Suggesions for Future Epics

Suggesions for Future Epics

Sirian
Sirian

June 3rd, 2002, 10:15 pm #1

While I'm capable of designing fun scenerios from now until the cows come home, the Epics aren't meant to be limited to my ideas. When Epic One closes on June 10, we'll open another Epic. Between now and then, I'd like to get your feedback on what you want to see.

Two kinds of feedback would be helpful:

First, general feedback. What difficulty levels you're interested in or would be willing to play, what map sizes and settings you like/dislike or are willing/unwilling to deal with, and also what pacing you think you can handle in regard to map/game size. Any civ player may respond, doesn't have to be limited to current Epics participants. (Are the current pacings good for you? Too long? Not long enough? What about the difficulty levels? Too rough? Not rough enough? Do you want to see all the games at high levels or some of them at low levels too?)

Second, specific proposals. If you have a variant or idea or situation or scenerio you think would be fun, interesting, and challenging, you can put it forth. My job as Organizer is not only to select good scenerios for use, but also pace things to make sure we don't flood the market and overdo the number of the games. The "game of the month" pacing may work out well for some, but if a game is shorter or longer, months don't grow longer or shorter to accomodate. RBCiv likes the flexibility that allows for duration to be matched to the scenerio. If we lack for ideas compared to game demand, I can come up with any number of games to cover the gap. If we end up with more ideas on the table than we can handle, I'll pace them out to make sure no reasonably available participants are shut out. Players can pick and choose what to play or skip if they are severely limited on time. The point is, you players out there have to put forth your own ideas if you want them to be considered for use. We want to run things in a way that includes your input. Help us to keep the Epics going and improve them over time.


Players can sponsor their own epics, with approval from the Organizers. Charis was originally intended to be a partner with me in this, and perhaps others also. For the moment, I'm all there is in the Organizer category. In order for others to move toward helping me on that level, they need to show talent and skill and good judgement in dealing with game balance, scenerio evaluation, and dealing with rules, as well as motivation and reliability. I'm not exactly sure how to get there from here, but discussion is a good start point. Further ideas for rules changes can also be put forth.

So... feedback welcome. Post your input!


- Sirian
Quote
Share

Joined: May 21st, 2002, 3:38 pm

June 3rd, 2002, 11:48 pm #2

I'd like to see something along the lines of starting one per week, letting each run for +/- three weeks. I'd probably play about half of them at that rate - probably nothing above a standard size map - and the more devoted players can play them all.

Definitely vary the difficulty levels. If we're competing for metagame goals - against each other or not - the game difficulty setting is irrelevant. Just as a random example and suggestion: get a 100k cultural victory as fast as possible on Chieftain.

We can also try all sorts of wacky metagame ideas. Just as another random example and suggestion: All workers must be automated.

This is the Realms Beyond after all. Let's get waaay out there...
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 9th, 2001, 4:09 am

June 4th, 2002, 1:25 am #3


>>Quote

We can also try all sorts of wacky metagame ideas. Just as another random example and suggestion: All workers must be automated.

<<End Quote

You mean there is another way? 8-0

--Cy
Quote
Like
Share

Sullla
Sullla

June 4th, 2002, 3:12 am #4

While I'm capable of designing fun scenerios from now until the cows come home, the Epics aren't meant to be limited to my ideas. When Epic One closes on June 10, we'll open another Epic. Between now and then, I'd like to get your feedback on what you want to see.

Two kinds of feedback would be helpful:

First, general feedback. What difficulty levels you're interested in or would be willing to play, what map sizes and settings you like/dislike or are willing/unwilling to deal with, and also what pacing you think you can handle in regard to map/game size. Any civ player may respond, doesn't have to be limited to current Epics participants. (Are the current pacings good for you? Too long? Not long enough? What about the difficulty levels? Too rough? Not rough enough? Do you want to see all the games at high levels or some of them at low levels too?)

Second, specific proposals. If you have a variant or idea or situation or scenerio you think would be fun, interesting, and challenging, you can put it forth. My job as Organizer is not only to select good scenerios for use, but also pace things to make sure we don't flood the market and overdo the number of the games. The "game of the month" pacing may work out well for some, but if a game is shorter or longer, months don't grow longer or shorter to accomodate. RBCiv likes the flexibility that allows for duration to be matched to the scenerio. If we lack for ideas compared to game demand, I can come up with any number of games to cover the gap. If we end up with more ideas on the table than we can handle, I'll pace them out to make sure no reasonably available participants are shut out. Players can pick and choose what to play or skip if they are severely limited on time. The point is, you players out there have to put forth your own ideas if you want them to be considered for use. We want to run things in a way that includes your input. Help us to keep the Epics going and improve them over time.


Players can sponsor their own epics, with approval from the Organizers. Charis was originally intended to be a partner with me in this, and perhaps others also. For the moment, I'm all there is in the Organizer category. In order for others to move toward helping me on that level, they need to show talent and skill and good judgement in dealing with game balance, scenerio evaluation, and dealing with rules, as well as motivation and reliability. I'm not exactly sure how to get there from here, but discussion is a good start point. Further ideas for rules changes can also be put forth.

