View Full Version : Is there a time cap on winning (3835 BC)?
de Mott Jul 10, 2007, 11:18 AM I recognise all the best times on duel maps are from this date. I tried to be faster and erased the opponent 3 turns before that date. It just went on till 3835.
Is 3835 (rather the end of the previous turn) the first time the game checks for a victor?
Denniz Jul 10, 2007, 12:27 PM I recognise all the best times on duel maps are from this date. I tried to be faster and erased the opponent 3 turns before that date. It just went on till 3835.
Is 3835 (rather the end of the previous turn) the first time the game checks for a victor?Yeah, It's a feature, not a bug. :crazyeye: I think it is a turn number not a date, though. (i.e. Different date on different speeds)
BTW, you lose if you don't settle by then.
de Mott Jul 10, 2007, 12:53 PM BTW, you lose if you don't settle by then.
Yes, I encountered that oddity, too.
WastinTime Jul 10, 2007, 02:56 PM I could have sworn people mentioned they explore with their settler for 20-30 turns. Anyone have more detail on this feature?
ParadigmShifter Jul 10, 2007, 03:05 PM I've never heard of this, but it makes sense (a bit).
If you lose when you don't place your settler by then (I'm guessing it's turn 11), I expect you can't win since in theory the AI could be exploring with their settler so there's a chance there is a civ/city that can be founded that you haven't destroyed (although the game must know that!!!).
I'm gussing exploring with settlers is on the easier levels where you can pop a setler with a hut, after you have founded your first city.
de Mott Jul 10, 2007, 03:27 PM I'm gussing exploring with settlers is on the easier levels where you can pop a setler with a hut, after you have founded your first city.
On duel maps, exploring with your first settler can make sense, because you normally don't have the time to build additional units for a fast victory. One quechua can/should be enough.
I could have sworn people mentioned they explore with their settler for 20-30 turns. Anyone have more detail on this feature?
Maybe game speed etc. make a difference. I encountered a loss by 3835 twice on marathon, duel map.
Thrallia Jul 10, 2007, 05:26 PM I've explored with my settler for 15 turns a couple times in epic, monarch level, looking for a good place to settle.
Dracandross Jul 10, 2007, 11:48 PM I could have sworn people mentioned they explore with their settler for 20-30 turns. Anyone have more detail on this feature?
I think if you turn require complete kills on you can wander as long as you want... I haven't tested this but it sounds that it should do the job.
-Dracandross
Thrallia Jul 11, 2007, 03:04 AM maybe...but I'm fairly sure I've explored longer than 15 turns, and I've never turned on complete kills.
Jean dŽEath Jul 13, 2007, 04:54 AM you have 10 turns to settle (if you didn't check require complte kill)... after 10 turns it is checked whether you and/or your opponents do own a city.... i am quite sure as i lost a game due to that yesterday....
Thrallia Jul 13, 2007, 05:16 AM yeah...I roamed around for 10 turns specifically to check that, and lost by conquest on settler lol
dutchfire Jul 13, 2007, 05:21 AM I did a test too, and I found out that it doesn't check for any victory conditions during the first 10 turns, not only conquest. I gave myself tons of settlers and Great Artists, occupied 80% of the globe and got 3 legendary cities, and still didn't win until turn 10.
Shoot the Moon Jul 17, 2007, 11:30 PM That's odd, considering that I recently lost on turn 0. I hit reload and got the message that I had lost. It was kinda odd losing a Settler Duel game. Obviously a glitch, but how could I lose if the game doesn't check for victory in the first ten turns?
Quintillus Jul 18, 2007, 04:07 AM Yeah, It's a feature, not a bug. :crazyeye: I think it is a turn number not a date, though. (i.e. Different date on different speeds)
BTW, you lose if you don't settle by then.
Hmm, never tried that in Civ4. Too bad; one of my favorite old Civ3 variants was to play on Chieftain and not build a city until 1 AD.
WilliamOfOrange Aug 01, 2007, 07:47 PM I have a question which I believe might be somewhat related. In trying out the recent Minor Gauntlet, I was lucky enough to have a few unprotected cities ripe for a good old fashioned razing. In trying for a Time victory on a Terra map recently, I have several times spawned near my neighbours and before I can get over there....like 2-3 spaces, they already have another warrior. I am assuming that this is not because it is a Terra map, but rather that I am playing on Quick speed rather than the Epic speed from the Gauntlet. I can build a warrior on a Plains Hill in 3 turns, so it is not unreasonable to assume the Ai can do the same? Once, it was like only 2 tiles away from the start and they beat me? Strange. Also, is it normal to spawn so close to others on a Terra map. We are all confined to the one continent, so is that why?
Denniz Aug 01, 2007, 08:31 PM I have a question which I believe might be somewhat related. In trying out the recent Minor Gauntlet, I was lucky enough to have a few unprotected cities ripe for a good old fashioned razing. In trying for a Time victory on a Terra map recently, I have several times spawned near my neighbours and before I can get over there....like 2-3 spaces, they already have another warrior. I am assuming that this is not because it is a Terra map, but rather that I am playing on Quick speed rather than the Epic speed from the Gauntlet. I can build a warrior on a Plains Hill in 3 turns, so it is not unreasonable to assume the Ai can do the same? Once, it was like only 2 tiles away from the start and they beat me? Strange. Also, is it normal to spawn so close to others on a Terra map. We are all confined to the one continent, so is that why?If you run MapFinder much you will see just how often player spawn close to each other like that. (You can't regen when two civs are in contact, so MapFinder stops.) Some map types, sizes and options are more prone to that than others. Of course, the number of players can influence that as well.
I think you thought process on the warrior builds on quick is probably correct. Everyone wants to think the AI cheats but I really doubt that is what happens. :mischief:
Thrallia Aug 01, 2007, 08:31 PM if you are playing on a difficulty level higher than noble, they get a production boost...so that could play a part in them getting a new warrior built so fast.
de Mott Aug 02, 2007, 01:20 PM I read that ai civs also start with 10 or 15 hammers allocated (to whatever they build first). However, I don't know at which difficulty level this starts.
WilliamOfOrange Aug 02, 2007, 04:30 PM What about this: All of a sudden, the AI's two warriors become Axemen, but they have no access to copper. This time I am playing on Prince. I know the AI cheats, but that is pretty crazy.
dutchfire Aug 03, 2007, 01:04 PM What about this: All of a sudden, the AI's two warriors become Axemen, but they have no access to copper. This time I am playing on Prince. I know the AI cheats, but that is pretty crazy.
Are you sure about that? They might have copper somewhere out of sight or on the city tile
jason77024 Aug 04, 2007, 02:20 AM I read that ai civs also start with 10 or 15 hammers allocated (to whatever they build first). However, I don't know at which difficulty level this starts.
I have a screen cap of China getting a new warrior in 3850 BC (Prince/Epic). The other two warriors were already out in the field. So there must be something funky going on.
|
|