http://hof.civfanatics.net/civ4/images/greatgeneral.jpgWhile the general Hall of Fame is an ongoing competition, we are running series of games called the Hall of Fame Challenge Series. Standard Hall of Fame rules (*) still apply, but any games meeting the settings of one of the games will be counted towards the Challenge.

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

Settings:

Victory Condition: Conquest (though all victory conditions must be enabled)
Difficulty: ANY
Starting Era: Ancient
Map Size: Large
Map Type: Pangaea
Speed: Epic
Required: No City Razing, No Vassal States, No Tribal Villages
Must Not Be Checked: No Barbarians, Random Personalities, Permanent Alliances, One City Challenge
Civ: India (Gandhi)
Opponents: Must include Aztec (Montezuma), Celt (Brennus), Greece (Alexander), Mongolia (Genghis Khan), Russia (Stalin), Sumeria (Gilgamesh), Viking (Ragnar Lodbrok), Zulu (Shaka)
Version: 3.19.003
Date: 10th May to 10th September 2010
The earliest finish date wins, with score as a tiebreaker.
.

A large conquest with NO city razing or vassals???

Avoiding the dom limit means a very early win...

The no razing may have been too much. Perhaps I should remove it. Thoughts?

I'm sure it's doable at low levels but I'm not sure if that is the intention of the challenge.

The no razing may have been too much. Perhaps I should remove it. Thoughts?

Keep it. Makes it more interesting. I'm sure it's doable even on Deity.
You could always let barbs take your cities, right?

You'll have to capture the Great Wall city last then :lol:

No Vassal State means no colonies, right?
It looks a very difficult game for a Conquest Victory....

No Vassal State means no colonies, right?
It looks a very difficult game for a Conquest Victory....A bit of a challenge, maybe? :mischief:

Wow. Large epic conquest no razing and no vassals... how do strikes work again?

Keep it. Makes it more interesting. I'm sure it's doable even on Deity.
You could always let barbs take your cities, right?

IF someone pulls this on deity, they will wear the crown of "best civ IV player ever in TMIT's eyes".

There are only a few ways I can think that make this one possible:

1. Simply capture and kill every civ in the game before they expand to amounts that would trip domination (impossible on deity until proven otherwise...so far it has not been proven otherwise).
2. Lower the sea level, build Gwall, and run raging barbs. Play this 3049873405893746908347 times until you get lucky.
3. Capture/destroy a few civs, putting you near domination limit. Then, within only a few turns nuke and paradrop every remaining city within the amount of time cities take to come out of revolt, so you kill everyone off before you trip the land %.

3 is not easy. The AI will block paratroopers with the likes of workers and executives, and on a large map the ground and sheer # of cities to cover is tough to overcome. I have a feeling this will be finished at a more middling difficulty by an elite player, but I hope I'm wrong.

Yeah, I'll will be amazed at any Deity victory here. I predict the highest level victory will be Emperor. Now prove me wrong ;)

Funny how this one would probably be the hardest one even with NCR off (only at high levels obviously). Some of the others should be quite easy, even at Deity.

too bad you can't play it on vanilla (less pain from the no vassal)

I guess I can make it up to chieftain at least
On monarch+, I can only see nukes working. Let's wait and see.

What have you smoked?
Anyone goin' over settler difficulty can't hope to be first.

For this game, you just need a few chariots or even a few warriors to conquer the closest neighbours, 2 stacks to send in different directions. game over.
Research: wheel (you got it free on settler), AH, BW. Stop.

The settler AI takes forever to research BW, you can have researched well past Alpha before they arrive to it.

The settings state: The earliest finish date wins, with score as a tiebreaker.Not difficulty as tiebreaker. Run and run fast.

Edit: Ignore this, AI can't raze either.

Thoughts on this strategy: Let genghis do your city razing for you.

If I read the xml right, he razes 75% of the cities he captures (smarter person confirm this?).

The ideal situation is to have genghis centrally located so that after each conquest you can declare on him, vacate your newly captured cities, have him roll through and raze most of them, retake/vacate until he razes them all. Take genghis last, as I assume the AI will not raze their own cities.

This is no silver bullet, as the ai will resettle the area (genghis himself included), and you'll have to make sure you can subdue genghis at all times. I'm gonna try this at Monarch and see how it goes.

Does no city razing still allow the AIs to raze cities?

Does no city razing still allow the AIs to raze cities?
no
even barbs can't raze

Moved the posts about difficulty adjustment to the Challenge Series II discusssion (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=364040) thread. Please keep the individual game threads for game discussions.

I sought to achieve victory on Warlord difficulty. However, I failed. One turn from achieving conquest, two Russian cities remaining, I won via domination... Anyone else here made the attempt, or plan on taking this on any level other than Settler?

I sought to achieve victory on Warlord difficulty. However, I failed. One turn from achieving conquest, two Russian cities remaining, I won via domination...


Did you try the following:

0) Set Raging Barbarian option

1) Abandon when Copper/Iron or Horse are not in Capital BFC.

2) Build The Great Wall in your Capital or capture the City that built it.

3) Pillage AI controlled Copper/Iron Mines and Horse Pastures.

4) Kill all AI Leaders/Civs one, two, three or four at a Time.

5) Construct no buildings that generate Culture, except for a few in the Capital.


Anyone else here made the attempt, or plan on taking this on any level other than Settler?


I plan to play Deity level. However, this Game is #5 on my priority list, so don't expect anything for at least another month (more likely 2-3 months).

Sun Tzu Wu

Did you try the following:

0) Set Raging Barbarian option

1) Abandon when Copper/Iron or Horse are not in Capital BFC.

2) Build The Great Wall in your Capital or capture the City that built it.

3) Pillage AI controlled Copper/Iron Mines and Horse Pastures.

4) Kill all AI Leaders/Civs one, two, three or four at a Time.

5) Construct no buildings that generate Culture, except for a few in the Capital.


sound advice except build the great wall
you may leave cities to the barbs if you don't

I plan to play Deity level. However, this Game is #5 on my priority list, so don't expect anything for at least another month (more likely 2-3 months).

If you make it at deity level, you'll get praise for several months from me
Sincerely I don't think it's doable.

