Challenge-II-01

Kaitzilla said:

Hooray, Conquest in 1750!

Click to expand...

Deity win on this settings is totally amazing!

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

Sun Tzu Wu said:

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

Click to expand...

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

Kaitzilla said:

Hooray, Conquest in 1750!

Click to expand...

I believe a new level of awe is required for such an incredible achievement.

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)

AgedOne said:

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

Click to expand...

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.

kcd_swede said:

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

Click to expand...

Thanks for all the kudos guys

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 Vitamin Sunshine

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

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:



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

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!


View attachment Ghandi Challenge-1.56 1600AD.CivBeyondSwordSave

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.

Sun Tzu Wu said:

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.

Click to expand...

Dynamic said:

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

Click to expand...

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.

shulec said:

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

Click to expand...

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.

Dynamic said:

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.

Click to expand...

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

Dynamic said:

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.

Click to expand...

shulec said:

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

Click to expand...

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.

Dynamic said:

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.

Click to expand...

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

Sun Tzu Wu said:

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?

Click to expand...

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):

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:

Dynamic said:

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

Code:

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

Click to expand...

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.

Dynamic said:

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:

Code:

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

Click to expand...

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!

killercane said:

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!

Click to expand...

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

killercane said:

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!

Click to expand...

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

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.