G-Major 144

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 note that due to the nature of this particular game we have provided an extended timeframe for completion*

Settings:

• Victory Condition: Score (though all victory conditions must be enabled)
• Difficulty: Deity
• Starting Era: Ancient
• Map Size: Huge
• Speed: Marathon
• Map Type: Any
• Civ: Inca (Huayna Capac)
• Opponents: Any
• Version: 3.19.003 or 3.19.004b
• Date: 28th February to 24th May August 2016

The highest score wins.

Imo. this deserves a forum-wide announcement. If a new highest score is achieved then I don't think it will ever be beaten again.

I'm always so cautious because I don't wanna write anything wrong.

What I really think towards this Gauntlet is, that whoever will come out on top will be regarded as the best CIV player of the world (assuming that WastinTime's highscore of 4.8M will be beaten, but I'm certain it will be, not only because a Huge map generally allows for a higher score than a standard one) . Imo. this is a one-time moment, and unless CIV will still be played by as many or even more players than it is played now, than the achieved highscore will stand in the HoF and it will not be beaten 'til the end of time.

I hope everybody will help the other competing players by openly sharing his knowledge when another player asks a question, just like in GM-137. For the players that take this serious the best tip might be to really be very careful when playing this Gauntlet, because even with the Gauntlet lasting 3 months I don't think you'll get the chance for a 2nd try. The thing is not, that you wouldn't be able to play two games, bcool did that in GM-137 and ranked 3rd, but just to give you a rough estimation, WastinTime's 4.8M game from 2012 lasted 131h, mine lasted even longer and even though there was idle time in both probably, only finding a map and a game that makes it past 2000 BC might already take you weeks. You don't need to be afraid of this, the Incans have the enormous advantage that they don't need Horses to conquer 3 civs 'til 2000 BC so in theory every map is viable. You shouldn't i. e. play any game though in which you don't have at least 2 Golds and oracle at least Currency, it just won't stand a chance in this competition, no matter how good your start might be (i. e. tripple food + Marble or Stone hill) .

We should discuss imo. about the appropriate setup of the map, because this game shouldn't be decided by whom can set up his map correctly, I'd like this to be a little like the GOTM's are, so while everybody of us will play a different map and can make as many tries as he wants, the maps should imo. be as equal as possible or the players simply need to have the right knowledge about the setup so they can make their choices suitable for their strategy. I'll write in the next post what I still know about the setup.

Problem is Inca are best when you can conquer close neighbors. I'm not sure they're necessarily the best civ on huge. Probably should have left civ:any and then remove the usual Inca ban for those that want to do that.

Seraiel said:

What I really think towards this Gauntlet is, that whoever will come out on top will be regarded as the best CIV player of the world (assuming that WastinTime's highscore of 4.8M will be beaten

Click to expand...

Glad you're trying to fire up some interest, but the winner will just be the player with the most time and patience. Not sure anyone will put a serious effort into this.

I've already put 4 hours of time into brainstorming. I'm looking for a shortcut. Maybe 6 million on Rainforest with cereal mills.
The brainstorming is probably more fun that actually playing would be.

WastinTime said:

Probably should have left civ:any and then remove the usual Inca ban for those that want to do that.

Click to expand...

This would have been a good idea. It would also have allowed anyone to get a successful deity G-Major entry for EQM by winning any kind of victory. With Inca, it doesn't count towards EQM as gauntlet either, right?

Good luck for those of you who want to have a crack at these games. Better clear your schedule until summer

Personally I'm not interested in such a giant time sink, but at least they warrant the "Major" title

WastinTime said:

Problem is Inca are best when you can conquer close neighbors. I'm not sure they're necessarily the best civ on huge. Probably should have left civ:any and then remove the usual Inca ban for those that want to do that.

Click to expand...

elitetroops said:

This would have been a good idea. It would also have allowed anyone to get a successful deity G-Major entry for EQM by winning any kind of victory. With Inca, it doesn't count towards EQM as gauntlet either, right?

Click to expand...

