We've established the ruleset for the permanent Hall of Fame. This ruleset is being made public so that there is time for everyone to become aware of it, but the Beta rules will continue to be active policy.

I'm also making it public so you know which games will get ported over to the permanent Hall of Fame, those being any HOF mod 1.61 games that meet the new rules. 1.61 standard games will be accepted for the Beta, but purged after.

Permanent Rules Page (http://hof.civfanatics.net/civ4/rules.php)

Notable Changes:

Mapsize Minimum AI's increased from 1/2/3/4/5/6 to 1/2/4/6/8/10
Mapsize Maximum AI's established (2/4/7/10/14/17)
No Cheating Mode has been renamed to Lock Modified Assets per the patch. Still required.
Require Complete Kills is optional (new to patch 1.61)


We're also constricting the legal maptypes:

Pangaea
Continents
Archipelago
Great Plains
Highlands
Ice Age
Inland Sea
Lakes
Oasis
Terra

Found a bug in the regenerate map facility. It keeps contact made from the previous map. In the next map, I tried to do a declare war to see if I can make the AI decide not to settle and thereby killing itself. It failed. So, I had a useless war. But this map was a pretty nice map with two luxury resource in my city radius.

Now, the question - Is this game still valid since it contains a bug where I had contact with France on Turn 1? It only hurt me though since I was lure to declare war (on deity). If it will not be accepted. I will restart instead of continuing on this game.

That bug boosts early game research. I think it should not be allowed.

It's safe to say that one won't be legal.

Found a bug in the regenerate map facility. It keeps contact made from the previous map.
I thought that was something that was fixed in the 1.61 patch, but obviously not! It's worth reporting bugs to us as it's possible we could fix them in the HOF mod.

Okay, I guess I have to give this one up then. Was kind of doing well so far though. The research boost was nearly non-existant. Playing 18 Civ on Lake Marathon. So, contact was quickly made anyway.

Would be great if you can fix it in the mod since it does waste one of the better map I got after a number of tries.

Actually I don't think he said it would be excluded. I have submitted a game where contact was made before I regenerated and it was accepted. No real reason it shouldn't be right now. (I could be completely wrong though)

I believe that was a 1.52 game though Big_Ben. We thought that bug was fixed for 1.61. We definitely won't be allowing games such as this to make it into the permanent HOF.

I mentioned this bug serveral time during the OCC Gauntlet against the two Khans, but no one said anything to my posts. So I thought it didn't matter. Since there is a maximum AIs of 2/4/7/10/14/17 per mapsize, the chance of interacting with the AIs at 4000BC is very rare.

I mentioned this bug serveral time during the OCC Gauntlet against the two Khans, but no one said anything to my posts.
We knew there would be another patch and an eventual purge of the tables, so I didn't see a point in dealing with it at the time. I guess we were as lucky as were that so many bugs were taken care of. Hopefully not many more will creep up, I like to keep the rules as simple as possible.

We knew there would be another patch and an eventual purge of the tables, so I didn't see a point in dealing with it at the time.

Since games played with patch 1.61 and HOF mod will go onto the permanent HoF tables, what is your final verdict on this bug? Basically, assuming we don't meet any AI at 4000BC, should "Regen" map be acceptable and go forward onto the permanent HoF tables?

PS: IIRC, if there is a goodie hut visible at 4000BC, it will also show up at the same spot on the regenerated map. However, it's really just a ghost/invalid hut.

Since games played with patch 1.61 and HOF mod will go onto the permanent HoF tables, what is your final verdict on this bug?.
This one will be against the rules, especially since it's so easily detectable.

Just quick question, what happens when two time victories have the same score? I know it rarely happens but I'm just curious.

Just quick question, what happens when two time victories have the same score? I know it rarely happens but I'm just curious.
Whichever one was submitted first wins. The same with fastest finish games that have the same date/score.

PS: IIRC, if there is a goodie hut visible at 4000BC, it will also show up at the same spot on the regenerated map. However, it's really just a ghost/invalid hut.
I've had a good go a repeating this, but with no success. When you say "at the same spot" is that relative to the start position, which is likely different each time the map is regenerated, or at the same absolute X/Y position?

I've had a good go a repeating this, but with no success. When you say "at the same spot" is that relative to the start position, which is likely different each time the map is regenerated, or at the same absolute X/Y position?