I sought to achieve victory on Warlord difficulty. However, I failed. One turn from achieving conquest, two Russian cities remaining, I won via domination... Anyone else here made the attempt, or plan on taking this on any level other than Settler?

I think the challenge of getting the fastest Settler finish is not at all as interesting as the challenge of playing this at the highest difficulty level you can manage. I decided early on that I wouldn't even try this one at settler.

I figured that I could probably win this one on Noble level, but the large map could push the limits of my computer unless I played it really well and finished early.

So I tried it out at Warlord difficulty. First attempt had everyone go on strike with like 8 cities left to conquer. I let harse archers carry most of the load, at least until they started evaporating. Note... I'm talking losing 63gpt at 0% research!!! As my units started disappearing and the enemy started taking back the now undefended cities... I called that one off (I think it was still winable). Domination was not an issue.

My second try, I decided to use warrior rush a bit more. I captured a capitol before I even settled my starting worker... just walked right in an undefended city. Stupidly settled my settler near another AI... should have just deleted the settler (keep number of cities as low as friggin possible). Anyhow, I warrior rushed the second AI (with 2 warriors). Then I had about 4 warriors and warrior rushed the 3rd. Woo hoo... I now have 3 AI capitols and my own settled city, and only 5 enemy left, each with 1 city. But no more research since maintencance kills. I barely got pottery, don't even think about alphabet or currency or CoL! :lol: Once archers showed up, my warriors are worthless, and I can't get teched up to parity, so I quit.

I decided I have lots to learn about what is possible on low level play and what remians challenging. So I moved down to Chieftan level to see how that afects... but then did a whole different game (Oracle'd CoL, for example, never fell below 50% research by cottaging early and often, and by getting currency early). Whipped lots of courthouses. I won it and submitted. It won't compete with settler submissions, but honestly I could not compete with those even if I played on settler level (which I won't, because Settler is for WEENIES). :mischief: :lol:

Maybe I try this one at Noble, just to see. I don't think Domination is really the MAIN problem until you get to Prince or higher. Unimpeded, the most cities any AI managed to settle by 1000AD was 4 (plus capitol). You can't even fill 50% of the land with that few. But they are all so far apart. Having to keep all the crap and avoid strikes is the main problem. I did manage to let Barbs take one city from me before I captured the great wall - this is a winning strategy at higher levels, I'm sure. Note, barbs at this Chieftan level are so ineffective you might as well ignore the GW, it makes little difference at Cheiftan.

But yeah... Bring it on, folks. Take the challenge! How high level can you conquest victory this set-up?:king:

KCD, your post is inspiring. I was totally turned off by this game until reading your post. It sounds somewhat intoxicating, frustrating, and potentially addictive. If time permits, I may try every level starting with settler, and working my way up to see what level I can't win.

Can you inspire me for game 4 also?:confused:

Congratulations on your Chieftain Win.


Maybe I try this one at Noble, just to see. I don't think Domination is really the MAIN problem until you get to Prince or higher. Unimpeded, the most cities any AI managed to settle by 1000AD was 4 (plus capitol). You can't even fill 50% of the land with that few. But they are all so far apart. Having to keep all the crap and avoid strikes is the main problem. I did manage to let Barbs take one city from me before I captured the great wall - this is a winning strategy at higher levels, I'm sure. Note, barbs at this Chieftan level are so ineffective you might as well ignore the GW, it makes little difference at Chieftain.


For higher difficulty levels, I would try Raging Barbarians, building or capturing The Great Wall, and help Barbarians capture the majority of AI Opponent Cities. For the last part, one will need to pillage all AI Opponents ruthlessly, thus keeping them in the Stone Age. The Barbarians will Tech faster than one's AI Opponents. Then all one needs to do to most AI Opponent Cities is reduce their defenders down to a single severely damaged unit, which a single Barbarian unit can easily take. I really think this will work, but my experience Playing with annoying Barbarians is extremely limited, so maybe there's some good reason why it is not a workable plan.

Sun Tzu Wu

Congratulations on your Chieftain Win.



For higher difficulty levels, I would try Raging Barbarians, building or capturing The Great Wall, and help Barbarians capture the majority of AI Opponent Cities. For the last part, one will need to pillage all AI Opponents ruthlessly, thus keeping them in the Stone Age. The Barbarians will Tech faster than one's AI Opponents. Then all one needs to do to most AI Opponent Cities is reduce their defenders down to a single severely damaged unit, which a single Barbarian unit can easily take. I really think this will work, but my experience Playing with annoying Barbarians is extremely limited, so maybe there's some good reason why it is not a workable plan.

Sun Tzu Wu

Sounds like a fair plan, but I seldom have any luck getting barbs to act how I want them to. Also, I'm not sure how I would manage to keep 8 civs in the stone age without bankrupting my economy. I think if I were to try that then an "Always war" setting might be nice to prevent war wearieness, but I'm not so sure. Also, I think rushing one or more AI first might be useful. Good luck!

KCD, your post is inspiring. I was totally turned off by this game until reading your post. It sounds somewhat intoxicating, frustrating, and potentially addictive. If time permits, I may try every level starting with settler, and working my way up to see what level I can't win.

Can you inspire me for game 4 also?:confused:

I'm glad you are inspired!

As for Game 4, Completing any Huge map without a game crash is the challenge. :eek:

Sounds like a fair plan, but I seldom have any luck getting barbs to act how I want them to. Also, I'm not sure how I would manage to keep 8 civs in the stone age without bankrupting my economy. I think if I were to try that then an "Always war" setting might be nice to prevent war wearieness, but I'm not so sure. Also, I think rushing one or more AI first might be useful. Good luck!


Barbarians will usually beeline their target, often a military unit they plan to kill. I wonder whether its possible to lure them to an AI City (with single weakened defender) using one of one's own lower strength military unit as initial bait.

Use chariots, horse archers with maximum retreat percentage to seriously damage the lone defender in an AI City. Occasionally, you will be "lucky" and take the City; More often you will be "unlucky" and lose the retreat roll and your unit.

A very early rush of one's neighboring Civs would be essential to build a small network of Cities to keep ahead of the AI in Research and Power.

