A new AU idea

[Dominae]

Inspired by CFC's GOTM tournaments (even though I've never participated in one), I think we should try something new with our next AU game. Here's the idea:

DARs.

What does that stand for? During-Action Report. The idea is to create multiple spoiler threads for specific stages of the game. This could be based on turns elapsed, or Age advancement, or whatever. We could, for example, have a spoiler thread for 1000BC, 10AD, 1000AD, etc.

The goal is simply to get a clearer picture of what's going in each others' games, thereby helping us learn from each other. AARs are all fine and good, but most of the time they either 1) leave out a lot of strategic detail because the player is so glad to have finished (and/or probably forgets most of it!), or 2) just list accomplishments without any mention of how the work involved ("then I got the Sistine", "I took care of the Zulus around 200AD sometime", etc.). I'm not criticizing anyone's AARs. Rather, I'm proposing an alternative that will help in the basic goal of AU: to learn from each other.

Like the "QuickStart challenges" at CFC, each player would hopefully keep a timeline of important events leading up to a report date. Sure, it could require a little more work overall, but then again each "installment" would be a lot less daunting than writing a full AAR. Plus, it would be more interesting to read, because it's easier to picture what's going over the course of 80 turns instead of 300.

Thoughts?


Dominae

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

Dominae,

I think that's a great idea, and might I throw out another suggestion?

It would be great if the pace of AU games could be slowed somewhat. I only say that because I'd love to participate in them, but my civ time in general has to be slowed down. I've seen 3 AU courses go by without being able to participate in them, as the "pros" quickly advance to the mid and late game in the amount of time it takes me just to get to 1 AD.

Anyhow... just a thought. Your proposal is good.

[vmxa1]

I think you would need to discribe the layout and info you want. I have put up step by step with each worker move, type reports in Moo2 thread, but I doubt anyone wants that in CivIII.
When I play AU208 and now that I am running down AU401, I log each significant event. I did not put that in a report as it would be too long and boring.
Something like :
3400bc captured Rome, war with Iroq
2430BC 2 regular and 1 conscript warrior at Salamanca
4 archers in route
30ad great leader, have Oracle and Pryamids
170ad Switched to Monarchy
That sort of thing, but not every battle or every improvement or even new research.
So what would be useful? I had never made an AAR so I was not aware of what would be needed to make sense out the report.

[Nor Me]

Firstly, although like you I've never played it, my thoughts on parts of the GOTM system (which is probably relevant to the discussion):

1. The reason they have to have so many spoiler threads is that they're trying to be competitive as well. This is a good solution given their goals but it's not perfect. In particular the parts of any one game are divided at points that are often artificial from the perspective of that game. It would be nice if people did things like link them but it does make them more difficult to follow than AARs.

2. On the QSC in particular, I think it can be counterproductive. So much detail is nice but it's not released until after the game has been finished. It then takes the attention away from the first spoiler thread which people will be reading after they've played that part of the game. By next month everyone will have forgotten what the start may have been like. There is then little discussion of it afterwards.

On the current AU system:

We do have DARs! Just look at the spoiler thread. Some people post a lot while they are playing the game and others more afterwards. I often wonder what balance I should have between the two. I suspect I'll have to post AARs duplicating what I've already posted.

Also players ask for detail from others and get it. Some players have posted very detailed AARs, just look at 301.


So what you're proposing is to formalise this. The difficulty that first springs to mind is that we have to decide what is interesting before playing the game. I'm not sure how accurate alexman's predictions of what would happen in AU208 were.

[Arrian]

I often do DARs - reporting on what I've done so far. In fact, I don't really do AARs... it's a string of DARs.

MARS!

-Arrian

[Dominae]

vmxa1, IMO the best things to include in a report are the thought processes that go into the decision you make. Saying that you founded such-and-such city at such-and-such a date is relatively uninteresting (unless you decided to build it very early without the help of a Granary, for instance). Your reports a good, so I'll not elaborate further, but I think it's important to keep in mind that others read the reports to be entertained, and a list of facts does not do this (usually). The point with the DARs is to get everyone to write periodically as they play the game, hopefully bringing out thought processes since these are still fresh in peoples' minds as they write.

So what you're proposing is to formalise this.

