CivIII at 'poly - Page 2

vmxa1 · July 2, 2003, 17:31

Am I the only one that see a problem with doing much with a forum that can not stay available?

Rhothaerill · July 2, 2003, 17:33

Quote:

Originally posted by vmxa1
Am I the only one that see a problem with doing much with a forum that can not stay available?

No, but we're hoping that in the future 'Poly will fully restabilize.

TheArsenal · July 2, 2003, 18:38

Quote:

Originally posted by Mad Bomber [/SIZE]

"... I'm not saying that the members themselves are eliteist but that the 'poly community in general feels that it is. Many of the best players belong to the Au community and it seems to many (or at least to myself) that it is basically for players at emperor or above level..."

Far from an elite level player*, I participated in one (208?) and only stopped because the parameters of all war all the time kicked my behind. And I will tackle 402 once I finish my current game. That said, the AU games do have a feel as though they are geared to Monarch players and above. But much that goes on with these boards do.

Quote:

Originally posted by vmxa1
Am I the only one that see a problem with doing much with a forum that can not stay available?

It is tough to participate in something when you are shut off of the server for a full day.

Competition: I played in some CTP2 SP (a game I am better at) tournaments here on 'poly. They are very good for a couple of reasons. Even more so than AU games, competition makes one consider the game and one's gameplay more closely. They discourage static play, but encourage taking gambles to further one's gain. And it is always good to see how one stacks up against other players to find out where his strengths and weaknesses are.

*Regent level making the move to Monarch. The only reason I mention this is I am - apparently - quite pleased with myself.

alva · July 2, 2003, 19:58

Why don't we try something more simple and on a smaller scale. Let it grow naturally and see wherre we end up (or not).

Say, start with a few succesion games ??
We often get questions like "hey I'm new to this game, now what?", instead of linking them to Crackers (him again

) opening turns, we set up a similar game and see what happens every 10-20 turns.
(similar to AU402, but something of a more limited time scale).
The new players could see what they are doing wrong and improve on their game, the better ones can get a change to see what actually works best.. and point and laugh

The advantage is that we would be targetting a different group, instead of competing with CFC.
Let us take take the novices on and turn them into good players (so then they can go and compete in the GOTM competition

)

That would leave us with a less rivalry approach but still have some form of competition and maintain 'Polys anarchy and general more casual place while still have a common base/interest.

Just a thought.

Good initiative Theseus

vmxa1 · July 2, 2003, 20:00

I am not sure about the elitist stuff, why do you say that? Most of the people that are real AU hard core players are very helpful and seem easy going.
Names that come to mind are Arrian, Theseus, Dom, Axelman and Catt. I know I have missed many, but these are players that are involved in most of the games.

Edit OK I have been admonished for my spelling so here is the correction.

Konquest02 · July 2, 2003, 20:05

Quote:

Far from an elite level player*, I participated in one (208?) and only stopped because the parameters of all war all the time kicked my behind. And I will tackle 402 once I finish my current game. That said, the AU games do have a feel as though they are geared to Monarch players and above. But much that goes on with these boards do.

Emphasis added

Keep in mind that AU 208 was a total war scenario and was REALLY tough. Only 2 people recorded a victory so far, most got wiped and many abandonned. Please do not judge all of AU scenarios based on this one...

Konquest02 · July 2, 2003, 20:15

I think what we need for AU is a little more structure and a LOT more visibility. I lost count of the times I've directed people to the AU History 101 (which is great btw) because they heard about AU and wanted to know what was going on. A link on the main page, a seperate web page, a civgroup icon, a separate forum (maybe not...), but SOMETHING...

I think that AU games have to remain non-competitive and based on learning. This is the main reason why I play those games (I've only missed 5-6...). It helped me tremendously to improve my level of play (I abandonned my first AU game because I was trailing horribly on regent and now I can beat monarch almost anytime and am taking a shot at emperor. All of this because of AU.

)

Great initiative Theseus!

Theseus · July 2, 2003, 20:38

Thank you, everyone, for contributing to the discussion.

First, I'd like to say that I wasn't trying to overly focus on AU, that just sorta naturally happened as it is pretty near and dear to me, and I think it's one of the outstanding features of what we have and have done at 'poly.

But there are certainly others!! (which pre-date CivIII I might add)

It seems to me that there are some themes developing here... but first, I apologize if I am repetitive of the first post, or are looking at the discussion through my own biases, and second, be warned that I have a tendency to keep introducing new thoughts while reviewing the recently stated (

).

