Adventures and Epics for Civ 6 Discussion

[Yazilliclick]

Well in this case we know what content will be. Forum, wiki or website doesn't really change that somebody has to put the content there and update it as new stuff comes out I guess.

[T-hawk]

I've suggested a wiki before and set it up for any member to edit, but nothing ever came of it.

This is exactly why.  Nobody's going to keep up another platform with continuous maintenance every day or week for the lifetime of Civ 6.  The original Realms Beyond Diablo site predated web forums entirely and carried over into RBCiv when we were bouncing around between Network54 and Lurker Lounge.  Then died when Griselda stopped maintaining it because it just wasn't necessary.  A modern forum is suitable for everything we need.  Especially considering the MoM and MoO guys also under our roof in their own garages.  We don't need a wiki-style info repository for any of the Civs.  CFC and Wikia and Carlsguides already do that better than we would.

One platform.  Only the forum works because that's the real-time action is.  Everything that would originate on the forum then migrate somewhere else would represent a narrowing in the funnel for both creation and exposure. Everybody wants somebody else to do it but nobody's going to do it themselves.

Don't fragment.  Stay on one platform.  Archival forums and index posts are good-enough for permanency.  Civ 4's famous Cuban Isolationists has resided in its CFC forum thread for 11 years now and is perfectly happy there.

[scooter]

Well we currently have a community-maintained Google Doc full of extensive details of every single MP game we've played here. Given that, we obviously have a willingness to crowd-source this stuff. Also, I have 0 memory of this wiki, and I spend way too much of my life browsing these forums. I'm sort of interested in a wiki, actually. I'd probably contribute occasionally. I think having a reference section of some sort is a no-brainer.

I kind of like the idea of running "Adventures" for a few months during the patch chaos time as Civ6 Intros, and when the game stabilizes a bit we launch the Epics and ditch the Adventure moniker. That way we just accept that if a patch interrupts the Adventure, such is life. I don't see a way to avoid it so neatly this time.

[BRickAstley]

It's trivial to put a wiki up alongside the website and only give access to members. If people that are not named me have the desire to try to own it and fill it out I don't see a downside. I just wouldn't delete anything off the forums unless we've shown a wiki to be often used and updated.

[BRickAstley]

I kind of like the idea of running "Adventures" for a few months during the patch chaos time as Civ6 Intros, and when the game stabilizes a bit we launch the Epics and ditch the Adventure moniker. That way we just accept that if a patch interrupts the Adventure, such is life. I don't see a way to avoid it so neatly this time.

Also, I'm a fan of this idea as well, that seems to be a general mood of it. So does anyone have an idea for another adventure?

As a full disclosure, I had been planning and have a save ready for a rehash of one of our Epics, but since I'd be putting that forward with competitive goals, I can see it being better to wait on it.

[Sirian]

2) The original distinction between the Epics and Adventures was simply the game speed they were played on. Epics were done on Epic speed, Adventures were played on Normal speed.

This wasn't exactly true.  Epics were bigger and more competitive games.  Adventures were smaller and casualer and weirder.  They weren't defined by game speed. 

Sulla is correct. Game speed was the hard divider.

You are not wrong about the Adventures being more casual, more experimental, but I can multitask in design matters. I funneled the experimental stuff and also the most casual stuff to Adventures and put in the work to raise all the Epics to meet certain standards. I had the benefit of having been the creative director (and majority sponsor) of the Civ3 Epics and also of having worked on Civ4 for two years. I *knew* that Epic speed was set up to work as well as Normal speed in terms of balance. It also meant more brutality from barbarians, more room for warmongering (units wasted a lower percentage of game span on maneuvers and travel) and the slower speed put more oomph behind each individual tech choice and some other bits.

You can't go home again, though. I'd crossed the line over to developer and (for this franchise, at least) just couldn't operate as a fan any longer. I did try! So the Civ4 tournaments got handed off to others.


- Sirian

[T-hawk]

Sulla is correct. Game speed was the hard divider.

OK, understood. But I'd have to say that distinction didn't hold up. Most folks didn't get why there were two lines of games with that one seemingly trivial aspect being the divider. The extra craft we designers would put into Epic-level events wasn't really perceived by the audience. I think we're better served (and Brick seems to agree) for Civ 6 by running one line for everything on normal speed, with a rare exception at most.

The "more oomph per choice" of 2005 is the "why am I wasting 50% more time on this" of 2016. Attention spans have fragmented, that's reality.

[BRickAstley]

Maybe once we could do a Marathon game with a 'win as fast as possible' singular goal. Otherwise, anything longer than normal won't go so well.

[rho21]

Re the website (should this be a separate topic?): personally, I'd have a splash screen with a very short description of the ethos of RB, carefully written so it never needs to change - importantly, no mention of specific games. At the end of this, an invitation to join us on the forums, with link.

The idea is to make RB's core identity a bit more obvious to people running into the site for the first time, making our unique selling points clear without having to spot the right thread in the forum. All while not looking out of date within about a month.

I like the idea of a wiki for summarising the history of the site, with links to appropriate threads and subforums. A lot of work though. Once it reaches maturity, it could also be linked from the splash page.

[Sirian]

The "more oomph per choice" of 2005 is the "why am I wasting 50% more time on this" of 2016.  Attention spans have fragmented, that's reality.

I wasn't advocating for doing it the way we did for Civ4. Just clarifying what was done then and why.

Nor am I volunteering to help out now. Others know today's community (and Civ6) better than I do.


- Sirian