Adventure Three Results

[Sullla]

I've added the Adventure Three results to the ongoing Google Docs spreadsheet of Civ6 results. We ended up getting more participants than I expected, after factoring in the early reports from a few weeks ago. Congratulations to Behrens for winning the event and posting a very impressive Turn 103 finishing date.

I'd be interested in hearing opinions on the open reporting format for this event. From what I saw, it appeared to split up the closing day reporting without serving much other purpose; no one appeared to be posting updates as they played in Pitboss/PBEM fashion. We'll try it again at least one more time in a future game, but (IMO) the open reporting didn't seem that useful for this particular game.

[T-hawk]

no one appeared to be posting updates as they played in Pitboss/PBEM fashion.

Hmm, true. I guess what people wanted wasn't exactly the ongoing updates, but they do want to post and share as soon as they've played. Waiting four weeks is so 2005, nobody has that attention span now. </curmudgeon>

[Sullla]

Which is understandable, but with the result of the earlier reports generally getting lost in the shuffle and not seeing any discussion, whereas the reports that came in on Closing Day felt like they were part of a group, and saw a lot more responses. Anyway, like I said we'll try at least one more game with the open reporting style and see how things go. I do think that there was a method to Sirian's original setup though.

[timmy827]

Oops. I completely missed three early reports that wound up below the epic 1 results (unaghy, Thespian, and Athmos, though latter was basically a stub).  Will catch up on those this weekend.
That was just me being silly, though worth noting that apparently none of the other who reported near/on closing day posted a comment on the early birds either.  
Pretty sure I'm set in my ways of tradition (going back to 2007 was my first RB event I think) so I expect would still do closing day if I do another one like Adv3.  If the open reporting encourages a few more to play/post that's good but do agree there is some critical mass benefit to discussion to having the reports go up at same time.

[Cheater Hater]

As one of the critics of the old-style method of reporting (who still can't participate due to not willing to jump in on PC games for $60 anymore), the lack of response is interesting. While the idea of people not wanting to play military-focused SP games in Civ6 might be the main reason, there are some other things:

• T-Hawk's point of people wanting to report ASAP is the main thing I think has been discovered, but the point of reports getting buried is an important negative. Maybe making sub-forums for each game (like the MP games) would help things not get lost?
  
• The new pace could also be helped by Adventures coming out a little faster (maybe three weeks?). This seems better for this pre-Worldbuilder era of Civ6, where unscored games are mostly X leader, Y victory condition, Z mapscript which appears to be reasonably balanced, and the game's main purpose is allowing everyone to compare results on the same map.
  
• Is there a way to track the number of downloads of the save? I've always wondered what the ratio of games played-reports is, and while you're never going to get that, it might help explain trends (especially as a lot of Civ6 games seem to be ending up as either extremely early Conquest losses or grindy games that take forever to convert but are inevitable wins).