I watched one minute. Looked at the time total, then closed the window.
I got the opposite feedback on the other videos: they were too short.
I think people who regularly watch livestreams want long videos they can put on and half pay attention to while they do other things. Normal people want short videos they can just watch in one go. Never the two shall meet.
I watched one minute. Looked at the time total, then closed the window.
I got the opposite feedback on the other videos: they were too short.
I think people who regularly watch livestreams want long videos they can put on and half pay attention to while they do other things. Normal people want short videos they can just watch in one go. Never the two shall meet.
Counter-strike got the feedback they should ban the AWP.
Way too long. Once I realized I wasn't going to see Scott point of view I skipped forwards in 10 minute chunks and didn't feel like I learned anything new about the game.
Scott only actually made, across all the game, a few videos.
The worst thing is that the REAL civ videos I want to share are for the big game we're playing. But I can't share them until the game is done or nearly so for fear of spies.
So I sat through all of it and want my 50 minutes back. 50 minutes might be worthwhile if it was 50 minutes of actual new content, this just repeated the first 5-10 minutes over and over until it finally ended. It consists of: 1. There's no way Scott can beat me, look at these #1 demographics! He sucks! LOLOLOLOL *twirls evil mustache* 2. I'm going to harass Scott with these units. 3. My army and strategy is amazing! There's no way Scott has any idea of what I'm about to do. Although his army is pretty close in size to mine. 4. Farming barbarians for culture. 5. The game will end very soon, so it's not worth it to do religion or culture (but the video continues on for 50+ turns). 6. Rym preening for 50 minutes.
It feels like these were a series of videos strung together without any thought to actual presentation. Repetition through many short videos spaced out over a few weeks works because consumers have time to digest and forget them by the time the next video comes out. In a longer video you can't repeat 5-10 minutes over and over and present it as new information.
If this is the new format you want to go with take notes on what you've presented previously or watch the previous section before you take your turn for the next segment so you're not repeating yourself ad nauseam. There was no information gained from watching the whole video versus just the first 5-10 minutes. You could even re-edit this one with the first 5-10 minutes, skip to where you declare war and retreat, then skip to the end with your future plans.
I think the problem is that the solo games with Scott don't really go anywhere. They're all the same "Scott doesn't expand, Rym surrounds him, game over."
I think people who regularly watch livestreams want long videos they can put on and half pay attention to while they do other things. Normal people want short videos they can just watch in one go. Never the two shall meet.
Mildly disagree - there is some overlap. For example, if I'm watching videos to kill time, I favor short, interesting videos. If I'm playing, say, Elite Dangerous and I'm making a Hutton Orbital run, or running BB missions, I need something I can watch, but not have to be watching constantly, or constantly switching videos - because if I don't pay attention, I'm liable to get interdicted and shot out of the sky, or smear myself up the side of a station while trying to land.
+1 Churba. It really depends on the context. Sometimes I wanna watch an interesting video. That's when a short-form CGPGrey style video gets my undivided attention.
Sometimes I want a solution to the problem where: what I'm doing doesn't require 100% of my attention and if I don't have something else to augment it I'm liable to get bored and stop doing it.
There are 1000 other contexts that exist as a fully fledged human with diverse interests and habbits. Those are just easy ones.
Scott let me settle in a huge area with good resources and good defensive terrain near his capital. He had no screening forces at all on his frontiers. The only thing slowing me down was my own caution: I could have pushed way, way harder way way earlier with basically zero risk knowing now how the game was progressing on his side.
Is it ever smart to build a wonder instead of a second city?
Yeah, I don't really understand how Rym gets away with such rapid expansion. If I build Settlers, it takes way too damn long. It slows my population growth. I lose the opportunity cost of the other things I could have built besides a Settler. The unhappiness from the new city brings my civ down even more. I can get away with building one or maybe two early cities, but beyond that it just ruins everything. I have to wait a long time before I get enough excess resources and happiness before I can expand. The only exception is if there is a really really great spot with luxury resources, and I can get workers on them fast enough.
It's hard to push early game, so the long-term benefits of a second city outweigh the damage from the second-city opportunity cost, especially since you can generally find a really good spot. I generally try to make my third or fourth build a Settler, timed to start right after I grow a pop to minimize the "the city could have expanded in the middle of building a thing" op cost.
Wonders take way too long to be spending your entire civ's production on one.
A lot of the opening plays in Civ5 leverage Liberty to get the extra Worker and Settler. If you can get a decent early pantheon that provides a steady amount of culture that would allow you to produce in parallel.
Comments
I think people who regularly watch livestreams want long videos they can put on and half pay attention to while they do other things. Normal people want short videos they can just watch in one go. Never the two shall meet.
1. There's no way Scott can beat me, look at these #1 demographics! He sucks! LOLOLOLOL *twirls evil mustache*
2. I'm going to harass Scott with these units.
3. My army and strategy is amazing! There's no way Scott has any idea of what I'm about to do. Although his army is pretty close in size to mine.
4. Farming barbarians for culture.
5. The game will end very soon, so it's not worth it to do religion or culture (but the video continues on for 50+ turns).
6. Rym preening for 50 minutes.
It feels like these were a series of videos strung together without any thought to actual presentation. Repetition through many short videos spaced out over a few weeks works because consumers have time to digest and forget them by the time the next video comes out. In a longer video you can't repeat 5-10 minutes over and over and present it as new information.
If this is the new format you want to go with take notes on what you've presented previously or watch the previous section before you take your turn for the next segment so you're not repeating yourself ad nauseam. There was no information gained from watching the whole video versus just the first 5-10 minutes. You could even re-edit this one with the first 5-10 minutes, skip to where you declare war and retreat, then skip to the end with your future plans.
The big big game there's a LOT more going on.
Sometimes I want a solution to the problem where: what I'm doing doesn't require 100% of my attention and if I don't have something else to augment it I'm liable to get bored and stop doing it.
There are 1000 other contexts that exist as a fully fledged human with diverse interests and habbits. Those are just easy ones.
What's funny is that the moment everything became inevitable was the moment I built a second city, while Scott instead built the Great Library.
Wonders take way too long to be spending your entire civ's production on one.
Either just 4 civs, or 8 civs and 4 AIs.
I guess I didn't make the cut.
I have four 8-player games going currently =P
I have finished maintaining the unicorn empire now it is time to monitor the republic of Dalek