What to do with AU?

[Harrier UK]

Originally posted by Ennet
*pokes life in this thread again*

Well. Before we decide what to mod in or not, perhaps we should get a little feeling for the game itself first.
A coupple of basic courses on various difficulties with some diffrent map settings and civs would be fine for a start. For me anyway =) (just a week to go now)

Have to agree with this. Seems a bit early to start modding the game as very few have played it yet. (I am of course refering to MarkG and Solver etc.)

[Mickeyj]

Originally posted by Harrier UK


Have to agree with this. Seems a bit early to start modding the game as very few have played it yet. (I am of course refering to MarkG and Solver etc.)

My understanding the mods in AU were to balance the game, if civ4 comes oit well balanced surely we won't need mods

[jshelr]

Great post Dom. AU is really the aspect of civ IV that I most look forward to. Your ideas look good -- simple enough to be actually implemented. (Particularly not bad for a Canadian )

[Dominae]

[Fried-Psitalon]

I honestly don't know that much about AU, but I might dabble a bit if folks don't mind my corrupting influences. If I understand the concept of AU, MP-AU might be a bit tough to teach, though, unless everyone was using the same map and civilizations and posting their thoughts as the game progresses. Speaking from recent experiences (you'll find out when the strat guide is released) it can be rather difficult to accurately log/compare a game across multiple players on the same timeline... nevermind comparing multiple players across multiple games on the same timeline.

[CanuckSoldier]

Once pitboss is released that might be the best option for a MP AU game, were one person could play it and everyone could look at it and comment and discuss the options.

CS

[Harrier UK]

Can someone clarify this please.

There appears to be three parts to the AU.

1. A series of games that test different aspects of the game.

2. These games are also used to help new players improve their gameplay.

3. The development of a mod that attempts to improve the aspects tested in part 1.

Am I right or wrong in this assumption.

If wrong can some one give me a brief description of the intentions and purpose of the AU.

[Tassadar500]

Originally posted by Harrier UK
Can someone clarify this please.

There appears to be three parts to the AU.

1. A series of games that test different aspects of the game.

2. These games are also used to help new players improve their gameplay.

3. The development of a mod that attempts to improve the aspects tested in part 1.

Am I right or wrong in this assumption.

If wrong can some one give me a brief description of the intentions and purpose of the AU.

You're basically right, but we are hoping to create and expand the scope of AU for Civ IV.

[Dominae]

Originally posted by Harrier UK
Can someone clarify this please.

The original post should answer all your questions in this regard.

[nbarclay]

I think the first thing AU should do is host some essentially random games without special themes in order to get a feel for how different strategies compare on the same map. The ideal might be to run several games very quickly, more than most players will have time for but with the opportunity for people who don't have time to play all of them to learn from players who do. I can't think of a better way for the AU community (including those who just lurk) to get a feel for the game relatively quickly. Then, once we have a feel for the underlying game, we can start thinking about courses focusing on specific aspects of the game and about what we might want to do in an AU Mod for Civ 4.

Keep in mind that Apolyton University didn't start until after its initial core players had been playing Civ 3 for months. We already understood the basics of the game pretty well, and were seeking to build on those basics by developing skills regarding particular types of situations.

AU will start with Civ 4 a lot earlier in the learning curve than we did in Civ 3, with the potential to launch our first game within days of Civ 4's release. Whatever strategy we choose for learning Civ 4, it needs to reflect that difference in where we are in the learning curve.

[Strollen]

I got involved in AU after Civ 3 right before conquests was released. I wish I had known about it before them so clearly the PR is lacking. I will volunteer to spread the word about AU for Civ 4 to the other Civ forums. I found it invaluable in improving my Civ game, and stimulating interest in the game and would like to help others benefit.

I particularly appreciated the work done in the AU mod to make the game more challenging. I personally don't really care to make this a highly competitive forum, but if other want to add a competitive aspect to it that is fine with me.

Obviously, we all need to play a few games before we have any business modding it.

