A New Forum: Civ2 Research

[William Keenan]

I would like to have a forum where civ research geeks like me, few in number as we are, can post and discuss the formulas and game mechanics we have uncovered. Stuff like how does civ calculate the number of beakers needed to gain your next advance? What is the % chance for a vet spy to destry city walls? and may others.

Thanks in advance for considering my request.

[MarkG]

can you produce a list of such threads that already exists so that we can have an idea on the kind of volume the forum will have?

[Winston]

I'd support this idea. Sounds very natural and useful as well. There are so many things to keep track of, and the subject doesn't really fall under the category of either strategy or general/community.

[William Keenan]

Mark, the volume of posts would be very low, which is a good thing. The problem now is that it is very hard to find the particular threads when one needs to because they could be in any number of forums; General, Stratagy, Creation, Sleague, etc.

Here are some recent threads:
Diplomats and Spies
Demographics
GNP
ToT Advance Slots

Here is an old one:
Beaker Reseach

[Paul Hanson]

I must say, I agree with Ming on this one. This sort of thing is covered in both the Civ2 Creation and Scenario League forums on a fairly regular basis. A whole new forum wouldn`t really be needed.

[William Keenan]

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by Paul Hanson on 02-23-2001 01:53 PM</font>
I must say, I agree with Ming on this one. This sort of thing is covered in both the Civ2 Creation and Scenario League forums on a fairly regular basis. A whole new forum wouldn`t really be needed.
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

That is just my point - This sort of thing is covered in both the Civ2 Creation and Scenario League forums - and in Stratagy and in General. That's why I feel it needs its own home.

Ming, I don't see any confilict between this and the Great Library at all. In fact, I think they would be very complementary.

I see the Civ2 Research forum not as a place to link other threads to (as the GL thread does), but rather as a place for these threads to be developed.

[Ming]

Those threads could just as easily be developed in the Civ Stratagey forum... as they already do As long as there is "minimal" activity in that type of thread, it will stay on the first page. And if not, then there really isn't a need for a new forum...

------------------
Ming
CivII & Off-Topic Forum Moderator
Ming@Apolyton.net

[William Keenan]

Research threads do take a long time to develop, Ming. That is why they would benefit from there own forum.

Research is not stratagy, so why should it be lumped into stratagy?

[Urban Ranger]

I'll have to say research <strong>is</strong> part of strategy. Why would you care about this if you aren't interested in optimising your game? Granted, there are a handful of those who are interested in knowledge itself, but they generally wear white lab coats and have crazy hair
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by Urban Ranger (edited February 23, 2001).]</font>

[Ming]

Yeah... many of these things have already been discussed. Instead of a new forum, links to such threads could be put in the "Great Library" thread that is always at the top of the Civ Strategy Forum.
As new threads are developed, just provide a link so people can find them. That IS the purpose of the GL thread

I really don't think a whole new forum is needed

------------------
Ming
CivII & Off-Topic Forum Moderator
Ming@Apolyton.net

[Slow Thinker]

I monitor two Civ2 forums only: "General/Help/Community" and "Strategy" (I don't know "Creation and Scenario League" forums ). I think most of threads comes under one of following category:

A. How to play (strategies, tips,tricks...)
B. How it works (rules, facts, formulas, game mechanics...)
C. Others

I suppose the primal intention was to keep C in "General/Help/Community" and A and B in "Strategy".
(Maybe, Ming should always move threads to the appropriate forums: "Why can't I be a princess?" belongs to "General/Help/Community", "Info: diplomats and spies" belongs to "Strategy"
(problem is that html is off in "Strategy"; why?))

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by William Keenan </font>
Ming, I don't see any confilict between this and the Great Library at all. In fact, I think they would be very complementary.

<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>
Yes, Great Library covers the group A. ("Info: diplomats and spies" thread is a try how to cover B.)

I see William Keenan speaks about a small subset of B. I think the determination of the group B is natural and shouldn't be narrowed.
Group B comprises about half of "Strategy" forum and a small part of "General/Help/Community".
I think to divide "Strategy" to groups A and B would be useful but it isn't necessary.
<hr>
I think another problem is more urgent: Group B should be categorized:
When I built "Info: diplomats and spies" thread and browsed through Apolyton, I noticed the same problems were discussed in couple different threads. People usually start a new thread since it is hard to find appropriate past thread.

One possible solution are subthreads, not accepted warmly here
(<A HREF="http://apolyton.net/forums/Forum20/HTML/001243-2.html"> Too much of information </A>
).

Other solution is to affix keywords (demographics window, combat system, dip/spy, caravan, terrain improvement...) to threads.
The set of all keywords would be released.
Keywords assigned to a thread would be visible on the forum window and used within search function.
Moderator (or every Apolytoner) would continuously add keywords to a thread (if needed).

[Ming]

Again... the purpose of the GL is to be a place people can go to when looking for information. If you find a thread that has important information in it, post a link to it in the GL. A real simple thing to do


------------------
Ming
CivII & Off-Topic Forum Moderator
Ming@Apolyton.net

[William Keenan]

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by Ming on 02-24-2001 10:51 AM</font>
Again... the purpose of the GL is to be a place people can go to when looking for information. If you find a thread that has important information in it, post a link to it in the GL. A real simple thing to do
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

Again Ming, your answer does not address the request. I'm not looking for a place to link threads to, rather a place to develop those threads.

BTW I don't have crazy hair nor do I even own a white lab coat, however, I can definatly claim membership in that handful of those who are interested in knowledge itself.

[Ming]

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by William Keenan on 02-24-2001 01:20 PM</font>
Again Ming, your answer does not address the request. I'm not looking for a place to link threads to, rather a place to develop those threads.

<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

But your request has already been answered. That is what the Civ Strategy Forum is for. People like Xin Yu have been tearing the game down for years there.

The first page of theCiv Strategy Forum usually covers threads going back 5 to 7 days. So any thread that has ANY life to it will be easy to find. If responses to threads take longer than that, then there isn't a need for a whole forum dedicated to just that

------------------
Ming
CivII & Off-Topic Forum Moderator
Ming@Apolyton.net

[William Keenan]

Well, Ming, we disagree; IMHO Reseach is not Strategy.