1) AU should be highlighted / marketed as part of CivIII on 'poly. (New thought: Anyone willing to contribute a few bucks for a Google listing?) BTW, the discussion about the complexity of AU versus GOTM was enlightening... as far as I'm concerned, the general perception is *ss-backward (i.e., I also think AU is much more easily played however one wants), and that bugs the living cr*p outta me.

2) AU needs some better organization.

3) We need to maintain the tradition of AU, but also introduce the new. I like alva's idea of succession games for newer players... maybe with an interestingly designed map / scenario? And it does feel like we need some kind of competition / ranking. Have people seen the 'loose' / semi-humorous awards system that Master Zen proposed at MZO for the Boot Camp games? I liked that, directionally.

4) AU, and the Strat forum, needs an attitude adjustment. We Strat forum regulars may think we are welcoming (and we really are), but there is some disconnect.

5) The DGs... ahhh, one thing at a time. Let us at least, however, try to highlight them, and try to make them more inviting / exciting to the new visitor to 'poly, even to the semi-regular visitor who isn't quite sure or aware of all the cool and fun things that are going on around here.

6) Other / new thoughts: a) I moved a couple of months ago, and didn't really have access to manuals and my reference print-outs (I know, horrible planning

)... do you know what I use as my standard reference beyond the Civilopedia? CFC. b) How many of us have trouble keeping track of the teams and teammembers in the DGs? I f*cking well do... what a pain it is to track all that down when I need to. c) Does the gaming world / press know that Firaxis, ostensibly including Sid Meier, is in the ISDG? And that Soren is, ostensibly, part of GS in the PTWDG? I don;t keep up on gaming as much as I used to, but isn't this a bit unusual? d) If you are a CivIII player poking around on the Internet, and get to www.apolyton.net, what do you see? No disrespect, but 2003 is vastly different than the late 90s... then, forums and some news was cool sh*t, whereas now, new visitors' expectations are vastly greater. Think about that for a sec, and think about 'poly... the more I do, the more it hits me.
______________________________

I'm not quite certain how to lay out my thoughts on what to actually *do*...

ps:

And I just gotta add this for ALL of the people who type as badly as I do, but don;t go back and look at the horror... THERE IS AN 'E' IN THESEUS!!! (j/k)

Aramis · July 2, 2003, 20:46

Excuse the brief intrusion. I just wanted to thank Frustrated Poet for responding to my post here earlier with

Quote:

Originally posted by FrustratedPoet
Rob_S: This thread should tell you all you need to know about AU: http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...threadid=83557

exactly what I needed. This 'AU' should be more easily accessible. Thanks, FP: for a poet you're not so bad.

Theseus · July 2, 2003, 20:58

Welcome aboard, Rob!!

NOT AN INTRUSION!!

Sorta my point: you are part of the 'test audience' and anything as simple as that (i.e., not knowing what AU is or where to find out about it) is what I want us to address. Keep'em coming!

I'm starting to pick up on some of the ideas previously stated.. a CivIII page? Simply presented... "Here's where to find what", with simple descriptions. Sorta the coolest CivIII things on 'poly... but hey, why not point to other sites too? CFC for the reference stuff and cracker's opening play tutorial and the GOTM, CIV3PLAYERS Ladder League for MP games, Realms Beyond for the esoteric...

People will have to volunteer for all the stuff we are talking about, but it can be manageable in chunks.

Konquest02 · July 2, 2003, 20:58

Quote:

Originally posted by Theseus
3) We need to maintain the tradition of AU, but also introduce the new. I like alva's idea of succession games for newer players... maybe with an interestingly designed map / scenario? And it does feel like we need some kind of competition / ranking. Have people seen the 'loose' / semi-humorous awards system that Master Zen proposed at MZO for the Boot Camp games? I liked that, directionally.

When I created the Boot Camp at MZO, I was thinking exactly like you are right now Theseus. I wanted a game that is a bit competitive, but mostly based on learning. Awards instead of a ranking system was then the obvious choice.

For those who do not know what the Boot Camp is, please visit this thread and its own forum, which Master Zen set up with a big smile.

[Shameless plug]
You can join in for BCII which is scheduled to start next saturday. It's a scenario proposed to us by Master Zen. For those who played the first one, you have until friday night to submit your final save...

[/shameless plug]

--Kon--

Theseus · July 2, 2003, 21:01

OOOPS, sorry Kon, credit where it's due.

alva · July 2, 2003, 21:18

Quote:

d) If you are a CivIII player poking around on the Internet, and get to www.apolyton.net, what do you see? No disrespect,

Only for those who like a bit of irony

.

Theseus, the link has a komma too much at the end.

Theseus · July 2, 2003, 21:29

That's ugly... fixed.

