While the general Hall of Fame is an ongoing competition, we like to run time-definite competitions between updates that we call Gauntlets. Standard Hall of Fame rules (*) still apply, but any games meeting the settings will be counted towards the Gauntlet.

(*) Please read the >> HOF rules << (http://hof.civfanatics.net/civ4/rules.php) BEFORE playing!


Settings:

Victory Condition: Diplomatic (though all victory conditions must be enabled)
Difficulty: Noble
Starting Era: Ancient
Map Size: Large
Map Type: Highlands
Speed: Normal
Civ: Japan
Opponents: Must include Carthage (Hannibal), Celt (Brennus), Egypt (Ramesses II), England (Churchill), Korea (Wang Kon), Ottoman (Mehmed II), Rome (Augustus Caesar), Russia (Stalin), Viking (Ragnar Lodbrock), Zulu (Shaka)
Version: 2.08.003
Date: 25th February to 9th March 2007
The earliest finish date wins, with score as a tiebreaker.
See G-Minor 16 (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=209220) for details.

PLEASE ALSO NOTE THAT THIS IS WARLORDS ONLY!

Ohhh I like this one! The last one I tried almost made me cry but this looks much better. :)

Best of all... no Khan! (after Major-8 I hate Mongols... both of them... forever!)

I am not quite acquainted with the setup of the minors and majors yet, so I apologize if this question is foolish. I arrived too late for the Vanilla only G-Minor, so will I have to wait for the timespan before another Vanilla Minor is available?

hahaha mr. "closed borders for life" winning by diplomatic victory, that's precious. the very thought makes me giggle, since i don't know if i've ever done the 'kill enough to vote yourself in' diplo thing. but imagining the AI toku playing diplo the way i do ... hahahahaha.

i'm guessing that since we have to be him (and use the specified opponents) the approach will be kinda different from g-minor 15 eh? in fact it probably would even if it was on settler again.

oh gosh normal speed. i don't remember when i last played on normal, was before i started submitting to HoF for sure.

@IVZanIV: there's only ever one major and one minor at a time. so if you don't have warlords, yes you'd have to wait until the next vanilla or combo minor swings around. i don't know if the flavors go in cycles or not.

I am not quite acquainted with the setup of the minors and majors yet, so I apologize if this question is foolish. I arrived too late for the Vanilla only G-Minor, so will I have to wait for the timespan before another Vanilla Minor is available?
Minors are typically much easier than Majors. The minors go for one update (~two weeks) and majors twice that.

The whole Vanilla/Warlord/Combo thing is something I just started doing last month. Sometimes the Gauntlets are part of my master plan, sometimes I just make stuff up at the last minute.

I try to rotate the flavors around though, so two-thirds of the minors will be Vanilla involved, either as Vanilla only or Combo.

Alright, thank you. I didn't buy Warlords, I thought Civ had lost it's cruel hold on my soul.

I was wrong. *sigh* Oh well, March 9th isn't TOO far away.

The Hall of Fame is a big exciting place, I'm sure theres something here you could play for between Gauntlets.

For people who haven't started this yet... normal barbarians are acting almost like raging barbs on a normal map. With large map and only 10 opponents plus the fact that there is no ocean on highland meaning a lot of land space... I've never turned off barbs in any game I've played to date but if my current game doesn't work out and I have to start over I am going to consider it.

Just thought I'd share for those who haven't played with this map much. :)

Alternatively you can add opponents, the list given is the minimum. :)

I thought about that when I first started - I almost always play with max on map because I like the flat maps which have more room. But this is diplomatic so that seemed like it would make it more complicated rather then less.

Some of the obligatory opponents are hard to win over, you might want to add some friendlies. Also you might consider backdoor diplo by conquering, which could be easier with more opponents. Consider making two factions and making sure yours is the bigger of the two.

I've already started and given up three games (plus a lot of games I played just a few turns) and I think I am going to take your advice. 14 civs it is... I feel like I'm cheating if I turn off barbs but I can't handle them with only 10 civs on the map.

Personally I think I like thin peaks and ridgelines best with large lakes although I'm not sure on the lakes because they can really get in the way sometimes. I've never tried seas I might have to see what that is like as well.

