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: Conquests (though all victory conditions must be enabled)
Difficulty: Monarch
Starting Era: Ancient
Map Size: Standard
Map Type: Terra
Speed: Epic
Civ: Any
Opponents: Any
Version: 1.61.011 or 2.08.004
Date: May 25th to June 9th
The earliest finish date wins, with score as a tiebreaker.

Hmm, Monarch conquest on Terra.... I think there will be a huge chasm between the people who get early conquest on the old continent versus those who have to struggle on to carry the fight onto the new continent.

It will be interesting to see if Rome or Inca is faster. No AI should ever set foot on the new continent.

Well I'll have a try at one or both of these Gauntlets but never having won on Monarch before I don't rate my chances for winning a game. At least if my conquest runs out of steam I'll be able to go for a space race plan B and try for the Major... not that that sounds like a tactic that will work very well.

I'm going to play with barbarians on again because I am daft like that.

There are two things I have to say about this Gauntlet:

1. Inca
2. Vanilla has big advantage over Warlord.

I haven't got my vanilla disc at the moment. What are the advantages?

I'm still trying to learn Monarch so I doubt I will enter a game but at the moment I am just going random leaders, either space or conquest depending on who I get. I think I need to turn barbs off, they are brutal. And the AI expands too fast.

I haven't got my vanilla disc at the moment. What are the advantages?

Just to name a few:

1. http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=5447159&postcount=290

2. In vanilla, you can capture a worker and immediately use it as bait to lure their archer out of their city. Of course, you will get your worker back when you capture their city. There will be no POW in Warlord; in fact, the AI will execute your workers immediately right on the spot - totally uncivilized if you ask me.

3. Since their primary goal during the early stage is to protect their nearest city, even when their archer has 99.99% chance of killing your unit, they won't attack. In Warlord, they have no mercy to wounded unit.

OK, so that's why I've been :wallbash: in my Warlords games. Thanks, for the tip, now if I can find my vanilla disk.....

However, I have uncovered some new tricks that work best in Warlord. If you are using Quechua, here is something you may want to try:

Pillage everything and park a Quechua within 2 squares from their city. You will see that they will start stockpiling their archers...2, then 3, then 4, then 5 almost at no time. Depending on the personality of the civ, they will start doing something really stupid after they have more than 4 archers.

What source of stupid things that AI may do when their city is under sieged?

A. They may start building a Wonder. If they do this, move your all your Quechua away from their city for about 2 or 3 turns. This would lead them to believe that the siege is over. Now, move back in to capture their city (assuming you have a stack of 4 or more to deal with the two remaining archers). What just happen to the rest of their defenders? They thought the siege was over, so they sent most of their defenders out hunting or fishing. After a long siege, their city probably run out of food, so logically, they need to go out looking for food or something.;)

B. They may start building settler. I like this part...free worker and experience.:) Just anticipate where they they may send their settler out next and ambush them out in the open field. The AI usually follow the same pattern, if we miss their first settler, just destroy their second city and wait for the next one. More settlers will come.

C. They set out to destroy our cities. I love this part...when the AI put their minds into something, they won't be sidetracked...if their mission is to destroy our city or pillage our land, nothing else matter. We just wait to engage them in the open meadow in between our city and their. Among the AIs, Washington like to do this, he keeps on sending out archers like forever. After awhile, my units got really bored of killing him.

Both B & C will eventually give us the ultimate warriors with at least 26 points of experience and a couple of warlords. Life would be so easy for us from this point forward (assuming we won't encounter any spears or chariots).

PS: The soul purpose for parking a Quechua within 2 squares from their city is to prevent their workers from improving their land and to keep an eye on their development. Other than that, it has no other purpose.

I've tried twice with 1.61 and each time I bogged down around 800BC. The first time, I chose random opponents and with my luck my last opponent was Mansa who had chariots and axes and his UU by that time and I had no copper and no economy. The 2nd time, Bismark kept himself hidden east of my capital, so I didn't discover him until very late. I didn't explore carefully in that direction and it turned out there was a tiny isthmus I didn't see. By the time I found him, he had chariots. Then Monty on the other end of the continent fortified himself on a hill also with chariots. I can build spears and axes, but even so, I'll need a lot to break him down. Possibly, I should offer a cease fire, and hope he goes fishing or something. But, I'm running out of money. I'm leaving London open hoping the barbs take it, but so far they haven't.

I can build spears and axes, but even so, I'll need a lot to break him down. Possibly, I should offer a cease fire, and hope he goes fishing or something.

I rarely attack a city that has more than 2 defenders. It doesn't matter how many defenders they get, I usually trick them into emptying their city first. For example, it's very easy to capture a city defended by 2 axemans and 2 archers using a stack of only two elite Quechuas and 2 newbie axeman. How can this even be possible?

Best case scenario, our newbie axeman has less than 1% chance of killing their archer defender. Best case scenario, our two elite Quechuas have less than 1% chance of killing their axeman defenders. If we attack with our axeman, they will defend with their archer. If we attack with Quechua, they will defend with their axeman. The situation seems pretty hopeless, but not really with the worker trick. We just move a worker into each of the non-roaded square next to their city and end our turn. By the next turn, the two axemans will come out to capture our two workers and leave their 2 archers defending their city. Now, our two elite Quechuas would have at least 90% chance of killing the two archer defenders (capture the city and rescue our two workers). Isn't that fun?;) In most cases, we don't really need to build a lot of units to deal with the AI.

PS: I was referring to the vanilla version.

Yeah, one thing why I prefer warlords over vanilla.
But this gauntlet is played better with vanilla, I guess.

I played many games until early AD and I was bad. I usually have put one AI down, but I was really behind tech and with huge happiness problem. I tried Capac with Vanilla and Warlords, and Augustus.

I just gave up the hope of a fast conquest game. I decided to choose a leader that would help me with my finances and my happiness. I took Hannibal. His UB is sweet too.

It's already 1550 AD and I have made one Civ my vassal and killed another. Now I am at war with the third, Washington. I was at war with Gandhi, when he was just two cities left, he decided to became a vassal of Washington, I have no choice now, I have to kill Washington. I just have to deal with :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: from my cities, after about 300 years of war. My cultural slider is at 20% and the science 50%, without deficit.

I installed Warlords 11th May. I'm eager to learn the new features. I still have to learn how to fight a war. I took a city from Gandhi, just to loose it the next turn. It happened two times :blush:. It slowed me down.

I'm shoulder by shoulder with the AI tech wise. The AI has Rifles, I have Rifles, Cavalry and Grenadiers.

I built only one Wonder: The Great Library. All others wonders I took by war. I was :lol: when the AI builds the Great Wall in a game without barbs. It's a waste of :hammers:.

To get a quick conquest, I think Incas and Persia are the way to go. For this gaunlet, I pick Cyrus for his superior UU and good traits Cha and Imp.

After about 3 maps (random leaders and no barbarian), I found a superb starting location, a 4 hills capital and a 4 hills horse 2nd city.:) My civ was at the center of the world, Germany was southwest, Greece was far southwest, Japan was northwest, Spain was northeast, France was far southeast and England was far northeast.

Start my wars against the world somewhere around 1500 BC, destroy everyone's bronze source and quickly annliate 2 neighbors :D (Alex and Frederic). Frederic was hopeless, he didnt have the chance of building a single wall in time. Alex almost linked a bronze source, but good thing I took him out early.

