quote: Originally posted by Scouse Gits on 03-20-2001 12:48 PM ST Vet Spies ... and so on ... ------------ SG(2) [This message has been edited by Scouse Gits (edited March 20, 2001).]

I suppose that if the boss (Dan or Mark or ...?) did not really wish that a very powerful and simple GL would be created, the main reason was probably that he did not wish to run the risk of 'killing' the forums.
And I agree. I love sending posts that are mostly off topic now and then when I feel like it. I love reading one page by EST saying what Xin Yu would perhaps say in one line... and so on.

SlowThinker gives a lot of good ideas about a more performing GL and he has shown that info about dips and spies COULD be stored likewise. I am quite sure that he being the boss and we working a few hundred hours would get a GL that would be a real WoW.

But I am far from sure I feel like it.
IMHO creating 2 threads, or 2 chapters, 1 about facts (how it works) with some kind of index, 1 about strategies (or hints or tricks or even brilliant pages like those written now and then by Mr Solicitor) should give good results in the right direction, without spending hundreds of hours on it and without taking the fun away from the forum.

apolyton.net/civ2 already has a couple of sections (like "Strategy > Hints & Tips" http://apolyton.net/civ2/civ2hint.shtml ) that are set up like hyperlinked documents so alternatives are technically feasible. Something like this or like a hierarchical mini website would be a better option.

Of course maintenance time (both to put it together and to add/edit existing content) would then become a problem for Apolyton. Perhaps someone (like jCarkey http://www.clarkovision.com/civilization/apolytongl.html ) could maintain it "off site" using input from this thread. Newbies would learn of it through the forums.

You are right about thread searching being rather willy-nilly. The talk about a hierarchical index stems from this idea. It might entail paring threads down to the relevant text within - in other words, making documents out of them. The discussion continues...

quote: Originally posted by La Fayette I suppose that if the boss (Dan or Mark or ...?) did not really wish that a very powerful and simple GL would be created, the main reason was probably that he did not wish to run the risk of 'killing' the forums.

quote: Originally posted by La Fayette ...that would be a real WoW. But I am far from sure I feel like it.

quote: Originally posted by La Fayette IMHO creating 2 threads, or 2 chapters, 1 about facts (how it works) with some kind of index, 1 about strategies (or hints or tricks or even brilliant pages like those written now and then by Mr Solicitor) should give good results in the right direction, without spending hundreds of hours on it and without taking the fun away from the forum.

who is Mr Solicitor?

quote: Originally posted by La Fayette ...spending hundreds of hours...

quote: Originally posted by Edward This has probably already been mentioned, but a thread is one of the worst possible ways to implement the Great Library. Just try to search the forums or the archives (or this thread) for a certain piece of information and you get the picture

In fact, it is not very important if Post 1 of "Info: ..." thread will be held on the same place as the debate or not, but I suggest it: Every "Post 1" may be included into that hyperlink structure well. And any reader can see the newest knowledge or theories (not included into Post1 yet) easily.

I will try to make a summary:

Optimal(?) model of GL

I think that three levels of hierarchical tree are sufficient:

There should be distinguished two types of links: links into condensed threads or www-pages (like "Info: ..." or "Compostiton") and links into regular threads (they are indented and have a smaller font).
Links of 2nd and 3rd level would refer into appropriate parts of threads/pages.
Some items will be under two or more sections (for example "plunder" comes into "Dips and spies" and "Combat"). Only one such paragraph should be maintained and hyperlinks should be used for next occurences.
Hierarchical tree should be made manually.

Some game elements may be heavily placed into tree resp. they would be placed into some deep level (for example hills; they will appear in Combat, Terrain improvement, Movement of units etc.). They should be placed into alphabetical index. Alphabetical index should be made automatically (performing a search function by the computer): every occurence of the word should be included in.

Procedure

We wil have to do two things:

a) to index (I mean both "indexes": tree and alphabetical index) existing threads
b) to compile threads to a condensed format

a)
Alphabetical index may be held over. The hierarchical tree is the first step:
Now, I prefer the idea of keywords (link: ../../Forum3/HTML/001371-3.html) under lists of threads (link: ../../Forum20/HTML/001371-3.html). The reason is that it is quicker: you read a thread and you add one new post with several keywords.
Of course, the set of keywords must be fixed (it would be equal to the structure of tree). I suppose we wouldn't be able to project all the tree in advance: we would progressively add new keywords into the list.
If a reader would think that he has read all thread and he has added all keywords then he would add a special keyword [indexed] (or [finished]).
We should choose some abbreviations (for example [spy] for "Diplomats and spies").
Maybe, in the beginning, two levels of tree would be sufficient. To index threads using three levels of keywords would be very laborious.
Unfortunately, archived threads cannot be processed this way.

b)
We should set a fixed format for condensed threads/pages so that we could move paragraphs if needed.