Anyone have any map tips? I finally found a gauntlet I have a hope of finishing so I'm determined to do this one. :)

Anyone have any map tips? I finally found a gauntlet I have a hope of finishing so I'm determined to do this one. :)

i have one i use if i'm trying a new map type. but it's kinda cheating :eek:

don't start an actual game. just set up a game that's all random leaders, but that map and that size, with each particular option (the peaks, the lakes, blah blah), remember which ones you use, and UNCHECK "lock modified assets". then you can go into WB and actually see the map and at least know how it looks, to know how the different options turn out. go out of WB and regen a few times, rinse and repeat for other settings, etc.

i like this method when i have a goal in mind but also want to get a map-type done for the QM table and have no idea if the combo will actually work or not. this way i don't actually start and then realize it's not gonna go that way after X amount of time and get annoyed with life. sometimes it still doesn't work out, but hey, it's saved me some 'man that would have been a BAD idea' moments. it may feel like cheating to you, if so, disregard.

do NOT forget to CHECK the "lock modified assets" box again when you've done your testing. especially for this minor, with having to specify all those opponents, i imagine starting up a game to get the "this game does not qualify" message would be annoying.

That is a great idea. To me it wouldn't feel like cheating since it isn't giving you any information you wouldn't have if you'd played the map type a few times before. :)

Edit: This is hillarious... I tried this and got an absolutely beautiful start - one of the best I've ever seen. And of course I can't use it. :)

i have one i use if i'm trying a new map type. but it's kinda cheating :eek:
That's not cheating, that's research.

Speaking of "cheating" or "research"... Here's my question... From what I read, by HoF rules, "random personalities" is not prohibited... so I am halfway through a game using random AI personalities. Doing quite well so far...

I guess I just want to check if my game would be thrown out before I finish... just in case it gets ruled that it's not in the spirit of the variant...

Should be okay.

I've never turned off barbs in any game I've played to date but if my current game doesn't work out and I have to start over I am going to consider it.

Not sure I'd ever try a gauntlet like this with barbs on... they simply distract you from the goal of the gauntlet. Its not a matter of handling them, its a matter of not letting them slow you down. ;)

Edit: This is hillarious... I tried this and got an absolutely beautiful start - one of the best I've ever seen. And of course I can't use it. :)

noooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! that's not fair!

That's not cheating, that's research.

well yes of course! but see, i consider playing with no barbs as ummmm, humane and kind, so as not to have to slaughter them. knowing and respecting Jenarie's different opinion in that area, i didn't want to assume about the map thing ;) *giggle*

bahh, first attempt arrived to the Sec Gen vote, pretty good start and surroundings, same research path used in 15.
Peaceful game (but with a strong army), lost the Sec Gen election by far.

As i supposed the only way with this leader is the backdoor, but it's too boring at this speed (i hate normal, and even talk about quick).

I don't konw if it's the map or else, but i never seen my PC so slow in Warlords, and it takes forever between turns.

No, i'll left this, i don't need another gauntlet (and i don't like this one), and i'll try to concentrate in my quattromaster climb.

Are there any assumptions of a winner's date?

What do you think about dates before 1000AD?

I've given this a go twice now. Its pretty hard. I thought it would be easier than the Diety Major but it really isn't. Its a much more 'open' problem. Maybe I'll just wait for the good players to have a go and copy what they did. Seems to work most times! ;)

Some observations
1) The highlands map is big! Its gonna be pretty hard conquering it all while building/keeping a population big enough to win the vote AND at the same time keeping up the tech do get to MM quickly. It takes >20 turns for a fast unit to move across the world even using roads.
2) The opponents are a tricky bunch. Many like to research their own religions and then stick to them, causing grief all round. Stalin and Shaka in particular are a pain as Stalin is miserable, grumpy and unfriendly and Shaka flies off the handle at any slight provocation....
3) They tech SO slowly! You have to give them everything you tech if you want to get any help on the path to MM.
4) If you try OCC, as per the Diety plan, the opponents will come and stomp on you unless you build a military, in which case MM gets put back. Winning the vote from here will also be a problem.
5) 'You traded with our worst enemy' wrecks you unless everyone is of the same religion!

I have tried two plans.
First, build a super science city, a super production city and 5 others. Then concentrate on pumping out the missionaries and enough military to keep me safe while researching ALL the religions, giving away tons of free techs and heading for MM. The aim here was to make almost everyone the same religion and make it so I was the 'best friend' of everyone by the time of the vote. Problems: it was slow getting to MM (1500 AD) and then I missed Islam and Christianity by trying to be too clever. Needless to say by the time of the vote, half my opponents had been converted by Brennus and Wang and things had all gone pear-shaped.

Second plan. Build an army, stomp everyone apart from one or two others, win by default. Problems. It was a big map and I just didn't get done stomping by the time the vote came round! I lost (or at least failed to win) again.

