thought it did in Civ1...

As for the score 'problem'... Just don't compare across boundries. Why would a newbie want to see how bad he sucks in relation to Mr Expert? And why would Mr Expert care if he outscores a beginner?

It's like the major and minor leagues (if you'll pardon the sports referance. ). If you're the champ in the minors, that doesn't mean you're the US champ...

 

[Aeson]

I don't think that splitting the competition is a bad idea at all. Most players who are still learning the game probably understand that they aren't going to score as well as more experienced players. They still should have the opportunity to play the GOTM and not be slaughtered when it is on a higher difficulty level than they are ready for.

By using Gramphos' Civ3CopyTool, any map can be quickly saved in multiple difficulty levels. This could allow for the players to download the difficulty they want while still playing on the same map. The highest scores would still come from the highest difficulty levels. The exception being Deity as it just adds too much difficulty in comparison to the 4:6 or 5:6 score ratio of Monarch and Emporer in many cases. There isn't a need for a Deity and an Emperor option though, just one or the other.

The GOTM's could alternate from month to month from a Chieftain/Regent/Emperor game to a Warlord/Monarch/Deity game. Each month would have a "advanced", "standard", and "begginer" map version. Deity games might not always have the highest scores, but would be the ones that would qualify for the awards. If there weren't any submissions for the highest difficulty level that qualify for an award, then the next highest difficulty game that qualified would receive the award.

 

[ChumChum]

have to say i disagree with multiple difficulty levels for a number of reasons.

firstly and cheifly i think it defys one of the main points of a GOTM which is a level comparison of players playing abilitys. hence the one map / one difficulty level. splitting the group (even in two), comprimises this aim quite a lot i think.

secondly, from a scoring point of view how are you going to make sure people play on the hardest difficulty level. you would find players choosing a level less than they were capable of to jack up their points score, and yes i know there is a level modifier but that can be overcome... (or am i being too cynical here?)

thirdly, i think the novices / moderate players who sometimes feel they are out of their depth will not improve as much. one of the things i have learned is that it is good to try things that are a bit harder than you can manage. you get better. i think that two or even three settings will encourage people to go for lower settings when in fact they should be pushing their own abilities to get better at the game.

i'm not afraid of change but i think the current GOTM rules are excellent. it seems strange that aeson advocates splitting the difficultly levels when (from his own words - and i entirely agree with this) "the competition/comparison between players is what makes it fun, not the difficulty level".

 

[Aeson]

i'm not afraid of change but i think the current GOTM rules are excellent. it seems strange that aeson advocates splitting the difficultly levels when (from his own words - and i entirely agree with this) "the competition/comparison between players is what makes it fun, not the difficulty level".

I do feel that the competition/comparison is very important. Playing at a harder level than you are comfortable with is the best way to learn the game as well. The problem is when we have an Emperor/Deity game, some people just won't be able to get into the game before they lose. I wouldn't think that that would be very entertaining for most, even if it offers a bit of a learning opportunity. There have been about 100 submissions for each GOTM now right? That would leave plenty of people in each difficulty category for a fun competition. As people become more familiar with the game, they could work their way up to the higher difficulty ratings.

As far as scoring goes, the only problem would be Deity games. A player that can score 10k on a Monarch map should be able to score a couple thousand more than that on the same Emperor map by playing the same way. For the most part the scoring increases compare very well to the difficulty increases. The jump from Emperor to Deity is more like the jump from Regent to Emperor though, without the extra scoring punch. The "by date" victories would certainly be easier to get on lower difficulty levels in many cases, and thats why the awards would be limited to the highest difficulty level where a game qualified.

I'm fine with how the GOTM is run now, but if I was consistantly having problems making it out of the Ancient Era alive, it just wouldn't be enjoyable. If there are enough people having those problems currently, it would be a good idea to offer them a playable difficulty map. And it shouldn't have much of an impact on scores at all.

 

[Matrix]

I think that when splitting the GOTM you sacrifice more than you gain. My guess is there are almost no people who are having trouble with monarch. Donsig and me perhaps. Though I have learned much lately and now will even probably win the current GOTM. But even if I wouldn't have been able to survive in this GOTM, then I'm most likely not the only one and I can still try/hope to be higher than the other losers. And when the difficulty level is low, than I'm sure you and the other top players can have fun as well. That's just a seek and destroy game.

But I'll always want to compare me with the top players, believe it or not. Or at least I want to know what score the best players got. And I don't really mind when I don't play on my own difficulty level.

I also hope I'm representative for my leage.

 

[Beard Rinker]

Originally posted by Matrix
Oh, by the way, I think the difficulty will differ according to this poll more or less. Sporadically a chieftain/warlord game or a deity, but mostly monarch and then regent or emperor.

If you are going to use this poll for deciding the next GOTM, then you should reset it or start a new one each month. I'm sure many people change their minds as to what they want from month to month.

I voted for Monarch last month but after playing Emperor I would definitely like to play another Emperor or maybe even Diety. Although with the 1.17 patch maybe not.

Perhaps another poll on the world configuration. This was my first game in an Archipelago and I was a little disappointed in the AI's ineptness at sea invasion. Landing two warriors in the industial age on a large island with rail is not my idea of a well thought out attack.

I'd like to try Pangea next.

As for victory conditions, I like having them all enabled. You can pick the one you like and go for that. Disabling domination may make the game to long for some and it can be avoided with care.

 

[wtiger]

Why don't we just stay at Monarch and up the difficulty of the starting location instead? Starting on mountains, desert, Tundra Island... Now, that would be something.

Something along the lines of Sirian's Rumble in the Jungle would be interesting...

