I know, we're still in the pre-history phase until creation day, but still during the early part of the game there are steps we have to take if we want to pursue specific victory conditions. In particular, if we want to aim for a 20K culture in one city win, we have to start cultural buildings as early as possible. If we want a diplomatic victory, then we need to start out treating our neighbors fairly well, or eliminate them before they can spill the beans. For either of these victory types, it helps a lot to be at the top of the score graph right from the beginning,as opposed to conquest and domination where a strong military is the early priority.

Lets start off by stating your preferred victory type, and which one you would like to avoid. To begin with this can be informational. My answer is I would prefer to aim for diplomatic {how ironic ;)} and avoid space race.

Lets see, DG1 had Culture victory. DG2 had Domination victory. DG3 had Spaceship victory.

I would like to see DG4's victory to have a conquest victory.

Diplomatic victory would be a real challenge.

No to Space Race

no space race.

If you give me the opprotunity later, Ill make a war machine that WILL get a conquest victory.

Conquest would be nice. I have never made that before...

At this point I am undecided among Conquest, Domination, or Culture.

Maybe conquest, but I think Diplo would serve as an odder game.

For a real challenge, and an interesting one, we should try for a Histographic victory. We would, among other things, have to keep the other civilizations from winning in any other way while at the same time making sure that we don't accidentally win in any way until 2050. Conquest would also be an interesting way to win, as we would also have to keep our territory and culture down until we had conquered everybody in the world. I am not much in favor of Diplomatic victory; Diplomatic victories are easy if we determine who the second-place nation is and sign up the rest of the world in MA's against them just before the vote is held, and if they are done in any other way, they can cause sudden, unexpected defeat. I wouldn't be in favor of 100k Culture, Domination, or Space Race victories as we've already done them, but I think that it would be interesting to go for 20k Culture.

Conquest, It would bring more interest to the game.

I usually win with either domination, 100k culture, spaceship or histographic depending on circumstances and how the mood takes me. I failed dismally at trying to get a 20k culture victory in GOTM 22 (still not finished it yet, but if I do manage to win it won't be 20k!) and have never trusted enough to go for the UN vote when I knew I had a good chance of victory anyway.

So for me 20k Culture (I would like to see how this is done), Conquest or possibly Diplomatic (that seems just too sudden though) would be most interesting. I would prefer to avoid histographic as I don't find just running out of time and stopping particularly satisfying. Saying all that however, I've always felt that the objective is to win and you must be prepared to adapt or change your strategy as the situation requires.

boots brings up a good point, a historograph would be a very interesting challenge, i vote for it

There should be a poll on this.

I would vote for Conquest, since it is challenging and is the opposite of DG3, when we did spaceship.

Wow, that's a pretty diverse set of ideas to get us going. :D

It seems clear that space race is out.

One aspect to consider on attempting a histographic win is that we need to be prepared to play the entire 540 turns. At the standard rate of 80 turns per month, we would be at this for 7 months, and a rate of 60 per month is more realistic which would last 9 months. I'm fine with that if enough people can stick with it that long, just wanted to point it out.

Out of the six non-histograph victory types, I believe the victory type most suited to our civilzation would be cultural. However, a histographic victory would prove an interesting challenge. However, DaveShack brings up a good point that it will take about 9 months to win a histographic victory, and in past DG's we have had trouble filling offices after about 5 or 6 months. I would definitely support a histographic victory only if we can keep up participation for that long.

I still think that we should give it a shot. If participation slacks off, we could just advertise it on the main page, an off-topic thread, etc. until participation rises again. Participation wouldn't become so low that it would cripple the game, as there would be a core group of people who would stick with it, and I think that all of the offices could be filled, though we might have some trouble finding people to do it. Therefore, I am not concerned about a lack of participation in that DG, and in fact participation may rise as we are trying for a novel form of victory.

One special aspect of histographic is that you need to prevent AIs from winning in the other ways. That means denying each remaining opponent something which will keep them from building a spaceship, and ensuring that either no UN vote is ever held typically by building it ourselves and answering "no" to the "hold a vote" question, or by keeping world opinion so muddy that nobody can win it.

That's the main reason why I want to try Histographic. :)

Histograph win, this is the greatest challenge, all others are wack. This brings in all different aspects of the game together; Survival, culture, Technology, money. Everything to stay up and good until 2050. This also gives for a long and nice game. Whats wrong with that? BTW, it will be a bigger challenge sinse there are like 12 opponents. It will be fun. Conquest is too much military, whats so fun about that? We already had domination...

Histograph is the most difficult indeed, but also the most boring. When we've reached the situation that no other civ can win, no matter what; the next turns are boring.

Imagine having the UN build (denying a vote) and owning all resources of Uranium (denying spacerace). We also have a strong enough army to prevent any civ from winning by force and have balanced our culture to not win that way. Then it's just boring milking the game.