Then I fought Japan. He didnt have bronze either, whew, but I had to fight his protective archers. Now is about 500 BC. As my army marched across my land, I found that Louis and Elizabeth have spears! :eek: Sadly, I did not have Iron Working and cant locate those iron sources. I wait til 400 AD and disconnect the iron source. And finally I sacriface like 20+ units to take out a English capital of 2 swords, 1 spear, and 1 archer. :cry:

By 600 AD, I finally have catapults and by 900 AD I finish Louis. Quickly I march the resourceless Spain and took out Isabella. Conquest at 1010 AD. :(

In this game, I think I made at least 2 mistakes. First, I should locate both bronze and iron instead of just bronze. Such as the example in the battle of London where I lost alot of experienced immortals to spears and swords fortifed in a walled city. My second mistake is to keep captured cities. In my game, I raze all the enemy cities b/c I fear the upkeep cost. Turns out I was able to run 100% research in that game, but my army production not enough. Mistake#1 is the most fatal, b/c I probably can finish all the ai at least before 500AD if not in the BC era.

I have made one Civ my vassal

Just to clarify, the victory type for this gauntlet is conquest and having them as a vassal means he/she hasn't been conquered!

BTW, after many upsetting attempts in previous gauntlets (and already in this one), and hearing about her from others, I made sure that sweet little Miss Victoria is in my games. :evil:

Just to clarify, the victory type for this gauntlet is conquest and having them as a vassal means he/she hasn't been conquered!

BTW, after many upsetting attempts in previous gauntlets (and already in this one), and hearing about her from others, I made sure that sweet little Miss Victoria is in my games. :evil:

I'm not so sure. I won a game as France after vassalising my last enemy. Expecting a domination win, I was greeted with a victory screen saying I had won by conquest.

Yeah, this months WOTM9 I vassalized the last opponent and got a conquest win, mainly to speed things up. The game ends anyway so what victory type could it possibly be? I wasn't at the domination limit. So I think Methos may be mistaken here.

So I think Methos may be mistaken here.

According to my wife, I'm always "mistaken"! :D

I apologize at my mistake. I didn't realize that. Kind of odd, since the "slave" can leave the master later, so it makes it weird that its still considered a conquest victory. Learn something everyday.

I'd just like to make it clear that I am not Methos' wife... He would be very disappointed if I was, and would probably insist that the beard has to go.

EDIT: The reason it has to be the case is because you can't declare war on a vassal so you can't eliminate them. They count as eliminated unless they break free (which is unlikely when you are in conquest burn and pillage mode).

I'd just like to make it clear that I am not Methos' wife... He would be very disappointed if I was, and would probably insist that the beard has to go.

:rotfl:

EDIT: The reason it has to be the case is because you can't declare war on a vassal so you can't eliminate them. They count as eliminated unless they break free (which is unlikely when you are in conquest burn and pillage mode).

:hmm: Interesting. I've been trying this on vanilla, but I'm wondering if using vassals would make it easier.

I've been trying this on vanilla, but I'm wondering if using vassals would make it easier.

In order to use vassals, don't you we have to research a certain technology?

Four failed attempts at this so far. All with Cyrus.

I have tried twice (with Incas in Warlords). One false start, where I quicky learned you really need to choose your opponents, and choose them without the protective trait, if you want to go for the early Quecha rush.

My second try, I came frustratingly close to winning. I sort of lucked out finding a starting location for my capital after a couple turns of exploring -- a plains hill with marble, which produces three shields when you place your capital on it, with another plains hill with trees within the City boundaries. So I was producing 6 shields a turn and cranking Quechas out (my capital did not grow past three the whole game). My capital was close to three other civ capitals, all eliminated with ease (since they were all close, I kept those cities, so I had four total, one which ended up yielding a source of iron). After taking them out, I took the time to build Stonehenge in my capital, which helped all my cities' culture grow (and which was my sole use of Huyana's industrial trait).

The others three civs were much farther away. For two of them, I was able to prevent them from getting horses or metals, and took them out with a fair amount of effort. (By this point, I was using chariots and then horse archers, as well as swordsmen and axeman, together with the ever useful Quechas.) I raised all but one of those cities (keeping one to have a remote "home base" to work from -- no units supply costs for units stationed in the city.)

Bismark was the last civ, and I came close to taking him out. However, my momentum faltered, and my unit costs, together with civil unrest/war wariness back home (probably exacerbated by my excessive use of slavery to rush units and keep population down) brought my economy to a screeching halt and fatally limited the number of units I could support. Also, as it turns out, Bismark had a remote city on a separate island I could not reach, where he was apparently getting a source of iron I could not take out. He had caravels, which prevented me from getting galleys/triremes there to even explore (and it was sooo far away it would take forever to reach by galley anyway).

Finally, I learned that I really need to stop being stubborn and turn off those !@#$ barbarians for this type of game. With the vast expanses of un-settled open terrain left open by my razing of cities, they really started to become much more than a nuisance, particularly at the end when they came at me with longbowmen and I did not have Fuedalism (if I had that, I think I might have beaten Bismark down enough to convince him to become my vassal, so I tried to reach it, but could not in time). If not for the units and time I lost to barbarians, I think I might well have won this game.

(By comparison, the barbarians proved a benefit in the G-Major/space race game, as they helpfully built a number of useful cities with some improvements for me to conquer in the "americas" on the terra map, so I did not have to build and send over as many settlers to take over that continent and was able to start out with cities which were already partially developed.)

At the end, my efforts did not prevent Bismark from shooting far far ahead of the research curve -- my horse archers (with a shock promotion) and swordsmen (and catapults), in sufficient volume, were barely able to take out his macemen and longbowmen and even his pikemen, but I finally gave up when I saw those musketmen. Arggh!

I will try again at some point soon, but I really need to do other things with my time.

Yes, I am beginning to think that I should turn off barbarians for this one. I started off with my standard normal barbarian setting. I wasn't too concerned because I was going for a military strategy anyway so no issues with being undefended, plus hacking loads of archers with my Immortals would provide valuable experience. However, barbarians have proven to be a fatal distraction so far, especially when they turn up before I have hooked up horses.

My latest attempt is going OK. No horses though which for Ramesses is not good. But I have Napoleon's France down to 1 city and just about to get construction when the peace treaty ends. But that's still only 1 out of the remaining 6 about to be eliminated. But it's my best attempt at Monarch yet. We'll see. I've always got plan B for the space race to get the major LOL.

Just popped a great engineer from the Oracle/Metal Casting/Forge gambit (more like dead cert with an industrious leader on epic speed) but Mao built the pyramids already, and I haven't researched literature so no Great Library. Went for the parthenon instead. I have a double holy city (hindu/confucian) so I'll probably be wanting a prophet next.

Okay, finished. Conquest at 320 AD with the Incas. Won't set any records here, but it is probably my personal earliest victory. Would have been earlier, if not for some bone-headed moves on my part and some really bad luck with one of the battles (although I had some good luck elsewhere, so can't really complain!). This time, I took my army of Quechas out to take out a couple of the more distant civs first, while terrorizing closer civs with some other Quechas to keep them from getting any dangerous resources until I could return for them. This kept my final battles closer to home, which better allowed me to control unit supply costs and keep my momentum going at a time my economy would otherwise start crashing. Turning off the barbs also made all the difference.

From what I learned, I may have to try this one more time to see if I can get any earlier!

It's hard to see how you can beat the Incas for an early victory (although both Persians and Romans are formidable).

Now I really need to go out and get some exercise!

I couldn't get a conquest victory with my game playing as Hannibal. I wasn't behind tech but when the enemy has cavalry, you have to left too many defenders behind. I had one city razed. :( I thought about quiting the game, but it would be a shame after so many hours. I knew I could win the game. I decided to go for diplo because I wanted to finish it fast. I won around 1800. It's a valid HoF game anyway. I'll submit it.

I started another game playing as Hatshepsut. I could manage a chariot rush and killed Washington around 700 BC. Now it's 1124 AD and I have two vassals. I put down three AI's! In the game with Hannibal I had around this time only one AI down. I'm getting better. :)

I think I will persevere with Cyrus. I can't bring myself to use Huayna after all those 'Cheesey!" calls in that other thread. For my 5th attempt I will use Cyrus with no barbarians and random opponents.

Horses within range of my capital would be nice.......

I think I will persevere with Cyrus. I can't bring myself to use Huayna after all those 'Cheesey!" calls in that other thread. For my 5th attempt I will use Cyrus with no barbarians and random opponents.

Horses within range of my capital would be nice.......

Cyrus is superb, all you need is take out every1's bronze and iron. AI will never research up to construction and feudalism....

I posted a 1280AD finish with Julius, which at the moment is the slowest of 6 entries. Would have been earlier but Vic had a city on a small island that took me a little while to get too.

Just to clarify, the victory type for this gauntlet is conquest and having them as a vassal means he/she hasn't been conquered!


As said before, vassalizing all your enemies will give you a conquest victory...mainly because it is an unwilling partner, and can only break free if they reach a reasonable level of power in the world again, unlikely in a conquest oriented game(I've never had an AI break free of me before, however, I enjoy making enemy AIs lose their vassals, as I usually pick them up immediately:evil:)

In order to use vassals, don't you we have to research a certain technology?

You do have to research Feudalism to enable vassals...it is a fairly expensive tech for as quick a conquest as some people are likely to get, but it shouldn't be too hard to slingshot for it using the Oracle, if you go for Monarchy quickly and are able to distract the AI from building the Oracle...I can do the Feudalism slingshot on prince fairly easily on Terra maps, so I am certain some of the players here can do so...I may try to do it. Otherwise, I'll make an attempt with Rome tonight.

Hi, conquestors!
I'v finished my first attempt and submitted it. hm... I'm wondered:
my game is accepted so there was no reasons to decline it.
but I do not see my game in G-Minor 19 table... Help! Please!

PS As it seems to me, current minor must be played very fast:
- before 1000BC IAC.
- it is only one way to do this: play by Inca (i'v played in warlords as I haven't played vanilla for a long time)

PSPS oh... I'v played in 2.08.003 mode... I forgot to switch mode after SGOTM4 game.... oops

No chance for a 1000BC game for me. I'm thinking of switching to a space race to see if I can get a major under my belt... still a bit undecided. I've only eliminated France and beaten up Ragnar a bit by 625AD. Still going OK though, 3rd in score but Beuraucracy in 2 turns and machinery about 10 turns after that I reckon. It'll probably all go horribly wrong though. Either way, I'm not going to win any prizes but I will be pleased if I manage to get my first Monarch win anyway (fingers and toes crossed).

My first attempt had Augustus(Creative, yay!) and raging barbs...they proved more distracting to me than the to AI. I had stone nearby, but lost a settler trying to get it...so I chopped out the Great Wall, by which point the barbs had dried up...I then had 1 city in 700BC, so I quickly whipped out two settlers, got iron hooked up, and proceeded to turn against my Hindu brothers Napoleon and Asoka. I then joined the ranks of the Buddhist Izzy after getting Buddhism in a french city. At 900AD, I'm third to last in tech, but I've vassalized Napoleon, taken all of Asoka's mainland cities, and could have turned on either Shaka or Izzy...but everyone now has Longbows(Praetorians aren't as great against longbows as against archers), and I'm never gonna be able to conquer everyone before Mansa and Mao reach the new world...so I quit.

I'll try normal barbs if I get another shot, and I'll either go Rome again or try for Persia.

Is it better to max out opponents or have the minimum?

Is it better to max out opponents or have the minimum?

- do you like bloody games?
If yes - choose as much as possible! And pray! :devil:

- if you want the fastest finish - choose 6 opponents... and pray too ;)

- do you like bloody games?
If yes - choose as much as possible! And pray! :devil:

- if you want the fastest finish - choose 6 opponents... and pray too ;)

The only thing is, with more opponents there is less room for the AI to expand, so instead of 6 strong-ish AIs there are 10 AIs with 2 good cities tops.

I can't seem to get the Quechua rush to work with Warlords 2.08. It's more difficult to take cities with the patch.

Would a civ with a faster moving UU be better because there's so much ground to cover? Maybe Cyrus or Hatty? Egypts chariots can do well if you make enough of them. Immortals are good too. There's also Shaka, Hannibal and Gengis Khan for fast moving UUs. Sometimes the slow but steady approach of the Romans and Koreans can work just as well.

edit: I just reviewed the log for the best time for standard/monarch. That's going to be tough to beat. They won several battles not in their favor. It's like they just played game after game until they got extremely lucky with one.

Not a great date but at one point I thought it a lost cause.

Eealier I found this island with a single galley. I didn't think I could attack without amphibious promotion but I tried it anyway. And it worked. :eek: I lost the battle but I came back later with 3 galleys and was able to take the city/island. :crazyeye:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/uploads/38674/Civ4ScreenShot0003a.jpg

It should also be noted that I had to go offshore to finish off 4 of the 6 civs. Sheesh! :(

Okay, so far so good... I reached a Conquest -Victory and now I´d like to submit the game.. How do I do that? I tried to register 2 days ago but I am still waiting for the email with the password I need to log in. Did I do anything wrong or what or how or why or when or...???

Oh damn it , now I read that I have to save the initial starting position what I of course didn´t do. I only have the replay file and the turn after my 565 BC Conquest Victory... Any chances of this game to be accepted (I am really proud of it!!!)

Oh damn it , now I read that I have to save the initial starting position what I of course didn´t do. I only have the replay file and the turn after my 565 BC Conquest Victory... Any chances of this game to be accepted (I am really proud of it!!!)Sorry not without the start file. Do you still have your autosaves? The initial autosave will do.

Okay, so far so good... I reached a Conquest -Victory and now I´d like to submit the game.. How do I do that? I tried to register 2 days ago but I am still waiting for the email with the password I need to log in. Did I do anything wrong or what or how or why or when or...???I just re-sent it to you at your registered e-mail account. Be sure to check your spam folders. If you don't get it by tomorrow. E-mail us at hof.civfanatics@gmail.com so we can verify your e-mail address.

Sorry not without the start file. Do you still have your autosaves? The initial autosave will do.

No, unfortunately not... mh, so I think I will have to do it again...

I just re-sent it to you at your registered e-mail account. Be sure to check your spam folders. If you don't get it by tomorrow. E-mail us at hof.civfanatics@gmail.com so we can verify your e-mail address.

Thank you, I got it.

You do have to research Feudalism to enable vassals...it is a fairly expensive tech for as quick a conquest as some people are likely to get, but it shouldn't be too hard to slingshot for it using the Oracle, if you go for Monarchy quickly and are able to distract the AI from building the Oracle...I can do the Feudalism slingshot on prince fairly easily on Terra maps, so I am certain some of the players here can do so...I may try to do it. Otherwise, I'll make an attempt with Rome tonight.

Thanks for the info.:) Since Feudalism is an expensive tech and we probably couldn't get it before 1000BC, I'm certain that it won't be the best tactic for this gauntlet.

PS As it seems to me, current minor must be played very fast:
- before 1000BC IAC.
- it is only one way to do this: play by Inca (i'v played in warlords as I haven't played vanilla for a long time)

I really don't want to say anything about the given date because I don't want to discourage anyone from trying. However, since you said it first, I totally agree with you on this.

This is really hard. I wonder what I need to do differently. My current (fifth) attempt is going better than the previous four in that I am in about 1200 AD and in a reasonably strong position. I am first or second in score and about the same in power. Hannibal and Roosevelt have been eliminated but it's pretty slow going to take out the others. I was battling it out with Mao but then Ragnar turned up at my borders with a host of Beserkers so I will now need to redirect my stacks of Immortals and Trebuchets that way. Plus, the economy is starting to tank. I missed out on Liberalism by about 10 turns and now Asoka is starting to build up a tech lead.

Clearly I should be doing something completely differently.

hm...I think I need to learn to balance out how aggressive I am at first...I've now lost two straight games when I began very early worker stealing wars.

I should probably stop doing that unless the worker is out of reach of a single turn of movement from the capital...I should also probably beeline to IW with Rome, rather than running around the worker techs first.

What source of stupid things that AI may do when their city is under sieged?

A. They may start building a Wonder. If they do this, move your all your Quechua away from their city for about 2 or 3 turns.
B. They may start building settler. I like this part...free worker and experience.:) Just anticipate where they they may send their settler out next and ambush them out in the open field.
C. They set out to destroy our cities. I love this part...when the AI put their minds into something, they won't be sidetracked...if their mission is to destroy our city or pillage our land, nothing else matter. We just wait to engage them in the open meadow in between our city and their.

:blush: I feel embarrased to ask, but...how do I know what they are building?

I'm in about 1450 AD and it's all bogged down. It takes about 15 turns to take each city and there must be at least 20 left on this continent, never mind what happens if anybody makes it to the new world.

I wish I could research Military Tradition a bit more quickly. I need Cavalry! Immortals just don't cut it any more.

:blush: I feel embarrased to ask, but...how do I know what they are building?

Base on their available workspaces, you can guess how long it take them to roll out an archer, or a settler. If neither of them coming out after your estimate time frame, they must be building a Wonder or something.

hm...I think I need to learn to balance out how aggressive I am at first...I've now lost two straight games when I began very early worker stealing wars.

I should probably stop doing that unless the worker is out of reach of a single turn of movement from the capital.

we need to find a way to mix and match our styles Thrallia, we'd do so well! i'm quite good at showing no aggression at first. i think i've done the worker steal thing twice my entire Civ4 career ... if you don't count barbs, since they of course start the aggression there!

Okay, this time I got a conquest vic in 295 BC. Not so good as the game before but I keep trying. I play Egypt to use the war chariots. I am not sure if they are the best units for early warfare but I like them. I think I will try to play the same settings with warlords now. I think the vanilla version made it a bit easier. At least the AI always leaves the cities in vanilla when they have more than two units stationed in the city, althought I am standing right next to the city with 4 or 5 units. Mh, we´ll see what the warlords AI can do...

How on earth do you manage to do it by 295 BC? I've barely even started by then. I am in 1798 AD and may now struggle to finish before Asoka launches is space ship. This is very difficult.

well, I'v finished my second game just now. I hope I did not do any mistakes in game options or HOF mode version this time and my second game will be accepted and included in minor table. I'v improved finish date for 360 years.

I just got Asoka's world map and there is a distressingly large amount of purple over on the new world. Maybe this game is already lost. How annoying. It takes days to get this far into the game only to have it slip away. Asoka's power graph is almost vertical. How does he get so powerful so quickly?

Thanks for the info.:) Since Feudalism is an expensive tech and we probably couldn't get it before 1000BC, I'm certain that it won't be the best tactic for this gauntlet.
I agree with this, with so many BC times coming around. I'm a slow domination/conquest player. I've been trying to change this since I realized that I couldn't beat Monarch because of my play style. Vassals are helping me on my goal because it's already 1472 AD and I'm fighting my last war, a World War I must add. It's me with my two Vassals against Cyrus with his Vassal, Asoka. Four AIs are down, two left. Asoka will not last more than 10 turns, I guess. I think I'll win this time. The worst time of all, I guess.

The worst time of all, I guess.

Not if I can pull off a win in my current game it won't be. I'm already at 1798 and still have three civs to knock over, two of whom have already emigrated to islands and new continents.

Not if I can pull off a win in my current game it won't be. I'm already at 1798 and still have three civs to knock over, two of whom have already emigrated to islands and new continents.If I might offer a suggestion. With a conquest type game, you only need enough economy/research to get you to producing your world conquerors. Good civs for this have a ancient era UU. (Eygpt, Persia, Rome, etc.) Your primary research path should beeline to whatever techs you need to produce that unit. After that, concentrate on producing a lot of those. Ignore anything else builder related that does not directly relate to that. Everything else is logistics.

Look in the Civ4 - Strategy & Tips fourm (http://forums.civfanatics.com/forumdisplay.php?f=155) and the War Academy (http://www.civfanatics.com/civ4/strategy/) for lots of strategy articles that you can barrow ideas from.

I won! :dance: My first monarch conquest victory, 1571 AD. Now, I just have to improve my time. I know I won't beat any record. I have time for more one or two games only. I just hope I can win before 1000 AD.

Nice idea, Denniz, but how can you take over the whole world just with Immortals? That works for a little while, but immortals run out of steam when faced with Longbowmen on hills with 60-80% cultural defence. Plus, your units all go on strike unless you have cash, so you have to build courthouses and markets and stuff. And your cities go all unhappy and unhealthy so you need temples and aqueducts. And you don't produce quickly enough so you need Forges.

All of that takes time. And when the macemen and trebuchets come knocking on your door, you need more than just Immortals to save the day.

That's what happens in my games anyway.

Ok, I give a try Quecha Rush on Warlord today, and it worked quite well...

On my third attempt using quecha rush (no barbarians and picking specific opponents), I finally won at 820 BC. I got quite lucky too, 2 of my opponents each link up one resource (horse and iron), but they never manage to build a single chariot or axeman/spearman/swordman. I also had money problem. In mid game, I had -13 gold per turn at 100% gold. I had to pillage and quickly take city down. That certainly kept me at a fast pace. I am pretty satsfy with this date and I'm sure ppl can beat this date.

Thanks to Moonsinger for the advice of tricking the opponent's defenders with baits. :)

Harbourboy, I was always in the same boat as you, but I managed a 1280AD victory with Julius. All I did was build 1 city, a worker or 2, researched till I got Iron Working (for the UU- Praetorians) and then all I built for the rest of the game was Praetorians. The first couple of cities I conquered I kept so to produce more Praetorians and then after that I just razed them so that my economy wouldn't cripple too much.

My game is accepted - it's good! But I got second place only - it's bad)))

Moonsinger! How are you? Do you think that we can have equal dates again?

Nice idea, Denniz, but how can you take over the whole world just with Immortals? That works for a little while, but immortals run out of steam when faced with Longbowmen on hills with 60-80% cultural defence. Plus, your units all go on strike unless you have cash, so you have to build courthouses and markets and stuff. And your cities go all unhappy and unhealthy so you need temples and aqueducts. And you don't produce quickly enough so you need Forges.

All of that takes time. And when the macemen and trebuchets come knocking on your door, you need more than just Immortals to save the day.

That's what happens in my games anyway.I haven't done it on Monarch with Cyrus yet but it is possible with Rome. You have to go faster. Take some risks. Figure out the minimum needed to take a city. Attack on multiple fronts. Build roads to the front. Expect losses. (It helps with the strike problem.)

You do have to do some improvements to increase production and pay for your troops. You should steal your first worker early on if possible. Mostly you have to manage how many you build so they don't go on strike. You might be keeping too many cities. Plunder away. As for happiness and health, one word: slavery.

Also, you don't necessarily quit researching, try to get construction. A suicide cataplt can help late.

Moonsinger! How are you? Do you think that we can have equal dates again?

I'm too old to remember my age!;) The last time I check, I was around 2xxx BC.

I was around 2xxx BC.

clear! I started and finised 2 games yesterday: 1840BC and 1780BC. Start positions were not ideal in both games (only 5 hammers per turn in my capital).

Start positions were not ideal in both games (only 5 hammers per turn in my capital).

Huh!?! Not idea? I won't start unless I have 5 :hammers:/t at 4000 BC. What are you looking for, plains hill marble? :D

I'm currently at either 8 or 9 attempts on this one, but apparently I just can't get this quecha rush thing down. Four quecha's aren't enough for me. :sad:

I'm too old to remember my age!;)

I have the same problem! I refer to my driving licence when necessary. [offtopic]

....................................

Huh!?! Not idea? I won't start unless I have 5 :hammers:/t at 4000 BC. What are you looking for, plains hill marble? :D

I'm currently at either 8 or 9 attempts on this one, but apparently I just can't get this quecha rush thing down. Four quecha's aren't enough for me. :sad:

You are rigth: "plains hill marble" or "plains hill stone" It's the best of all! ;)
5 hummers are acceptable, if you have no enough time.

Why "Four quecha's"? - Build as mach as you need and enjoy yourself! :D

I have a 845 AD with Rome. A 360 AD with Persia. I can't get the Inca thing to work for me. Somebody always had axemen or chariots by the time I can conquer 3 civs.

How about an some kind of overview of a Inca conquest again six opponents?

I have given up on my fifth attempt as Asoka spaceship is inevitable. Time to start game six.

In game six, it is 415AD and I have eliminated Montezuma and Ragnar using Immortals and taken over their capitals. I was fighting Elizabeth when she became Mansa's vassal. The good times are over now as Longbows have just materialised in every city. I will now need to find a way to get hold of catapults, which will slow things down for a while.

In this game I had the perfect start: horses right in my capital. I have done nothing but build immortals and fight wars and I am still only 2/6 of the way to conquest and I am already past the dates that you guys are all getting. How do you manage to win SO much faster than me?

I have a 845 AD with Rome. A 360 AD with Persia. I can't get the Inca thing to work for me. Somebody always had axemen or chariots by the time I can conquer 3 civs.

How about an some kind of overview of a Inca conquest again six opponents?

I've done the Quechua Rushes with vanilla only. You can tech up to axes and/or chariots if needed, which is often the case with standard size maps. You can also imploy tricks like using workers to lure the axemen outside of the city so your Quechuas can take it.

Do you guys build ANY wonders in your superfast conquest victories?

Do you guys build ANY wonders in your superfast conquest victories?

I stated building stoneheng, but every time did not finish.

My finish date is for now the worst. :lol: Today I finished another game with Cyrus, it was earlier but still in the 1500's AD. I felt it was so unfair! Around 125 AD I have killed four AI's, then over 1000 years to get rid of the other two! Liz built three cities on an island, I noticed that only around 1300 AD when I took over London and she was still alive. I had at this time no idea where her cities were. :rolleyes: Another win, at least Monarch is not an impossible level for me anymore, I used to lose one game after the other.

I built no Wonders early in the game. I built the Pyramids and the Great Wall (in a game without barbs) near the end, just for the fun, my army at this point was so huge, that I haven't used the half of it finish up Liz. I didn't have time to land all of them in the island. She fought to the last city. No vassals this time.

How about an some kind of overview of a Inca conquest again six opponents?

You can easily prevent the AIs from hooking horse/bronze/iron like forever. Let's say we need to kill all 6 civs by using only Quechua (not using axes, spears, or horses). First, build six Quechuas while our capital still at size 1. The first Quechua will head out to steal a worker, and pillage all improvement from whatever AI he counters, then move on to the next civ further away. The second Quechua and the third one will do the same thing but go on opposite direction. The next three Quechuas will take position against the first three civs. Basically, each Quechua will camp by each of the AI capital. That's it. Now, you would have all the time on the world to do whatever that you like to do. Just as long as you have a Quechua camping near by their capital, the AI will never dare to send out workers. Sure, they will stockpile their defenders, but that's no big deal because we can always lure all of them out (except for two) before we attack.

Do you guys build ANY wonders in your superfast conquest victories?

Because it's a fast conquest, 99.99% of the time, the game would be over before any wonder can be finished. Beside, with the upkeep for all our troops, we really don't have much money for research. Also, since we need to build as many military units ASAP, we really don't have time for Wonder.

First, build six Quechuas while our capital still at size 1.

How? By the time you are halfway through the second one, your capital will be size 2.

each Quechua will camp by each of the AI capital.

Whenever I do that, the AI just builds hundreds of archers, meaning that I need even more armies to take over the city. Isn't it better to stay away, and then attack without warning while they still only have two archers?

because we can always lure all of them out (except for two) before we attack.

How?

Moonsinger explained that a lot of times.
You need to use at least one stolen worker and put him next to the city.

There is a nice side-effect:
If you take his capital (being his only city), you eliminate his remaining units, which stood where the worker was.

How? By the time you are halfway through the second one, your capital will be size 2.

No. Settle on a plains hill and have a forested plains hill within 1 square. Work it immediately. You generate 5H and 0 extra food, so your city can't grow.

Whenever I do that, the AI just builds hundreds of archers, meaning that I need even more armies to take over the city. Isn't it better to stay away, and then attack without warning while they still only have two archers?
How?

Are you using 1.61? The Ai will often inexplicably move 3 archers out of the city at a most inopportune time (for it) to chase a worker.

You can easily prevent the AIs from hooking horse/bronze/iron like forever. Let's say we need to kill all 6 civs by using only Quechua (not using axes, spears, or horses). First, build six Quechuas while our capital still at size 1. The first Quechua will head out to steal a worker, and pillage all improvement from whatever AI he counters, then move on to the next civ further away. The second Quechua and the third one will do the same thing but go on opposite direction. The next three Quechuas will take position against the first three civs. Basically, each Quechua will camp by each of the AI capital. That's it. Now, you would have all the time on the world to do whatever that you like to do. Just as long as you have a Quechua camping near by their capital, the AI will never dare to send out workers. Sure, they will stockpile their defenders, but that's no big deal because we can always lure all of them out (except for two) before we attack.my problem is I keep losing harassers to a double archer attack.

So are you saying that you need to go to war with everybody at once? So you ignore all the usual rules of diplomacy? And no tech-trading?

This is like having to unlearn everything you have previously learned about this game. This is why I enjoy these gauntlets so much.

Whenever I do that, the AI just builds hundreds of archers, meaning that I need even more armies to take over the city. Isn't it better to stay away, and then attack without warning while they still only have two archers?

The main reason you are having problems, I think, is because you are using Warlords, whereas Moonsinger talks about lurring them out of their city in Vanilla. The AI are more reluctant to come out in Warlords.

How?

Read MoonSinger's posts attentively! All you need to konw were posted some posts before.

PS I finished all 3 games with capital size = 1!

Game 6 is grinding to a halt in 1200 AD as Mansa Musa attacks my immortals with knights. Time to go back to the drawing board....

@Harbourboy: Make sure you settle on a plains hill and that you have a forested plains hill inside your city radius. By settling on a plains hill your city center will produce 2 :hammers:/t, plus by having your only citizen working the forested plains hill you're making 5 :hammers:/t total. You're not producing any extra :food:, so you won't grow, but that really doesn't matter.

The above part I have down really well. It's what to do with them afterwards that's frustrating! ;)

my problem is I keep losing harassers to a double archer attack.

I've noticing this too. I even parked one on a forested hill and still got the double wallop (and taken out).

my problem is I keep losing harassers to a double archer attack.

Are you using Warlord or Vanilla? If it is Warlord, you need to camp 2 squares away to avoid double archer attack. I also promote to Medic before Cover for the unit that camp inside enemy territory.

Thanks for the info.:) Since Feudalism is an expensive tech and we probably couldn't get it before 1000BC, I'm certain that it won't be the best tactic for this gauntlet.

just a side note, in case i can help you learn something, i've learned so very much from you! feudalism works like alphabet, either party can know it. naturally them knowing it rather than just you is dangerous, since they can voluntarily vassalize to somebody else and then that leader declares on you. so it's tricky, but important to know! chances that they know feudalism before you on monarch, if you're beelining to it, are low, and before 1000 BC, basically zilch without getting monarchy from a hut and using it wisely. but worth a mention since we don't always play monarch ;).

Make sure you settle on a plains hill and that you have a forested plains hill inside your city radius.

Oh! OK. I see that the superfast wins require Vanilla, MapFinder, and Inca.