It's at the same absolute X/Y position. If the new absolute postion is the ocean on the new map, you would see a hut appear on water too.:crazyeye: Basically, I think the programmers forgot to erase the old huts. Although you may see a hut, but there may not be an actual hut on that location. Once you move your units near by, the hut will disappear. Of course, the probability of a real hut to show up at the same spot does exist. Therefore, it's really confusing not knowing whether it's a real hut or the one left over from the previous map. If you save the game and reload it, you won't see any hut there. Btw, if you declare war on someone at 4000BC, then "regen", you will be forever at war with that civ on the new map too.

Seen the ghost hut several times too. And I was wondering I am seeing things as I got a blank when I enter the tile. Glad to know I am not imagining things.

Are the HOF keepers going to watch for the following scenarios when migrating to the permanant HOF? -

1) A submission doesn't make the top ten in beta, but would make the top ten in permanent.

2) A submission doesn't make the tables because I already have 2 entries, but one of them is a Beta submission. Post purge, this should make it in, right?

Yeah, I have been noticing the ghost huts for a really long time. Just figured it was a glitch in the code that didn't erase hut coordinates before it regen'ed the map.

The declare war and regen has been discussed. It will probably be banned in the permanent HOF but since there are now maximum AI limits it shouldn't be possible to come into contact with the AI on the first turn.

Remo: The answers to both questions should be yes. I am guessing when migrating to the permanent HOF they will simply sort the entries by eligibility, copy the eligible entries to the new database, then publish the new database. That way the old entries will not be attached to the new HOF at all. It is basically the same as starting the HOF from scratch and submitting each eligible entry individually.

BTW, I don't know if anyone else gets it, but when you are at the edge of where world wrap kicks in you can see the land on the other side of the world wrap even if you have explored it. Only good for 1-2 spaces and goes away if you scroll in either direction. Doesn't show resources, cultural borders, or units, just land formations. Adds an advantage to knowing which way to send boats if using them to explore though.

Are the HOF keepers going to watch for the following scenarios when migrating to the permanant HOF? -

1) A submission doesn't make the top ten in beta, but would make the top ten in permanent.

2) A submission doesn't make the tables because I already have 2 entries, but one of them is a Beta submission. Post purge, this should make it in, right?I don't know the exact details but I think it is more of a migration to the Permanent HOF than a purge. So no eligible games should be excluded regardless of their Beta table standing. Also, the Beta tables should still be available for viewing in some form for awhile. More details will follow as we get closer to the cut over.

Also, the Beta tables should still be available for viewing in some form for awhile. More details will follow as we get closer to the cut over.
I think the beta games should be accessable even when the permanent HoF arrives. There should be a final beta HoF update link or something IMHO. :)

BTW, I don't know if anyone else gets it, but when you are at the edge of where world wrap kicks in you can see the land on the other side of the world wrap even if you have explored it. Only good for 1-2 spaces and goes away if you scroll in either direction. Doesn't show resources, cultural borders, or units, just land formations. Adds an advantage to knowing which way to send boats if using them to explore though.
The world seam issues were something that were supposed to be fixed in 1.61. If you are sure that you have a clean 1.61 install please send a savegame file that reproduces it, if at all possible.

Note: I say clean install because a lot of people didn't delete or rename their 1.52 "My Games/Sid Meier's Civilization 4" folder when they installed 1.61. If they have installed mods in their CustomAssests folder, this leads to playing the game with a mix of versions.

HOF table position won't matter. All 1.61 HOF mod games deemed legal for the permanent Hall of Fame will enter the new database. And we will find some way to leave the Beta up for viewing. It'll be closed for submissions, but I'm certainly not going to publically ignore all the fine achievements of the last six months.

I didn't rename the folder before the install, so it may be part of the problem. It still does it for me in 1.61 though.

I didn't rename the folder before the install, so it may be part of the problem. It still does it for me in 1.61 though.
You probably need to get rid of it and make sure you clear you cache afterwards (hold shift during startup). These things have a way of sticking around.

The human player may not play a leader already included as an AI. Civilizations may be repeated, but not leaders.

Does this mean it's not ok to play against 10 Gandhi?