So... feedback welcome. Post your input!


- Sirian
Another one is starting on the 10th? Well, I should be able to get to it... maybe. I really enjoy these games, but the current pace is a bit fast for me. I have to micromanage everything so my games tend to take a little while; Epic2 will probably take about 5 more days to finish, and then I really need to play the CivFanatics GOTM. Hey, have to keep my standings up there Personally, I think one per week is WAAAY too fast; the games will go by so fast there won't be enough people participating in each and the interest will fade out fast. Part of the reason why CivFanatics GOTM is so popular is because there is but one game per month; when people win or lose they have time to think between games, and if you read their forum there people are always eagerly anticipating the next one. My thought is that we slow the current pace down a wee bit (please? ). Maybe trying never to have more than 2 games running at the same time is a good idea; I know otherwise I'm going to start getting confused between games.

I only ask that in terms of map sizes we stay away from huge maps; I can deal with large ones, although for me they take too long as is, but huge ones are ridiculous. You try manually moving 200 workers each turn - and I will NOT automate them. For me, I feel that I can play on any difficulty level, since I have soloed and won on all of them by now. Emperor is my favorite level for now, but while I think it's fun maybe others think it's a little hard.

As for variants, bring 'em on! I've thoroughly enjoyed some of the ones concocted for succession games, and even the ones I didn't play in were fun reading about. Somehow I think Sirian has something devious planned for the next Epic... like the "Cyrene" game where you are required to build what the governor recommends and automate all workers! Noooooooo!
Quote
Share

Joined: May 22nd, 2002, 7:37 am

June 4th, 2002, 1:46 pm #5

While I'm capable of designing fun scenerios from now until the cows come home, the Epics aren't meant to be limited to my ideas. When Epic One closes on June 10, we'll open another Epic. Between now and then, I'd like to get your feedback on what you want to see.

Two kinds of feedback would be helpful:

First, general feedback. What difficulty levels you're interested in or would be willing to play, what map sizes and settings you like/dislike or are willing/unwilling to deal with, and also what pacing you think you can handle in regard to map/game size. Any civ player may respond, doesn't have to be limited to current Epics participants. (Are the current pacings good for you? Too long? Not long enough? What about the difficulty levels? Too rough? Not rough enough? Do you want to see all the games at high levels or some of them at low levels too?)

Second, specific proposals. If you have a variant or idea or situation or scenerio you think would be fun, interesting, and challenging, you can put it forth. My job as Organizer is not only to select good scenerios for use, but also pace things to make sure we don't flood the market and overdo the number of the games. The "game of the month" pacing may work out well for some, but if a game is shorter or longer, months don't grow longer or shorter to accomodate. RBCiv likes the flexibility that allows for duration to be matched to the scenerio. If we lack for ideas compared to game demand, I can come up with any number of games to cover the gap. If we end up with more ideas on the table than we can handle, I'll pace them out to make sure no reasonably available participants are shut out. Players can pick and choose what to play or skip if they are severely limited on time. The point is, you players out there have to put forth your own ideas if you want them to be considered for use. We want to run things in a way that includes your input. Help us to keep the Epics going and improve them over time.


Players can sponsor their own epics, with approval from the Organizers. Charis was originally intended to be a partner with me in this, and perhaps others also. For the moment, I'm all there is in the Organizer category. In order for others to move toward helping me on that level, they need to show talent and skill and good judgement in dealing with game balance, scenerio evaluation, and dealing with rules, as well as motivation and reliability. I'm not exactly sure how to get there from here, but discussion is a good start point. Further ideas for rules changes can also be put forth.

So... feedback welcome. Post your input!


- Sirian
Hi,

my personal preferences for the Epics would be:
  • No huge maps, large only if necessairy for scenario. Unit micromanaging and the wait between turns is too time-consuming otherwise.
  • 'Emperor' difficulty is okay for the more normal scenarios, the level below (is it monarch?) for the more variant scenarios. But games at a lower level of difficulty could be a nice change of pace, too, and could encourage more players to join. After all, not winning but the comparison to other players is a large part of the fun.
  • The pace is okay as it is. Keep in mind that not only time for playing is needed, but from the 10th of June onwards, more time is needed for a lively discussion. At least I hope it will be more than everyone post their report and that's it.
And thank you Sirian for the time end effort you put in this!

-Kylearan
Quote
Like
Share

Arathorn
Arathorn

June 4th, 2002, 7:40 pm #6

RBD -- realms beyond deity -- give the AI 50% costs and another bonus worker to start with -- something like that. I really want to see a game or two in this vein.

Emperor is a good default level. But I want to see games where the competition is against the game, not (just) the other players -- push us to the limit.

I like the idea of varying difficulty levels -- how fast can you get a diplomatic win at Chieftain? Leave all the victory conditions enabled, but anything other than diplomatic is a loss.... (or something similar)

I would echo the no huge maps preference others have expressed. Anything else is fine.

Personally, I would prefer easy "scoring" rules. I'm shying away from Epic 2 partly because I don't want to keep track of all the "scenario" conditions.