 

[lawren8]

Originally posted by Matrix
No no no, the GOTM stays the GOTM. The fact that some people have difficulties with difficulties is not a good reason to split up the Game of the Month. It'll totally spoil the power of the concept.

Sorry, guys...

It would be fun some month to have the same save game
(map & starting position) editted for a handful of different levels:
(e.g diety, monarch, chief). There only be one ranking of scores.
Since the harder levels get score multipliers, it would be an interesting trade off to pick the
level that gets you the highest score without having it so hard
that you lose.

 

[Fossil]

I would encourage variety in GOTM competitions.

I've been playing at Monarch, mostly. I just started my first ever Warlord level game last night - the April GOTM (Indians).

It seems to me that there is not much doubt about the outcome for experienced players. The AI is too handicapped, with a 20% disadvantage. The competitive interest is limited to comparative scores: can you stomp them better than I stomp them? At some level, I wonder what's the point of that?

With the two previous games, Americans and English (I didn't try the ones prior to those), losing or getting killed outright was a possible outcome for all but the most elite players. For me, this is more interesting.

It might be interesting to have a map where winning is in doubt at Warlord level. It would need a miserable starting position on a remote isolated island. Think Eskimos. I think it could be very satisfying to overcome this handicap.

Also, it might be fun to twist the tables and play a Deity game where the player had a starting position vastly superior to the AI.

Thanks again to Matrix and Thunderfall for the GOTM and the site. I really appreciate it.

 

[God]

I like to play in the regent-monarch region. I' m fine with the current rules of the GOTMs.
Maybe a bellcurve like Killer suggested, but mostly on regent and monarch and a few on emperor. Really little on warlord and almost none on the other two.

 

[dikwhit]

to all of you who say deity is too easy, bite me.They are too easy only if you play the conquerization way. The "mad rush method"works, on small maps, with plenty o land. Fine but i thought we were playing civilization, not command and conquer. Call it what you will but IMHO the mad rush is crap..... no different than exploiting lumberjacking, concentration camping (entertainer pop rush cities), or using scouts to block resources. Sorry i dont buy that you are the greatest civilization there is when you havent even reached the middle ages and the game is over. I gotta vote for either the 2 gotms one for the lower 3 one for the upper3 or just 1 at regent to emporer. I prefer the first 1, as it would give me 2 gotm every month, esp since apollyton cant seem to have a gotm anymore.


as a side note matrix one of these months id love ya to put out a map that will leave these command and conquer types hung out to dry. id lmfao as would many others im sure.

 

[Park Ranger]

Hats off to CFC for providing GOTM! Great way to spice things up.

Voted Regent because that seems to be a level where strategy really comes into play but micro-managing isn't a must. Good players will recognize the best terrain, know when to war and when not to, and use advisors to their fullest. Regent level rewards this sort of play.

Hours of play is an important limitation for some, I guess. Me, I don't have TV so there ya go.

 

[spork]

GOTM6 is making me realize that these low-difficulty games are just a chore to play. After really enjoying GOTM5 and getting interested in the whole GOTM thing, I thought this month's game was a real letdown.

I mean, where's the tension? Where is the fear and loathing? It seems from turn one that the game is basically a race agains the clock--or specifically, against other GOTM'ers who are themselves just racing against the clock. It's not like any of the AI civs are worth taking very seriously, but you don't feel good about youself for beating them, because they're just handicapped. (OK, on Regent they're technically not, but I count AI stupidity as a handicap).

This month I was all pumped up to do my fist "real" GOTM (no reloading, submit my score), but now I'm not sure if I'm even going to go through the tedium of finishing the game. I'd rather just make a nice random map on Diety and play that.

 

[Babble-on]

Since this game has players on so many levels, I think it would be best to keep rotating the level of difficulty from Warlord to Monarch. I find Monarch levels incredibly difficult and frustrating - frankly, I don't want to play them. I find Warlord games enjoyable even though they are less difficult. By rotating between all of the levels you are appeasing all of the game players from the experts to the newbies. I have been playing for about a month, and I really enjoy the game, but my approach is not to go war-mongering around the globe. I like to build a real civilization. I prefer my civilization to look like the historical Rome or the Spanish Empire than to look like a roaming band of Visigoths destroying other civilization just to win a game. Just my preference.

 

[God]

I agree with Spork. It is almost a chore playing warlord but i want to try to get close to a score comparable to some of the best guys so this may be my chance.

 

[Durendal]

I can definately see Spork's point. However, I feel it is a weakness of CIV not the GOTM. When the game is too easy, it certainly becomes tedious.

My vote goes to Rotation of difficulty. I think GOTM5 has shown the map design can go far to make the game challenging. Lets see what else can be done besides making the AI weaker to make the GOTM more fun.

 

[Aeson]

Warlord is a bit below my preferred difficulty as well Spork. My advice would be to play GOTM06 in an unconventional way. I went for peaceful domination, no wars at all. It was actually interesting, and kept the outcome in doubt.

Warlord games don't take too long to play either, unless you are going to milk it to 2050. I probably spent 12 hours total on my game.

 

[Kipner]

I tend to agree with a lot of posts here (diplomat...) - and although I'm currently a struggling Regent player, I think that I will be able to fair decently on Monarch soon and on Emperor a little (or a fair) bit later.

Possibly Warlord is one step too low for most players, but the occasional Warlord GOTM will enable more players to join the GOTM challenges and measure themselves against other players (since there is no real measurement towards the computer on how "good" you really are).

Therefore, in my opinion, the majority of GOTM's should be on Regent and upwards even if it means I'll have to submit a loosing game once in a while - but it sharpens my tactics and provides a great learnng experience from time to time (and the opportunity to see what I should have done, when reading the descriptions from others in the forum)

//