If you choose 18 opponents on Huge Big & Small, the distances aren't that great (on Marathon speed! ) . The requirement to play Inca should nonetheless be lifted imho. . If someone wants to play with a weaker civ it's his choice. Arguing that Inca are not the strongest choice isn't something I can understand though. The advantage of Inca's UU being the Warrior, the only unit that doesn't has any prerequirements and that is the cheapest unit of all units, but it still isn't that much less strong than an Immortal, + Inca's incredibly good UB + Inca's having two of the three or four best traits possible make them so OP for me, that I can only assume that you have played too much Incans and too little other civs to not notice how significantly weaker the normal civs are anymore.

WastinTime said:

Glad you're trying to fire up some interest, but the winner will just be the player with the most time and patience. Not sure anyone will put a serious effort into this.

I've already put 4 hours of time into brainstorming. I'm looking for a shortcut. Maybe 6 million on Rainforest with cereal mills.
The brainstorming is probably more fun that actually playing would be.

Click to expand...

Pangaea said:

Good luck for those of you who want to have a crack at these games. Better clear your schedule until summer

Personally I'm not interested in such a giant time sink, but at least they warrant the "Major" title

Click to expand...

I don't know if this is over the top, but I also thought already, that this Gauntlet needs a 6 month time limit. 3 months for GM-137 was basically the minimum limit and what we're trying to achieve now is at least as difficult as what we achieved in GM-137.

And I need to sincerely disagree, but whoever wins this imo. is the best CIV-player of the world. Name me one competition in which single players competed where the bar was higher? GM-137 maybe, ok. , but other than that? Any GOTM? Surely not, at least not in the time since I play CIV. The current minimum limit to even get a better highscore than Wastin in 2012 is 4.8M. Wastin himself argued that 7M would probably be the next limit and that he thinks 10M might theoretically maybe be still possible (with using all new exploits and so on) . We're reaching an edge in Civilization here, like in GM-137, we're coming near to the limits of CIV.

My intention definitely is to provoke some interest for this challenge, but that has nothing to do with me thinking that it's winner might or will be regarded as the top CIV player from then onwards if he beats the old highscore of 4.8M. This Gauntlet may be a lot about time and patience, but patience i. e. is a players skill, so if this Gauntlet measures it, then this Gauntlet measures one of the most important skills. I'm sure it's about a lot more though and that patience and time will not be the only deciding factors, and as already written, we're reaching the limits here, and the bar has (maybe!) only be as high as this time one time before, if not true, proove.

Here is what I think about the ideal setup of the map :

Map-type: Big & Small
Climate: Arid*
Sealevel: Low (-.- ^^ )
Massive Continents**
Tiny Islands***
With random events ****
With Vassal states

----------

* Regarding Arid: We had the discussion back in the time when Wastin and me competed in the highscore discipline and it was his thinking that Arid can allow for a higher score. I think this is because Arid i. e. has areas that have deserts and those areas ofc. don't need to be conquered but they still count towards the general land, so it's possible to have more good land or there'll be only bad land left for the AIs in the end (the land with Arid generally has more Floodplains but it has less trees which may make "Temperate" a good option aswell. Tropical would have the advantage of more Rice for Sushi, but I think this option is inferior towards both Arid & Temperate. ) .

** Regarding Massive Continents: I have no idea if this really provides the player with a bigger continent, but even if the continent has only less edges then it might be an advantage, because it allows easier movement.

*** Regarding Tiny Islands: This option is a must. You definitely want to have as many island cities as possible in the end because they take less land, so more cities are possible with i. e. gifting away territory on the main continent and then trying to get as many island-cities as possible. I believe Tiny Islands also offers more seafood, but not sure about the last.

[EDIT]

Ofc. the game should be played without Barbarians unless playing it solely for QM but not for the .

You forgot one of the most important:
Islands mixed in (instead of separate)

And yes, Massive really does make one (or sometimes two on large/huge) continent.

Arid vs. Temperate, etc. I'm not sure. On smaller maps, I think Arid is a no-brainer. It was my secret option back in the day. I'm leaning towards temperate for this game.

I'm also in favor of 6 months.

Another point that will probably be important here, as you'll be storming cities right away, is to untick the autorazing of cities at size 1 (whatever that option actually is called ). Waiting for cities to hit size 2 before you can capture them is a pain in the neck, and since this is marathon, would take quite some time, even with absurd AI bonuses.

Ultimately this is just another game in a long series of others. GM 137 was great for those of us who participated in it, and some got fantastic results, but for everybody else it was just a game that a few really good people played. It's buried in the archives somewhere, and that's that. It will be the same with this game, even if one of you get 8 million points or whatever. It will be a massive achievement in micro and patience, and a select few will be awed by it, but most won't know about it. It's just the nature of these things, with a decade old game. Some play for the HoF or GOTM, and most just plug along now and then, and post some stuff in S&T and such.

Pangaea said:

Another point that will probably be important here, as you'll be storming cities right away, is to untick the autorazing of cities at size 1 (whatever that option actually is called ). Waiting for cities to hit size 2 before you can capture them is a pain in the neck, and since this is marathon, would take quite some time, even with absurd AI bonuses.

Click to expand...

For space race, I'd say yes. For hi score, I would NOT use "no city razing". You might not be happy with the AI's city placement.

That is certainly a concern, as some of the cities they place are truly bewildering. However, I assumed that with the settings and playing as Incas, you'll get to cities really soon, and it's nice to get them there and then, and not have to stand around scratching your clubs

@ Pangaea:

I know that this won't get the topic of the evening news, but plz don't write things like "only a few will participate and it will get burried... " etc. . Motivate the others to join. We might only be very few but that doesn't matter, we're the ones that are left and we're actually the best CIV players that exist, not because we'd be better humans but because the others stopped learning and the game still develops. When I see a game I played 4y ago, I think "wow, I was such a newb, but hey, I already had some skills back then " . Ask Wastin what he thinks when he views the savegames from his 4.8M game, it's probably not gonna be too different . 4y ago I thought "I'm a really good player" , from a today's perspective I can only laugh and smile about that. It's the same for the players from 2 or 4y ago though, they may have been good back then, they may have really had mentionable skill, but if you don't learn 10y then you're i. e. also no good doctor anymore, if that is i. e. your job. It might be not that harsh in every job and I don't want to say CIV is like being a doctor, but I only know those comparisons because it are all experiences I gathered during the last 15y.

@ WastinTime:

It's great that you're helping and sharing your knowledge. I'd be interested in a little more information or argumentation towards Arid or Temperate though, because to me, Arid still is better.

----------------

I've btw. made myself a lot of thoughts about which opponents to take and publish the ones I'm going to take, because if players that aren't used to HoF games join this, they will appreciate this help:

1. Mansa (no-brainer)
2. Asoka (don't like that choice because of his high wonder-build-rate but didn't find any better one)
3. Brennus (the common hate-target for all good civs because of his ultra-low peaceweight, this allows to trade with the other bad AIs without fearing negative diplo from worst enemy)
4. Boudica (new choice from me, didn't play with her yet, thought about Louis first but Boudica seems better)
5. De Gaulle (very common choice for a bad AI because he's such a weakling and also builds only few wonders)
6. Darius (economically good AI so one can trade gold from him and he techs quite acceptable)
7. Elizabeth (very good techer, builds only cery few units, also builds gold)
8. Frederick (my favourite opponent because he's just the weakest of all good AIs )
9. Gandhi (the common hate-target for all bad-AIs, also has the lowest unit-build-rate and one doesn't need to fear negative diplo from denying his demands)
10. Hatty (I just like her, CRE may not be ideal but it's easy to get her to friendly, she builds only few units and she spreads religion well)
11. Hamurabi (didn't like that choice, alternative would have been Ramesses or Willem, with 17 opponents one simply needs to choose a few that one won't like 100%)
12. Lincoln (I don't like that he likes to go for Education early because of his flavours but he's still one of the best opponents possible because he's so weak)
13. Pericles (good techer, easy to trade with, not ideal because of CRE but overall still good AI imo. )
14. Peter (best teching bad-AI, also easy to trade with)
15. Roosevelt (again very weak)
16. Victoria (good techer, builds Gold, I see her being IMP a little critical but still better than i. e. Hammu)
17. Washington (weak, not perfect but ok)

This leaves 4 bad AIs and 13 good ones which should be a good ratio. I generally didn't take any PRO opponents because PRO-Archers are more difficult to beat with Checkers and I also tried to not take AGG opponents. Hamu was just the best option out of many options I didn't really like. I believe crowding the map is the right decision for various reasons.

