G-Minor 143

[Ozbenno]

While the general Hall of Fame is an ongoing competition, we like to run time-definite competitions between updates that we call Gauntlets. Standard Hall of Fame rules (*) still apply, but any games meeting the settings will be counted towards the Gauntlet.

(*) Please read the >> HOF rules << BEFORE playing!

Settings:

• Victory Condition: Domination (though all victory conditions must be enabled)
• Difficulty: Noble
• Starting Era: Ancient
• Map Size: Standard
• Map Type: Any
• Speed: Normal
• Civ: Any
• Opponents: Any
• Version: 3.19.003
• Date: 25th April to 10th May 2012

Must not play as Inca.
The earliest finish date wins, with score as a tiebreaker.

[Firmlife]

I'm sorry if this has been answered elsewhere, but this has always bugged me and I've never found the answer. Domination victory is defined as one player owning 75% of the land and 75% of the population in a game. Why then, when you go to the victory screen, are the percentages displayed below the Domination heading ever anything over than 75%?

[Sun Tzu Wu]

Originally Posted by Firmlife

I'm sorry if this has been answered elsewhere, but this has always bugged me and I've never found the answer. Domination victory is defined as one player owning 75% of the land and 75% of the population in a game. Why then, when you go to the victory screen, are the percentages displayed below the Domination heading ever anything over than 75%?

The Population Domination Threshold is always 25% more than the highest opponent Population percentage. It varies up and down to match the up and down of the highest opponent Population percentage. (BTW, a 75% Population Domination Threshold would never be achievable, since the player must have 75% and the opponent with the highest population must be at 50%. 75% + 50% = 125% plus other remaining is way over 100%, a contradiction, thus the premise of achieving 75% Population Domination Threshold must be false.)

The Land Domination Threshold percentage is based on the map size and the number of opponents. For a Standard Map Size the Land Domination Threshold based on number of opponents is:

• 6 - 64%
• 7 - 62 %
• 8 - 60 %
• 9 - 58 %
• 10 - 56%

This applies only to the number of opponents when the game starts. Eliminated Civs do not increase the percentage, nor do colonies (No Vassals option prevents Colonies entirely) decrease the percentage as the game proceeds.

Sun Tzu Wu

[Bugio]

Lately i've been focusing on tech games, i needed this break and brutally rape some AIs . First lazy try 300BC and that was with 6 opponents, didn't knew about land domintation differences. Thanks SunTzu Wu. Suspect 1000/1200 BC is possible with max opponents and the right map.

[lymond]

I kinda wish these types of Gauntlets used a set Civ and Map. Otherwise there is really only one combo here that ensures the earliest date hands down, and I've overused both in the past - and I suspect many overuse them. Especially with such easy settings. I'd rather mix it up to add to Quattro. I actually attempted some different maps and civs but the results were quite different. Highlands is a beast.

I suspect you are about spot on Bugio. The key is balancing the unit production with settler spam without losing your army to Strike. Technically, you only need 3 techs here, so you can cash out for the remainder. I like to see all metals though.

I actually prefer no huts for this type of game. I see no advantage to it and really the AIs will just lucky pop archery or BW way before they would get it. I always have events off.

[Bugio]

Huts makes little difference here, since you can't pop settlers/workers. I end up popping max 2 huts since land can be so limited. I like the few extra gold though to help me not to strike on my way to math. Events also play little role, maybe you can get the free chariot promo or a few extra production on a hill, but shouldn't make any difference.

As for leader selection, there are at least 3 close competitors. Cathy for best early dom traits, hatty for war chatiot and creative, and cyrus for imperialistic and immortals.

Technically any CRE leader should do, although passing WC extra strength and egypt starting techs is plain stupid for this game.
Cyrus is intersting because you can pump out more settlers to compensate for the borderpops (which can be a waste sometimes) and immortals are better till AI get spears (which should not happen in this game).
Cathy has incredible potential (see tachy's 1700bc warlord dom), but her strategy is different and i'm not sure it could beat the other two without huts popping workers.


Edit: as for maps, you play global highlands? i have to try that, but i believe pangea are smaller.

Edit 2: also i belive the freedom given for this is to put a good entry on the table, the 540 AD there screams for being improved.

[Ozbenno]

Originally Posted by Bugio

Edit 2: also i belive the freedom given for this is to put a good entry on the table, the 540 AD there screams for being improved.

You're right, I just looked at the tables for a date that needed improving

[Bugio]

I improved to 1240BC, it is maybe possible to improve even more 1400/1500 with a bit of luck and good play. My play wasn't pristine at all, probably i should have split stack more and opponents choiche can be imprved, but my map was really good.
The hunt for the map though is really painful as mapfinder can't help you here. I don't think i'll have time to try this more so good luck and congrats to whoever will beat me

[IglooDude]

This came in handy for me to beat on some AIs, too. I've favored inland sea for these domination games in the past, because I only have to fight on two narrow fronts - and only one, if one neighbor is friendly enough. I'll see if I can give pangea a try this weekend, though I'm in absolutely zero danger of getting a finish date that would concern any of you.

[Firmlife]

Originally Posted by Sun Tzu Wu

The Population Domination Threshold is always 25% more than the highest opponent Population percentage.

The Land Domination Threshold percentage is based on the map size and the number of opponents.
Sun Tzu Wu

Thanks for the answer Sun Tzu Wu, simple enough.

So now I have a question I bet you can't answer. If you've given the correct answer for the criteria for a domination victory, why does the in-game Civilopedia say, "The game ends when one civilization controls 75% of the world population AND 75% of the world's land area."?

I've now done a 600BC with raging barbs and a 1040BC with no barbs. I can certainly see doing better than either, there were things I'd definitely do differently if I had those games again. On the other hand, with the caveat that I know there are better players than me, it's still very difficult for me to see anything before 1320BC, just because you're so constrained by how quickly you can get the first chariot or two out and then by travel times.

Unless, of course, you're willing to wait for a game where you pop Animal Husbandry from a hut, have horses in your first city's boundaries, AND have a compact, non-elongated map. I've needed the last two for the games I've done, but I don't have much more patience for trying.

[Sun Tzu Wu]

Originally Posted by Firmlife

So now I have a question I bet you can't answer. If you've given the correct answer for the criteria for a domination victory, why does the in-game Civilopedia say, "The game ends when one civilization controls 75% of the world population AND 75% of the world's land area."?

You are right, I have no idea why the "in-game Civilopedia" is sometimes wrong about the details. Observing whether the rules are being enforced correctly in real games (for HoF submittal) and playing test games (including HOF Mod) are the best to determine whether or not "in-game Civilopedia" is correct. In any case, the "in-game Civilopedia" can't provide all the details and such level of detail must be gathered via experience playing (primarily via test games) and even reading the publicly available Civ 4 source code (XML, Python and C++).

Originally Posted by Firmlife

I've now done a 600BC with raging barbs and a 1040BC with no barbs. I can certainly see doing better than either, there were things I'd definitely do differently if I had those games again. On the other hand, with the caveat that I know there are better players than me, it's still very difficult for me to see anything before 1320BC, just because you're so constrained by how quickly you can get the first chariot or two out and then by travel times.

Unless, of course, you're willing to wait for a game where you pop Animal Husbandry from a hut, have horses in your first city's boundaries, AND have a compact, non-elongated map. I've needed the last two for the games I've done, but I don't have much more patience for trying.

It is usually impossible to know what turn the fastest possible game can be won with any particular set of allowed and disallowed options. One can only guess. The guesses get better as the number of determined players increases and successful games increases. Obviously, the best game so far is always an upper bound on the best possible game. The lower bound is always turn 11; the game will never allow an earlier win than t11; it is hard coded to wait 10t before checking for victory conditions. Of course, obviously the best possible win is much greater than t11, but there is no current guide for a higher lower bound than 11t, as hard as it may be to believe. For the Domination Victory Condition, I believe one could make some calculations of the number of cities and culture required to win plus the minimum means of getting there, but I'm not aware of anyone suggesting such a theorem and much less offering a mathematical proof of it.

Is it possible to pop Settlers from Huts at Noble level? If so, one could be wildly lucky and pop 10 Settlers from Huts, build Stonehenge and come up with a Domination Victory without even a single battle and do it extremely early too. Normally, a Domination Victory consists of a building phase, conquest phase and Settler spamming phase; what I have described is a game with only a Settler spamming phase.

Good luck to all those participating in this Gauntlet!

Sun Tzu Wu

[Ozbenno]

Originally Posted by Sun Tzu Wu

Is it possible to pop Settlers from Huts at Noble level?

Nope, Warlord is the highest level you can pop settlers on.

[Firmlife]

My comment was intended more as a reflection of my ignorance and lack of vision than as an iron-clad statement of truth.

I think the problem with any kind of mathematical proof would be that, as you indicate with the idea of popping settlers, extremely unlikely things can happen. Could you have a capital with four freshwater corn, a gem, and a bunch of trees to maximize town growth and settler production, get one more happiness, and facilitate chopping? Sure! Could you make four chariots, send them out, always have open paths along diagonals to all your enemies' cities, and never lose a point of health? Sure! Could your enemies provide you with two workers each and be lined up so that you only need two turns of travel time to move between conquests? Of course. Could all of those things happen in one game? Perhaps not in a million years.

Perhaps I'm too conservative, but there are certain limits as to how much risk I'm willing to take in any particular game. I'd rather try a handful of games and finish a couple than twenty or thirty and only finish one. That said, taking your post as a spur in the saddle, I thought about what a mathematical proof would look like. I then fooled around with being more selective on the maps I play and on optimizing build order/capital placement. (I'm still amazed at the power of a plains hill to speed production by ~four turns, potentially more if you can get a lucky tech pop from a hut). I now agree that 1400 is definitely possible. Maybe 1480. Beyond that, though, I think would require ridiculous luck both in the way the map was setup and in the way it plays out.

But I'm always aware of the possibility of being proven wrong, especially when surrounded by others who know far more than me

[Bugio]

I just sent a new game, hope i'm not too late. Seen someone beated my previous entry i tried another time. 1560BC, everything went good, if someone beated that it can't be by too much 3/4 turns max, think that was close to perfection. 61 turns without huts popping anything due to level.

[Sun Tzu Wu]

Definitely not too late. The update is rarely done before 17:00 US Central Time. Still plenty of time (~5 hours) to submit games.

Sun Tzu Wu

[Sun Tzu Wu]

Note that the update often occurs significantly later than 17:00 US CT. Sometimes up to a day later is not that uncommon. Just note that submitting by 17:00 US CT is not 100% guaranteed and the later the submission, the greater the risk of missing the deadline.

Sun Tzu Wu

[Ozbenno]

This gauntlet is now closed...

G-Minor 143 - Domination, Noble, Standard, Normal
1^st Bugio 1560BC
2^nd Firmlife 1400BC
3^rd Pollina 875BC

Well done all

[Firmlife]

Holy crap! There were 61 previous attempts at this game type, and 16 games by five different players beat the previous best.

Good job all!