John-SJ induced an interesting tool, the MindManager.
We could use it

a) for the table in my last post (if we will want to keep every individual condensed text together with the discussion, as in "Info: diplomats and spies" thread)

b) for all amount of the condensed text (if we want to keep all condensed text together).

The Great Library should contain knowledge on particular subjects purposely (re)written for the Library.

SlowThinker,

Your initial posts in your condensed "Diplos & Spies" thread are absolutely wonderful. Great work on summarization and gathering information. While I'm thrown off by having subsequent posts beneath it, it looks like you've done a good job incorporating the changes into your main post. The subsequent posts provide an obviously located and already existing mechanism to propose suggested changes.

My hat is off to you for actually starting the Great Library (unlike I who have merely swung in midstream, spouted out criticism of the work at hand, then refused to do anything constructive myself).

I totally agree with you about the terrible state of the "Strategy > Hints & Tips" section. In my previous post, I was not trying to say that it's organization or content was good. I was trying to say that Apolyton is technically able to post stuff other than threads. (Of course, whether or not the administrators are willing to create and/or maintain such a thing is another question altogether.)

4)who is Mr Solicitor?

5) My guess is that "Info: diplomats and spies" thread is about 1/10 - 1/20 of all knowledge about Civ.

6)Anyway, "Strategy > Hints & Tips" are old, stiff and they sometimes contain false information. We need "living" Hints & Tips: they must be updated and corrected constantly.(/quote)

1) Of course, I will.
2) Never mind: I think that if the SGs and Ming agree that we are doing good work the 'big bosses' will be convinced that we can go on (won't help us but won't stop us).
3) I don't consider myself competent to discuss the best organization for the GL (though I go on thinking that it is a good idea to separate facts (how it works) from strategies (how to use it at best)).
4) East Street Trader (his profile states so).
5) I agree (and I suggest that the SGs, who started the GL, and you, who have nice ideas about how to improve it, get acquainted and organize some kind of working team, with 10 volunteers or so, people like me, willing to be responsible for the ground work about 1/10 of the knowledge).
6) I agree (and I have been about to start updating and correcting, several times, but I am just as eager to play instead of 'slow thinking' as most people on this forum, and I started playing a new game instead of writing a new post).

Edward,

quote: Originally posted by Edward If the purpose of the Great Library is to provide easy access to gathered knowledge about Civ2, then IMHO what we do NOT need is an easily searchable index of all the threads. The threads are inherently long and full of repeated and unrelated info.

But existing threads are the source for condensed threads and it is useful to sort them before building condensed threads.
Besides, I am not sure if the condensed GL will arise. If not or only part of knowledge wil be included, then a categorized list of existing threads may be useful.

If we would suppose the condensed GL will originate quickly then I would suggest to index existing threads using only the first level of civ terms (Dips and spies, Happiness, Caravans...)(See table "Optimal(?) model of GL" on this page): it would be sufficient for the purpose of building the condensed GL.
Otherwise it may be useful to fill higher levels of the hierarchical tree by links to existing threads.

La Fayette,
1)
Could you post your decision to "Building Great Library: who will participate" directly? It will increase the morale of the squad.

BTW,

quote: Originally posted by La Fayette ...the risk of 'killing' the forums. And I agree. I love sending posts that are mostly off topic now and then when I feel like it. I love reading one page by EST saying what Xin Yu would perhaps say in one line... and so on.

---------

------------------
Scouse Git[1]

quote: Originally posted by SlowThinker on 04-06-2001 06:52 PM Roman, if the concept of "Info: diplomats and spies" thread (or a similar one) will be accepted, then GL will be included in about 20 threads: your browser will keep them in the disk cache for the offline work.

Excellent! I might be interested in helping to build the GL, but my knowledge of Civ2 game mechanics is rather limited. Do you find out most of the information on relationships among the variables through empirical approach combined with looking for patterns, or do you somehow look through the program code to look for the relationships?

quote: BTW, Slovenia, is it somewhere near Italy?

LOL

I think most other people won't understand why this is funny to us, eh.

quote: Originally posted by Marquis de Sodaq See my new thread in the Strategy forum about a final combat results library entry. What I've found on that topic is that everybody and his uncle has a theory about how an aspect of the game works. Testers debate results, and finally something emerges from the cloud of dust. Even in this forum is a current thread about hit points and firepower, which has been resolved at least 3 times! All the more reason to finish the GL entry! Yet still the debate rages on. Most of the posts are speculation or somebody remembering the previous misinformation and propogating it furthur. Grrr...

I suppose that every condensed thread could contain links to living threads. And we could "close" redundant threads if we will put a link to an analogous thread to the end.
BTW, see "Info: diplomats and spies" thread: To mantain Post 10 would be very tedious if there would be some traffic. It will be better to move it into a (new) thread (link in the Post 1 would refer there).

SGs, we could reconstruct Post 1 of Apolyton's Great Library" into a starting page with links etc. now

Sirotnikov,
See my post here (posted March 23, 2001 22:08; "In fact, it is not very important...")
My idea is that a .hlp file will keep something similar to a table of "The Great Library: a hierarchical structure" thread

I will try to summarize hints how to do it. Regard them as suggestions only, the final look depends on your decision. But the existence of a standard look has some advantages: It would be more comfortable for readers and a prospective moving of paragraphs between threads would be easier.

The main post (Post 1 in the "Info: diplomats and spies" thread) needn't be held on the same place as the debate (if you want to keep it on your own web pages for example). But I suggest it: It is simpler to load everything in all and any reader can see the newest knowledge or theories (not included into Post1 yet) easily.

Name the thread Info: topic,
where topic is taken from a table in "The Great Library: a hierarchical structure" thread.

When I made "Info: diplomats and spies" thread, I went to SEARCH button and I searched for words spy, spies, diplomat, brib, sabotag etc. But you may search also for "keywords" (see "The Great Library: a hierarchical structure" thread).
You can put new keywords if there are no ones or missing ones in threads you work with.

Use posts for additional informations and reserve one or two posts for a future use (posts 2-5 of "Info: diplomats and spies" thread).

Don't be afraid of the html code if you don't know it:
Use the Post 1 of "Info: diplomats and spies" thread:
Load "Info: diplomats and spies" thread, go to edit button and copy the content to a Windows clipboard. Then make a new file through Notepad (or any text editor), paste the content of the clipboard in, and save the file with a .htm extension. Exit the text editor. Open your something.htm file using a html editor (you have to use (at least for the first time) a WYSIWYG (What You See Is What You Get) editor: for example a built-in editor in IE (Front Page Express) or Netscape (Netscape Composer)), edit it and save it.
Unfortunately, you cannot send the result to Apolyton immediately: a standard html ignores EOLs (end-of-line-markers), but Apolyton mixes html and EOLs. You have to replace all EOLs by spaces:
I use MSWord for that purpose: I copy my something.htm into something.txt file and I open it in Word. I use the replace function (Ctrl-H) and I replace all ^p by ^s (I have made a simple macro for that procedure).
The text is ready now: you have just bring it (through a clipboard) to an Apolyton input field.

It is useful to keep links to threads that were not abandoned, i. e. to threads that contain a semifinished problem. (See yellow parts of Post 1 of "Info: diplomats and spies" thread: 3.9 (emerging partisans) and 12.1 (industrial sabotage)).

Help others to maintain build and their condensed threads. Or create a pair or a group that will build one thread. The cooperation improves the morale.

1. make a link to other text within the same post
2. make tables (and fill them, if that's not intuitive)

Re: improvements and wonders

It has become clear that GL threads on various topics will refer to various improvements and wonders. Do we want to create a static thread for these? Basically, one that lists all we know about them that can be linked in references from other GL threads? Or do we keep them disparate?

The appeal of keeping city improvements and wonders in a separate thread is organization - they are all the same type of game element.

Sorting them by type - putting economic improvements into one thread, defensive into another, science into a third, is useful because it eliminates the need for any link.

It comes down to how we choose to group things. There are 2 options:

• all GL info threads link to the improvement/wonder thread as appropriate
  
• improvements/wonders are not summarized in one thread, but only when relevant to another topic