Gaspar, Lewwyn, et al go full Sartre

[Gaspar]

A few words on invitationals...

This was raised elsewhere on the forum, but since I'm not letting myself comment in that particular forum any longer, I thought I would discuss it here. This is I believe the 2nd time I've taken part in a game that was mostly arranged outside of the Civ General Forum, though there have been other attempts that didn't actually result in a game. Anyway, the purpose behind this sort of game is twofold:

1. Play with players of a relatively similar skill-level to make the game more competitive and interesting.
2. Play with players who have a similar outlook on the game as you.

I can't begin to understand why anyone would frown on the first point. We encourage new players to play greens games all the time. I actually think in a lot of ways those are less helpful because a lot of times its a players first game and I think you're better off starting in an open setup - it is good for the soul to get your ass handed to you at least once. Nonetheless, the concept is sound and I've never really heard anyone complain about them. The problem is that when you make a post in the general forum looking for players of a "similar skill level to yourself" you get two issues. Firstly, people have varying ideas of what that skill level is. And secondly, invariably a few people have to jump in and tell you you're a <insulting word to someone's manhood> for wanting to restrict at the top level. So, to me, self-selecting these games is the way to go.

Now, I didn't organize this game - partly because I don't really have enough personal contacts at RB to do so anymore, after my leaving for a while and the fact that I'm generally a giant jerk - Commodore did. I didn't jump in immediately but I've got some free time and I said so long as the game was base BTS and I could find a teammate, I would play. I wouldn't have generated this field, necessarily. I don't know enough about the players to do so. But I think its pretty obvious that even if you used the absolute worst possible ranking of the players in this game, they range from T4-T6 on a hypothetical RB pyramid. That should make the game for the individual players involved a hell of a lot more competitive than the usual open field which ranges from T1-T9. It might make some of the players who want a game but didn't get an invitation a bit salty, but hell, there was just a 34 player game opened. Its unlikely another full field was going to fill up anyway.

The second point, I'm less convinced on. PBEM38 was an invitational and the behavior of players at the end of that game was enough to drive me away from RB. There's been a definite sea change at this site as it has become more multiplayer oriented and the attitude of some of the players that sort of orientation attracts is exactly the sort of behavior that I come to RB to avoid. Don't get me wrong, RB has always had asses - I'm one of them. But there's a tendency to assign differences of opinion to character flaws that I recognize from online games with kids that is precisely why I don't play a lot of online multiplayer. I'm 37 years old, on my list of things I would like to do, arguing about my manhood with college kids is not very high. Nonetheless, after the last invitational I was in went down as it did I was hesitant to sign up for this one. But ultimately, I don't plan on getting as emotionally invested in this game as I have some of my past games, so even if Thoth gifts his whole civilization to Commodore who renames all of his units to Bad Manner and blankets them around my civ pillaging roads around my cities before finally killing me off, I'm not going to let it get to me in the same way. I think I mostly managed to not take things too personally in PB16 and I hope to improve on that here.

Anyway, the basic point is that I don't need any additional games against Mackoti or SevenSpirits to know they're better players than me and I don't need any additional games against Kuro or Nakor to know I'm better players than them. It doesn't mean I won't play in open fields in the future - I very probably will - and I sure as hell don't have to prove I'm willing to do so, I've got quite a few games played against open fields including the very best players RB has to offer to show I'm plenty willing to take my lumps and find my own fun in a losing effort. But every now and then its nice to play a game you didn't lose or win on T0 and an invitational is one way to do it.

There are players I would never play against again but that has nothing to do with their skill level and everything to do with their attitude. And if self-selecting whether or not I want to hang out with people I strongly dislike because of my perception of their antics is self-indulgent, well, color me guilty as charged.

[Ichabod]

Where is this discussion?

I don't have the slightest problem with games arranged this way. Let people have fun the way they want, if it's not harming anyone.