I like NBarclay suggestion of playing a few random games without themes first. A lot of the time involved in the AU games is for the course coordinator to build a map, figure out a theme etc. Frankly, I am going to be to busy playing to think about a making course (and I am sure I am not alone in this view)

The simplest way to do this is to simply keep track of the random seed/starting map of any games you play. If you find a particularly interesting map you can share it with the forum. If we can get several other to play the same map we have the basis for figuring out good strategies and just as important ways of improving the AI to cope with the strategies.

I will leave it as an exercise for the forum to define what "particularly interesting" means. For mean personally the holy grail of good Civ maps was one which wasn't too hard at the beginning. (I.e. didn't require reloading), but remained competitive into the industrial age. I love to see such a map for Civ 4.

[Harrier UK]

I never played the Civ3 AU games. In fact I was not aware of them until this thread was started.

But I have just had a scan through them now.

So while you are discussing the format of the civ4 version here are a few suggestions.

1. At first the civ3 site looks a bit intimidating to a newcomer. Just where do we begin?

Maybe the 'Welcome thread' could give a bit more info on how and where to start.

It would also be useful if an example of the type of feedback you require was given: e.g. layout of the posting, items to be written about. etc.

Headings could include:

General description of the game play and thoughts.

Time Line - showing key points (Era change, GW built, AI civ destroyed etc.)

Problems encountered requestes for help/ guidance.

Suggestions for changes to the mod. (If that is what you are playing).

This is of course only meant as a guide to help the first time posters compose there gameplay masterpieces.

Writing a game report can be a daunting task if you have not done it before.


2. If you are going to adopt the idea of awarding points, which I think is a good idea and is even better if you give a ranking. Freshman etc. I think it would be useful if you had a registration thread.

The idea being you post to this thread when you first start. Giving basic details such as the level you normally play at, the type of game you play - bulder, warmonger. and the victory condition you normally aim for. etc. They could also indicated if they were interested in participating in the AU Mod.

This would also help in deciding on the theme of the course units you will be designing. It will also tell you how many people are participating.

The only post here should be the registration. So the thread does not get hi-jacked with unnecessary posts.

3. A second thread could be used to monitor a players progress through the various course units. Having registered and downloaded the first unit, the player adds them self to this thread.

When they have played the first unit and posted a report (optional) they edit their post to log their progress.

example.

26/12/05 started U401 - Chieftain

30/12/06 Spaceship victory 1985, report posted.

02/02/06 started U401 - Warlord.


4. As for the frequency of new units, I think 2 months is the best option. If it is longer players may lose interest and stop visiting the site. If it is shorter it may make people rush the games and not enjoy them. (I must finish this game before the next one appears - syndrome). Those who have not written game reports before will probably find it daunting.

Also it does not give ample time for the discussion and creation of a suitable unit.

[nbarclay]

Traditionally, AU games haven't had firm time limits. Rather, we've taken the approach that when pretty much everyone who we know is playing is finished or almost finished with one game, it's time to come out with the next.

[DeepO]

I'd like to get actively involved in AU as well, if time permits. I kind of missed the start last time due to the mini tournaments, and later on there were other places to discover new tactics (GS for one).

My question is more on how the AU will relate to a CIV strategy forum: it was a spin-off from the Civ3 strat forum once the latter became too disorganized and had too few new material. Now, if you launch AU and the CIV strat forum at the same time, you're going to run into overlaps.

So, where do you put the border between the forums? If you're talking about starting a couple of must read threads first to get the basic knowledge spread around, where do these belong?

DeepO

[nbarclay]

Initiallly, I think the best division would be to focus the AU forum on Apolyton University games and the lessons learned from them and to have the more general strategy discussions in the strategy forum. Later on, we may want to launch one or more Apolyton University projects aimed at consolidating information collected from both the strategy forum and AU games (and also places like CivFanatics) into a form that is easier to access and use than hunting through long threads of discussion.