Is course 101 being thought out?

[Arrian]

Heh, a huge map would probably kill my computer. Standard epic will be fine for me. I've a feeling that I'll enjoy the pacing better. But for now I'm sticking with normal speed... plenty of time to try Epic down the road.

-Arrian

[Dubhghlas]

Hmmm.

1. I am a teacher by trade. I think that you are incorrect in your evaluation of how to best present simple basic lessons.

2. Epic-Huge is the only way to play a real SP game at home! It allows so much more in the way of decisions (and recriminations over your decisions).

3. However, I suggested the shorter time span simply because it takes less time to complete, would likely offer the same chance to learn, and therefore be more likely to be completed by all who participate.

[DeepO]

Originally posted by Dubhghlas
Hmmm.

1. I am a teacher by trade. I think that you are incorrect in your evaluation of how to best present simple basic lessons.

I was an assistant professor for 3 years, and have more then a little experience in industrial trainings and knowledge dissemination within companies. But that's besides the point: there were two things I wanted to say:

1. religious track is not the same as SPI track, on the contrary. SPI goes better with warfare than with religions. Or better yet, SPI allows for games where a lot of different civics combinations are used, many of them good for warfare, many of them good for building. Some of them even good for religions.

2. I think that right now, main priority should fall on understanding civics better. If you can do this in a war-scenario, all the better. If you can do this in a more balanced scenario (where some will go for war, some not), also nice. What's a necessity, though, is that you can compare. Different situations --> different civics.
Right now, with the basics covered by anyone (I mean, everyone will more or less now how to use cats), it's IMHO very important to get up to speed to civics, and in which situation to use what. Diplo is also important, but civics are still not that well understood, it seems.

DeepO

[Blastum]

Hello everyone. This is my first post here on Apolyton; though I have been surfing here for a while. Just wanted to say I am very impressed with AU and that AU100 was a blast. I beat AU100 with about a 19500 score at monarch; so I guess I don't totally suck at this game like I had originally thought. Huge/Epic/Island maps are much harder at Monarch level, apparantly.

I am looking forward to the next lesson, I think that people have brought up valid lesson plans; covering the big 3 topics war/enonomy/religion. All these topics should be covered, does it really matter which one is first?

Anyway, just wanted to let you know how much I enjoyed the lessons; great work!

[joncnunn]

I perfer normal size maps and normal production rates.

Either Egypt or Louis XIV would be a good next pick.

Both are Creative so we can see the +2 culture per city in action.
Egypt is Religious, and Louis is Industrious.

[Arrian]

Originally posted by Blastum
I beat AU100 with about a 19500 score at monarch; so I guess I don't totally suck at this game like I had originally thought. Huge/Epic/Island maps are much harder at Monarch level, apparantly.

The reason you probably felt a difference in difficulty was that the scenario that got set up was somewhat flawed: the AI didn't get its free units (on Monarch, this would mean a free worker). It still had its other bonuses, but that worker is a big deal. The other thing, obviously, is that we had awesome land.

-Arrian

[Blastum]

Yep. I read about the trouble of scaling the maps with the difficulty levels. Unfortunately I don't know enough about scripting to be much help solving that problem.

Courses could be generated as 1 map with several difficulty levels; but that may lead to a bit of confusion if there are 6 files/difficulty levels for map 101.

However; if the point of AU is to learn strategy then it isn't really neccessary for the difficulty of the AU courses to correspond to the single-player generated games. As long as there is good learnin' happening, then it doesn't really matter.

Just my 2 1/2 cents.

[Strollen]

Let me put in a strong agreement with DeepO on the need to make sure that AU course actually match the standard AI bonus.

I got into AU100 late and didn't bother to finish the game or post an AR (I bad). I normally play on Monarch and restart if I get a bad position. So for AU 100, I figured well if I can beat this one with a Random position, it is time for me to move up to Emporator.

In AU100 I played really badly, lost a lot of units to barbarians, and tried to build the pyramids in a dumb location etc.
Despite making all of these mistakes I was still leading the game at the end of the classical era. I am pretty sure it was as a result of the missing units the AI didn't get.

As for theme, I vote for a AU 100B, with a slightly different twist maybe a Pangea map or something.

[joncnunn]

As long as each file is clearly marked with the difficulty level, I don't see the problem with having a seperate file per level.

[Blastum]

After just having my butt handed to me playing a normal map on monarch (again); I have decided that it would nice to see several game files at different difficulties.

I would really like to play a course through on an easier level, then replay it on a harder level. I think I might try out the au100 map again at monarch; and just give the AI a worker with the map editor.

Steep learning curve without some DAR's to study, tho.

[DrSpike]

I think we should consider having a suggested level for the game. It will make for a better comparison game, and we might not even need to be a scenario then if we can play from a normal save.

Of course, the suggested level should be something low like Prince to start with.

If the makers are willing to set it up as a scenario where difficulty can be chosen, that's fine for those who absolutely do not want to play the suggested level. I personally don't care what level we play, as long as more people play the same game.

[joncnunn]

DrSpike, saying everybody has to play at the same level would decrease the number of people who participate.

Those who have already won on Emperor just wouldn't find Prince challenging enough to play.

Conversely anyone who hasn't won on Prince wouldn't try an Emperor one because it wouldn't be fun.

[DrSpike]

I'm not sure you can speak for everyone.

I for one don't care what level we play, within reason. Obviously it could be chosen to be neutral territory, like Prince or Monarch.

As to the challenge, well the challenge is in the comparison of your game to other players, not the challenge of the game per se. It is just as hard to play a perfect game on noble as it is on Deity.

[Arrian]

I personally strongly favor the ability to play AU games at any difficulty.

And yeah, maybe we should start thinking about setting up the next game?

-Arrian

[DrSpike]

How about the ability to play at any difficulty but with a suggested level that people will play if they feel able to?