I don't think you are a jerk/ass. I think there has been some discussions concerning morality on RB that are a bit over the top and discussing about tha validity of "invitational games" seem to go on the same way. I try not to stress over this kind of stuff, but I'm pretty sure I'll be disappointed when I read the PB13 spoiler threads, because I have a nagging feeling that some people didn't appreciate my behaviour in that game very much.

And to Noble it up, I don't think PB38 was an invitational. I played that game and I do not remember having been invited.

[WilliamLP]

Thanks for the discussion. I'm just raising points here, I have absolutely no problem with a group of people who know each other setting up a game and reporting it. (How could I?) There's perhaps a point to be made about whether game closed to most of this site should get a number in the "RB Pitboss X" scheme, as if that matters, but I'm not the one to make it.

The problem is that when you make a post in the general forum looking for players of a "similar skill level to yourself" you get two issues. Firstly, people have varying ideas of what that skill level is.

What "skill level" is is also varying. This is a game with seven people who Commodore determined have similar skills. If you asked people to self select (and were willing to turn a few people down) would you get a worse skill balance once you really played the game, do you think? I'm not so sure. (For the sake of discussion, say the suggested criteria were something like: not reasonably described as one of the ten best players here, but believe you're capable of winning a game at the level just below that.)

The upside of this games's way is you don't have to hurt anyone's feelings overtly. A downside may be that maybe the game could lack a certain spice because the knowns are a little too known. E.g. PB13 was probably more intriguing because Dtay and TBS were in it, and nobody knew who they were, or at least I didn't. You may lose out by telling this kind of player to stick to a greens game.

Anyone's estimate of skill level will have large uncertainty, won't it? Maybe someone like TBS is actually Seven 2.0 and this will be his breakout game. Someone will probably have a stinker of a performance. People color their idea of "skill" with how they think the game should be played also. Maybe this is related to your second point.

I'm really interested to see how the balance of this game shakes out.

And secondly, invariably a few people have to jump in and tell you you're a <insulting word to someone's manhood> for wanting to restrict at the top level.

You mean nobody's doing that with this game now?

But ultimately, I don't plan on getting as emotionally invested in this game as I have some of my past games,

Easy enough to say that, isn't it?

[regoarrarr]

Where is this discussion?

It's in the PB13 lurker thread, which is why you probably haven't seen it yet

[NobleHelium]

I already told Gaspar that 38 was definitely not an invitational but he keeps trying to revise the history.

One restrictive part of that game was that you were replaying a combo that you had previously played and had regrets about, so that prevented absolute newbies from signing up. But I'm pretty sure I would have shooed them away regardless.

[Ichabod]

Where is this discussion?

It's in the PB13 lurker thread, which is why you probably haven't seen it yet

But I think I'll see it soon enough...

I already told Gaspar that 38 was definitely not an invitational but he keeps trying to revise the history.

[Lewwyn]

Where is this discussion?

It's in the PB13 lurker thread, which is why you probably haven't seen it yet

But I think I'll see it soon enough...

Not before me.


As someone who was initially invited to this game and eventually ended up not solo participating I guess I can see where someone might be offended. But to be honest, I was hoping to put something like this together myself in the future. Sometimes you just want to try playing with certain people. If you create open sign-ups then you can't and what if someone wants to play and you think, "No I don't really want to play a game with that person again." Well you can't really. Instead you either suck it up or drop out.

I don't think invitationals will become the norm or anything. But I do know that I personally like the idea and have tried to get people on board for other games.

I guess without seeing the actually complaint and discussion in pb13 lurker thread I can't make enough of an argument.

[NobleHelium]

And secondly, invariably a few people have to jump in and tell you you're a <insulting word to someone's manhood> for wanting to restrict at the top level.

Ironically, I said you're a <insulting word to someone's manhood> for failing to restrict 47 despite wanting to do so.

Anyway, the basic point is that I don't need any additional games against Mackoti or SevenSpirits to know they're better players than me and I don't need any additional games against Kuro or Nakor to know I'm better players than them.

I don't think you've actually played any games against Nakor.

[Gaspar]

Good discussion, fellas.

Where is this discussion?