I think 2-4 weeks play time should be enough. Too long and people forget the game/lose interest. And 2-3 games going at the same time. Some scenarios just aren't going to interest some people. Some post-game discussions will run long. Ideally, most of us can be in one "currently playing" and a couple "discussions", but fanatics can play 'em all.

Just a few lira from the top of my head,
Arathorn

P.S. What else are you looking for in an Organizer? Time commitment/other expertises/etc. are my questions. I have a fair bit of time to THINK about Civ (long commutes), just not a whole lot of time to play it. But I can't start too soon, with baby two on the way any day.
Quote
Share

Sirian
Sirian

June 5th, 2002, 3:39 am #7

I'm shying away from Epic 2 partly because I don't want to keep track of all the "scenario" conditions.

Copy them to a file, paste them to your desktop, refer to them as you care to while you're right there in the game playing, or ignore them completely. I considered making such a downloadable list available, but it's SO easy to make your own, take you less time to do that than to download one.

You're missing out on a fun game. It's a glorious map. Don't be a wallflower! Get out here and dance!


As for Organizers, I don't know yet. Definitely go through the Sponsor level first: IE, run your own Epic (subject to approval, but approval isn't hard to obtain) and keep it organized, show initiative, commitment... if it runs smoothly, that might be most of the way there. You personally are soon in for low availability, so yeah, maybe not the best timing for you on your end. No particular hurry here, though.


- Sirian
Quote
Share

Joined: June 3rd, 2002, 5:38 am

June 5th, 2002, 5:12 am #8

While I'm capable of designing fun scenerios from now until the cows come home, the Epics aren't meant to be limited to my ideas. When Epic One closes on June 10, we'll open another Epic. Between now and then, I'd like to get your feedback on what you want to see.

Two kinds of feedback would be helpful:

First, general feedback. What difficulty levels you're interested in or would be willing to play, what map sizes and settings you like/dislike or are willing/unwilling to deal with, and also what pacing you think you can handle in regard to map/game size. Any civ player may respond, doesn't have to be limited to current Epics participants. (Are the current pacings good for you? Too long? Not long enough? What about the difficulty levels? Too rough? Not rough enough? Do you want to see all the games at high levels or some of them at low levels too?)

Second, specific proposals. If you have a variant or idea or situation or scenerio you think would be fun, interesting, and challenging, you can put it forth. My job as Organizer is not only to select good scenerios for use, but also pace things to make sure we don't flood the market and overdo the number of the games. The "game of the month" pacing may work out well for some, but if a game is shorter or longer, months don't grow longer or shorter to accomodate. RBCiv likes the flexibility that allows for duration to be matched to the scenerio. If we lack for ideas compared to game demand, I can come up with any number of games to cover the gap. If we end up with more ideas on the table than we can handle, I'll pace them out to make sure no reasonably available participants are shut out. Players can pick and choose what to play or skip if they are severely limited on time. The point is, you players out there have to put forth your own ideas if you want them to be considered for use. We want to run things in a way that includes your input. Help us to keep the Epics going and improve them over time.


Players can sponsor their own epics, with approval from the Organizers. Charis was originally intended to be a partner with me in this, and perhaps others also. For the moment, I'm all there is in the Organizer category. In order for others to move toward helping me on that level, they need to show talent and skill and good judgement in dealing with game balance, scenerio evaluation, and dealing with rules, as well as motivation and reliability. I'm not exactly sure how to get there from here, but discussion is a good start point. Further ideas for rules changes can also be put forth.

So... feedback welcome. Post your input!


- Sirian
Here is an idea for you: how about the opposite of Epics One--what I call a Dastardly Rule Set. The basics are no cultural improvements (except the Palace), and auto razing of all conquered cities. This means no wonders (captured or built), and all cities except those near the capital are nine tile city spaces. This might make for a nice change of pace from Epics One and Two.

Quote
Like
Share

Meldor
Meldor

June 6th, 2002, 2:56 pm #9

This one fast becomes a REX attack and the AI is not equiped to handle it. After you raise all of those cities, and have 3 times the cities you would have noramlly, it gets real tedious. Just ask those who have stopped playing the game. Too boring, too many worker movements. If this one is re-done as an epic, make it a lot samller map. Maybe islands to boot.
Quote
Share

Sullla
Sullla

June 6th, 2002, 7:59 pm #10

Here is an idea for you: how about the opposite of Epics One--what I call a Dastardly Rule Set. The basics are no cultural improvements (except the Palace), and auto razing of all conquered cities. This means no wonders (captured or built), and all cities except those near the capital are nine tile city spaces. This might make for a nice change of pace from Epics One and Two.
Meldor is right; when the Cretan game started up with the "no culture" idea I thought the game would be very difficult. The opposite was true; it forced an ICS build that was much more powerful than the AI civs were prepared to handle. According to Civ3 players who compete to see what the highest score possible is (such as Aeson and SirPleb), a super dense build will conquer the AI with ease on any difficulty. I don't like using this though because it's not, well, a civilization. This kind of game turns out inevitably to be too easy and not much fun - as the players in the Cretan game found out. Now the game is limping along to completion as a chore for the players to finish. Trust me... we don't want to do this one.
Quote
Share