 |
|
Adrian Hon
|
|
Living in Perplex City
Nov 2001 time: 05:31
|
|
Yeah, I definitely like reading them. Probably the most useful thing is the map though, I like to see how we're doing at chopping down the jungle and so forth.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
dejon
|
|
I used to read/use the Turn Reports, but then they started to lag behind, so I started reading the individuals turn threads.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
vondrack

|
 |
Praha, Czech Republic
Jan 2002 time: 06:31
|
|
quote: Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
vonD - what exactly makes you take the 2 hours? I always ensure I post EXACTLY what orders are carried out when I am the one who posts what is done - the few times that I perform the official orders.
If there is a way we can cut down on your time spent here - we will do it.
Although I rarely read through every order for a turn I miss (there are a few, being GMT+12), I ALWAYS consult the map whenever I miss a turn, so I certainly find this a big help. |
Perhaps T120 was an exception... but I spent quite some time figuring out what happened to the WF in our core cities (posted reassignments were contradictory, leading to tiles being worked by more than one city at the same time). I eventually had to trash the almost replayed (and processed) save, load the next one, and check where exactly the labourers were at the beginning of Turn 121, later having to replay the whole turn again (and due to my stupidity, I had to do this twice...).
BTW, Tripoli did not get reassigned on Turn 119 as planned/reported in the turn thread (we were not working the iron hill)... dunno if E_T knows that.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
OliverFA
|
|
Leeds, UK
Sep 2002 time: 06:31
|
|
I find them very interesting and useful, but I also agree that 2 hours is a bit too much, so if you stop doing them I will understand
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Adrian Hon
|
|
Living in Perplex City
Nov 2001 time: 05:31
|
|
Is it worth spending the time writing out what happened to the WF? I know I don't really bother reading that bit, does anyone else?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
wervdon
|
|
The most important part of them to me is the map.
I look at the map at least every 2 or 3 days. I look at the other screenshots (cities, scores, stats) about half of those times.
I only read the actual actions taken when something momentous happens (war/city founded/contact), and then only really for the stuff that is pertinent to that action.
-You better believe I'll read the whole thing during the GCA war though, in particular I'll be looking for a list of engagements and their outcomes. Suggestion: Bold any attacks and list the outcome on the same line.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
pikesfan
|
|
I read them all the time to keep track of what’s happening since my Internet connection is slow and downloading a save would take too long. So I hope you can still keep doing them.
I look at the maps and the table of cities that has the builds. I don’t often look at the list of where all the units went (especially not the workers), though with the war starting I will pay more attention to that. However, if Trip keeps us up-to-date with the war news, we might not need the information to be repeated in the turn report.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
WhiteBandit
|
 |
Southern California
Jul 2002 time: 21:31
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Arnelos
I agree with Adrian Hon, does anyone actually scrutinize those WF placements in the turn reports?
I know that E_T needs records of that, but I assume he has his own records, no? |
THe thing with the WF placements and everything is that effects the growth/production numbers in Vondrack's spreadsheet that he posts, so in essence, they are important.
I guess the question in that sense is: How many people pay attention to that spreadsheet? BigFree does. I glance at it sometimes, but I see that Trip, E_T, BF and others are extremely capable of simming/getting their own results without these spreadsheets.
But then again, if we want the updated turn maps to show the correct # of turns for city production, these WF changes have to be updated anyway...
|
|
|  |
 |
|
E_T
|
 |
Orlando, Florida
Mar 2001 time: 00:31
|
|
quote: Originally posted by vondrack
BTW, Tripoli did not get reassigned on Turn 119 as planned/reported in the turn thread (we were not working the iron hill)... dunno if E_T knows that. |
I did notice it the next turn.... and had it corrected, but I just hope that the damage is repairable to my careful plans....
As for the reports, I look at them, from time to time, just to track a few things I can't do quickly with my computer.
And as for time spent doing things for this game, part of being a team is that we choose to spend our time to do things for the team, even though they aren't sometime apprechiated as much as we had originally thought. But then, there are still those people who value the work that we have made and the time that we have spent, for these things. The one thing that I had found out a long time ago, is they aren't verbally appreciated (as much as we would all like) until they are no longer available. Keep that in mind.
E_T
|
|
|  |
 |
|
vondrack

|
 |
Praha, Czech Republic
Jan 2002 time: 06:31
|
|
OK, Turn 121 was an even worse nightmare... I can understand why, because it was a turning point with 70+ actions being carried out, but still...
This is by no means a rant - I am not angry or anything, in fact I am writing this in a very calm mood. It is a late response to MWIA's question about what it is taking so long to put a report together (almost 3 hours this time).