I think my new plan will be to keep my super science capital and beeline MM while having the rest of my empire concentrate on military. I wonder if I can conquer the world by 1200 AD with just horse archer and knights??? I'm also gonna give it a go at getting EVERY religion this time. I might need a double oasis start to get both Buddhism and Hinduism...

I tried the 'get all the religions plan' again and managed to found every last one. I built 7 cities as planned and concentrated on cottages to speed my way to MM. Unfortunately, my plan to start sending out missionaries once I figured out which of my cities could best be changed to a religious production line backfired.

Around 900AD all my secondary religions suddenly leaked out across the globe and within 15-20 turns at least 4 opponents had converted, were now no longer friends with me and had the cursed -4 'you traded with our worst enemies'. They then closed borders so I couldn't reconvert them to the true way - which in this case was confuscianism. After that, any attempts to bring them back in to the fold caused -4 trading problems with my other friends. In short, the whole thing went to pieces.... By the time the vote came along EVERY opponent had the -4 'you traded with our worst enemies'! Shaka won the vote :blush:

I still think this plan could work, you just need to send out the missionaries asap. For this reason I am thinking of going with hinduism from the get-go.

I had no trouble with AI aggression in this game so I wonder if OCC might work after all. If you have a start with some good production you could both research and spread the faith and still get to MM pretty quickly.

I don't konw if it's the map or else, but i never seen my PC so slow in Warlords, and it takes forever between turns.


I have the same problem....

As i supposed the only way with this leader is the backdoor



Backdoor takes a long time to play. I'm not sure I'll make the deadline...
It is a fun game though. :)

Are there any assumptions of a winner's date?

What do you think about dates before 1000AD?

So far 1700 AD is the fastest large map, normal speed diplomatic win in the HOF. That may be beaten with this gauntlet, but I'm not seeing any pre-1000 AD possibilities here...

Highlands maps are like playing mapsizes 1 size larger. Theres just so much room.

Ummm ... maybe I'll regenerate this map

http://www.cliftonbazaar.com/civ4/bad_start.jpg

It is an extremely rarely position for a highlands map- you are very lucky guy!

try yourself in a lottery!
Las Vegas is waiting for you!)))

Well, I regenerated the map and played. I discovered Budhism and tried to spread it around, but my neighbor got Hindu so I was ready for trouble.

Midway through the game I noticed that Hindu hadn't spread, finally I traded maps to see who had what and I saw this, no wonder Hinduism wasn't spreading -

http://www.cliftonbazaar.com/civ4/egypt.jpg

The Gauntlet is concluded:
Congratulations to the winning participants:
Rank Player Date Score
1 Misotu 1832 AD 22382
2 CliftonBazaar 1856 AD 8925
3 Airny 1880 AD 25085
4 shyuhe 1888 AD 15506

I suppose I should give a write up of how I accomplished this :)

I played this map about 12 times with a variety of methods.

First I tried Military but Highland maps are very defensive orientated as nearly every city is built on a hill :mad: Then you get the 'You declared war on my friend' negatives.

Then I tried to be nice to everyone; but sooner or later everyone gets mad at everyone and differant religions don't help.

I then voted on 'Free religion' but by that time all the negative bonuses had accrued and there was no way of getting rid of them :(

My third method was to get a religion and spread it. But if another civ discovered a new religion they would convert to it, no matter how many cities they had of your religion.

So I tried to get all the Religions while only spreading the first one I got (Budhism).

I did found Budhism but didn't get Hinduism; I was tempted to give up there and then but I kept going. If you have a look at the screen shot 2 posts above you will see that the Egyptions got Hinduism but couldn't spread it as they were on an island. 2 posts above that I posted a screen shot where I started on an island! I did regenerate that map :crazyeye:

So I madly used my Capital to teach Budhism monks and spread my religion. On the screen shot 2 posts above you can see that I converted everyone to Budhims except Stalin (the monk was on it's way). Another curious thing to note is that I only coverted the capital to Budhism and they stayed that way for the whole game; when you can only have 3 monks at a time you cannot convert every city - you just need to convert enough cities in order to make the civ change.

I did end up with 3 religions and Wang Kon got another 2; everyone converted to the religion they founded.

Meanwhile I did push on to the UN; built it with an Engineer and won the vote!

EDIT: I see the other scores were higher than me suggesting that they had more cities - so it looks like everyone else had 'military' victories in order to get the votes.

My experience was slightly different. The game I submitted was my second attempt, and I did play at least half a dozen more games to see if I could improve, but I didn't.

I didn't have a "military" victory - given the map conditions, it was a non-starter (for someone as poor at military tactics as I am, at least!)

Founding all the religions just took too much research resource away from the techs I really wanted - and was a disaster. When it came to the election, I was up against a candidate with the same religion, usually Mehmed. Hannibal, Brennus, Ragnar and Stalin would promptly vote for the opposition EVEN THOUGH I was +17 and the other guy only +11 to +14 with them. WHY??? WHY??? :cry: If anyone can explain this, I'd be grateful. Maybe because I was #1 on the score graph? It didn't seem to relate to position on the map (ie close borders, or wanting to placate a powerful neighbour).

In one game I was sure I'd hit 1700ish - but Shaka, my best buddy and +17, suddenly declared war (probably because he was trapped in a corner and my territory was boxing him in for around two-thirds of his border). I'd stupidly got confident and hadn't kept building military. By the time I'd halted his invasion he had grabbed three of my twenty cities and of course was voting for the opposion with my votes :mad:

So in the end, my strategy was: buddhism just takes too much effort away from early worker techs and doesn't lie on my beeline. Found polytheism, monotheism, code of laws and theology. Leave the two later ones to be founded - hopefully - by the best opposing civ. Build stonehenge and the oracle in one city straight off if poss to get very early prophet, build a shrine. Get workers to build roads to good rivers as soon as the shrine is built and watch my religion spread. Constantly have three missionaries going out. Build a strong economy, expand as much as possible, beeline MM and biology. Farm and windmill everything, grow each city as fast as possible, and try to account for a third or more of the votes, so only relying on a few of the civs to vote for me. Support the strongest opponent as much as possible without annoying my friends.

So ... a combination of growth, religion and fostering an opponent. I was intrigued by the possibility of giving away the UN, but never had a game where it was possible and I was never absolutely certain that I had the largest pop all the time. Giving tech help for the relationship bonuses unfortunately means that the AI is expanding rather well ...

Converting their capitals, in my games, was absolutely no guarantee that they wouldn't convert to another religion later so I had to keep the missionaries going.

I came to the conclusion that "poor" maps - ie lots of hills and short on grassland/flood plains/food resources - are much better for the human player and more likely to produce a result. I also found that many maps were poor on resources - particularly those available with calendar. In fact, in one game there was only a single incense square and no other resources requiring calendar anywhere else on the entire map. This was a huge handicap - you need the relationship bonus for resource supply which means you need to start handing out resources as early as possible. But everyone had the same resources ...

I found this game hard to win, but interesting to play. I learned a lot about diplomatic victories :) But if anyone can explain why the AI votes for a civ it likes less than me, that would be very handy!

I played only once with no testgames, lacking time and submitting only a few hours before deadline. (Airny G-Minor16-1)

I had a very nice position giving me approx. a fifth of the map for myself! I played with "seas" and few, scattered mountains.
So it all went very good till 1550:
Capital Tokio with 2gold, 3 food:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/uploads/97408/Civ4ScreenShot0002.JPG

1550AD G-Minor 16 has completed The United Nations!

After that I wasted 200 years building up my empire for more population, making diplomacy and trying to win peacefully. My first plan was to get everyone attacking Brennus, who decided to attack me, and getting the votes with help of "military struggle bonus", it gave me a nice bonus and Brennus soon was history, but it didn't work out in votes.

Things changed when Stalin decided to attack me:
1720 AD Stalin has declared war on you!

I built a large army and took most of his cities. When I was able to make him a vassal I did (getting his votes anyway, war would just reduce the population). I still didn't have enough votes with 4 people now voting for me!
I then collected and reinforced my army (bombers+tanks were the key) to reduce Shaka's (my opponent in votes) pop and increase mine.

military advisor:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/uploads/97408/Civ4ScreenShot0003.JPG
technology advisor (1880AD as usual):
http://forums.civfanatics.com/uploads/97408/Civ4ScreenShot0004.JPG
victory conditions:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/uploads/97408/Civ4ScreenShot0005.JPG
info screen (crop yield):
http://forums.civfanatics.com/uploads/97408/Civ4ScreenShot0006.JPG

I once had 1063 of 1066 required votes, which fits well in this neverending run. I was very surprised to see the others being as slow as me.
I still think much faster victories were possible.

I was very surprised to see the others being as slow as me.
I still think much faster victories were possible.

Faster victories may have been possible but not 'much faster'. Highlands map slows military (because of both size and city defence from hills) and our opponenents were war mongers who only really respect military power - and it was hard to get those votes.
Everyone being differant religions was difficult and missionarys were hard to send out (big map).

Looking at these descriptions I think I was the last to build the UN as my theory was to get everyone on side and then build it. Whereas others have built the UN and then worked on diplomacy.