How fast have you beaten a game?

A

ahman

Warlord
Joined
May 21, 2007
Messages
147
Location
Färila, Sweden
...and what's the best setup?

* Chieftain, tiny, pangaea 80%, obviously.
* Arid and cold to hopefully give the AI even less space to build.
* No barbarians to be able to expand quickly.
* 5 billion to get rid of hills and mountains. You're not gonna have time to use them yourself anyway.

What civ is best? Iroquois with their mounted warriors? The extra food from agricultural is nice too when you get a game with a lake or rivers. How many cities do you build? Is a granary worth the time, to pump out workers for roads to the AIs cities?

Well.. I'm gonna try it now!
 
ahman said:
...and what's the best setup?

* Chieftain, tiny, pangaea 80%, obviously.
* Arid and cold to hopefully give the AI even less space to build.
* No barbarians to be able to expand quickly.
* 5 billion to get rid of hills and mountains. You're not gonna have time to use them yourself anyway.

What civ is best? Iroquois with their mounted warriors? The extra food from agricultural is nice too when you get a game with a lake or rivers. How many cities do you build? Is a granary worth the time, to pump out workers for roads to the AIs cities?

Well.. I'm gonna try it now!
Click to expand...

What sort of victory are you looking for? With that set-up, a single opponent with a very late Unique Unit or a naval one would be ideal for a conquest or domination victory if you have a civilization with an early Unique Unit.
 
timerover51 said:
What sort of victory are you looking for? With that set-up, a single opponent with a very late Unique Unit or a naval one would be ideal for a conquest or domination victory if you have a civilization with an early Unique Unit.
Click to expand...

I wasn't even thinking of setting opponents to RANDOM, so four opponents. Conquest is the only choice.
 
ahman said:
What civ is best? Iroquois with their mounted warriors?
Click to expand...

Egypt gets a cheaper UU with 2 attack for 20 shields instead of 3 attack for 30 shields. So that would likely be preferable, but in both cases you need to have early access to horses. Not depending on that is also preferable, so the aztecs with their 1/1/2 Jaguar for 15 shields will do fine.
 
Sorry if this isn't what you wanted, but just going by the thread title rather than OP, I regularly get 20,000k single city victories on Regent Huge Archipelago maps with Raging Barbarians and at least 11 opponents in approximately 3 hours of game-time.

On the topic of the the OP, it can be as quick as you want it to be with conquest and heavily manipulated starts. I believe the usual trick is to re-join your starting worker to your city, work two tree tiles for 5 shields per turn and just spam any Unique Unit which has a movement of 2. You get a Golden Age pretty quick which zooms your production to 8 shields per turn, should you even need it. The length of time it takes to win will depend on the distance and quantity of AI opponents (assuming none are unattainable, such as islanders).
 
Buttercup said:
On the topic of the the OP, it can be as quick as you want it to be with conquest and heavily manipulated starts. I believe the usual trick is to re-join your starting worker to your city, work two tree tiles for 5 shields per turn and just spam any Unique Unit which has a movement of 2. You get a Golden Age pretty quick which zooms your production to 8 shields per turn, should you even need it. The length of time it takes to win will depend on the distance and quantity of AI opponents (assuming none are unattainable, such as islanders).
Click to expand...

Great, thx :) Aztecs it is then.

Atishay Jain said:
I think he wants to know of a game where actual rolling is involved. With the editor, a game can end as early as 3900 BC. Nothing is off limits if the editor is used.
Click to expand...

If you put the AIs on islands with only mountains, I think they commit suicide in the first turn, so maybe even 4000 BC or 3950 BC.
 
Atishay Jain said:
I think he wants to know of a game where actual rolling is involved. With the editor, a game can end as early as 3900 BC. Nothing is off limits if the editor is used.
Click to expand...

I guess that I have a hard time seeing the difference between spending a large amount of time on Mapmaker searching for "just the right map", and making said map in the editor. All Mapmaker is doing is what I sometimes do with the editor, and that is plugging in a succession of Random Number seeds and then displaying the result.
 
timerover51 said:
I guess that I have a hard time seeing the difference between spending a large amount of time on Mapmaker searching for "just the right map", and making said map in the editor. All Mapmaker is doing is what I sometimes do with the editor, and that is plugging in a succession of Random Number seeds and then displaying the result.
Click to expand...

But when you yourself make a map, you already have knowledge of everything and it simply takes a critical element of surprise out of the game. You know where the ai is, where the resources are, what lies under the fog of war et cetera. All that's left for you to do is send a unit there and win. Anyways I talked about mapfinder because in that post I referred to an HoF game where creating maps isn't allowed. Although I think using mapfinder is fairer than creating a map, Everyone has his preferences.
 
ahman said:
If you put the AIs on islands with only mountains, I think they commit suicide in the first turn, so maybe even 4000 BC or 3950 BC.
Click to expand...
Yes, I remember reading something like that in the strategy articles forum. It's good if one just wants to win, even if it is by the human doing nothing himself .
 
Atishay Jain said:
But when you yourself make a map, you already have knowledge of everything and it simply takes a critical element of surprise out of the game. You know where the ai is, where the resources are, what lies under the fog of war et cetera. All that's left for you to do is send a unit there and win. Anyways I talked about mapfinder because in that post I referred to an HoF game where creating maps isn't allowed. Although I think using mapfinder is fairer than creating a map, Everyone has his preferences.
Click to expand...