Does this mean it's not ok to play against 10 Gandhi?
Correct. It's not okay to play against two Gandhi. Or be a Gandhi and play against a Gandhi.

But you are allowed to play as a Khan and play against a Khan ;)

But you are allowed to play as a Khan and play against a Khan ;)
Assuming one of those Khan's is Ghengis and the other Kublai, yes, that's OK!

And it is okay to play against two Khans.

And it is okay to play against two Khans.
It's okay to play against both Khans.;)

what happened to Balanced map?

what is wrong with it and it is not allaowed?

what happened to Balanced map?

what is wrong with it and it is not allaowed?
Maps designed for Multiplayer play are excluded for Permenant HOF competition. Balanced is very popular because you are sure to get certain strategic resources near your start location.

Balanced is very popular because you are sure to get certain strategic resources near your start location.

and?.what is wrong with that.?
i dont understand it.every player can play balanced or the other map types.
i think you are trying yo protect the AI.:lol: .

Actually, we're trying to protect the players from becoming addicted that maptype. We felt it was getting used too much.

Team_battleground was excluded too :(, I really liked that map. Can you give some reasons why it was excluded? (Except it wasn't it the play now screen :mischief:.)

Team_battleground was excluded too :(, I really liked that map. Can you give some reasons why it was excluded? (Except it wasn't it the play now screen :mischief:.)
Denniz pretty much summed it up. HOF games are single-player endeavours, and it was decided certain maptypes were out-of-line with the traditional requirements of randomly generated worlds. Many were too predictable. Fractal was excluded for being too unpredicatble.

damn.balanced is my favorite map type.i really dont want to play others.:(

Actually, we're trying to protect the players from becoming addicted that maptype. We felt it was getting used too much.

i dont agree.the next best type of the map wiil be used too much too.problem is not the map type.problem is the score from the map types.


look at the Civ3 HoF.always the same map type.:D :crazyeye: .

We based the include/exclude map type list those available in "Play Now" option and upon Sirian's Map Info Reference (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=134226) breakdown of map types better for single player vs multi-player.

Probably to two most popular map types used in the Beta HOF have been Balanced and Team Battleground. One because it gives a very predictable distribution of resources and the other opponents. ;)

While I would agree that other map types will take their places, hopefully different map types will be used for different victory conditions. As it stands now, why would I play anything but balanced?

IMHO, the Hall of Fame is about glory. There is no glory in knowing where to find your opponents for a quick kill. There much glory in overcoming the lack of strategic resources to score a #1 fastest finish.


Warning to Single Players!
All of the maps can be played in single or multi player, at your discretion. However, some maps are specifically aimed at the multiplayer side of the game.

Balanced
This script guarantees the key strategic resources are near all civs, knocking out the "risk" to certain civs who require resources for their Unique Units.

Mirror
This script is aimed at 1v1 or two-teams play. It's a wild thing to play in single player!

Hub, Ring, and Wheel
These scripts are completely artificial, intended to supply balanced environments for MP action.

Team Battleground
The name says it all! This is a "deathmatch" map for multiplayer, aimed at quick, brutal gaming.

Warning to Multiplayer Players!
All of the maps can be played in single or multi player, at your discretion. However, some maps are specifically aimed at the single player game, while one or two require some additional warnings.

Continents
Soren has described this map as the "anti-MP" map. It is our most random, least predictable map. Of all the maps in the game, this one is the least well-suited map for multiplayer games involving teams. It is also the default map for single player. The behavior is nearly identical to Civ3's "Continents" map setting, creating a random number, size and shape of continents. Civs will start on the largest/richest of these and usually have multiple civs on any large continents.

Terra
This is the largest map script in our core group shipping with the initial game. I know some folks on the Civ3 forums caught wind of the notion that Large and Huge map sizes would be a little bit smaller than comparable maps in Civ3, but it just isn't true for this map type. Terra is gargantuan, and in fact, like the Earth Map scenarios, it may not perform well on older or slower machines.

Terra produces earth-like worlds. There is one large continent where all players begin. This is equivalent to Asia, Europe, Africa and the East Indies all rolled in to one, but it is produced randomly and will vary to a significant extent. A second continent akin to the Americas is lost out in the fog and will not be reachable until ships can safely cross long ocean distances. There will tend to be some smaller landmasses akin to Australia or Antarctica that may or may not be reachable prior to oceanic shipping.

