Scenario Design Contest number 5

[beingofone]

Someone once said that " A giraffe looks like it was put together by a committee, its neck to long, head to small, and legs way to long. "

Someone has to make decisions otherwise it will go into limbo land and endless discussion. Techumseh is just trying to get the ball rolling. I am sure before the rules are final he will listen and be open to ideas.

Here are my ideas

I think the graphics should only be worth 1 point because I am graphically challenged. Ancient history should score a bonus of 50 points.

Just Kidding

[curtsibling]

So we are being rail-roaded into doing historical scenarios?

So no dinosuars, Atlanteans, or aliens?

The subject should be left open I say!

The scoring should be on coherency, not merely historical accuracy!

.

[curtsibling]

[SIZE=1]
Ditch the sound category and award the extra points to the graphics. I won't be the first to complain at that.

Sounds are important, It is not hard to make a design that just uses the existing CIV2 sound folder.

And I thought you detested over-emphasis on graphics?

.

[Leonidas]

I have to agree with Curt on his two above posts:

Leave the design of the scenario open - let imaginations rule the day...

And I always play with sounds on.

For me playing a Civ 2 scenario is a visual, auditory and tactile experience...

[homer]Mmmmm... keyboard... mouse....[/homer]

[techumseh]

Originally posted by curtsibling
So we are being rail-roaded into doing historical scenarios?

So no dinosuars, Atlanteans, or aliens?

The subject should be left open I say!

The scoring should be on coherency, not merely historical accuracy!

.

Curt! Snap out of it! (slaps face) Read: "Historical, Mythological or Fictional". Fictional includes Fantasy, and Sci-Fi. Geeze.

[N35t0r]

Originally posted by Mercator

If N35t0r is interested in making the map..

I won't be able to touch it until after this weekend, and even then I won't hae lots of free time, but I'm willing to work on it...

[edit:]

Merc, what projection is that? It looks squished...

[edit 2:]

Do you actually take the tiles to measure the same horizontally as vertically?

[curtsibling]

Originally posted by techumseh


Curt! Snap out of it! (slaps face) Read: "Historical, Mythological or Fictional". Fictional includes Fantasy, and Sci-Fi. Geeze.

Blurble...Bwah? What!?!

Oh thanks, I needed that!!

(OK - My concerns are excorcised!)

[Panda]

Originally posted by techumseh
I'm not sure you read this far. I happy to take it out, but that puts those who try to represent a historical, mythological, or fiction-based scenario at a disadvantage. These scenarios are lots more work.

I apologise, as I hadn't read that footnote at the time.

Edit: and I apologise again as innovation is weighted equally with accuracy, I guess factual and fiction are on a level playing field.

(Edi: or did this mean technically innovative with the game mechanics?)

I guess there is always a question of emphasis, and my personal tastes are not so different from your own, merely less prescriptive. Ergo:

Environment - 30%
Inc Graphics, Sounds, parameters, all text files bar events.

Playability - 50%
Inc events, bugs, map, early game, mid game, end game, replayability, technical innovations

Innovation and General care - 20%
inc accuracy, documentation

I like that you'd stressed the importance of playability throughout, and that if a scenario became tedious mid-game and is simply never completed then that should be reflected in the judging. Replayability is more a minor thing, such as alternative factions/starting positions/difficulties, even alternative scenario files (*.alt). Playability should be a trump: as long as the gameplay continues to be enjoyable it shouldn't really matter about even glaring errors. Remember ColdWarX?

As a designer intending to compete I'd appreciate comments for each as a justification, and that all scorings should be made public when judging has closed. And that is all I have to say.

[techumseh]

Thanks, Panda.

Have another look at the contest page and see if the language is clearer. Instead of "Historical Accuracy", it now says "Consistent Theme".

http://www.tecumseh.150m.com/Scenario%20League/SLpage6.html

I think we want a pretty tight scoring key, if everyone and their dog is gonna be judging. It reduces subjectivity and makes sure wildly different approaches aren't applied.

Something that is very important for feedback has been overlooked by everyone. It's the handicapping system, and I think it's vital to get newbs to participate. The definitions of beginner and intermediate need approval, as do the scoring factors, which are significant.

beginner (never posted a scenario) +50%
intermediate (no more than 1 posted scenario) +25%

[curtsibling]

Looking good!

I take the points listed are the maximum any category can score?

[techumseh]

Yes. Handicapping system?

[techumseh]

newbies will have a BIG advantage!

OK, I want to make sure everyone knows what I'm proposing and are OK with it. I want to level the playing field for new scenario designers, to encourage them to enter the contest. So here's what I'm suggesting:

If you have never posted a scenario, here or elsewhere, you are a Beginner, and your score will be multiplied by 1.5.

If you have only posted one scenario, here or elsewhere, you are an Intermediate, and your score will be multiplied by 1.25.

I don't want any complaints after the contest results are announced that this is unfair. Read the fine print!

[Cyrion]

Re: newbies will have a BIG advantage!

Originally posted by techumseh
I want to level the playing field for new scenario designers, to encourage them to enter the contest.

Sounds fine!

If you have never posted a scenario, here or elsewhere, you are a Beginner, and your score will be multiplied by 50%.

If you want to give an advantage, then I suppose you mean 150% ??

If you have only posted one scenario, here or elsewhere, you are an Intermediate, and your score will be multiplied by 25%.

And here 125%??

If that's the case, then I think it's a good idea!

[our_man]

beginner (never posted a scenario) +50%

Am I the only one here that thinks a 50% boost for beginners is too large? There's a good chance with a bonus like that an extremely average scenario might win the competition. I know we're trying to encourage new designers, but such a boost is uncalled for, and to be honest I would find it a bit patronising.

Might I suggest 25% for beginners and 10% for intermediates?

[Mercator]

Originally posted by techumseh
That looks about right.

OK

Could you economise on wasted space if you rotated the map ~45 degrees to the right?

Sure, that's possible.

A medium size map would be best, as the work increases in proportion to the area covered. Also the AI can only work properly on maps of a reasonable size.

Well, the AI shouldn't start having problems until the map is much, much bigger... But you're right about a bigger map increasing the amount of work, obviously. My main concern, though, is that I'm hardly familiar with Indian history. That means I don't really have any idea what sort of scenarios people could come up with, or how important certain regions or cities are. Making the map too small might make certain topics unworkable.

How long do you need?

A month (or two)?

Originally posted by N35t0r
I won't be able to touch it until after this weekend, and even then I won't hae lots of free time, but I'm willing to work on it...

How long do you think it would take you? And if you're going to do it, you don't have to use that image and sketch I provided earlier. You just make the map from scratch as you would normally do it.

[edit:] Merc, what projection is that? It looks squished...

It's the Lambert Azimuthal projection. I chose it because (a) the website I use has it and (b) it's an equal-area projection.

[edit 2:] Do you actually take the tiles to measure the same horizontally as vertically?

Yes, I do take tiles to be the same size horizontally as vertically, as it should be, IMNSHO. I make my maps to look natural in the radar map. They look squished on the main map, because you're looking at in a bird's eye view.


@techumseh: I think the handicapping system is good.
But um, yes, our_man is quite right. I don't really know what the "optimal" values could be...

I'm with Panda on the scoring, though. I'd prefer something less prescriptive. But you also have good points. Perhaps graphics and sounds can be combined into art, and rules, events and scenario parameters combined into, um, technical implementation or something... I'm thinking, say, something halfway between your proposal and the way SLeague scenario reviews have been done.

In any case, I think it's essential that the judges also give a short motivation for their choices. Not just a list of points. I think requiring a motivation will ensure subjectivity more than detailed scoring will.