Tassadar500 · July 2, 2003, 22:17

Well I think I have an idea. Lets say the AU is split in two. One is competitive and one is for learning. In the learning one there will be "professors" there that help with the learners game and stuff like that. Also how to improve. In the competitive side well that could be worked out later. How does that sound?

CanuckSoldier · July 2, 2003, 23:00

Speaking as an Admin of Civ3players Ladder, we have a thriving internet online MP community. We, however, are not inherently limited to just online games. We have so far provided a framework for a competitive ladder, many varied Tournaments, and a very popular Epic game format. There is nothing that says that wins/losses can't be recorded on the same ladder for any other type of game....we have thought of creating specific rules to accomodate PBEM veterns, although there are many sites catering to this already. If there is someway we can provide a system for friendly competition of any format just drop me a line, we have a very dedicated staff of Admin's and TD's.

Kuciwalker · July 2, 2003, 23:08

More people should do the "I'm with Stupid" contests

alva · July 3, 2003, 00:03

Quote:

Well I think I have an idea. Lets say the AU is split in two.

You first need a group that is large enough before you start splittin' it.

That's why I used something that has appeal to a rather large potential group.

I wouldn't mind helping to organize it if one or two more volunteers stand-up.
Perhaps we can get the owners permission to use the CIV3-MP forum for it, which is hardly used anyway (does it even still exist?->checks->yes it does

)

Catt · July 3, 2003, 00:50

Quote:

Also their is a feeling of elietism that exudes from some of the AU community.

I've heard this from others as well.

I won't say it's distressing -- heck, it's only a game right? -- but I'm disappointed that the AU series has created this impression with many at 'Poly. Part of what I like about AU is that it is all-inclusive, open to players of any skill or interest level, and all players and comments welcome. It began before there was a robust editor (is there a robust editor now ?

) and .savs were necessary, preventing the player from choosing their preferred difficulty level - early games tended to be Monarch or Emperor. As soon as the editor was improved, AU games were posted as scenarios, and the number of players playing at Regent or below grew and continues to grow. I hope that those who haven't played AU games won't let any perceived superiority complexes or elitism coming out of AU players turn them off. Some AU players will have strong opinions and won't be shy about sharing them (and I think that's a good thing -- promotes thoughtful discussion), but I've played a fair number of AU games and feel confident in stating that the active posters are not actually trying to come off as elitist, even if intentions don't always come through clearly, and even if some of us sound like we're tooting our own horns occasionally. Those of us who do enjoy AU games and reporting our games obviously need to work hard to convey our thoughts and games in a less elitest manner.

I'm not sure I have any opinions on what, if anything, to do with AU games. But AU games will not be, and should not be, CFC GOTMs. Cracker and CFC already do an excellent job with the format. AU has been a bit anarchic, in fine 'Poly tradition, and everyone who already plays AU probably has his own idea of what AU represents and should represent. I'd put my own plug in for my view of AU -- a community to play and share the same game in the spirit of Zachriel's posted games: the chance to play a fun game, face some of the same circumstances as other players, compare your circumstances and decisions to others', learn a little, teach a little, and maybe tell a good story, too. Of course, no one is expected to be as talented as Zachriel at presenting games. Although he's no longer an active contributor, if you haven't visited his Civ III pages, do so immediately

at www.zachriel.com. [/End of Zachriel homage]

If competition brings in more players, then bring in some competition; but if all of AU moves towards competition, then it'll end up a shadow of CFC's GOTM. Like Dominae, I can't see a good middle ground either.

What would induce you, lurkers and active 'Poly posters who don't play AU games, to play and report your AU games?

Catt

Tassadar500 · July 3, 2003, 01:19

Anyone else willing to volunteer for my idea?

vmxa1 · July 3, 2003, 01:23

I suspect that the break down to DAR (During Action Report) will make it a bit easier to follow games and get something out of a good style or strat by a player.
When the whole game was slammed in in one shot it lack details and was hard to know what allowed the player to get to a given point. People posted days after they started and may not even recall event.
It also allows for people to play at their own pace and avoid seeing the whole map exposed.

Dominae · July 3, 2003, 01:31

A funny thought I had the other day:

Maybe I'm losing interest in Civ3, but for the life of me I cannot find any interest in SP games unless I know there are a bunch of people out there playing the same scenario as I am. It's not that I'm competitive. Rather, the feeling of knowing there is a community of people out there sharing the game with me makes it, well, fun enough to play (because I would definitely quit Civ3 a long time ago if it were not for 'Poly and the internet). All this due to AU. It's like going to watch a movie alone: sure, it's entertaining, but it would probably be better if you could chat about it with friends afterwards.

