Hall of Fame Rules/FAQ

EMan · Feb 26, 2005

Maybe I spoke too soon!

If you look at the Conquest, Small tables, many of the Finish Dates have been changed to 2049AD.

For example, my Conquest Victory, Small Map, Monarch Level should say 1300BC not 2049AD!? :eek:

superslug · Feb 26, 2005

EMan said:
Maybe I spoke too soon!

If you look at the Conquest, Small tables, many of the Finish Dates have been changed to 2049AD.

For example, my Conquest Victory, Small Map, Monarch Level should say 1300BC not 2049AD!?

I'll let Dianthus know to look into this.

One of the problems with divorcing the fastest finishes from the histographs were old games that had valid data entries but not .sav's. (Remember, there's been at least 4 HOF admins over the years, some stuff just got lost.) We know the victory condition of said games, but not the finish dates, so we just listed them as 2050. Part of the separation process was to switch them to 2049's so they'd stay on their respective vic condition tables. It's *possible* your files were affected in this switch.

Again, I'm just stabbing a guess. We'll just have to hope Dianthus is an early riser. :lol:

Dianthus · Feb 26, 2005

superslug said:
Again, I'm just stabbing a guess. We'll just have to hope Dianthus is an early riser.

He's not, especially at the weekend

. I'll look into it straightaway.

Dianthus · Feb 26, 2005

EMan said:
Maybe I spoke too soon!

If you look at the Conquest, Small tables, many of the Finish Dates have been changed to 2049AD.

For example, my Conquest Victory, Small Map, Monarch Level should say 1300BC not 2049AD!?

OK, it should be fixed now. I got my query the wrong way around and updated the entries that had .sav files rather than the ones that didn't! Thanks for reporting that so soon EMan :goodjob:

.

Moonsinger · Feb 28, 2005

superslug said:
Is there a reason I should change the rules?

According to the shortrushing area in the green section, there are some things you can do during the interturn. According to the build sequence area of the red section, there are some things you can't do during the interturn. All I've done is try and clarify my interpretation of how the two intersect.

I don't honestly feel like I've changed the rules here, so I'd need a good reason to do so.

No, you don't have to change the rule (at least not for me)! All I'm saying was that it took me like forever to decode your clarification/interpretation. Of course, the key word was "interturn". If EMan has never mentioned the word "interturn" in one of his post, I would have never figured out what you guys were talking about. I thought you guys were banning the use of specialists in the game...I thought that was pretty odd...until I encountered the word "interturn" which was mentioned only once before I posted my last comment. If I was a newbie, I would have had a hard time figure out these gray areas of the rule.

Moonsinger · Feb 28, 2005

superslug said:
We've completed a change to the database today. All 2050 wins are now listed as Histographic only, meaning they're no longer on the fastest finish tables. This clarifies a discrepancy and means that no games are recognized for multiple victory conditions.

Let's say that we are going to play a game and have our spaceship ready to launch around 1000BC. At this point, we will save the game as "space_ship_will_launch_by_next_turn.sav", then (without exiting or reloading the game) we switch off the production of the last spaceship component and play all the way until 2050 AD. Now, technically we have achieved the FASTEST space launch ever (since no one has ever launched any starship around 1000BC); however, since we also played all the way until 2050AD, our FASTEST space launch has disappeared into a blackhole.

You can do the samething with all other FAST finishes. For example, in the fastest 20K game, you can save the game at the end of the turn where 20K going to happen next...then destroy that city and play on for a different goal.

superslug · Feb 28, 2005

Moonsinger said:
No, you don't have to change the rule (at least not for me)! All I'm saying was that it took me like forever to decode your clarification/interpretation.

It helps (some) that we have this thread where questions can be asked, but you're right, it is complicated. I'm hoping we can do the rules for IV-HOF with an eye on simplicity, but that's impossible to know until I get to play it.

superslug · Feb 28, 2005

Moonsinger said:
Let's say that we are going to play a game and have our spaceship ready to launch around 1000BC.

Most peculiar. I see nothing but facts and truth in your post, but your point seems to have eluded me.

Dianthus · Feb 28, 2005

superslug said:
Most peculiar. I see nothing but facts and truth in your post, but your point seems to have eluded me.

I *think* Moonsinger is requesting that the game be recognized as a 1000BC space race as well as a histographic.

EMan · Feb 28, 2005

superslug said:
Most peculiar. I see nothing but facts and truth in your post, but your point seems to have eluded me.

I think Moonsinger supports Multiple Victory conditions!?....just a guess.....Women are not my strong suit! :lol:

BTW, if you ever get tired of making/changing/deleting rules, there's always my suggestion in Post #3 of The Wishlist thread (viz. Firaxis Rules Rule!)

superslug · Feb 28, 2005

Dianthus said:
I *think* Moonsinger is requesting that the game be recognized as a 1000BC space race as well as a histographic.