There wasn't a discussion in the 13 lurker thread (or at least for Ichabod and Lewwyn, it won't be the part of the 13 lurker thread you'll remember) so much as a particular snide comment and I know some others have expressed similar misgivings in other games.

Thanks for the discussion. I'm just raising points here, I have absolutely no problem with a group of people who know each other setting up a game and reporting it. (How could I?) There's perhaps a point to be made about whether game closed to most of this site should get a number in the "RB Pitboss X" scheme, as if that matters, but I'm not the one to make it.

That's absurd - we all know each other through RB, the game is being reported on RB. Its more of a RB game than 14, and 14 absolutely counts anyway. Not to mention I can't possibly imagine that there's a single person who gives a crap about how the game is called/numbered.

What "skill level" is is also varying. This is a game with seven people who Commodore determined have similar skills. If you asked people to self select (and were willing to turn a few people down) would you get a worse skill balance once you really played the game, do you think? I'm not so sure. (For the sake of discussion, say the suggested criteria were something like: not reasonably described as one of the ten best players here, but believe you're capable of winning a game at the level just below that.)

The upside of this games's way is you don't have to hurt anyone's feelings overtly. A downside may be that maybe the game could lack a certain spice because the knowns are a little too known. E.g. PB13 was probably more intriguing because Dtay and TBS were in it, and nobody knew who they were, or at least I didn't. You may lose out by telling this kind of player to stick to a greens game.

Well, I don't think anyone is advocating we do away with non-invitational games, or even make them not-the-norm. And if we had posted in general saying below X skill level but above Y skill level well there's zero doubt we would have had this exact discussion for about 400 posts and lots of people would have gotten upset. I don't like to turn people away from a general game anyway, because I generally believe inclusion is positive for the community and this wasn't exclusion so much as self-selection.

Anyone's estimate of skill level will have large uncertainty, won't it? Maybe someone like TBS is actually Seven 2.0 and this will be his breakout game. Someone will probably have a stinker of a performance. People color their idea of "skill" with how they think the game should be played also. Maybe this is related to your second point.

I'm really interested to see how the balance of this game shakes out.

TBS isn't Seven 2.0, because nobody is Seven 2.0. But he might be one of the 10 best players on the site - I don't think so, yet, but this could be the game he proves that. That's perfectly fine as well. Anyway, the point isn't that we necessarily have the world's most balanced field but rather that we started with an attempt at it. All this is overstated for me, truthfully. I was invited to a game and accepted the invitation. I would never have developed this game if for no other reason than I prefer PBEM, so I would have built a smaller game. I absolutely would build a game, though, and make no apologies for that.

I already told Gaspar that 38 was definitely not an invitational but he keeps trying to revise the history.

One restrictive part of that game was that you were replaying a combo that you had previously played and had regrets about, so that prevented absolute newbies from signing up. But I'm pretty sure I would have shooed them away regardless.

The game started as an invitational that we couldn't fill. The idea of Second Chance Saloon was mine, because I wanted another bash at Izzy of China and suspected there were other players who felt similarly. There may have been a signup thread, but we had discussed before it was ever posted with Commodore, Davy and Yuri. Only Ichabod's inclusion was through the signup thread. On a second note, I think the idea behind the second chances was pretty good and I'm surprised nobody else has run one since.

As someone who was initially invited to this game and eventually ended up not solo participating I guess I can see where someone might be offended. But to be honest, I was hoping to put something like this together myself in the future. Sometimes you just want to try playing with certain people. If you create open sign-ups then you can't and what if someone wants to play and you think, "No I don't really want to play a game with that person again." Well you can't really. Instead you either suck it up or drop out.

I don't think invitationals will become the norm or anything. But I do know that I personally like the idea and have tried to get people on board for other games.

I guess without seeing the actually complaint and discussion in pb13 lurker thread I can't make enough of an argument.

Pretty much what Lewwyn said.

[Ichabod]

Let me say that I'm pretty disappointed with people that don't choose their insults. "<insulting word to someone's manhood>" should not be allowed!

I propose that we start considering insulting someone without choosing your insult as something morally wrong.