Soren thinks this would be the ideal PBEM/Pitboss map and he may be right. At the very least, though, it is not a likely candidate for normal use in MP, being slower in almost every measurable way!

Custom Continents
If you choose "One Per Team" setting, this map is akin to a "team version" of Islands and is very friendly to multiplayer gaming. Any other setting will tend to produce incongruous starts! This is a map chiefly aimed at the single player crowd! Use anything but "One Per Team" at your own risk.

Maze
This is a novelty map. If it's not your cup of tea, don't complain. Just move on to something else!

Mirror
This map is aimed specifically at 1v1 games or two-teams games. Four-teams is also relatively playable, but if you use it for anything else, expect some incongruous starting situations! Also please be aware of the dramatic difference between the land-only setting ("Small Lakes") and the oceanic settings!

But when you don't have the necessary resource to win you need to restart. After restarting a few times and you get tired and gives up. Then you won't submit because there are no games to submit.

But when you don't have the necessary resource to win you need to restart. After restarting a few times and you get tired and gives up. Then you won't submit because there are no games to submit.
Not always. A skillful player can sometimes use other means to acquire a missing resource. Tossing out a game at the first sign of trouble does little to help someone improve their game. Some of the most interesting and impressive games have come from overcoming adversity to succeed. Much, much glory in that, especially if you take the time provide a detailed write up. :D

The Hall of Fame rewards skill and persistence. :mischief:

look at the Civ3 HoF.always the same map type.:D :crazyeye: .
Really? Milk runs were typically minimal water on archipelago. Conquest runs were typically maximum water pangaea. For other victory conditions, the map type depended sometimes on difficulty level and how fast/slow the player wanted the AI tech pace to be.

I realize it's already known, but I suggest updating the IV HoF Rules page to include version 3 of the mod as an allowed submission. No since in possibly causing any confusion. :)

I realize it's already known, but I suggest updating the IV HoF Rules page to include version 3 of the mod as an allowed submission. No since in possibly causing any confusion. :)
Done. +xcl

Really?


yeees.just check the highest scores.always the same map.i am not talking about fastest finishes.they dont need to play the game.it is just finding the smallest map.(2h max.).

yeees.just check the highest scores.always the same map.i am not talking about fastest finishes.they dont need to play the game.it is just finding the smallest map.(2h max.).
I have to disagree with you there. The best of the fastest finishes were played with very high levels of skill, it wasn't just because of the map they had. The same was equally true for milk runs in III. I once had a Monarch huge map with a Domination limit well over 4000 tiles. Moonsinger or SirPleb could have easily broken it for 50,000 points, but I only managed 28,000.

I don't mind each particular victory condition winding up with a best possible maptype, but when Balanced and Team Battlegrounds were legal in Beta, they were getting used for almost everything.;)

Quick question, games with HOF mod version 1.61.001 or 1.61.002 will make it?

Quick question, games with HOF mod version 1.61.001 or 1.61.002 will make it?
New games should be started using the latest version, 1.61.003. We stated that games submitted in 1.61.001/1.61.002 would make it into the permanent HOF, and that is still our intention. Unfortunately for us, the HOF staff, that means we will have to go back and re-check those submissions to make sure the problems fixed in 1.61.003 weren't exploited.

What's the reasoning behind "no tech trading" being an illegal option? It think it makes for an interesting game. It makes it much harder to keep the AI pleased. You also can't "draft" off the AI -- feeding them tech to get more trades. At lower levels, the AI doesn't get Alphabet for a long time, so it's really just the human player who gets to trade. You can't give them liberalism so they go Free religion. You can't give them physics so they mine uranium and trade that with you. Same for aluminum, etc.

What's the reasoning behind "no tech trading" being an illegal option? It think it makes for an interesting game. It makes it much harder to keep the AI pleased. You also can't "draft" off the AI -- feeding them tech to get more trades. At lower levels, the AI doesn't get Alphabet for a long time, so it's really just the human player who gets to trade. You can't give them liberalism so they go Free religion. You can't give them physics so they mine uranium and trade that with you. Same for aluminum, etc.
I don't remember the reason but I doubt anyone would use it if we made it player's choice. You are less competitive if you can't trade techs. You might persuade Superslug to let you use it, if you like competing with one arm tied behind your back. :mischief:

I don't remember the reason but I doubt anyone would use it if we made it player's choice. You are less competitive if you can't trade techs. You might persuade Superslug to let you use it, if you like competing with one arm tied behind your back. :mischief:

The same argument could be made for Raging Barbs, but that is allowed. Maybe a clever player will find that No Tech Trading has some hidden advantages. For example: It would slow down the Diety AI a lot in the space race.