When I create a map, they tend to be huge or larger, up to 360 X 300. I will typically decide what civilization I am going to play, normally Sea-Faring, find a nice starting location on the coast, set my starting position there, and eliminate one other starting location so as to not confuse the computer. Remembering where resources are or where starting positions are, assuming that I look for them, is not really possible.

As I play on Archipelago and Continent Maps, the AI civilizations always have a high likelihood of considerable expansion before I find them, if I ever do. I normally set the number of opponents to less than 10 to make sure they are spread out. As for sending a unit to a specific place and then winning, it does not work that way.

I have been playing on one map for about 20 hours, and it is not even a Huge one, and have not yet found all of the AI, much less eliminated them. Someone else made that map and posted it. Winning on one of my really big maps can take quite a while. Add to that I am not really a fan of seeing how fast I can win at a game, I like to see how well I can develop my civilization, speed at winning is not a concern of mine. My favorite way of winning is the Space Race. I hope that gives you an idea of how someone else plays the game.
 
Atishay Jain said:
Yes, I remember reading something like that in the strategy articles forum. It's good if one just wants to win, even if it is by the human doing nothing himself .
Click to expand...

That only works if the game is set not to allow cities on mountains. I would have to see if that is the setting for the basic starting BIQ file.
 
timerover51 said:
When I create a map, they tend to be huge or larger, up to 360 X 300. I will typically decide what civilization I am going to play, normally Sea-Faring, find a nice starting location on the coast, set my starting position there, and eliminate one other starting location so as to not confuse the computer. Remembering where resources are or where starting positions are, assuming that I look for them, is not really possible.

As I play on Archipelago and Continent Maps, the AI civilizations always have a high likelihood of considerable expansion before I find them, if I ever do. I normally set the number of opponents to less than 10 to make sure they are spread out. As for sending a unit to a specific place and then winning, it does not work that way.

I have been playing on one map for about 20 hours, and it is not even a Huge one, and have not yet found all of the AI, much less eliminated them. Someone else made that map and posted it. Winning on one of my really big maps can take quite a while. Add to that I am not really a fan of seeing how fast I can win at a game, I like to see how well I can develop my civilization, speed at winning is not a concern of mine. My favorite way of winning is the Space Race. I hope that gives you an idea of how someone else plays the game.
Click to expand...

But wasn't winning as fast as possible the reason the Op created this thread?
That was why I said that mapfinder should be used to find a map with the AIs close to the start so that the game can be won quickly. Huge or even Large maps don't even figure into the picture when seeking a really fast victory date. If you like playing on larger maps on the way you described then that is something entirely about your personal choice. The point that I'm making here is simply this : Of you want to win fast, play on a tiny map, find a start where the AI is close using mapfinder (since placing the opponents at 1 tile distance using the editor or filling the map with mountains) is no way to really win a game.
 
For super-fast conquest games, you don't need Mapfinder. Almost any starting location gives you what you need to get your jaguar warrior out quickly. Either you find the AI really quickly or you don't, but Mapfinder doesn't help with this. If you don't find the AI before they build their first unit, you can restart. These sorts of games are really boring, but at least they only last about 30 s.

You want a tiny map, with no more than regent difficulty. To get 4 or 5 turn wins takes a lot of trying, but it isn't horribly difficult to get wins within 10 turns. I spent a day on it once and got a win in 8 turns or so. I then decided that was good enough for me and moved on to a more fun game.

It is much more fun to go back and read through the HOF threads when people were trying to get the fastest conquests on higher levels than it is to play these sorts of games, at least for me.
 
CKS said:
For super-fast conquest games, you don't need Mapfinder. Almost any starting location gives you what you need to get your jaguar warrior out quickly. Either you find the AI really quickly or you don't, but Mapfinder doesn't help with this. If you don't find the AI before they build their first unit, you can restart. These sorts of games are really boring, but at least they only last about 30 s.

You want a tiny map, with no more than regent difficulty. To get 4 or 5 turn wins takes a lot of trying, but it isn't horribly difficult to get wins within 10 turns. I spent a day on it once and got a win in 8 turns or so. I then decided that was good enough for me and moved on to a more fun game.

It is much more fun to go back and read through the HOF threads when people were trying to get the fastest conquests on higher levels than it is to play these sorts of games, at least for me.
Click to expand...

Just curious, but what is the fascination in seeing how fast you can with the game? I can see that if your only victory condition is the Space Race, as that means a player has to fully develop their civilization as rapidly and efficiently as possible.
 
Cultural victories (20K, 100K) and UN victories are also fun to play in the "as fast as possible mode", but the military victories are indeed more or less a "bloody mess"... :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

LordofDread
[C3C] Opening/early game questions surrounded by mostly infertile Lands
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
LordofDread
LordofDread
RulerOfDaPeople
Describe your most recent game
Replies
18
Views
1K
Oberinspektor Derrick
Oberinspektor Derrick
B
Reflections on Fast Diplo/SS Win At Regent Level
Replies
1
Views
239
BlackBetsy
B
King Phaedron
Secret of Evermore - World Map Scenario for you
Replies
2
Views
753
Planktonic
P
TyrannusRex
(E&E) Civilization VI - Deep Dive: Kievan Rus
Replies
17
Views
523
TyrannusRex
TyrannusRex
Top Bottom