Possibly, but I'll wait for clarification from her rather than respond to speculation.

Moonsinger · Feb 28, 2005

superslug said:
Most peculiar. I see nothing but facts and truth in your post, but your point seems to have eluded me.

How so? Don't focus on the 1000BC date! We all know that space launch by 1000BC is impossible...I'm sorry that I picked an unbelievable example. Anyway, instead 1000BC, pick another date that is more believable and hopefully you will see my point.

Moonsinger · Feb 28, 2005

Dianthus said:
I *think* Moonsinger is requesting that the game be recognized as a 1000BC space race as well as a histographic.

You read my mind!

IMO, it should be recognized as fast space launch as well. This would explain why Aeson was orginally asking us to submit the SAV file before the victory turn. My guess was that he was planning to recognize Multiple Victory conditions.

Moonsinger · Feb 28, 2005

EMan said:
Women are not my strong suit!

My apology to what I said the other day in the other thread.

Sorry, I may have hurt your feeling when I misunderstood what you said.

superslug · Feb 28, 2005

It's already been proposed and decided against awarding multiple victory conditions for the same game on the same turn. I've never been open to the idea of awarding multiple victory conditions from different turns, and for plenty of reasons, but I'll just list the most basic scenario:

Obviously, the hypothetical game would be saved right before the spaceship launch and then played on to milk. The scores of the two .sav's would obviously be different, so I'd have to treat them as different games since Firaxis score determines some rankings and can be a tiebreaker in other rankings.

So then I have two games to vet, and there's two more problems. First, they'd both have the same mapseed, which puts one in violation of the map replay rule. Second, one of them would violate the reload rule (event change). Did the player manually launch the spaceship first and then reload to milk? Or did the player milk and then reload an earlier .sav to launch the spaceship?

If anyone wants to argue further for multiple win conditions, feel free to do so in the appropriate thread: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=110925, but please realize you're beating a dead horse.

EMan · Feb 28, 2005

Moonsinger said:
My apology to what I said the other day in the other thread. Sorry, I may have hurt your feeling when I misunderstood what you said.

NOT at all Ms. Ms..............To be honest with you, I had the best ever laugh on the whole CFC!...............Perhaps causing people to laugh should be a Required Rule! :goodjob:

(Just desperately trying to get this post back on topic! :lol:

)

Moonsinger · Feb 28, 2005

superslug said:
It's already been proposed and decided against awarding multiple victory conditions for the same game on the same turn. ...
If anyone wants to argue further for multiple win conditions, feel free to do so in the appropriate thread: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=110925, but please realize you're beating a dead horse.

Well, I didn't realize that DaveMcW has suggested the same thing before. In any case, if Dave couldn't convince you guys, who am I to attempt? Sorry, I don't mean to beat the dead horse. I just simply didn't see any horse at all; therefore, I wasn't aware of its living status.

I've never been open to the idea of awarding multiple victory conditions from different turns, and for plenty of reasons, but I'll just list the most basic scenario:

Obviously, the hypothetical game would be saved right before the spaceship launch and then played on to milk. The scores of the two .sav's would obviously be different, so I'd have to treat them as different games since Firaxis score determines some rankings and can be a tiebreaker in other rankings.

So then I have two games to vet, and there's two more problems. First, they'd both have the same mapseed, which puts one in violation of the map replay rule. Second, one of them would violate the reload rule (event change). Did the player manually launch the spaceship first and then reload to milk? Or did the player milk and then reload an earlier .sav to launch the spaceship?

Final note: I'm not trying to beat the dead horse ...this is just my final farewell to the dead horse.......Oh well, I change my mind...I can't bring myself together for the eulogy. Dead is just another journey; let our horse friend rest in peace. :cry:

EMan · Feb 28, 2005

I think in this case it's a Spaceship lost in space! :mischief:

Moonsinger · Mar 2, 2005

Another rule verification:

Is it ok to respawn the AI infinitely? Since every time you destroy an AI civ, that civ would respawn back with 100 gold in its treasury. With proper railroad setup, you could easily milk them infinitely for extra cash. My explaination can be found in this thread (from post #19 to #21):

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=110469&page=1&pp=20

superslug · Mar 2, 2005

Moonsinger said:
Is it ok to respawn the AI infinitely?

You may eliminate each AI twice per turn.

Hall of Fame Rules/FAQ

HOFer: Milk-Cow?

Still hatin' on Khan

Small but hardy

Small but hardy

Settler

Settler

Still hatin' on Khan

Still hatin' on Khan

Small but hardy

HOFer: Milk-Cow?

Still hatin' on Khan

Settler

Settler

Settler

Still hatin' on Khan

HOFer: Milk-Cow?

Settler

HOFer: Milk-Cow?

Settler

Still hatin' on Khan

Similar threads