Even if there are no advantages, I'd be nice to have it an a gauntlet from time to time. Especially Diplomatic ones.

The same argument could be made for Raging Barbs, but that is allowed. Maybe a clever player will find that No Tech Trading has some hidden advantages. For example: It would slow down the Diety AI a lot in the space race.

Even if there are no advantages, I'd be nice to have it an a gauntlet from time to time. Especially Diplomatic ones.Actually, that might be the reason. One of the few advantages the AI gets is the fact that it trades at a discount to other AIs at higher difficulties. :)

For example: It would slow down the Diety AI a lot in the space race.
That in itself was the significant enough concern to ban No Tech Trading. ;)

I have to admit the NTT ban was a rare rules call I had to make more on instinct than on precedent. I went with banning, because it still allows the possibility of lifting in the future without harm to the HOF. If I'd allowed and been wrong and had to then ban it, games would have been tossed, and I hate that.

As far as Gauntlets that are outside HOF rules go.....well, there's no official statement to be made on that issue as of yet.

The FAQ thread was closed so I will ask this here: What happened to my graph (http://hof.civfanatics.net/civ4/game_info.php?show=histogram&entryID=1754) :crazyeye:? In my own HOF, this did not happen. :confused:

Looks like a bug, maybe something to do with non-Ancient era games? I'll take a look at fixing it.

The FAQ thread was closed so I will ask this here: What happened to my graph (http://hof.civfanatics.net/civ4/game_info.php?show=histogram&entryID=1754) :crazyeye:? In my own HOF, this did not happen. :confused:
You're in the right place, I just edited in the FAQ that should have been in the thread title.

The FAQ thread was closed so I will ask this here: What happened to my graph (http://hof.civfanatics.net/civ4/game_info.php?show=histogram&entryID=1754) :crazyeye:? In my own HOF, this did not happen. :confused:
OK, it's fixed now. As an added bonus I've also added stats for territory and city count :D.

Nice feature.

When I check a game it says "GOTM starts not allowed". What does that mean?

When I check a game it says "GOTM starts not allowed". What does that mean?
The start file page checks if the name of the game contains "gotm". It's possible that you could have generated a file with a name that contains "gotm" accidentally. If that's the case (I.e. that you're not actually trying to submit a GOTM game to the HOF) then just ignore that error message.

The start file page checks if the name of the game contains "gotm". It's possible that you could have generated a file with a name that contains "gotm" accidentally. If that's the case (I.e. that you're not actually trying to submit a GOTM game to the HOF) then just ignore that error message.
I submitted it.

When I check a game it says "GOTM starts not allowed". What does that mean?
The start file page checks if the name of the game contains "gotm". It's possible that you could have generated a file with a name that contains "gotm" accidentally. If that's the case (I.e. that you're not actually trying to submit a GOTM game to the HOF) then just ignore that error message.
@Shadowsong, did you by any chance open a gotm game by double-clicking the save file? Opening a save that way has been known to change your "GameName" parameter in the CivilizationIV.ini file to whatever the file has. You have to manually change it back. ;)

Where's the #1 hof sign? And also, why can't I search stuff like in CIV 3 hof?

Where's the #1 hof sign?
Could you explain? I've no idea what that means!




And also, why can't I search stuff like in CIV 3 hof?
You mean like the players tab of the statistics page (http://hof.civfanatics.net/civ3/stats.php?show=players)? The Civ4 HOF site is still a work in progress. As with the Civ3 site, extra stuff will keep being added. It's already got quite a number of features that the Civ3 site doesn't. Some feedback (I.e. asking nicely) may well influence what changes get priority. And new ideas are welcome too!

@Shadowsong, did you by any chance open a gotm game by double-clicking the save file?
Yeah. :blush:
You have to manually change it back. ;)
I just submitted a new game and it was approved :). I guess it somehow got fixed :confused:.

