Developing and constructing the "permanent" IV Hall of Fame will probably take a few months, but in the meantime, we're going to run a Beta HOF. The Beta HOF will serve multiple purposes. For starters, it means we don't have to wait for the Hall of Fame since we'll have a temporary substitute. Secondly, we need to get to know the game so we can collectively decide what HOF standards and rules will be for IV. During Beta, player feedback will be critical in these discussions, as decisions made will likely last until CivV. :eek:

For the Beta Hall of Fame, I'm planning on a simple High Score only table, no Fastest Finishes just yet. The priority question, however, is what to do about game speed? Do we keep it truly simple and go with a single page of only one speed? And if so, which one? Or do we go with multiple speeds?

Please note that this vote will only affect the Beta HOF (we'll make decisions for the permanent one later, after we've got to know the game).

I'm glad you've decided to try a beta approach, this way will avoid many of the problems that plagued the Civ3 HOF and caused so many games to be dumped along the way.

I voted ''All'' so we can get a feel for how speed will matter. Since only similar speeds would be comparable I figure we should just use one for the HOF. And in the interest of compromise I would expect that to be normal.

I'm guessing that size will matter more, and people will bring their own epic settings and goals to a game like the huge farming epics of Civ3.

All this aside I think the eventual "rebalancing" patches and exploit patching will cause more turmoil and chaos for this sort of competition. No one beta tests enough anymore, cept maybe Blizzard and id.

Will games that are accepted carry over into the real Civ 4 HoF? Will they if major exploits are discovered?

Don't know enough about the game speeds, but tiny maps are sorta like fast games in civ3 and those were accepted.

I'm glad you've decided to try a beta approach, this way will avoid many of the problems that plagued the Civ3 HOF and caused so many games to be dumped along the way.
I wasn't personally around for the early days of Civ3 HOF, but I've read THE thread many times, so I know what you're talking about. :)

Will games that are accepted carry over into the real Civ 4 HoF?
Very doubtful, as initial required settings will be lighter than the eventual ones. What we'll probably do is keep it around as a minor part of the site, so that it can be used again for possible XP's.

I think all. But i havent played Civ4 yet, because it doesnt come out until the 3rd in Australia...

Good point on the international release, azzaman333. I should probably hold off on a decision until then.

Right now, the way I'm reading the numbers, it looks "All" is just barely beating a combination of "Now" and "Now+others later". Of course the nonexistant votes for the Quick speed makes a case for Normal and Epic...

Eh, we'll give time for more countries to have their release. I'll plan on the full Beta opening in two weeks, although portions of the site may appear before then.

I voted for "nornal and Epic". Civ4 seems like a fun game, but it's really too early for me to say any thing about it. So far, I'm still on my first game (an Epic game on a huge map) and here is a screen shot of my capital - a perfect city with zero unhappiness.;)

a perfect city with zero unhappiness.
It may be happy but just a skitch unhealthy :D

@Moonsinger: I remember someone saying they wouldnt get Civ 4 til after the first patch. What happened to all that?

@Moonsinger: I remember someone saying they wouldnt get Civ 4 til after the first patch. What happened to all that?

What can I say...I'm weak!:cry:


It may be happy but just a skitch unhealthy :D

Keepping them happy is easy, keeping them healthy so far is the toughest thing I find in Civ4.

a perfect city with zero unhappiness.;)

Why do you have three citizens? Do you want to make sure to get a great prophet?

I voted for Normal and Epic. The only problem I see with Fast is the limitations on unit movement throughtout the game. You have many more turns to get to places in Epic then Fast (which is why I like Epic best, it's most realistic)

i say put them all in... And split them into categories, just like in the Civ3 Hof.

We're going to have to think about this a little bit or the number of tables is going to get excessive. I.e. difficulties(9) * victoryConditions(6) * mapSizes(6) * gameSpeeds(3) = 972 tables, 9720 slots. That could also be multiplied by 7 if we allow any starting era, making 68040 slots!

And we do not allow all in the current HoF.. We will not accept games with AP turned on.

Well I'm pretty sure I voted normal only in this back when I first read the poll but I'm changing my vote to epic speed only. I think epic should be the normal speed. With normal speed waging successful wars is extremely difficult. For instance in one of my games I was playing on a continents map and had my own continent. When I got riflemen I wanted to go wage a war against a tech backwards civ on another continent. So I start building lots of riflemen/cannons/galleons. I ship all my units over to the other continent. But due to the insane tech speed by the time I got my army over there they had rifles of their own, even though originally they only had longbows in their cities, let alone musketmen. It's just too difficult to move troops around with the insane tech pace. I'm only playing games on epic speed from now on, unless it's a gotm game or something.

Does everyone agree that playing faster speeds HURTS your performance? If so, I think all speeds should be allowed on the same table. That way people who value RL time over score can still participate.

Does everyone agree that playing faster speeds HURTS your performance? If so, I think all speeds should be allowed on the same table. That way people who value RL time over score can still participate.

Good point. No harm in letting people play on faster speeds if they want to.

My current thinking is that we'll go will at least two speeds for Beta, maybe all three. As games fill up the page, we'll start seeing just what the relationship between the speeds is. From there we can make educated decisions for what to allow in the permanent HOF.

Of course, until they kindly provide us with the first patch, the Beta HOF is a moot point itself.

i suggest normal and epic
quick time frame is shifted, while normal and epic time frames are synchronised.
i mean in mid game(total turns / 2) the year is 1500s on normal and epic, (same yaer, just cant remember now). but in quick speed, mid game is 1600s.
quick speed are designed for multiplay

The years aren't synchronized at all for normal and epic either. If we use multiple speeds the fastest finish date would have to have a separate table for each speed.

I say to avoid using "quick" since it was clearly designed with MP in mind. Kind of like playing with Accelerated Production in Civ 3. Also, judging by how the scoring works, higher scores are liable to be generated with normal and epic games anyways.