How do I modify these strategies to work on Warlords, No Mapfinder, and Cyrus? Under these settings, I simply can't follow Moonsinger's advice of building a unit and sending one to each enemy and hamper them all at once. By the time I have hooked up horses and built 5 immortals, each enemy has more than one city and two archers in each. So at least 3 immortals required to take each city, which means I have to focus on one enemy at a time.

The trick with the worker doesn't always work (playing vanilla of course).
I used Praetorians and put a worker next to their city waiting for them to come out, but they won't.

I can imagine two reasons:
-The AI takes the strength of your units into account
-They don't care about worker, which you didn't steal from them

Oh! OK. I see that the superfast wins require Vanilla, MapFinder, and Inca.

How do I modify these strategies to work on Warlords, No Mapfinder, and Cyrus? Under these settings, I simply can't follow Moonsinger's advice of building a unit and sending one to each enemy and hamper them all at once. By the time I have hooked up horses and built 5 immortals, each enemy has more than one city and two archers in each. So at least 3 immortals required to take each city, which means I have to focus on one enemy at a time.


Have a look at Balbes 1st spoiler in the Cyrus WOTM07.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=213072

be awed and amazed - 830 AD Conquest with Immortals against a tough set of AI. :goodjob:

Ah, good point, erikthecelt! That is what I need. Balbes shows the pure war tactics required to get a Cyrus conquest in tougher conditions than in this gauntlet. I think this is what I should be looking at, rather than the uber-quechua rush. Even Balbes couldn't pull off the pure immortal rush so I don't feel so bad that I need catapults as well (although this is two levels down).

Now on to game 9 and it is about 700 AD. I have more armies than before this time, having, ironically, played more cautiously and therefore not lost my big stacks to premature attacks on well fortified cities. From here on, it will be a pure catapult spam, combined with some strategic resource denial. I am miles behind on tech, but from what you guys are saying, this shouldn't matter.

Oh! OK. I see that the superfast wins require Vanilla, MapFinder, and Inca.

I think you misunderstood me. I have never said that you have to use MapFinder, Vanilla, and Inca for this game. I simply mentioned that the Inca and Vanilla would yield the best date for this gauntlet. I'm sure any civ and any version is winable.

As for using MapFinder, I have never used it in Civ4. Please don't get me wrong, MapFinder is a wonderful program, it's just that I'm just playing for fun and not looking for any optimal result at the moment.

It's 1472 AD in Game 9 and I still must be doing something wrong as I am in around 4th place but with catapults and immortals up against musketmen. How many catapults do you reckon are needed per defending musketman in a city?

It's 1472 AD in Game 9 and I still must be doing something wrong as I am in around 4th place but with catapults and immortals up against musketmen. How many catapults do you reckon are needed per defending musketman in a city?When the opposition transitions beyond axemen you need to start thinking about upgrading your forces to more competitive units.

I would suggest trying Rome. Preatorians have a pretty long life span on epic. Just remember you only need to keep your core producing cities (4-6) and maybe one good city from each conquered civ. Don't neglect building cottages as time goes on so you can keep up some research. You should have lots of extra workers. You do build a road network with/in advance of your conquests?

Random advice: The important thing is to figure out how many units you need to conquer a target city and send enough so you don't have to fight that battle twice but not too many so that you waste moves. Use your less experienced units to damage the defenders allowing your more experienced units to make the kills. Always go for their copper/iron/horse asap. Capture the city or plunder them. You have to manage more than one stream of attackers. One city at a time is too slow but don't attack with an understrength stack. Don't waste time plundering everything in sight. Conquer the city and move on.

You should have lots of extra workers. You do build a road network with/in advance of your conquests?

I have more workers than I know what to do with. Every tile on the whole continent has a road on it.

Hidden benefit of catapults is that they seem to be immune to collateral damage so they can pass through enemy territory virtually unscathed.

Still, this is very slow. I am only doing one city at a time but this is the only way I can be sure of taking the city.

I have more workers than I know what to do with. Every tile on the whole continent has a road on it.

Hidden benefit of catapults is that they seem to be immune to collateral damage so they can pass through enemy territory virtually unscathed.

Still, this is very slow. I am only doing one city at a time but this is the only way I can be sure of taking the city.Disband some of the workers then, you pay unit cost for those as well. Just keep enough for what needs to be done.

How many units are you sending? Usaully you need about a 2-1 for a regular town with archers. 3-1 for a hill town or high culture with archers. Oh, for horse unit I find withdrawl better than strength.

I'm thinking of trying Rome this time. I hope I can improve my date and get way from the last place. My last game was a little better but still the worst date.

I am on to Game 10 now. I am trying to idea of going to war with everyone to slow them down. I didn't really have enough to go against everyone at once but I am at an early war with Asoka, Hannibal, and Elizabeth and it is working much better. Until I found that Asoka has copper in his capital and so could make spearmen instantly. I have given up on Asoka for now and concentrating on Hannibal as he has a capital and two holy cities up for grabs.

Another game finished. I got a 1274 AD victory this time with Rome. The Prets were great, with the help of few cats, no problem with longbows. At the end macemen came around, they are harder because the bonus against meele but I had so many prets that nothing could stop me. I just hope this new submission will take me out from the last place.

I think Warlords is better for slow players like me. I had vassals this time, four. Gandhi accept to be my vassal very quickly, I took just three cities. I had a really big army. The great generals help too. I got a Medic III spearman, that healed all my prets and cats fast.

I built a big empire with strong economy. At the middle of the game I fell behind research, but I could recover later. I had a lot of cottages. I got few great people, I lightbulb only one tech.

Very nice tips Moonlord :worship: . Got somewhat nice go for 865bc with those. Most like coulda done a lot better (like 1200bc easily i think) if i'd moved units faster to far end of the world and kill closer neighbors last. This should lead to hard competition as tips are so good.


-Dracandross

I just hope this new submission will take me out from the last place.



This should take you out of last place because I have a 1280AD game submitted and I am currently second to last.
I'm trying to submit a second game but don't know if I will have time to play much more before it closes.

This should take you out of last place because I have a 1280AD game submitted and I am currently second to last.
I'm trying to submit a second game but don't know if I will have time to play much more before it closes.

Yes, I'm not on the last place anymore. :)

Yes, I'm not on the last place anymore. :)

I am now though:(

ok, my third attempt w/ the incans, this time got a 685 BC conquest victory. Worse than my second game, because my last opponent was on the other edge of the world from my second to last opponent

It is 1172 in Game 10 and I am second in score to the ever annoying Asoka and second in power to Genghis (who I left alone in the knowledge that he would never build up a good tech infrastructure). Hannibal is gone, Elizabeth, Mao, and Brennus have 3 cities each. Surely even I can't lose from here, although it will easily be the latest date, if I get there.

4th attempt, this time 790 BC conquest victory. Turns out Egypt's starting location on a horse and he took my capital with his lone chariot.

Why would you put in civs with early UUs? Pick 2 Indians and Americans and maybe Germans, avoid Cultural leaders as their cities will have higher cultural defense.

As I've become relatively free currently I might make a run or two for it. I find Gosha's and Moonsinger's range pretty reasonable.

Thanks for the tips everyone, specially Moonsinger. I've broken the BC barrier and gone from a 680 AD to a 400 BC conquest in a week. Now I have to see how low I can go in the last few days.

Interesting things I learnt today (number 754): 2 fortified infantry in a city can be defeated by 11 CR3 trebuchets.

It is 1840 AD in my current game and I am number one in everything (except technology). Brennus, Hannibal, and Mao are history. Genghis is sulking in the corner. Asoka has vanished to some hidden part of the world, whilst Elizabeth has taken some power pills and is growing in strength every day. It's slow going with trebuchets vs infantry, but unbelievably, it is still possible. Not looking forward to Elizabeth getting Artillery though.

Man this hard. It is now 1948 AD in Game 10 and I am now beginning to have doubts about completing a conquest victory. Elizabeth has just built Apollo Program, but only has 4 cities left. The main problem is Asoka, who has 13 cities in the new world, bristling with SAM Infantry and Artillery, while I still only have cannons and rifleman, but more importantly, no galleons yet. Genghis still has half a dozen cities but they're all in the old world so shouldn't be too difficult to mop up.

Any tips on how to take 13 new world cities in 102 turns, with the first galleons at least 15 turns away (need to research Astronomy, and then build them) and using inferior military units?

Man this hard. It is now 1948 AD in Game 10 and I am now beginning to have doubts about completing a conquest victory. Elizabeth has just built Apollo Program, but only has 4 cities left. The main problem is Asoka, who has 13 cities in the new world, bristling with SAM Infantry and Artillery, while I still only have cannons and rifleman, but more importantly, no galleons yet. Genghis still has half a dozen cities but they're all in the old world so shouldn't be too difficult to mop up.

Any tips on how to take 13 new world cities in 102 turns, with the first galleons at least 15 turns away (need to research Astronomy, and then build them) and using inferior military units?

I would suggest beeline to artillery and build a bunch of those. Perhaps concentrate getting a GM or 2. Also, nukes maybe the way to go.

Beelining to artilleryis certainly an option because once I get rid of the last English city on the old world, I can make peace with Elizabeth and turn off the 30% culture I am currently running to offset the massive war weariness. This would kick start research allowing me to get Galleons and Artillery. Not sure I would be able to wait for nukes given that there are only 102 turns left. But it will mean having to build a zillion galleons and artillery and then simultaneously taking out just about all the remaining cities in one mighty blitz. I will probably use up 20-30 turns getting into that position so I might need to lead off with some spy action in the meantime.

You can easily prevent the AIs from hooking horse/bronze/iron like forever. Let's say we need to kill all 6 civs by using only Quechua (not using axes, spears, or horses). First, build six Quechuas while our capital still at size 1. The first Quechua will head out to steal a worker, and pillage all improvement from whatever AI he counters, then move on to the next civ further away. The second Quechua and the third one will do the same thing but go on opposite direction. The next three Quechuas will take position against the first three civs. Basically, each Quechua will camp by each of the AI capital. That's it. Now, you would have all the time on the world to do whatever that you like to do. Just as long as you have a Quechua camping near by their capital, the AI will never dare to send out workers. Sure, they will stockpile their defenders, but that's no big deal because we can always lure all of them out (except for two) before we attack.

Moonsinger I have been trying to follow this for my last couple of attempts and keep stubling in a few areas.
IS it crucial to capture their worker? What happens when you can't find their worker.
Once you have their worker and pillaged all their improvements, and you move on to the next Civ with your Quechua, what do you do with their worker that you have captured?
And finally where do you camp your Quechua- I often camp mine directly next to their city so I can see what units they are stockpiling but this often causes 2 arches to attack my sole Quechua and it generally loses.
Any suggestions.

I am now though:(


Vanilla, 1768 AD. You're not in last place anymore!

I made a few attempts at the quick victory type, but I didn't want to do it with Quechas, and that seems to make it much harder. I used Cyrus instead and found that Immortals were still useful right through the end of the game.

The key to this game for me was knocking down the top AIs to prevent anyone from teching to Gunpowder or beyond. Except for a single Knight in Rosie's last city, I never had to fight a unit over 6 strength.

I was also lucky that I captured the Pyramids fairly early, meaning Police State, and a Great Engineer that got me machinery and maces.

I had one strike, but demands for tribute quickly corrected that. By the end of the game, I was actually positive income at 20% research. I never used (or had) the culture slider; I whipped unhappiness when necessary, but mostly just lived with the red faces.

My conquering dates:

190 BC Ghandi
245 AD Victoria
1547 AD Louis
1655 AD Monty
1679 AD Toku
1766 AD Rosie

Ah well, good enough for me, anyway. I still haven't even downloaded the GoTM, and haven't had a try at the Major either, so I won't be revisiting this scenario.

Moonsinger I have been trying to follow this for my last couple of attempts and keep stubling in a few areas.
IS it crucial to capture their worker? What happens when you can't find their worker.
Once you have their worker and pillaged all their improvements, and you move on to the next Civ with your Quechua, what do you do with their worker that you have captured?
And finally where do you camp your Quechua- I often camp mine directly next to their city so I can see what units they are stockpiling but this often causes 2 arches to attack my sole Quechua and it generally loses.
Any suggestions.

Interesting questions, my 2 gp and maybe I'll learn something more when Moonsinger comments.

Workers - the sooner you capture them, the sooner they can chop more Quecha for you. So it's better to catch the worker than kill an an archer for XP. If you are lucky, can you can do both when an archer is protecting a worker. Although the workers are always waiting in the city, so if you have to choose between an archer in the city and one outside - go for the city, the outside ones die when the civ loses it's last city.

Camping - I've noticed two or three archers will come at a one time against a unit with 2 or more promotions camped beside the city. I now try to move they back and forth so they lose the fortification bonus but the AI doesn't bunch up the archer attacks.

Additional suggestion. I've had success attacking cities with just three against two odds. The first two die but the third wins and usually gets a promotion. The promotion heals the unit enough to finish off the remaining archer next turn. This works early on with 16 or 26 % odds for the first attack. Once the culture builds up, it's not as effective.

Note - I'm only in 10th place with my finish but I'm getting close to beating it. My biggest problem is finding a start with a plains hill and a forested plains hill.

Got 1120bc run after zillions of tries. All went well I got first captured city with first quecha, I was sitting on chokepoint of the world in the middle. Got one scout from hut to get locations fast. Only one opponent had city on a hill in troublesome place but it was last one and it had been choked off by neighboring civ so I was running with 20 ques on it. But now im done for this G. Im eager to see how well Moonsinger performed.

I am now in 2011 AD. Thanks to a thousand screaming artilleries, there are only 4 Indian cities and 3 English cities left. But I can't find one of them! Elizabeth has settled on some remote desert island somewhere. I hope I can find her before 2050, or before this gauntlet closes!

Got my minor out of the way! 1300BC finish (should have been 1 turn earlier if not for a solitary archer holding on by his teeth)!

The other issue I have is a lone Indian pirate destroyer (I think it must be called the Black Pearl or the Flying Dutchman) that keeps popping up and sinking my galleons. Maybe I need to finish off Asoka first (because I can find all his cities) because I have no naval units capable of taking out that destroyer.

Only 39 turns left! This is when circumnavigation would have come in REALLY handy.

Sorry...should have posted the file too (and mention it is on Warlords, not vanilla)!

Got my minor out of the way! 1300BC finish (should have been 1 turn earlier if not for a solitary archer holding on by his teeth)!

Very fast victory requires few coincidence:
1. strong start position
2. favourable AI locations and quechuas logistic
3. plain AI cities
4. good random
each time i am playing, one of this conditions do not present

Oh! OK. I see that the superfast wins require Vanilla, MapFinder, and Inca.


Don't need MapFinder or Vanilla...but I think it makes it more difficult. I don't know how to use MapFinder :( and I HATE Vanilla now so I don't play it.

What are the best results that people have managed with Cyrus in this game?

What are the best results that people have managed with Cyrus in this game?260 AD for me.

So nobody has managed one of those crazy BC conquest dates with Cyrus then? Does this mean that the Quechua factor is worth up to 1,000 years of time?

Yeah Que are superb. They get you going so much earlier that movement isnt the point anymore. As there's now thread about QM challenges difficulty I'd really say that Inca should get only 75% or even less of qscore points just because they are so overpowerful. There is absolotely no idea to play any other civ as it's allways better to get early worker+city. Below monarch it's not that straight but still.

But I can't understand how those dudes get scores so low with Incas still. Maybe they try to kick even more luck in to push few more extra rounds off.

I tried the gauntlet twice. First I managed a 460BC win with Huayna Capac and then tried Cyrus and got a 475BC win.

Man! How come Jimmy Peau here can get a 465 BC win with Cyrus? Using Cyrus was my main excuse for not getting a sub BC win!

IS it crucial to capture their worker? What happens when you can't find their worker.

Even if we can find their worker 50% of the time, that still is a lot of workers. Therefore, we don't need find all of their workers. Too many workers would also cost us money for upkeep.

Once you have their worker and pillaged all their improvements, and you move on to the next Civ with your Quechua, what do you do with their worker that you have captured?
Send them home to improve our land.

And finally where do you camp your Quechua- I often camp mine directly next to their city so I can see what units they are stockpiling but this often causes 2 arches to attack my sole Quechua and it generally loses.
Any suggestions.

I usually camp my Quechua 1 or 2 square away (on top of the forest-hill). Just as long as we can see what inside their cities and they can see us, their worker don't dare to come out. In the vanilla version, the AI would send only one archer out at a time. In the Warlords version, the AI would send out stack of two or three, but they will not attack us.

Don't need MapFinder or Vanilla...but I think it makes it more difficult. I don't know how to use MapFinder :( and I HATE Vanilla now so I don't play it.

1. I finished more than one game in warlords before 2000BC but I did not play in vanilla yet. So I can not compare difficulty.

2. MapFinder? It's easy! install it, start your hof game, press ALT-M and look at your monitor)) MF saves your time - very helpful utility!

Download from here:
http://hof.civfanatics.net/civ4/mod.php?show=mapfinder#download

Phew! Last English city, hidden on a one tile desert island, found and destroyed in 2035 AD. 15 turns to spare! This 10th game took forever!

Not sure I have the energy now to attempt G Major....

Send them home to improve our land.

workers can discharge scout's job as well.

My first BC win! I got a 250 BC win with Cyrus/Vanilla. :cool: I know I'm far way from the first place, at least I'm not competing for the last place any more.

workers can discharge scout's job as well.

True! Workers are also excellent scouts and the best part is that we don't have to build any of them.:)

But you better switch off barbs.
I would never send a worker to scout far away with barbs turned on.

My first BC win! I got a 250 BC win with Cyrus/Vanilla. :cool: I know I'm far way from the first place, at least I'm not competing for the last place any more.

Congrats! Good for beginner! And you are right - you are very far from the first place)))

My best warlords game is ended in 2110BC but I do not close to fist place too. I believe that Moonsinger used vanilla, instead warlords, where tactics differs from warlods tactics and lets to achieve best resalts.

My prediction for winner's date is about 2500BC/vanilla.

at least I'm not competing for the last place any more.

That part of the gauntlet has been well and truly wrapped up.... :rockon:

My best warlords game is ended in 2110BC but I do not close to fist place too. I believe that Moonsinger used vanilla, instead warlords, where tactics differs from warlods tactics and lets to achieve best resalts.

My prediction for winner's date is about 2500BC/vanilla.

You are right...about me using Vanilla, but I didn't get 2500 BC or 2400 BC. Many of my games ended in total failure and the rest ended around 15XX BC or later. However, I did get one just a few turns before 2000BC (probably just only 1 turn before you did).

1. I finished more than one game in warlords before 2000BC but I did not play in vanilla yet. So I can not compare difficulty.

2. MapFinder? It's easy! install it, start your hof game, press ALT-M and look at your monitor)) MF saves your time - very helpful utility!

Download from here:
http://hof.civfanatics.net/civ4/mod.php?show=mapfinder#download


I did that and it gives me nothing but error messages.

:mad:

I did that and it gives me nothing but error messages.

:mad:You also have to download Microsoft .NET Framework Version 2.0 (http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=0856eacb-4362-4b0d-8edd-aab15c5e04f5&DisplayLang=en).

Is Civ IV written in .NET? Wowzers if it is. What with all the interface being in Python I'd have thought if the rest of the game was .NET it would run like a dog with 3 legs.

I did that and it gives me nothing but error messages.:mad:

did you ask someone to help you with this problem? As I know, HOF staff and
experienced players are always glad to help. There is special thread for problems discussing:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=167346

PS as a rule, error message appears because of wrong way to MF directories.

Is Civ IV written in .NET? Wowzers if it is. What with all the interface being in Python I'd have thought if the rest of the game was .NET it would run like a dog with 3 legs.No, I think Civ4 is written C++ and Python. The reference to .NET is for the VB.NET utility (Civ4MapFinder.exe) that supports Map Finder. I provides an interface to review saves generated via the HOF Mod Map Finder part of the utility. It also contains the interface to maintain rule files for what maps to save.

Phew! Last English city, hidden on a one tile desert island, found and destroyed in 2035 AD. 15 turns to spare! This 10th game took forever!

Not sure I have the energy now to attempt G Major....

Well done, for sticking with the gauntlet and sticking with that last game, too :goodjob:

No, I think Civ4 is written C++ and Python. The reference to .NET is for the VB.NET utility (Civ4MapFinder.exe) that supports Map Finder. I provides an interface to review saves generated via the HOF Mod Map Finder part of the utility. It also contains the interface to maintain rule files for what maps to save.

Thanks for the info, my sanity has been restored. Looking at SDK snippets posted on the site, it is obvious they are using vanilla C++ anyway and not managed C++ or another .NET language, so I guess I could have answered my own question.

.NET is "da bomb" for UI stuff though. I used to code in MFC. It's like whipping yourself with barbed wire. Unless you want a user interface that is identical to notepad of course.

Grrr! I have tryed vanilla yestarday... - is absolute thrash. Terrible random: my quechuas lost almost all battles (up to 99.4% for victory) and extremly bad maps...
It was not Backham day!)))

Warlords looks much better for me. Each evening I played and finished 1 or 2 games. Only first game was finished in 1480BC. Next: 1840BC, 1780BC, 1900BC, 2020BC, 2110BC. It is only submitted games. A lot of games I did not play to the finish because of theirs finish date - more late than I achieved before.

Grrr! I have tryed vanilla yestarday... - is absolute thrash. Terrible random: my quechuas lost almost all battles (up to 99.4% for victory) and extremly bad maps...
It was not Backham day!)))

Warlords looks much better for me. Each evening I played and finished 1 or 2 games. Only first game was finished in 1480BC. Next: 1840BC, 1780BC, 1900BC, 2020BC, 2110BC. It is only submitted games. A lot of games I did not play to the finish because of theirs finish date - more late than I achieved before.

After a week of banging my head against the desk as yet another six Quechas suicided themselves against a couple of archers I gave up on vanilla and went back to Warlords. Got a 1570BC, which I'll gladly take.

Thanks for the tip.

I had a little trouble submitting so I don't think my best effort got registered in time. I only made 3 real runs at this gauntlet and the one that got registered was a 600 or so AD with Rome (all games played in vanilla).

Then I had one run with the Incas which I could have finished in the BCs, but I wanted to break 1000 BC at the very least so didn't submit. Got the hang of it a bit more on the 3rd try for a 975 BC conq. Bah...
Anyway, messed up my files so the 4000 BC file wasn't attached to the original submission. I finally found the right file, but deadline had passed. No biggie, wasn't going to win anything anyway.

I've learnt a lot about this type of game, though. I generally need to be more agressive early on, and these games were good practice. Thanks to the staff :thumbsup:

but deadline had passed. No biggie, wasn't going to win anything anyway.

We update the deadline when we post the updates. In other words, you're good! ;)

The Gauntlet is concluded.
Moonsinger took first place with a 2380 BC finish. Gosha190 took second with a 2110 BC finish, with denze taking third place at 1570 BC.

Aw, last place! Hats off to all of you who managed a pre AD finish!