Could you explain? I've no idea what that means!


Oops, was in hurry when I wrote :p. I mean #1 in whole hof game like #1 in score, #1 in time etc. When i check a game I can't see if it was #1 in whole hof. :(

Oops, was in hurry when I wrote :p. I mean #1 in whole hof game like #1 in score, #1 in time etc. When i check a game I can't see if it was #1 in whole hof. :(
Well, you are busy (seen your sig ;)). So you mean the game_info page?

Well, you are busy (seen your sig ;)). So you mean the game_info page?
Yes example here. http://hof.civfanatics.net/civ3/game_info.php?entryID=869
I clearly see #1 in score and histograohic. :goodjob:

It seems that I can no longer access any of the General/Map/Histogram/Log tab right for "unchecked" submitted game. Is this how it supposes to work from now on?

It seems that I can no longer access any of the General/Map/Histogram/Log tab right for "unchecked" submitted game. Is this how it supposes to work from now on?
Yes, that's the intentional. We don't want players submitting non-HOF games just so they can get access to the game info page.

Yes, that's the intentional. We don't want players submitting non-HOF games just so they can get access to the game info page.

Would you release those game info as a separate utility program? I'm sure many people would want to use it for non-HOF game.

Would you release those game info as a separate utility program? I'm sure many people would want to use it for non-HOF game.
No intention at the moment. One of the big headaches is trying to avoid spoiler information, and I don't have to worry about that for the HOF page as I can be absolutely certain that the game has finished, and so show any information without having to worry about spoilers.

I was wondering about the reasoning behind excluding fractal, shuffle, and custom continents maps. These are the maps I find most interesting and the ones I play the most. Though I might want to submit a few games to the HoF, this might not be true if I cannot play my favorite maps. I can kind of see reasons for custom continents, though I don't see any for shuffle or fractal.

Custom Continents allows a little too much player manipulation over the map. Fractal and shuffle are just too unpredicatble. While regenerating maps for good starts in standard HOF tactics, those two maps in particular could yield phenomenal starts.

I was under the impression that shuffle chose either a pangaea, continents, or archipelago map script and then used one of those. Therefore, it should be just as legal as those three.

I understand we can regenerate the starting map in HOF games... Question - If I regenerate a map and don't move past the 1st turn, will it matter if I "settle" to just see what kind of production/research I would have received had I stayed in the original position?

To clarify - I wanted to submit a descent game to the HOF, but I noticed in the log that the game log listed my two earlier settlements in the log of game activity, in year 4000bc, when I regenerated my maps. Those two capital city founding were in crappy places, but I just wanted to see what the cities would produce. Once settled, I regenerated the game map and ended up keeping the third city and proceeded through a game from there. The 'founding' of those two first cities in no way effected my game score or knowledge of the game/map as I still had to explore the whole map.

I have the original 4000bc file saved prior to any movement or settlement for submission, for the city I evenutally founded after map regeneration, as I abandoned the first two maps/cities. Would this game be allowed for submission to HOF? :confused:

Cheers.... ...JungleIII

I understand we can regenerate the starting map in HOF games... Question - If I regenerate a map and don't move past the 1st turn, will it matter if I "settle" to just see what kind of production/research I would have received had I stayed in the original position?

To clarify - I wanted to submit a descent game to the HOF, but I noticed in the log that the game log listed my two earlier settlements in the log of game activity, in year 4000bc, when I regenerated my maps. Those two capital city founding were in crappy places, but I just wanted to see what the cities would produce. Once settled, I regenerated the game map and ended up keeping the third city and proceeded through a game from there. The 'founding' of those two first cities in no way effected my game score or knowledge of the game/map as I still had to explore the whole map.

I have the original 4000bc file saved prior to any movement or settlement for submission, for the city I evenutally founded after map regeneration, as I abandoned the first two maps/cities. Would this game be allowed for submission to HOF? :confused:

Cheers.... ...JungleIII
Your scenario is okay. We see that alot. The 4000BC save from your final regen is the correct one. Good luck. :goodjob:

BTW, Welcome to the Hall of Fame. :band:

Wow - that is GREAT! I reallly didn't want to waste several days of 'work' and I couldn't see how it made any difference except to the log.

Thanks and I will be submitting the game shortly!!!

Cheers... ...JungleIII:king: