GOTM23 Results (http://gotm.civfanatics.net/results/index.php)

With apologies from the GOTM Staff on the tardiness of these results, here they are finally.

Thanks for the results and congrats to the top players. Their detailed games just enhance my plaing skills.

Congrats to all the players who entered and especially those who did well. So many of you did. I was pleased with my result this month only to find myself 52nd. :eek:

:goodjob: for the many great games with 11000+ Jason scores!

Yeah, I eventually made my break through ! Always stuck at around the 50th or 60th place or so, and this time I made it to the 24th place. :) I'm eager to see how I did in the Medal series, for this game and for the summer season overall. :scan:

(That could be a nice point where to do something about the GOTMs, but more on that later...)

Glad to see some results :D

That once some tough competition. 1160AD domination only gets me 38th?

It seems like spaceship and diplomatic victories got the highest bonuses while conquest and domination was fairly low. Which is good for me, because my 1752 diplo victory(my first in a gotm) netted me 105th. I'm running out of time with the current one so I don't know if i'll be able to submit this month but I'm setting a goal of breaking 100th by the end of the year, with either november or december. (I don't think I did very well on the scores with Korea because although I made huge terrain grabs in the late game the Han had a huge tech lead throughout the game and grabbed the spaceship a couple of turns after I entered the modern age) Actually, looking at the scores, it looks like diplo and spaceship losses had the biggest penalties out of all of them too. Still, I may be close to the high-scoring loss for that month.

September was a while ago and I don't remember too much from the game, but I did learn quite a bit from it. The main thing being that I've improved my war tactics a bit, with my early running-over of Carthage(and my third GL capture in a row, including October's, which rocketed me into the early IA) and then setting my sights on the other nearby civs who had great tech leads over me, but I used clever diplomacy to set AI's against each other and then rush in with settlers to plop down an area where I could launch attacks of my own...a tactic which I've used in the past(perhaps too much) but never to great effect.

Anyway, this is a 33 place jump over last month, and hopefully the beginning of an upward trend. Apparently the score sheets use the score you input on the submittal form and most of the time when I sumbit my saves it's not from home(i put on disk and take to school, where they've actually got an outgoing transfer rate that can be measured in k/s) so I don't know my exact score, i usually round down to the lower 100(for example, in 22 my score was actually 2130 or so, i just put 2100 on the submittal form) which in hindsight was a bad idea. When(if) I submit this month, I'll make sure to put down the exact score which could have netted me a few more places had I not been so lazy to not write down the score.

Yay

I cracked the top 100

This was the Arab GOTM wasn't it. If it was it was my fav game of CIV ever. That map was awesome.

Results!!!!!

Very high scores. Those ansars were great. Congratulations to everyone that beat me, especially to those that kept me out of the top 10.:mad: I don't suppose I will ever be as close again.

I was delighted to have finally made the first page of my printout of results (13th) but sadly fear that I will be a lot lower down in gotm25.

I am intrigued by apparent anomalies in scores: eg Yurian dominated in an amazing 290ad, but scored lower than Mark Cutt who won in a mighty impressive but slower 370ad. Similar discrepancies are present further down the list. Obviously this is a result of score being averaged for all turns played. It could be that Mark Cutt had a very strong start but was a little slower at achieving domination. Alternatively, he may have been running with a higher pop/happiness level. The differences aren't very big but do impact on final positions so it would be nice to understand them properly. Given the general rate of improvement here this could be all important to my chances of keeping in the top 100 in gotm27.

I've just been looking at the score graph for Yurian and Mark Cutt using my CRpViewer (I've just uploaded the .crp file to my website (www.cfc-dianthus.com)), and it shows Mark having a higher score between 975BC and 280AD.

With apologies from the GOTM Staff on the tardiness of these results, here they are finally.

Provided I win a medal you can delay the results as much as you want:)

Originally posted by Dianthus
I've just been looking at the score graph for Yurian and Mark Cutt using my CRpViewer

Thanks for this. These replays are great fun.

I was intrigued by some of the games by the top players and tried to look up their reports in the forum only to find ... nothing.
Clearly you don't have to post, but you guys who are better than me, how I am supposed to learn if you don't tell me how you did it?

Surely I'm not expected to figure it out by myself.

Special thanks therefore to the top players who did post detailed reports.

Aeson, thanks for putting this together. At some point will there be a mention of the level at which each player played?

The color of the Jason score denotes whether the game was Predator (red), Open (black), or Conquest (blue).

Also, it seems the 1.27f games were showing as the version of the game above it in the listing. That's fixed now.

Thanks a lot for finally updating the scores!

Congratulations to all great scores in this game. Some really impressive results up there in the top. This was by no doubt one of the most interesting GotM:s ever! At the first look, the desert seemed to be so dry and boring, but then again - the challenge of creating a nice core, using the most of the fertile tiles we had was really funny!

If the scores for the other games keep on coming now I might start to play again :)

Originally posted by Offa
I was intrigued by some of the games by the top players and tried to look up their reports in the forum only to find ... nothing.

You're right! I'm not very good in posting my reports (it's mainly a time problem, I often complete my games very close to month's end).
For GOTM23 I wrote two posts.
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?postid=1247771#post1247771
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?postid=1264471#post1264471
They are not very detailed...
If you want I can PM you my qsc timeline.

11th Heil to :king:

My game isn't on .crp file :(

Originally posted by Kuningas
My game isn't on .crp file :(
That's true. I had problems downloading your .sav from the gotm site. I've PM'd Aeson, but if you want to send it to me I'll update the .crp file when I get home tonight.

Originally posted by Mark Cutt

You're right! I'm not very good in posting my reports (it's mainly a time problem, I often complete my games very close to month's end).
For GOTM23 I wrote two posts.
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?postid=1247771#post1247771
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?postid=1264471#post1264471
They are not very detailed...
If you want I can PM you my qsc timeline.

I didn't mean you.
However I would like your qsc challenge timeline.
Well done on your medal, impressive game.:goodjob:

Originally posted by Offa
I didn't mean you.

Ancient Romans used to say: "Excusatio non petita, accusatio manifesta" i.e. "not requested apologies means you feel guilty"...it's true I feel guilty for not posting enough information about my game. I would have never improved my civ skills without the enlightening posts of SirPleb, Moonsinger, Qitai, ...

I think that the calculator yields not so good results. Among 100 best players only 5 have won a cultural victory. It is not normal. I understand, that domination or conquest is easier, but the calculator should take into account it. It is possible, that ours 85 and 99 (with Assura) results correspond to a level of game, but it is better than us only 3 received a cultural victory... I think, that it is necessary to reduce weight of a military victory.
Sorry terrible English

Originally posted by EsatP
I think that the calculator yields not so good results. Among 100 best players only 5 have won a cultural victory. It is not normal. I understand, that domination or conquest is easier, but the calculator should take into account it. It is possible, that ours 85 and 99 (with Assura) results correspond to a level of game, but it is better than us only 3 received a cultural victory... I think, that it is necessary to reduce weight of a military victory.You forgot to account for GOTM23 being Medal Pay Game 5-5 with the target of domination.

If you look at the GOTM22 results (doubling as MPG 5-3 with cultural 20k target), you might deduct overweighing of c20k.

It is not a failure of the calculator, it is intended by the players.

Originally posted by EsatP
I think that the calculator yields not so good results. Among 100 best players only 5 have won a cultural victory. It is not normal. I understand, that domination or conquest is easier, but the calculator should take into account it. It is possible, that ours 85 and 99 (with Assura) results correspond to a level of game, but it is better than us only 3 received a cultural victory... I think, that it is necessary to reduce weight of a military victory.
Sorry terrible English

If you aim for fastest conquest or domination victory then your score will be very close to the score you would achieve if you were simply trying for maximum Jason points :D. If you aim for the fastest finish via other victory conditions then typically you will have to sacrifice Jason points to do so, as you are unlikely to reach the domination limit as fast as domination/conquest players will :(.

The system is fair insofar as everyone plays under the same rules and is free to pick which victory condition to aim for. Jason points are also the best scoring system anyone has come up with. However the downside to the system is that it tends to undervalue those games seeking to reach a fastest finish date for victory conditions other than conquest or domination. For the moment if your goal is to maximize your GOTM score you should aim to reach the domination point (or wipe out all rivals) as quickly as possible, and not attempt a fastest finish in one of the other victory conditions.

Originally posted by Dianthus
I've just been looking at the score graph ... using my CRpViewer (I've just uploaded the .crp file to my website (www.cfc-dianthus.com))

Many thanks for your excellent utility. I have never used it before and its a pity. It greatly helps with game analysis. For example, I found out that at every single point of the game my score was slightly higher than SirPleb's and most of other players above my 20th place. It was just slow warfare that made me finished 200-600 years later (with only 12% difference in score which is very minor compared to other GOTMs). Probably, building too much culture, happiness and settlers instead of military. However, total difference in score is very small (either Jason's or Firaxis) considering the bigger bonus you get for finishing earlier in both scoring systems. It looks like that I just got in the "linear" part of the Jason's curve where Firaxis score is more or less proportional to the Jason's. Anyhow, the goal of the game is to keep your folks happy and grab some land at the same time. Looks like grabbing the land rapidly does not make anyone happy. And when everyone's happy you cannot grab the land very rapidly. At least in GOTM23... You learn the trick when land goes in rapidly and people are still happy. Apparently, this is either impossible or very-very difficult.

I also considered a possibility of cultural victory (100K) instead of domination and it looks like that it was possible to achieve it around 1450-1550 AD if I would have continued cultural growth at the same rate.

Thanks again for the game, it was a huge fun.

Originally posted by Offa


I was intrigued by some of the games by the top players and tried to look up their reports in the forum only to find ... nothing.
Clearly you don't have to post, but you guys who are better than me, how I am supposed to learn if you don't tell me how you did it?


Ancient summary (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?postid=1224419#post1224419)

Middle Ages summary (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?postid=1228848#post1228848)

All the information you need to play a high scoring game is within these forums.
Looking back on it the key things in this game were:

Fast growth start (look at some of Qitai's posts or Cracker's starting guide)
Aggressive trading (I think Moonsinger started an excellent thread on this)
Targetted research (SirPleb's GOTM19)
RCP (see DavidesJ's thread in strategy articles) and resource disconnecting to upgrade (not sure where this came up 1st) also help

It looks like not bothering with a Forbidden Palace may also have ended up helping my game and that building warriors to upgrade to swordsmen wasn't as bad as I thought at the time.

The only thing I haven't seen get much exposure are tips for fast unit tactics. Things I did were:
Attack with numbers, but don't waste forces by using more than is needed. In the initial phases I'm happy with about a 80-90% chance of taking a town if it is not on a critical path and even less if it is. By a critical path, I mean an enemy town that is slowing up my progress towards further targets. If a town is slowing me up and is down to its last defender I am quite happy to sacrifice wounded units in attempting to take it.

Obviously at the start of a rampage you want to attack more cautiously, and the more success you have the more you can throw caution to the wind as each of your units becomes less valuable.

Combine this with a tactic I refer to as "forking" (careful how you say it ;)). If you can position attacking units so that they threaten 2 or more enemy towns at once then you can adjust the number of forces you throw at each town as the turn progresses. If you divide 6 ansars against 2 towns each with 2 pike defenders then you end up with two risky 3 on 2 attacks. If on the other hand, you have all 6 available to attack both towns, you are almost certain of success against the 1st, and then can decide whether to attempt the 2nd town that turn. With multiple smallish stacks of ansar each with a number of possible targets, you can improve your attacking odds significantly by picking the attack order and adjusting your targets if the results go particularly badly or particularly well, taking maximum advantage of whatever the RNG throws up. You also have fewer "wasted" attackers. A fully healed ansar that spends a turn in the front line without attacking is not pulling its weight.
Many forks exist where taking one town will opens up a path to further towns. Make sure your forces are positioned to take advantage of this.

Unit healing:
If a unit has a single point of damage you can rest it anywhere for a turn
If a unit has 2 points of damage then resting outside or moving to a town and then resting, both have the same 2 turn cost.
If a unit has 3 points of damage then resting outside or moving to a town without a barracks have the same 3 turn cost
Don't forget to take advantage of a wounded units remaining movement. Often you can save a turn by waiting till the end of all combat before moving wounded units and then moving them as far forward as you can. They are not going to heal that turn anyway, so the extra movement is effectively free.

Other things to do are:
If you are not that bothered about leaders (and you shouldn't be towards the end), always send in elites 1st. They have both a greater chance of winning, and better retreat odds if they fail.
Keep fast units on roads where possible, even within enemy territory when that territory will soon be yours.
Keep workers near the front to build roads where needed; build roads towards distant targets before you attack if none exit.

Originally posted by Kuningas
My game isn't on .crp file :(
For those that are interested (even if it's only Kuningas ;)), I've just updated the GOTM23 .crp files to include Kuningas' game.

What no prize for the 4th highest loss? (139/154).

Oh well, I learned more in this one than my previous 3 - I was doing pretty well and could have probably won (not well mind you but a win). I broke one deal to grab two cities and it all fell apart. I have never had a game pivot on a rep hit like that before. Very good lesson.

This is also the last GOTM I've turned in. I've just been swamped and I have some hangup about only playing if I can finish - I really need to at least play the QSC and turn that in to compare with others. I've been playing in what little spare time I've had - and I plan on playing the Asian melee.

Love these things but reality keeps interfering - once I win the lottery - this becomes my full time job. (since I don't even buy tickets - that may be awhile).

ssharlow

Snaga,

Excellent tips, especially the point about not wasting movement for newly wounded units. This can often be the difference in getting them to a town with barracks, or at least positioning them so that when they are healed, they are still in striking distance of the front.

Yup, that's a great list of things to do for successfull warmongering given that one knows the articles you point to.

Now my problem is, given that I do all things mentioned above, why do I always score lower?

Originally posted by Snaga


Ancient summary (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?postid=1224419#post1224419)

Middle Ages summary (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?postid=1228848#post1228848)

All the information you need to play a high scoring game is within these forums.
Looking back on it the key things in this game were:



Great game Snaga, and well done on your gold medal. Thanks for the hints. I agree that there is a plethora of good advice on the site, and I certainly have benefited enormously from it. Your performance is still pretty amazing though.

I hope my initial post is not misinterpreted. It was supposed to be a lighthearted comment. I was really referring to a few top players who, as far as I am aware, have never posted at all, ever. Maybe they don’t speak English. I think that the gotm community would be enhanced if more people post reports. Civ is a pretty time consuming game as it is, so I think it is worthwhile to waste a little more time to post a report. If people wrote a couple of paragraphs about some aspect of their game, it would enrich the site. Very long reports aren’t necessary, although as much detail as possible would be appreciated from folk who have clearly aced the game. I would especially like more reports by people who didn’t do well, as these are often very entertaining

Originally posted by Yndy
Yup, that's a great list of things to do for successfull warmongering given that one knows the articles you point to.

Now my problem is, given that I do all things mentioned above, why do I always score lower?
Well in this game the single biggest factor would be how quickly you discovered Chivalry. I would guess there would be a stronger correlation between this date and final score than any other factor. Chivalry unlocked both ansars and a golden age. In combination these were strong enough to take over the world. I researched Chivalry as fast as I could and got it in 370BC, you appeared to slow down research after reaching the middle ages and didn't get Chivalry until 110AD.

To get Chivalry quickly I maximised the number of citizens I had working on trade generating squares in non-corrupt towns, especially towards the end of the ancient ages, and at the start of the middle ages, when I was researching ahead of the AI. I think the best way to do this is to use RCP, heavily emphasis growth and build or buy many workers during the ancient age (I think Qitai came up with a good rule of thumb: if a citizen isn't producing at least 2 food, a shield and a trade unit then it will be more effective as a worker.) A citizen in an uncorrupt 1st ring town is more productive than a citizen in an outer/higher corruption-ranked town, so growing core cities will give you a stronger economy (and production base) than trying to build many towns. In this game especially, the terrain outside the core area was poor, so there was even less value in expansion through settling.

I compared our games using the .crp file (great tool Dianthus! :goodjob: )
I built 14 towns before starting my conquest phase in 570BC. You built 26 before starting yours in 30BC. By that turn I had captured my way to around 70 towns.

The only other thing I noticed was that your placement of Makkah on the starting tile was not as strong as placing to SE. The SE square allows twice the growth rate with a granary under despotism.

Wow!! My first 10,000+ Jason point game, and I'm 21st :eek: And, if I counted correctly, my 870AD Domination Victory puts me in a 3 way tie for 22nd fastest victory. What a bunch of warmongers! :)

Clearly the GOTM process has improved the general level of play. This crowd knows what to do with a stack of Ansars, and the pre-discussion thread really helps set the stage to prepare for the upcoming Game.

:jump: 132 and LOWEST DIPLOMATIC VICTORY on my first (and seemingly last) win. I've never been so excited to be lowest anything.

Realizing I was losing I marshalled my military for a daring gambit toward the AI controlled UN and took the first vote I could -- just before AI spaceship launch; they said they loved me! This one was a steal but I'll take it.

Originally posted by civ_steve
Wow!! My first 10,000+ Jason point game, and I'm 21st :eek: And, if I counted correctly, my 870AD Domination Victory puts me in a 3 way tie for 22nd fastest victory. What a bunch of warmongers! :)

Clearly the GOTM process has improved the general level of play. This crowd knows what to do with a stack of Ansars, and the pre-discussion thread really helps set the stage to prepare for the upcoming Game.

I'll say! I also scored over 10k and ended up right behind you..even with faster domination date (800 AD). People here are just too good!

Congrats to all. I am looking forward for the December GOTM :D.

Originally posted by SewerStarFish
...

Realizing I was losing I marshalled my military for a daring gambit toward the AI controlled UN and took the first vote I could -- just before AI spaceship launch; they said they loved me! This one was a steal but I'll take it.

That is a Great Victory!! This shows that you're rarely out of it, even if you're far behind.

Congratulations to all!:goodjob: Especially to Ronald!:goodjob: Wow, I have noticed that you are now outscoring SirPleb!

So...When are you coming back to play, Moonsinger? :hmm:

Originally posted by ainwood
So...When are you coming back to play, Moonsinger? :hmm:

After I win my first Sid level. So far, I lost twice already.:( But I have a new plan....and it may work this time.:)

Originally posted by Moonsinger
After I win my first Sid level. So far, I lost twice already.:( But I have a new plan....and it may work this time.:)
Well, maybe ainwood could make the next GOTM's Predator class game be at Sid level ;)

My first gtm and I get 99. I'm thinking thats not to great but hey, theres 49 people worse off than me.

I think you're being hard on yourself Rallonian, 99th on your first attempt is good :goodjob:. New player's to GOTM will often find the standard quite high. I failed even to win on my first three attempts, let alone get a good position in the table (OK, so I lost this one as well, but I've got an excuse :)). Keep up the good work, and remember, there is always more to learn, even for those at the top.

Great. I might start playing GOTM again :)

Yeah, I was planning on playing all GTM to try and get a better score but theres been lots of things stopping me. I did do the Korea one but failed missurably so I didn't bother submitting. Then there was Mongol that I was enjoying but Conquests then came along. And now the Han one I can't play on Conquests and there something about going back to PTW when I just purchased a knew version of the game that realy doesn't appeal to me.