Exactly. Most people write DARs when they take a break to go to sleep or to work (or the wife makes them stop). I think it would be better if everyone could compare their games at set stages. True, number of tuns is an arbitrary measure, but I think it works well: after x turns, what did you accomplish in comparison to everyone else in the same amount of time? The DARs need not be very long, and in fact they should not be. With ~4 DARs per scenario, people should have ample opportunity to describe their game.


Dominae

[Arrian]

I know I'm sloppy when I do my DARs. I don't keep notes while I play, so my DARs tend to be written from memory (without access to the game usually) the next day. My memory for Civ games is shockingly good, but far from perfect. Further, it's hard to explain things properly without adequate screenshots.

AU207 was my best effort in that regard, and it still wasn't all that good.

Doing really good DARs that take the reader(s) into your game takes work.

Like you say, it should be "this is how I set about getting the Sistine and it worked (or didn't work)" is better than "I got the Sistine." Except that the former requires that the player think to document what he/she is doing as he/she is doing it so that they can properly illustrate later.

So basically I'm just whining about putting more work into my DARs.

I agree with your basic premise, though.

-Arrian

[Dominae]

Originally posted by Arrian
Except that the former requires that the player think to document what he/she is doing as he/she is doing it so that they can properly illustrate later.

One of the best ways to learn is to actively "meta-learn", meaning you think about what you're learning.

Anyway, I'm not trying to force everyone to write super-duper AARs or DARs. I actually think that if we make DARs more formal in structure, people will make them better without even noticing it.

"Hm, well, it's 1000BC, and that was some pretty exciting stuff that happened in the past 3000 years. Time to go get a beer and write my DAR while it's still fresh in my mind."

That's basically what I'm aiming for (although you can replace the beer with whatever you want).


Dominae

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

Originally posted by Dominae
"Hm, well, it's 1000BC, and that was some pretty exciting stuff that happened in the past 3000 years. Time to go get a beer and write my DAR while it's still fresh in my mind."

That's basically what I'm aiming for (although you can replace the beer with whatever you want).

"Hmmm, time to get my axe and smash this computer into a thousand little pieces while my game's still fresh my mind."

(just a joke of course)

[Arrian]

Hmm, if there is beer involved, I guess this is ok. Can't be that bad.

-Arrian

[vmxa1]

I like what you are proposing, but I am not sure about the entertainment aspect.
I thought the stories thread was for that. I know I am not up making it fun to read. I thought the idea was to say what steps you were taking and how that worked, so we could see the ways that work and maybe even an optimal path.
Not that I did either one, but I at least now will try to think of it before doing anything else.
I do enjoy some of the ones people post, but I also hope to see what people are up to and see if I want to incorporate any of it.
Understand that I see some doing things differently and often better, but choose not to use those technics as I am also about fun. What is fun for one, may or may not be for another.
IOW the best method does not have to be used.

[nbarclay]

My one big concern about using multiple threads for AU AARs/DARs is the competition it would create between AU threads and other strategy threads. One of the reasons the system works so well with the GOTMs is that there's a whole separate GOTM discussion area. If we could get a separate forum here for Apolyton University instead of having it be part of the Strategy forum, that would make using several threads per game significantly more practical.

[Dominae]

Is that really a big concern, Nathan? I mean, with 4-5 threads per AU game, AU would definitely monopolize the top of the Strat boards, but it's not like there would be no space left for normal Strat stuff.


Dominae

[MrWhereItsAt]

I too would like to see the time betwixt AU games lengthened a little. When I get home I had hoped to try the latest one quickly. Perhaps I won't be able to, if there's already another one out by then.

AARs, DARs - whatever. I know I'm not compelled to do them if I really don't want to - I just want to be able to try a full AU course!

[Theseus]

I like it... I've been very frustrated with MYSELF about keeping up with the courses, and even more with the paucity / brevity of my own AARs. I recently re-read the Son of SVC thread, and (aside from having forgotten how intense it was), I was reminded how much more fun it can be to *really* report on one's in-game thinking.

Speaking strictly from my own, time-constrained perspective, it would be good if we: 1) slowed down a bit, and 2) identified non-turn-determined and in-game-relevant pauses (e.g., meet the first AI civ or discover a tech or discover a new continent, etc.), and used those for DARs.

Does anyone know if 'poly supports further nested threads, as MZO has been doing?

A further issue... once an AU game thus reported is 'over' (ever?), won;t we have a compilation issue?

Good thinking, though, Dom... I know I need something to help me take notes and report better.