 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
colinf
|
|
Scarborough Fair
Jun 2002 time: 05:29
|
|
Maybe I can add my 10 penn'orth as a long time lurker here and a full time staff member at CFC.
I think the biggest single event that developed people's interest in GOTM to the point where we have 250+ entries each month was the introduction of the QSC - the Quick Start Challenge. It was a contest over the first 80 turns of the game ie up to 1000bc to see who could develop their civ the best. Inevitably there has been a lot of ahem discussion about the mechanics of the scoring but one spinoff has been that everyone keeps really detailed records turn by turn of every move. That in conjunction with Crackers guide to the opening moves has done more to raise standards of play than anything. SGs are great but its not possible for 200+ people to play in them and compare.
Comparing your game to others has never been easier. When a lot of people slowed down and started to plan their moves the general level of standard went up and up. GOTM20 was on deity level and 100+ (iirc) people will have beaten it (results out soon).
Of course, once you play your first 80 turns with care - and lets face it, they are the critical ones in most games - folks wanted to carry on to the end and compare their games.
Some people play for score; others just play for a good time. A couple of us started up a lowest scoring win subcontest and developed a whole host of OCC skills along the way.
The key to GOTMs success has been
1) prominent links on the front page of the site
2) a well organised and dedicated team of staff
3) organised strategy threads
4) a community where the top players show how they won and why they made the choices they did.
5) efficient weeding out of cheaters.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
vondrack

|
 |
Praha, Czech Republic
Jan 2002 time: 06:29
|
|
Just an idea that crossed my mind while reading through this thread... as AU is non-competitive and learning-oriented, what about awarding prizes based upon something like an "artistic impression" (something NOT based on score or not solely based on score).
Like:
- most impressive/elegant win
- best AAR
- best story (?)
I imagine that after a new AU course would be announced and published, there would be a certain period (1,2,3 months) people could submit their AARs & stories for a "contest". After this period would be over, all entries would be organized into a simple poll and people would choose the ones they will have liked most. Those that played the AU course and submitted their AAR/story might have multiple votes or something, to encourage participation, while not excluding those that are happy just watching...
Maybe it's a stupid idea, dunno... (I've never had time to play any AU course, so I may very well be completely missing something important). But it would be easy enough to implement, totally different from GOTM, and still something players might consider a worthy award (since the award would be actually given by others, who played that game or watched it being played).
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Theseus

|
 |
The warmonger formerly known as rpodos. Gathering Storm! Apolyton Spirit!!
Apr 2002 time: 00:29
|
|
I've got a new idea, from playing AU402 with DARs...
Wouldn't it be cool to have some sort of summary table by phase of who accomplished what?
Diff level, contacts, tech, gold, gpt, military, GWs/SWs, etc.
Then, also, in the oh-so-'poly anarchic but helpful way, the more advanced players could chime in to help the newer players. This would also help facilitate the awards concept we are toying with.
Just an idea.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:29. Apolyton Time is 00:29. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|