I'll leave then. I want fun, not boredom.

Conquest it's the only fun way to win

I'll vote for a Cultural Victory! Either by total Cultural Victory (100k Culture Points) or by our Capital achieving 20K in Culture Points (if not the Capital then the second city).

On second thought I believe it would have to be the Capital City. :D

Go Culture!

a 20k culture would be nice. Perhaps the 2nd city, for use of the palace prebuild.

Good thinking Stuck, but it's hard to build up thay 20K without the Palace adding points the whole game.

Originally posted by Rik Meleet
Histograph is the most difficult indeed, but also the most boring. When we've reached the situation that no other civ can win, no matter what; the next turns are boring.
<snip>
I'll leave then. I want fun, not boredom.

Yeah, that's the reaction I'm worried about. There is a reason that GOTM adopted a scoring system that balanced milked games with fast victories, and that was to spice it up for the vast majority who can't stand to sit through 100's of turns of micro-management and not much action otherwise.

Those who want to milk it out to the end could always run a SG starting sometime before we reach critical mass on the DG win. Then they'd have the best of both worlds... :D

Cyc & Stuck, I'd be with you on a 20K culture goal. The only reason I didn't start off suggesting this is that one of the prior DGs was a culture victory. Diplo was the major victory type we haven't had, lumping conquest and domination together as two flavors of the same general victory type.

Hmm, now where was that culture calculator? ;)

Yeah, I'm one of those guys that likes to plug along until I get the Histograph Victory because I'm actually always going for the Culture Victory. I will even set my Offensive strategies against the tribe that has the best Culture, in order to knock them out. Problem is, another one steps right in its place.

This makes a Cultural Victory one of the most difficult to achieve. Because you don't want to win by Conquest/Domination while seeking Cultural superiority, you can't just hack and slash your way to Victory. You can't let other nations launch or build the UN. The 20K Victory? I haven't done it yet. I think that would be a great goal.

When I get a Histograph win it's usually because I'm too slow in reaching the other victory conditions - not quite enough culture, too slow research rate (for everyone) for spaceship, not quite enough territory for domination and no one likes anyone else enough for Diplo. edit: meant to add "hence it would be my least favorite" but hit submit by mistake. Also edited as it sounded like I usually get a histograph win which is not what I meant either.

I would like to go for 20k Culture - as like several others I haven't done that!

Yes to 20K Culture or Conquest. No to the histograph. Histograph victory seems to me like a failure to win any other way, where you ran out of time. I play to win, not to stall victory for anyone including self. Do we just want victory or a great civilization to be proud of because of its accomplishments, not lack there of? 20K culture seems to me like it would encompass several of the elements that people are looking for in the histograph as this victory would require stalling on a diplomatic or spaceship victory. Plus, 20k culture would handicap us early in the territorial landgrab game as we would need to focus more on cultural builds as well as territory expansion. It could be a substantial challenge.

Well, 20k culture would be a good challenge, and I have never managed to do it before. As for Conquest, that would also make for an interesting game. I don't particularly want to have a game where we sit building most of the time, instead, I think we should conquer our entire continent if possible, and then try to win by 20k Culture. I don't want 20k Culture turning into another building game.

It IS possible to win at 20k culture and not grab that many early game... It was done in an Epic... *Digs for URL* Here we are. Hmm.. Done by Sirian, so it might be a hard feat to match. http://sirian.warpcore.org/civ3/epic35.html Just keep your eye on Delhi. In my plan, we would have the option of the palace prebuild. And @boots- that game was pretty bloody. Sirian got only two ancient wonders (GL, Col) 2 middle age wonders (Sistine, Newtons), ONLY ToE, and every wonder after that, but he had the Internet since it was PtW. We can match that. We wont have as quick a temple, but if need be, we can start with the Pyramids in a secondary city which would become our culture city. What about it? I've lobbied through alot of causes in this game (Being French, Parisians/Les Civerables (failed, yea)), so lets try a 20k game in a city other then the capitol. For another (very bloddy) other city 20k culture game, http://www.dos486.com/civ3/epic27/page1.html
An AW game where T-Hawk was able to win by conquest and culture on the same turn.

Hope these help the cause!
SaaM

Stuck, How about Conquest AND Cultural, like on that second link. "An AW game where T-Hawk was able to win by conquest and culture on the same turn."

Looks good to me; I'm fairly convinced that we should go for 20k culture.

Go for 20k Culture! Lots of wonders, peaceful game and nice trading will be our way!

I'd be all for 20k culture, with lots of wonders, a warlike game (though not warlike enough to accidentally win by conquest/domination), and nice trading with those who support us and don't present a convienient back to stab. ;)

how about just leaving it open? personally, i kinda think it spoils some of the fun to decide what victory to go for that early in the game.

Originally posted by D'yer Mak'er
how about just leaving it open? personally, i kinda think it spoils some of the fun to decide what victory to go for that early in the game.


clap clap clap clap clap clap clap clap...

I think this was the BEST suggestion made in this whole thread. And I think it makes the most sense. Why spoil the fun? You know culture victory let alone 20k does nothing of importance to the Military Department, why neglect it? There is no need to set what we are going to do. I thought this was going to be realistic, why dont we play along with the game just like a real democracy would. If we find a good oppertunity to go conquest, so we do it. 100k win, then we go for it.

But what messes with my head the most is that we spended about three polls on what civ, chose FRANCE over EGYPT (the best cultural civ) and now we want a full 20k win. This doesn't make sense.

Anyways, if we realy want culture victory, make it 100k becuase it involves building, technology, money, war and culture. This is a good all around victory.

I also agree that we should not do a 20K Victory since its much to easy. We should try to do a 100k victory or something more challenging. France is not a culture civ its it does not have religion in its traits.

20K would leave nothing for the military to do.

I'd like to point out that winning via culture requires ensuring none of the other civs win via another method, so the military would definitely not be left out.

The point of asking this question was that if we want to aim for a culture win then culture improvements have to be built fairly early. If we go for diplomatic, then we'd better not get in a habit of breaking deals. If we're aiming for conquest then we should build a lot of units early.

I'd really prefer to see us attempt a multiple win strategy. There were several high-profile cases in recent GOTMs where the really good players got into a position to win via space if they allow production to complete, diplo if they say yes to the UN vote, or conquest / domination by capturing an AI city, all on the same turn!

This is way too analytical for casual play, but I think that using the style of trying to do all things well in the beginning would result in the most enjoyable game, particularily in a demogame, because all types of players get a chance to shine. :D

it'd be hard to go for a multi victory win, for instance, do we declare war to get land, or stay out to keep a UN vote, do we build a temple in a war to get culture, or units to get land? while some players think this makes the game exciting and chalenging, i think it makes the game difficult and will result in much debate among citizens, no save ourselves a headache and decide a victory now, i have no problem with not determining a victory now, provided we don't just say aww lets go for all, but we should, at the very least decide peaceful (UN, Space race, culture), or aggresive (domination, conquest, i supose histograph) before we decide on a victory condition we should at least decide aggresive or peaceful, i'll start, i think aggresive would get players involve and provide for more exciting gameplay

Dave, we are playing on MONARCH. How much military are we going to use on Monarch let alone a 20k. Now remember, I said 20k, 100k is fine for me. I'm all for it, becuase this does include military and other departments but I dont like the 20k idea. What are we going to do? Defend in wars, IF we are attacked. I dont see how we could use military realy in 20k, unless its defense...

Or, we can have fun and be aggressive, but then win eventually by 20k culture. Perhaps conquest would be a better victory condition.

Time to ask this question again given what we now know about the start position. Can our 2nd city get high enough production to have a realistic shot at a 20K culture goal? I'm not sure, here is a map of the territory we currently know about.

http://www.civfanatics.net/uploads6/DG4_BC3000_known.jpg

I wouldn't go for a 20k game with this map. But with all the rivers we have and our settler factory Capital City, I think a 100k Cultural Victory is still within our reach.

This is some of the nastiest terrain I've seen for a starting location. I actually believe that the best direction for expansion is to the south.

My vote for 2nd city location would have to be in the forest tile, on the coast, adjacent to the cattle (SE of our capitol) - and I believe a 20k culture in any city we found will be extremely difficult to achieve (without employing a few tricks or exploitations).

well, it's becoming fairly clear the 20K city is getting more and more unlikly, there was really no clear majority in this thread so far (maybe 20K) so, we should probably pursue other pathes

informal poll posted here (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=77028)

Since we had a builder game more or less last game, let's go for conquest this game. We haven't done conquest before and it would be fun for warmongers like me, and provide a good challenge. ;)

Originally posted by ybbor
well, it's becoming fairly clear the 20K city is getting more and more unlikly, there was really no clear majority in this thread so far (maybe 20K) so, we should probably pursue other pathes

informal poll posted here (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=77028)

And the longer we wait for a temple and library, the less likely it'll be. Had we been religous and built the temple as the first thing (finished in 3000 BC), that's 2,000 culture out of 20,000 by game's end (2050AD). An early collosus would've helped, too, then the oracle while we're researching the Great Library (perhaps as a prebuild, then fall back to the oracle -- cheap, high culture wonder). At 1575BC, it's pretty much over for 20K. Babylon probably has a better chance than us, given that they can build a temple early (and probably did).

Conquest would be a challenge though, and would require a new production center.

Our interior might struggle to get to 25spt -- WITH rails and mines. maybe 80spt at best with all production improvements, and we're gonna need a lot of good cities if we want to do a conquest victory. (Remember DG2? We could have easily won by conquest some 8-15 turns later, maybe sooner if we wanted to, just by razing cities.).