Sun Tzu Wu

Barbarians will usually beeline their target, often a military unit they plan to kill. I wonder whether its possible to lure them to an AI City (with single weakened defender) using one of one's own lower strength military unit as initial bait.

Use chariots, horse archers with maximum retreat percentage to seriously damage the lone defender in an AI City. Occasionally, you will be "lucky" and take the City; More often you will be "unlucky" and lose the retreat roll and your unit.

A very early rush of one's neighboring Civs would be essential to build a small network of Cities to keep ahead of the AI in Research and Power.

Sun Tzu Wu

I already tried the retreat thing. I'm pretty sure it will work on lower levels <monarch. The jump from prince to monarch on this one is huge (AI starts with archers).

I'm currently attempting something similar by using cats + other units to knock the AI city down to one 0.8 defender and no culture bonus for the barbs. I could probably do it on Monarch with an overpowered start. It's getting very frustrating on emporer because I can't take out the nearest civ fast enough and the AI spreads too fast...even with raging barbs.

cas

I already tried the retreat thing. I'm pretty sure it will work on lower levels <monarch. The jump from prince to monarch on this one is huge (AI starts with archers).

I'm currently attempting something similar by using cats + other units to knock the AI city down to one 0.8 defender and no culture bonus for the barbs. I could probably do it on Monarch with an overpowered start. It's getting very frustrating on emporer because I can't take out the nearest civ fast enough and the AI spreads too fast...even with raging barbs.


Well, you have refined this technique to the point where its really workable. Catapults to eliminate the Cultural Defense and then decimate all defenders to 25% strength and eliminating all but one defender is a far more viable approach than I was envisioning. The Catapult can continue to knock down the remaining Defender to 25% strengh until a Barbarian unit can be lured to the AI City, where the Barbarian AI will notice the great chance to capture a City and then do it.

A review of what may be optimal settings for Challenge Series II Game #1:

1) Raging Barbarians

2) Low Sea Level (Far more area in Fog where Barbarians can generate and even built Cities).

3) TBD: Coastline - Not sure which would be more advantageous to the Barbarians - Solid, Natural or Pressed. Probably doesn't have much, if any effect.

4) There may be additional settings that may make winning this Game easier at higher levels.

Initial Goals:

1) Capture all immediate neighbors' Cities (3 Civs) for a solid basis for Research and Military unit generation.

2) Build several pillaging stacks to harass the remaining (5) Civs, stunting their Growth, Research, and Build capacities. Pillage everything, including Roads.

3) Deny all Horse, Copper, and Iron Tiles near all AI Civs by building Forts on them (when possible) and defending them with Archers, Longbow and other units good at City defense.

4) Destroy all AI units in the Wild (outside of their own Culture) to reduce fog busting by the AI Civs.

5) Build several 2 tile move units like Chariots, Horse Archers, any Woodsman II, any Guerrilla II; use as the pillaging units in pillaging stacks and to snag undefended/poorly defended Workers.

6) Locate Barbarian Cities to help defend them (if necessary) and know where Barbarians units emerge from to ...

7) As already described in detail, prepare AI Cities for Barbarian unit capture and governance.

Sun Tzu Wu

I really wanted to try this game on something above settler level. Surely it must be achievable on Warlord? So off I went.

I started off in the far north-east corner of the pangaea, and began a steady trek of wiping out each civ in turn. Never any problem having enough power to overcome each opponent, but it was all just a bit - just a lot - too slow.
I realised that it was all going wrong when I had reached the 1000AD onwards period and could see that there were already too many cities in the world. I was going to bust the domination limit before I could get conquest.
Obviously, I did consider the idea of presenting cities to the barbarians, but I really should have prepared for this from the start. I notice SunTzuWu's comments above. I really must take some of these to heart on my next attempt. Basically, there were too few barbarians around, and they were unbelievably timid! I also handed cities over to my future enemies, knowing they would have to leave them empty for some considerable time. Then I would try to entice barbarians over to them. I watched at one point in frustration for 9 or 10 turns while a barb longbow walked around inside Gilgamesh's borders - an empty city mind you - pillaging roads and pastures and avoiding walking into the city!

Quite early on I had almost no option but to capture Brennus' city with the Gt Wall in it. So I made a present of it to Ragnar (smallest and weakest civ - also furthest from my capital).

All-in-all I managed to lose one solitary city to barbarians, and that was never going to be enough.

Finally, I was left with just Ragnar. I couldn't see any way to avoid a domination win, so I went for a strategy of wiping out all of his 6 cities simultaneously. This, I achieved satisfactorily, but I already knew what I was going to see next: domination victory.

So I'll give it another push. Probably turn the barbs up a notch to 'raging', and open up the land area to make them more of a menace.
Then I'll just aim to be more of a menace myself, and cut the AI down in about half the time it took me in this game:/

I've been trying this one on and off for a few weeks now on Deity.

I'm not sure it is possible. The Ghandi "Great Wall" espionage economy has allowed me to conquer up to the Dom limit in 1400AD, but now I'm stuck at 55% with game over at 58%. I got Brennus on the east coast and Gilgamesh on the west coast.



http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t276/DANE3E3/ConquestDilema.jpg

Mining Inc will come online in 1410, and I have a great merchant ready for a food corp. Brennus and Gilgamesh are completely surrounded. The stage is set for super ultra mega thermonuclear war :devil::devil::devil::devil:

Im thinking of giving the 4 remaining civs some of my cities once I whip them down to 1 population and place Sid's Sushi in them. I will force them into Free Speech with my spies, and gift them seafood, and hopefully they will accumulate enough culture to stay in revolt a few turns once I re-conquer them.

Basically, TMIT's 3rd idea. This game is VERY hard due to not being able to raze. I don't think I can smash 30 deity cities in a few turns even with nukes. And even if I do, I've heard if you reach conquest and domination on the same turn, you get domination :hammer2:

I really wanted to try this game on something above settler level. Surely it must be achievable on Warlord? So off I went.