1) scattering the information about the actions carried out into several posts - in this case, the first and second posts of the turn thread, then Trip's military record, then the post with 'everything as planned, except', and then the screenshots. It's unbelievably difficult not to miss anything, having to constantly skip back and forth, check things at several places.
2) not mentioning the paths followed. Saying 'X attacked the GCA sword at Catcher 8-9' does not include the information WHERE the unit was attacked FROM - I have to look into the screenshots (and sometimes, if I don't realize there was more than one way to attack enemy, I have to replay the turn from scratch, since the units end up on incorrect tiles.
3) saying 'the rest of units in AGA/AGB moved to...'; first: with AGA/AGB defined in the first post using numbers, while having units only named ingame, it's next to impossible to know which unit belongs to which army. Solution: implement the numbering ingame, too - drop the "...the Medieval Infantry" part, and replace with "M13...", like in "M13 Beta". Second: the best trick to force me to replay the whole turn is to say that the whole of the AGA/AGB moved somewhere and immediately follow it by two units being sent elsewhere. What happens? I move the rest of the armies somewhere and then feel like putting a bullet through my head, since on the next line, I find out that some units were supposed to go elsewhere... you can imagine that with a turn of 70 odd moves, it's a nightmare...
There is something I barely dare to propose, since I very well know how much time the turnplayers/Consuls have to devote to this game, but... it works smoothly for Lego, so perhaps it might work here, too.
Whoever plays the turn, fire up notepad a make a note of every single action carried out. It would be okay to jot down only very brief, perhaps even a bit cryptical notes, like:
1. GWT counteroffered Rep+WM, acc, sent
2. inv Catcher, Girl
3. Poly, Ming, Nana start mercs
4. declared war on GCA
5. PoA 8-8-8, ffy all
6. Exp 8-8-8, both swords 4
7. BFI 2-6-2
8. vonH 9-8-9-8
9. MZ 6
10. Ghengis 8-4, ffy
...
45. Poly WF 5 to 8, 13 to 18
etc.
It takes less time than you might think. It would cost the turnplayer less than 15 minutes to put this together even for a turn like this (with every line consuming ~10-15 seconds) and save me as much as 2+ hours of very laborious work. But then again, I do know very well that the Consuls are carrying a burden big enough as it is, so it is up to them to decide if they can/want/are willing do that or not - I will not feel ignored or anything if they keep posting the reports the way they do... I just thought I would explain what it is that makes creating the official turn reports so time consuming.
Thank you for listening (and may the Force be with the armies of Apolyton). 
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Arnelos
|
 |
of the Free World
Sep 2002 time: 00:31
|
|
quote: Originally posted by vondrack
Whoever plays the turn, fire up notepad a make a note of every single action carried out. It would be okay to jot down only very brief, perhaps even a bit cryptical notes, like:
1. GWT counteroffered Rep+WM, acc, sent
2. inv Catcher, Girl
3. Poly, Ming, Nana start mercs
4. declared war on GCA
5. PoA 8-8-8, ffy all
6. Exp 8-8-8, both swords 4
7. BFI 2-6-2
8. vonH 9-8-9-8
9. MZ 6
10. Ghengis 8-4, ffy
...
45. Poly WF 5 to 8, 13 to 18
etc.
It takes less time than you might think. It would cost the turnplayer less than 15 minutes to put this together even for a turn like this (with every line consuming ~10-15 seconds) and save me as much as 2+ hours of very laborious work. But then again, I do know very well that the Consuls are carrying a burden big enough as it is, so it is up to them to decide if they can/want/are willing do that or not - I will not feel ignored or anything if they keep posting the reports the way they do... I just thought I would explain what it is that makes creating the official turn reports so time consuming.
Thank you for listening (and may the Force be with the armies of Apolyton). |
I used to do something less anal like that in the SPDG. When you have something on the order of 60-80 military units to move each turn, it's a pain in the arse to keep track of what happens to each one, but there were dividends. I'll vouch for this being relatively easy to do in chat, since you're basically just jotting down what you are doing as you are doing it as opposed to trying to remember things or look through turnchat logs after the fact.
I had originally started with just recoding major events like FAM deals, but eventually got in the habit of recording nearly everything because it was relatively easy to do while running the chat and made record-keeping and reporting on what took place in a chat far easier.
It DOES take extra time over the course of a chat, which means you're spending everyone's time. But, in the case of the ISDG, if that's saving vondrack hours of his time, it might very well be worth it 
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:31. Apolyton Time is 00:31. |
top of page
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|