Wouldn't Joao be a good choice too? Prefers HR, which you'll run unless you build/capture the Mids early, doesn't declare at Pleased, techs pretty well, and isn't too averse to trading either. Willem and Zara might be two other choices. Otherwise it's the usual suspects

I like Willem van Oranje as a good technology trade partner. He is almost as good as Mansa Musa.

With a starting Civilization of Inca and its unique unit, the Quechua, I hardly think anyone would consider the winner of this gauntlet as the best Civ IV player ever. Inca is banned from EQM and normally banned in gauntlets, because of its overpowered unique unit; inca also has an awesome unique building and an excellent pair of traits, arguably the best pair of traits available. If the winner of this gauntlet beats the current overall Score record, the best one can say is he has the best overall Score starting with the Inca Empire and Marathon Speed (both qualifications required). He is definitely not the best Civ IV player ever. Sorry, Seraiel.

To win decisively with Inca on Marathon, all you need is close neighbors on a reasonably large land mass and a 5-6 hammer city at Population 1. As you capture early cities with Quechuas and beeline Bronze Working for Slavery to build more Quechuas and add Axemen to the mix when you find Copper near a captured city. Beeline pottery next to built cottages to finance the empire.

Doing the same peacefully with other Civs requires building several 300H Settlers, a very costly, time consuming peaceful strategy.

Doing the same militarily with non-Inca Civs, also requires easy access to the appropriate strategic resource, researching The Wheel and Animal Husbandry and Horseback Riding or Bronze Working or Iron Working and building all the necessary infrastructure to actually build more expensive (than quenchuas) chariots, war chariots, immortals, horse archers, axemen, vultures, swordsman, praetorians or other early unique units. By the time a nice stack of such units is completed, the AI has built more archers and maybe even found his own strategic resources and built units that require them. Warfare has just gotten a lot more complex and costly than just spamming Quechuas from any newly captured city in a limited (by the economy) geometric progression.

Hamm has some things I like, but don't forget about his UU, bowmen.

Sun Tzu Wu said:

To win decisively with Inca on Marathon, all you need is close neighbors on a reasonably large land mass and a 5-6 hammer city at Population 1. As you capture early cities with Quechuas and beeline Bronze Working for Slavery to build more Quechuas and add Axemen to the mix when you find Copper near a captured city.

Click to expand...

That's very old-school. True, it would be enough to 'win decisively' any game, but only optimal for a conquest or maybe domination. It's the not currently how the fast score, diplo, religous, culture, and space games are being played by the top players using Inca. Maybe you can revive that old strategy and show a successful opening with it. You never know when the currently accepted 'best' way becomes obsolete with new ideas.

Seraiel said:

@ WastinTime:

It's great that you're helping and sharing your knowledge. I'd be interested in a little more information or argumentation towards Arid or Temperate though, because to me, Arid still is better.

Click to expand...

On a 7M point game, playing Arid will give you a bonus of ~200,000 pts.

So, the questions for the player are: can you get to Sushi faster with the extra forests and grassland on temperate? and/or can you grow your population enough using farms where the Arid map has deserts?

Every turn faster you finish, you get ~40,000 pts. So 5 turns faster makes up for the Arid bonus.

It takes an additional ~180 population to make up for the Arid bonus. (1 pop is just over 1000 pts). So can you grow 18 of your cities that would normally be stuck in desert +10 each?

Combination example: an extra 100 population and 2 turns faster to sushi on temperate?

If I play, my goal would be 10 Million. In that case, the Arid bonus is ~250,000.