I started off in the far north-east corner of the pangaea, and began a steady trek of wiping out each civ in turn. Never any problem having enough power to overcome each opponent, but it was all just a bit - just a lot - too slow.
I realised that it was all going wrong when I had reached the 1000AD onwards period and could see that there were already too many cities in the world. I was going to bust the domination limit before I could get conquest.
Obviously, I did consider the idea of presenting cities to the barbarians, but I really should have prepared for this from the start. I notice SunTzuWu's comments above. I really must take some of these to heart on my next attempt. Basically, there were too few barbarians around, and they were unbelievably timid! I also handed cities over to my future enemies, knowing they would have to leave them empty for some considerable time. Then I would try to entice barbarians over to them. I watched at one point in frustration for 9 or 10 turns while a barb longbow walked around inside Gilgamesh's borders - an empty city mind you - pillaging roads and pastures and avoiding walking into the city!

Quite early on I had almost no option but to capture Brennus' city with the Gt Wall in it. So I made a present of it to Ragnar (smallest and weakest civ - also furthest from my capital).

All-in-all I managed to lose one solitary city to barbarians, and that was never going to be enough.

Finally, I was left with just Ragnar. I couldn't see any way to avoid a domination win, so I went for a strategy of wiping out all of his 6 cities simultaneously. This, I achieved satisfactorily, but I already knew what I was going to see next: domination victory.

So I'll give it another push. Probably turn the barbs up a notch to 'raging', and open up the land area to make them more of a menace.
Then I'll just aim to be more of a menace myself, and cut the AI down in about half the time it took me in this game:


AgedOne, thanks for sharing your experiences with Game #1 at Warlord level.

The strategy that I suggested earlier in this thread may work best at Deity level, because lower Difficulty Barbarians are quite lame when it comes to capturing Cities while Deity Barbarians will actually try to capture Cities. Also, don't forget to set Raging Barbarians and capture The Great Wall early; you don't really want the Barbarians to capture your Cities; if you do want to get rid of a pesky City or two, just gift them to the weakest AI and knock down their defenders if necessary; What you really want is the Barbarians to capture the AI Opponents Cities.

In addition to Deity level, I'm sure the strategy would work at Immortal Level and maybe as low as Monarch. It would be great if Prince level were viable with this strategy, since Warrior defenders would be far easier to overcome than Archers in the early Game.

Caveot:

I've never validated the Strategy I posted earlier at any Difficulty level.

Also, I don't play with Barbarians much and usually play primarily at Deity level, so I really don't have solid experience for extrapolating the Strategy to levels below Deity.

Sun Tzu Wu

... And even if I do, I've heard if you reach conquest and domination on the same turn, you get domination :hammer2:
This is true, Kaitzilla.
Exactly what I did in my attempt described above. Took the last 6 cities on the same turn. Ragnar was marked as DEAD, but the next turn the domination comes up in preference to the conquest win.
I knew it was going to happen, but couldn't think of any other option. Besides, I had to see it for myself before I would trust that it was the truth!

The strategy that I suggested earlier in this thread may work best at Deity level, because lower Difficulty Barbarians are quite lame when it comes to capturing Cities while Deity Barbarians will actually try to capture Cities. Also, don't forget to set Raging Barbarians and capture The Great Wall early; you don't really want the Barbarians to capture your Cities; if you do want to get rid of a pesky City or two, just gift them to the weakest AI and knock down their defenders if necessary; What you really want is the Barbarians to capture the AI Opponents Cities. I'm listening..:)..but can't really visualise myself having any impact on more than one of the other civs at Deity level.! That says more about my skill at warfare than anything else.
I had got the wrong idea, though, about letting barbarians take cities and the Gt Wall's obvious effect on that. I had been thinking along the lines of allowing the barbarians to take a selected number of my less-desirable cities in order to keep my land-area below the threshold. To do this I would naturally not own the Gt Wall.
You are outlining a different strategy, where you keep your own cities immune to barbs by owning the Gt Wall, but keep the city numbers down by handing indefensible cities over to your AI rivals and waiting for barbarians to oblige by capturing them. Is this correct?

In addition to Deity level, I'm sure the strategy would work at Immortal Level and maybe as low as Monarch. It would be great if Prince level were viable with this strategy, since Warrior defenders would be far easier to overcome than Archers in the early Game.I have been playing a new attempt today, but I'm only half way through. Setting barbarians to raging does make a significant difference, even on puny Warlord level. I have seen a number of empty cities taken by barbarians, and dangerous clusters of barbarian cities in some areas.
However, I still haven't got the Gt Wall, so this probably isn't the best test of the strategy.

I'm listening..:)..but can't really visualise myself having any impact on more than one of the other civs at Deity level.! That says more about my skill at warfare than anything else.


The choice to play at any Difficulty level is valid, as long as one is having fun, though Winning would be nice as well.

I sketched out my Strategy specifically for Deity Level, since the majority of my experience playing is at Deity level.


I had got the wrong idea, though, about letting barbarians take cities and the Gt Wall's obvious effect on that. I had been thinking along the lines of allowing the barbarians to take a selected number of my less-desirable cities in order to keep my land-area below the threshold. To do this I would naturally not own the Gt Wall.


The Strategy of avoiding possession of the Great Wall was advanced by some one else early in this thread. It is a valid tactic for keeping under Land Domination. However, I do not believe it would work very well at high difficulty levels, especially with Raging Barbarians. It can be very difficult to defend one's own Cities on flat terrain from Raging Barbarians at Deity level. The cost of such defense can be huge and completely avoided via possession of the Great Wall.


You are outlining a different strategy, where you keep your own cities immune to barbs by owning the Gt Wall, but keep the city numbers down by handing indefensible cities over to your AI rivals and waiting for barbarians to oblige by capturing them. Is this correct?


Yes, The Great Wall obviates the need to defend any of one's own Cities from capture by Raging Barbarians. When one starts accumulating Cities in excess of the needed Production levels, Maintenance levels or just to get rid of unproductive or distant Cities, one can simply give them away to a weak AI and have a stack ready to decimate its defenders as needed, lure Barbarian units to these Cities with weakened defenders in the hope the Barbarians take them. Even good Cities can be given to the Barbarians in this manner to increase production of their units and thus take on a greater share of the total Land tiles, hopefully enough to avoid Land Domination.


I have been playing a new attempt today, but I'm only half way through. Setting barbarians to raging does make a significant difference, even on puny Warlord level. I have seen a number of empty cities taken by barbarians, and dangerous clusters of barbarian cities in some areas.
However, I still haven't got the Gt Wall, so this probably isn't the best test of the strategy.


Thanks. This gives us hope that this Strategy can be used at lower than Monarch. Sounds like Warlords level may be possible. The latter part of the title of this post could probably be changed from "especially Deity through Monarch" to "especially Deity through Noble"? Maybe marginally effective at Warlord level? (I'm wild guessing now.)

Regarding The Great Wall, I would say that its more important for Deity level and Raging Barbarians. Having The Great Wall will be less important at lower Difficulty levels, because even Raging Barbarians are not too difficult to defend against at say Prince level or lower when compared to Monarch through Deity level (I'm guessing again).

Good luck, AgedOne, with your current Warlord level attempt!

Sun Tzu Wu

I've been trying this one on and off for a few weeks now on Deity.

I'm not sure it is possible. The Ghandi "Great Wall" espionage economy has allowed me to conquer up to the Dom limit in 1400AD, but now I'm stuck at 55% with game over at 58%. I got Brennus on the east coast and Gilgamesh on the west coast.



http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t276/DANE3E3/ConquestDilema.jpg

Mining Inc will come online in 1410, and I have a great merchant ready for a food corp. Brennus and Gilgamesh are completely surrounded. The stage is set for super ultra mega thermonuclear war :devil::devil::devil::devil:

Im thinking of giving the 4 remaining civs some of my cities once I whip them down to 1 population and place Sid's Sushi in them. I will force them into Free Speech with my spies, and gift them seafood, and hopefully they will accumulate enough culture to stay in revolt a few turns once I re-conquer them.

Basically, TMIT's 3rd idea. This game is VERY hard due to not being able to raze. I don't think I can smash 30 deity cities in a few turns even with nukes. And even if I do, I've heard if you reach conquest and domination on the same turn, you get domination :hammer2:
I have been playing this a bit as well. Giving away cities is key to the strategy. I think you have conquered too much. The end game imo should be killing units, which requires searching down all ships with a technologically superior large navy and tanks/modern armor vs. an exhausted civ or two. Once you have a huge numerical superiority, you can take the remaining cities. I would guess you would stop conquering at 40-45% land area to be sure you would get under domination and just work on pillaging and picking off units until only one remains in each town with backup to pick off the next units produced. Once you have done that and cleared the seas you should be able to take the remaining towns and win via conquest.

Hooray, Conquest in 1750! It took 20 hours of nuking, pillaging and squating armies on oil and uranium, but I conquered all the civs on the last 2 turns. I ended up 7% over the dom limit, but all the civs were dead and I got a conquest victory anyway. :rolleyes:

Now I'll just cross my fingers and hope I saved each time correctly over the past few weeks and started with the right settings.


Highlight was spies and air blimps revealing Brennus had 150 military units in his capital out of a total 230ish in his empire. Sabotaged the fallout shelter/nuclear bunker, and 2 ICBMs wiped them all out. Gilgamesh made a similiar blunder with 2 seperate stacks. The first strike was definitely devastating! :crazyeye:

Once everyone lost oil and uranium, the naval battle turned and the marines landed on everyone at the same time with nuclear support.
Didn't try the Sid Sushi thing, the game was going too fast for me to divert any resources to it, so I founded it and did nothing else with it to keep the AI from having it.

Hooray, Conquest in 1750! It took 20 hours of nuking, pillaging and squating armies on oil and uranium, but I conquered all the civs on the last 2 turns. I ended up 7% over the dom limit, but all the civs were dead and I got a conquest victory anyway. :rolleyes:

Now I'll just cross my fingers and hope I saved each time correctly over the past few weeks and started with the right settings.


Highlight was spies and air blimps revealing Brennus had 150 military units in his capital out of a total 230ish in his empire. Sabotaged the fallout shelter/nuclear bunker, and 2 ICBMs wiped them all out. Gilgamesh made a similiar blunder with 2 seperate stacks. The first strike was definitely devastating! :crazyeye:

Once everyone lost oil and uranium, the naval battle turned and the marines landed on everyone at the same time with nuclear support.
Didn't try the Sid Sushi thing, the game was going too fast for me to divert any resources to it, so I founded it and did nothing else with it to keep the AI from having it.

That is stunningly impressive! Even though you have done it, my brain is still convinced that a deity win with these settings is impossible! I am amused to see your pathetic effort has you in last place!;) That will certainly change.

That is stunningly impressive! Even though you have done it, my brain is still convinced that a deity win with these settings is impossible! I am amused to see your pathetic effort has you in last place!;) That will certainly change.

Yes, I don't like Deity, but in this case such victory deserves the high place may be even first.

Hooray, Conquest in 1750! It took 20 hours of nuking, pillaging and squating armies on oil and uranium, but I conquered all the civs on the last 2 turns. I ended up 7% over the dom limit, but all the civs were dead and I got a conquest victory anyway. :rolleyes:

Now I'll just cross my fingers and hope I saved each time correctly over the past few weeks and started with the right settings.


Highlight was spies and air blimps revealing Brennus had 150 military units in his capital out of a total 230ish in his empire. Sabotaged the fallout shelter/nuclear bunker, and 2 ICBMs wiped them all out. Gilgamesh made a similiar blunder with 2 seperate stacks. The first strike was definitely devastating! :crazyeye:

Once everyone lost oil and uranium, the naval battle turned and the marines landed on everyone at the same time with nuclear support.
Didn't try the Sid Sushi thing, the game was going too fast for me to divert any resources to it, so I founded it and did nothing else with it to keep the AI from having it.


Congratulations, Kaitzilla!

With these settings, it is amazing to get a Deity Conquest Win with any Turn/Date! Turn 385 AD 1750 is an excellent Win Turn and Date. :goodjob:

I don't understand how you could be 7% over the Domination Limit and still get a Conquest Win. I've always heard that Domination is awarded when both Domination and Conquest conditions are met, but as you said, you killed every Opponent.

Sun Tzu Wu

all hail Kaitzilla !!!:bowdown::clap::worship::wow::band:

Whatever the result (place in the challenge, I mean) may be this achievement is unbelievable, stunning, astonishing and proves to everybody that some people are really great!
hurray Kaitzilla!

Hooray, Conquest in 1750!

:bowdown:

Deity win on this settings is totally amazing! :goodjob:

(Oh, and thanks for knocking me out of last place). :p :lol:

I don't understand how you could be 7% over the Domination Limit and still get a Conquest Win. I've always heard that Domination is awarded when both Domination and Conquest conditions are met, but as you said, you killed every Opponent.

Sun Tzu Wu

Victory type priority is shown on Victory screen (from up side to down).

Hooray, Conquest in 1750!
I believe a new level of awe is required for such an incredible achievement.
:bowdown:
I would have bet good money that nobody would have succeeded at this challenge above Monarch.

(How ridiculous that the most amazing victory submitted is at the bottom of the scoreboard and not unassailably at the top)

I would have bet good money that nobody would have succeeded at this challenge above Monarch.



I've learned that it is never wise to bet against the ingenuity of this community. The more impossible it looks, the more likely the truly skilled will see a challenge, and rise to meet it. This result should become legend (at least until another Deity beats it, that is.).

I share you're awe. Really... the scoring on this one should be straight up: higher level beats lower level. In case of tie, count turns to finish. :eek:

I've learned that it is never wise to bet against the ingenuity of this community...

Thanks for all the kudos guys :D

I'm sure many other Deity players can duplicate this feat, but the time investment is prohibitive and last place is almost guaranteed. Just like to show it can be done with lots and lots of :nuke:Vitamin Sunshine:nuke:

My entire goal for this game was to conquer half the world, get Mining Inc as soon as possible, and launch a very one sided nuclear war. The real question was what to do about the domination limit. At the start right before the nuclear war in 1600AD, I gave away most of my border cities to Brennus and Gilgamesh, forcing down my land percentage by about 10%. This turned out to be a blunder. Even though it said 100% Brennus on the city and 8 tiles surrounding it, this was a lie. As soon as I took the cities back 150 years later, I got my old culture back and the city instantly bypassed revolt, restoring its old borders. It was once again 82% Ghandi 18% Brennus :mad:

The only case where giving cities away resulted in useful turns of revolting was those that had less than 20% India culture at the time I gifted them away.



However, there was one benefit to giving cities to Brennus, namely this gem during wartime:

http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t276/DANE3E3/BrokenEspionage.jpg

Yes, my espionage game went to a whole nother level in Bjorgvin. 5 turns of 0% espionage slider and Plastics was mine :lol::lol::lol:

At this difficulty level against these opponents, I can't recommend espionage economy enough. Ghandi is terrific at it. I think after Alphabet I self-researched Literature, Liberalism to get Steel, Biology and Refrigeration. I stole most everything else or partial researched it so I could trade for it.

My first Great Spy scouted out Ragnar, some of Brennus, and Stalin for me, before infiltrating Stalin. My second infiltrated Brennus. I watched their teching, kept track of their stacks of doom, saw what wonders they were building, and stabbed one of them in the back at the perfect time. Don't spend the 4500 when you first get it like it's water. Burn it on a tech only your victim has, then trade it for maximum effect.




As for nuclear war, the earlier the better. Everything you need to know can be summed up by Jimbob27's comment in this thread http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=180829

The main tech milestones in Nuclear warfare are:
Electricity: Bomb shelters become available (-50% nuke dmg)
Fission+Rocketry: Nukes become available
Ecology: Fallout can be cleaned up
Plastics: Offshore oil rigs and Standard Ethanol Corp can be built, greatly complicating efforts to deny the enemy oil.
Laser: SDI can be built, which ends nuke effectiveness when combined with bomb shelters
Mass Media: UN can be built which can ban Nukes if you don't have a blocking vote

Here is my save from 1600AD, the turn when I gave my border cities away and started nuclear war, if anyone wants to practice with nukes. Don't forget that Brennus has bomb shelters that need sabotaging, while Gilgamesh is defenseless. Good luck on your games!


256955

I submitted a 1550 BC Settler Conquest Victory for this one. As always hope I didn't mess up the submission somehow.

I don't hold my head high for turning in a Settler finish, but this is actually the only Conquest Victory I've ever done as I am one of those players who starts far, far more games than he finishes and I've always neglected Conquest.

I wanted to get a submission and a Conquest Victory, so I submitted on Settler. I plan to also turn in a victory on this one in as high a level as I can manage. I normally play Emperor, so I'll probably start there.

I had Horses in BFC along with riverside grass gems. Now I don't use MapFinder, but I was quite happy when that gem spot came up and when AH came in I was even happier. I beelined Horse Archers. Took out Gilg's undefended capitol with starting warrior. Then the cities had warriors in them, so I needed more. Took Shaka's cap with a couple chariots and a warrior. Ragnar's and GK's capitols were far away so when I had HAs 1 each took out their cities. Then Monte gave me lots of trouble. Alex was second to last. He only had a couple of warriors. Around this time barbs warriors and spears started showing up and I lost 2 HAs to Barb Spears and Monte's cap. I still had more than enough to take out Stalin once I found him.

I could have been faster if I'd microed a little bit and I didn't build enough workers from captured cities instead building archers that never got to take a city because they were so slow. With roads up sooner it would have helped. Monte gave me a bit of trouble as he whipped a spear into his hill capitol. I won a lucky battle (1.3%) with a Horse Archer versus that spear, so it could have been worse. And the thing that slowed me down the most (probably around 200 years) was that Stalin was way out of the way on a narrow peninsula behind mountains. I had to find him first and then go around the mountains which was slow.

I don't understand how you could be 7% over the Domination Limit and still get a Conquest Win. I've always heard that Domination is awarded when both Domination and Conquest conditions are met, but as you said, you killed every Opponent.

Victory type priority is shown on Victory screen (from up side to down).

I share Sun Tzu Wu's confusion. I disagree with Dynamic's assertion.

In the G-major 78, I milked population while skirting the domination limit. I killed off all of the AI on the last turn to increase my score. I won a domination victory. The following spoiler shows my F8 Victory screen and my victory turn map showing domination with all dead AI.

http://i942.photobucket.com/albums/ad265/shulec/DomintationF8screenshot.jpghttp://i942.photobucket.com/albums/ad265/shulec/Dominationscreenshot.jpg

I share Sun Tzu Wu's confusion. I disagree with Dynamic's assertion.
I've checked the code. Yes, Victory detection system was changed from Vanilla to BtS (I haven't checked Warlords). In Vanilla victory was assigned as I described above. But in BtS now the final victory is selected as random value from all available types at current turn (testVictory() from CvGame.cpp).
It's new for me also. :)

But in BtS now the final victory is selected as random value from all available types at current turn (testVictory() from CvGame.cpp).
It's new for me also. :)

It would be shame if Kaitzilla's victory had been randomly chosen to be a Domination victory.

I've checked the code. Yes, Victory detection system was changed from Vanilla to BtS (I haven't checked Warlords). In Vanilla victory was assigned as I described above. But in BtS now the final victory is selected as random value from all available types at current turn (testVictory() from CvGame.cpp).
It's new for me also. :)

It would be shame if Kaitzilla's victory had been randomly chosen to be a Domination victory.

Wow! I'm not quite sure how this makes me feel about my failed attempt I described earlier. I knew I would break the domination limit but went ahead with a plan to take all the remaining cities on the same turn. While I was doing it I was sure it was a doomed strategy - and that's the way it turned out. I got the expected dom victory and put the whole thing down to experience.
Now I can see that it might have succeeded after all! Which makes me feel a bit better about trying it, and I'll do it again if I get into that situation. On the other hand I suddenly feel as though my luck wasn't in that day. :dunno:

I've checked the code. Yes, Victory detection system was changed from Vanilla to BtS (I haven't checked Warlords). In Vanilla victory was assigned as I described above. But in BtS now the final victory is selected as random value from all available types at current turn (testVictory() from CvGame.cpp).
It's new for me also. :)


Thanks for checking.

I've checked the testVictory() code in CvGame.cpp, but really don't understand it. There appears to be a loop that iterates through the different victory conditions and in the loop itself, there is the expression getSorenRandNum(100, "Victory Success") < kLoopTeam.getLaunchSuccessRate((VictoryTypes)iJ). Is that what you are referring to? What is kLoopTeam.getLaunchSuccessRate((VictoryTypes)iJ)?

Its still not clear to me that assuming that multiple Victory Conditions are valid, that this code randomly picks one of them, much less with equal probability.

I suspect that part of my problem is not understanding the environment this code runs in, especially the functions it calls and whole BtS Game structure. I wouldn't really want to understand it all as that might spoil the magic of BtS, but it would be nice to understand a bit of this "white magic" like the testVictory() code. Any suggestions?

Sun Tzu Wu

I've checked the testVictory() code in CvGame.cpp, but really don't understand it. There appears to be a loop that iterates through the different victory conditions and in the loop itself, there is the expression getSorenRandNum(100, "Victory Success") < kLoopTeam.getLaunchSuccessRate((VictoryTypes)iJ). Is that what you are referring to?

No, it's just universal part of code that check chance of "Victory Success", but really works just for SS victory.
Multiple victory resolving code is placed farther, I will explain it later (I haven't access to code now).

This part of code add winner team and victory type to the list of ready victories (aaiWinners):

std::vector<int> aWinner;
aWinner.push_back(iI);
aWinner.push_back(iJ);
aaiWinners.push_back(aWinner);


This part of code checks the size of victories list and got the random value [0; Victories Number). This value is used as Index in the victories list:

if (aaiWinners.size() > 0)
{
int iWinner = getSorenRandNum(aaiWinners.size(), "Victory tie breaker");
setWinner(((TeamTypes)aaiWinners[iWinner][0]), ((VictoryTypes)aaiWinners[iWinner][1]));
}

This part of code add winner team and victory type to the list of ready victories (aaiWinners):

std::vector<int> aWinner;
aWinner.push_back(iI);
aWinner.push_back(iJ);
aaiWinners.push_back(aWinner);



So the if condition controlling the above code executes for each Victory Condition that is valid, with a special case for Space Colony Victory where the mission can fail due to lack of SS parts (rushed launch). Thus, the success or failure of the Space Colony Victory is actually determined right in the if condition containing this code block.


This part of code checks the size of victories list and got the random value [0; Victories Number). This value is used as Index in the victories list:

if (aaiWinners.size() > 0)
{
int iWinner = getSorenRandNum(aaiWinners.size(), "Victory tie breaker");
setWinner(((TeamTypes)aaiWinners[iWinner][0]), ((VictoryTypes)aaiWinners[iWinner][1]));
}



Thanks for your kind assistance. The testVictory() code makes much more sense now, but I'll probably never fully grok it.

Sun Tzu Wu

Anybody else playing this currently? I have been away for awhile but started back up. Axe rush, elephants, Great Lighthouse, Pyramids and Great Wall are all strong depending on your map but I have to keep these "pleased" AI from jumping me and calling in their buddies! Ack!

Anybody else playing this currently? I have been away for awhile but started back up. Axe rush, elephants, Great Lighthouse, Pyramids and Great Wall are all strong depending on your map but I have to keep these "pleased" AI from jumping me and calling in their buddies! Ack!

I think the mechanics of this challenge are either flawed or the challenge has been misinterpreted.

The mechanics are flawed in that if you win a victory such as Kaitzilla's on a high level, you will most likely have to rely on random chance based on some code that will give you a conquest or domination victory. Kaitzilla spent +65 hours on his game, and quite franklym, got lucky that the game didn't determine that his victory was a domination victory (unless someone can convince me otherwise, based on the coding for victory types.) I would have no chance a deity for this game. I might have a chance trying what Kaitzilla did on emperor or immortal, but I sure as hell will not try knowing that all my work could land me a domination victory.

I am misinterpreting the challenge if it is meant for the player kill all AI before they are able to colonized the map to the percentage that will trigger a domination victory. Clearly this is impossible on deity and likely down to monarch or noble.

Therefore, I chose to cheese this one on settler.

My cheese submission is good enough for third place behind Termitnik (2nd) and Kaitzilla (1st). I have to admit that I am a pathetic warmonger. I finished at 1675 BC with a lot of room for improvement. I challenge anyone who has finished later then 1000 BC (on settler) to replay with my strategy (or a better variant) and finish better than 1800 BC.

Edit: I say this because it should be relatively easy to accomplish with a dedicated effort!

Here is my strategy:

Settle a 5 or 6 hammer start. Six hammers is obviously better. This mean settling or a marble hill or stone hill. This give three hammers in your city tile. There must also be a plains forested hill adjacent to this tile. (A five hammer start means settling on a non forested plains hill, ivory plains tile, non hilled stone or marble tile and next to a forested plains hill or hilled marble or stone.) This allows you to crank out warrior 1 and 2 in 4 turns and the third warrior in 3 turns. (I think a five hammer start is 5, 5 and 4 turns respectively.) Get these warriors out ASAP an take unguarded cities. In my game I captured three. In another attempt, I captured four. (I think termitnik got four also.) You can often capture the third or fourth city with two warriors if the AI has a warrior, but hasn't founded a religion (40% defense) or didn't settle on a hill. I found that AI that started with hunting (and a scout) were more likely to have a warrior by turn 18 (and sometimes by turn 14). I think settling directly on a river network is ideal, but nearby to a river network is OK, too. (This makes it easier to get horses to your other cities for chariot production.) After building three warriors, you should switch to building a fast worker. (In my game, I actually started a Barracks, but I will get to that eventually.)

The tech order that is ideal is AH> BW> (Hunting)> fishing> sailing> writing> Alpha or Archery. Animal husbandry is the first tech to see of you get horses in your BFC. If you don't, you should consider abandoning. The third ring is not good enough. Copper is not worth it as the axe rush is too slow with axemen having only one movement per turn. In my game, I didn't get horses in my bfc, but it was in my first conquered city about 8 tiles from my capitol. I put hunting in parentheses since it may be fruitful to have one of your early conquest cities build a scout for exploring. I chose not to use a scout. Sailing is essential to establish trade routes along rivers (not requiring roads to connect all cities). These trade routes allow access to horses so chariots can be built in cities other than your capitol. Writing is valuable to get open borders to allow advanced scouting to make sure you have enough military force to take a city. Archery is not bad to garrison cities against barbs. No stronger barbs (spearmen) showed up until about 2000 BC. Alpha can be of benefit to see if the AI has BW or Archery. By the time you would get Alphabet, it is probably useless because you should assume the AI already have archery and should be able to see if they have any copper mines. They will not have Iron working before 1800 BC.

I recommend building fast workers as your first build in your first three to four conquered cities. Production from any cities take with chariots will be too late to help and should have absolutely no impact on the outcome of the game. Warriors are no longer strong enough to take cities efficiently. Barracks are not valuable if you cannot connect to a horse resource. Fast workers can build a network to bring horses to the city to build chariots. Connect your cities to rivers that will connect trade routes. Finish the roads to connect the cities for your chariots to move more quickly as time permits. Workers need to share time between chopping, road building and improving prime resources in the city BFC or Little Box (it's not really a cross). Do not build monuments. If you build any barracks, make sure it is really worth it. If you can build roads to military targets, this helps tremendously to speed up your conquest, but don't stifle your chariot production too much by building too many roads and not chopping enough.

Attack! Chop, build, and whip chariots like wildfire! Happiness should not be a problem on settler unless you are a crazy whipper. The first one to two cities taken with chariots should be able to be taken with three chariots (Really two should work if you want to risk it.) The last two to three cities should be taken with five chariots. In my game, three was good enough for two of them and one required four, but risking it and falling short will mean lots of lost turns. When I took the last three cities, they were initially guarded by only one warrior. Two of the three AI whipped an archer. Therefore, the strongest defenses I saw were one warrior and one archer. I assume the AI that didn't whip an archer was not in slavery.

This is an easy "cookbook" approach to the settler challenge. I don't know what is the best balance of worker chopping, city improving and road building. The person who can find the optimal balance of these should get the best settler time. Unfortunately, luck plays a big part in this. In my game, I had a five hammer start and I didn't get horses in my BFC. Luckily, I captured a very nearby city that required only a short stretch of road to connect rivers to give me horses in my capitol. This allowed me to build a barracks in my capitol. I also lost one turn in my game by "attacking" a civ that I had open borders with, but forgot to declare before my first move. Therefore, I was stuck inside his borders without having declared war. I declared which popped me out of their territory, to attack one turn later.

I think someone can easily finish on settler earlier that 1800 BC and take second place from Termitnik. Yes, I am still maintaining that Kaitzilla is in first place. It would be ridiculous to not "curve" the results to make it so. I would like to see some of you other settlers whoop my score!

Shulec, thanks for the great write up on your 1675 BC Settler Win.

I agree that it may be impossible to Win this Challenge (place 1st) at Deity given the current turn offsets. However, the AI starts with Warriors rather than Archers at Prince level and a Win at this level (Prince) seems likely.

Kaitzilla's Deity Strategy of beelining Fission and Rocketry for Tactical Nukes and ICBMs seems to be the best Strategy for Deity at the moment. I don't believe I will have time to finish this Challenge at Deity level. Due to lack of Time, I may simply try it at Settler level or not at all.

Sun Tzu Wu

Anybody else playing this currently? I have been away for awhile but started back up. Axe rush, elephants, Great Lighthouse, Pyramids and Great Wall are all strong depending on your map but I have to keep these "pleased" AI from jumping me and calling in their buddies! Ack!


Are you attempting Deity level?

Trying best Kaitzilla's result?

Espionage should help a lot with this Challenge, especially at higher levels.

Nice to hear from you again, killercane! Good luck with this Challenge!

Sun Tzu Wu

Wow, so when 2 victory conditions occur on the same turn it's up to a random number generator? That means I won my game on a digital coin flip :mad:

Not a strategy at all, just dumb luck.

Thanks for digging into the code for this! I was replaying my last turns trying to kill off that last barb city before the end and the answer was on the forums all along. Figured the game thought I wasn't dominant enough cause I left some barbs alive.