I know that many people feel the same way, and this is why they love the idea of AU or GOTM once they hear about it. If only we could spread the word that the best games you play are the ones you share with a bunch of other players, I'm sure we would have a lot more interest in AU.

Dominae

P.S: I also really like helping people get better at Civ3, which is the second reason I'm still faithful to AU.

BigDork · July 3, 2003, 01:33

Hi all...

My first AU game was 204. I joined in the AU fun because that's what it was, fun. And it was a great learning opertunity. It gave me a chance to play a game and at the same time see how others played. By seeing everyone else play I improved. I started on warlord and am playing now kinda on monarch.

I like the idea of giving learning awards more than grades. I don't think I would have ever joined if I was to be graded. It's kind of discouraging for the newbies. Instead I got some good constructive critisism and a lot of help. I personally didn't feel any elitism at all.

Another great thing about the AU games is they've kept me interested in CivIII. I've never played a single game for so long. Playing with everyone else and seeing how everyone does makes it more exciting. Not to mention that I've gotten to know you all better because of it.

Since 204 I've seen a lot of new people join up for the AU courses. On their own people are coming in. But I think it's a good idea to organize a little and definatly try to get the word out more. I'm not familiar with the GOTM at all so I'm not necessarily sure how it can be improved and I have no clue who Cracker is or what he's done. But from what I've gathered he's made playing CivIII better for people so good job Cracker

BigD

BigDork · July 3, 2003, 01:37

Quote:

Originally posted by Dominae
A funny thought I had the other day:

Maybe I'm losing interest in Civ3, but for the life of me I cannot find any interest in SP games unless I know there are a bunch of people out there playing the same scenario as I am. It's not that I'm competitive. Rather, the feeling of knowing there is a community of people out there sharing the game with me makes it, well, fun enough to play (because I would definitely quit Civ3 a long time ago if it were not for 'Poly and the internet). All this due to AU. It's like going to watch a movie alone: sure, it's entertaining, but it would probably be better if you could chat about it with friends afterwards.
Dominae

P.S: I also really like helping people get better at Civ3, which is the second reason I'm still faithful to AU.

Yes, exactly what I feel. It's the whole community aspect that keeps me interested in Civ3. It's being able to play with a group of people from around the world and sharing our hardships and our victories. It's cheering for each other, giving a piece of advice, or a pat on the back that makes AU so great and why I will continue to participate in it.

BigD

vmxa1 · July 3, 2003, 01:57

I layed off for some time and it was the AU that help me decide to play some more, that and reading Gotm.
Cracker used to post here from time to time, but he can be a tad caustic for most even when he is right.
His lay out of QSC and Gotm was the first time I ever saw such detail.
Looking at that and Zachriel's website.

Tassadar500 · July 3, 2003, 02:06

Well if CFC can do it we can put even more detail then that

I am prepared to work my butt off for this. Whos with me?

Arrian · July 3, 2003, 09:09

Quote:

It's like going to watch a movie alone: sure, it's entertaining, but it would probably be better if you could chat about it with friends afterwards.

Wow. Well said, Dominae. I'm getting there myself. I will still play SP games in isolation (I was trying out England, for instance, just for the hell of it), but less often. Part of that might be because it's summertime. Part of it may be that I've played a ridiculous amount of Civ. I dunno. But the AU format (hey! here's a game, let's all play it and talk about it!) sparks some extra interest.

I'll read the AAR/DAR threads even if I'm not playing, just to see other's writeups.

-Arrian

Kuciwalker · July 3, 2003, 11:23

I'm actually going to try AU now. YAY!

Solomwi · July 3, 2003, 16:02

Thanks, Theseus, you got my mouth all watering to join the PTWDG now, only to find it already underway

. Oh, well, consider me in when PTWDGIII starts up. Looks like big fun.

I did learn quite a lot from the OCC AU course (for instance, I now strive to immediately get a settler factory going and try to approximate OC with my capital after seeing the early build power it had). AU is great as it is, but definitely needs more visibility and more contributors. Not that I'm saying anything new, just throwing my $.02 in.

FrustratedPoet · July 3, 2003, 17:38

Quote:

Thanks, Theseus, you got my mouth all watering to join the PTWDG now, only to find it already underway . Oh, well, consider me in when PTWDGIII starts up. Looks like big fun.

You are still welcome to join either the 1st or 2nd demogames if you can find a team that a) appeals to you, and b) is accepting new members (AFAIK most are).

Gathering Storm accepted Octavian X as a new member fairly recently, and Vox Controli have got a new member too.

The PTWDGII teams are all willing to have new recruits who are interested in that style of a game (it's very different to the first one).

Check out the public forums for both games and see if anything takes your fancy. Come join the fun!