It is basically right what you say, but first of, I wouldn't throw IMM and Deity in the same bucket, there's a huge difference in those two (i. e. Oracle on IMM can sometimes go as late as 1000 BC, on Deity, I've never seen it go later than 1800 BC, which is almost 50% earlier).
So what you're technically saying here, is the jump from Immortal from Deity is a higher jump from anything else in the game.
I believe TheMeInTeam said that Immortal to Deity is similar as in Noble to Immortal. Deity is only one level up from Immortal, but I guess CIV 4 developers wanted to set a standard for the best of the best to reach.
This also means that the AI in general has a substantial discount on Deity as opposed to their discount on Immortal.
I don't understand that last sentence. To be absolutely clear: HoF = impossibility to use Worldbuilder, the button in the options is deleted, the shortcut not working, no possibility to use it, playing the game on another pc and playing the map again with prior knowledge, not possible, one action that cannot be reverted and not saved or re-done, leads to exclusion of the game. BUFFY = ultimate anti-cheat / buguse / anything tool written by various Users, all HoF games checked by admins, why do you even mention huge Scores, HoF and Worldbuilder together?
Perhaps this is the biggest flaw I have committed. I wanted this to be a simple posting of high scores that players have achieved. Yet I made the mistake of mentioning Hall of Fame, World Builder and High Scores all in the same topic, because I feel that they hold some connection.
I should of said without using World Builder for scores, and I probably shouldn't of mentioned the CIV IV Hall of Fame on Civilization Fanatics, since I'm not planning on competing anytime soon.
I agree about the part that cheating takes the fun out of the game, because one is cheating onesself.
At least there's one thing we both agree on.
Regarding you telling me you don't care about other players: I don't believe that. Maybe it's true, but it's unlikely. I don't wanna be to harsh on you, but I have the feeling that you seem to often think "oh, I just got unlucky, if I hadn't been, things would have been" or "if this would have been that..." . Those sentences one of my teachers always called "if the word if wasn't there" - sentences.
I can say the same to you. But quite honestly, you just seemed to view my statement as being highly insulting when I had no intention at all to make it out that way. Even if you didn't mean it, I felt for a bit that you were being harsh, because I'm not as experienced of player.
That victory with Shaka is the best score I have for now, and my general average for scores is between 20,000 and 80,000. Since I wasn't able to find any topics regarding high scores on the -personal- Hall of Fame, I just thought it would be fun to make this thread to see how high people can go.
Instead, I'm finding that I'm arguing with you. No offense, but you really took my statement the wrong way.
No, that was not what I was saying. I only told you the impression I had of you, not anything I expect from you, no offense. I actually only smiled because you and that user searched for the same thing, highscore, and your first answer on people scoring higher than you was "cheating" , at least, that's how I percieved you. You and him got told the way to highscores very friendly, yet, your mind made it impossible for you to read / understand everything, maybe because those scores just seemed too unbelievable for you.
First impressions are often misleading.
Maybe the user left because he was given a bad impression. But no. I definitely know that you can achieve otherwise unobtainable high scores with World Builder, and unfortunately I happened to mention it because it helped you reach a higher score in the end game by cheating.
You can definitely rack up scores in the millions on Marathon game speed. On Normal and Quick speeds the scores tend to be a lot lower. This is probably based on how the gaming mechanics work, but I wouldn't disagree that Marathon abuses the game in which you can get higher scores than what you could obtain otherwise.
I have no idea how that factors in, since the speeds I enjoy the most (Normal and Quick) give me a decent score should I play well, but nothing like the stuff given off of Marathon.
And since those scores you listed are far beyond what I'm used to seeing, I quickly regarded them as being 'unbelievable'.
Read again what I wrote in my all posts above, I promise you'll better understand what I think then.
Point taken. I think you misinterpreted me when I wrote out what I was saying.
Now you got it. Deity is just so difficult, that even the best players don't beat every map with every Civ (implying Incans are excluded, but even with Incans one can fail).
I guess Quechas with their 100 percent bonus against Archers makes the game too easy in regards to attacking them in cities. I happen to think that on higher difficulties, the bulk of your success depends on luck and persistence.
No, you have to read again what I posted before. The part about 300k being as good as 3M.
I'm not sure what to say about this, other than a score of 300,000 being great for me, in regards to my -experience-.
You are getting the right instinct now. 800 BC Liberalism is extraordinary, it needs everything going right and having everything right, that is the case in the top-HoF games, skill, combined with luck, combined with lot's of knowledge about the game, its settings, its opponents... What you imo underestimate is the amount of skill and knowledge, but I think you know better now that you know, that even the best players don't beat Deity regularly.
You're starting to remind me of the top ranked raiding guilds with the best players on World of Warcraft. Comparing them to the Deity players of Civilization IV, quite a number of similarities actually.
People who get to Deity should feel proud just as much as those who do Heroic Raids on World of Warcraft. Unfortunately World of Warcraft isn't nearly as good as it used to be, so there might be a change in direction in regards to Blizzard.
I'm branching a little off-topic here, but having played other strategy games and other MMOs, the top ranked players and those who play at highest difficulty are actually the ones who study every possible detail to ensure a victory.
I'm not saying that strategy games are easy. The Civilization series always had a steep learning curve. Although I don't know about the newer Civilization games, especially Civilization V. The strategy genre is very difficult to master, and Civilization IV is no exception.
So I think you once again, misinterpreted what I said. I knew that you took offense when I said that Deity players can rack up high scores without too much trouble. Not underestimating here, I'm just saying, I don't have quite the patience to ever consider being at that level. Even if it is well, obtaining a decent score.
There is a difference in a playthrough video to an extreme form of gaming, the HoF gaming. In a video, a player plays to show, he probably plays a random map, maybe he can use cheats in between the clips, but with those finish dates, I don't think so.
I watched at least five different people make a 'Let's Play' of Civilization IV. Every single one of them gave the audience (the viewers of Youtube) a different approach to playing the game. It was great watching them play and hold a sense of humor at the same time.
A couple of them even gave tips on improving your score by game's end. But none of them gave out the scores nor the technologies researched so early as you listed. The finish dates they made are more or less standard for an experienced CIV IV player.
Hall of Fame gaming is essentially hard competition. No offense, but I find it as something that appeals to the skillers, the elitists, and the more-so obsessed who concern themselves with every little detail. It can be fun, but it can also be seemingly cutthroat. A lot like competitive multiplayer in general, whether it be racing someone to the end game or getting the maximum efficiency in skilling on a MMORPG.
Not sure where you're trying to get at here in terms of finish dates.
In contrast to that, a HoF game can take infinite time, i. e. my last game took me 225h (think about youtubing that
) , the start is cooked so as good as possible, the opponents are cherrypicked, and, the player can play 10 games, only 1 has to be successful.
Now this is certainly something I never heard about before.
If the game took you 225 hours, are you essentially writing down details on a notebook? Keeping documents on a Word processor? Drawing out the yields and the number of tiles in your given territory?
That's definitely not normal. I had a Marathon game that lasted 12-13 hours, but this..... this is something interesting.
I don't visit the Civilization Fanatics Forum often, but since I'm here I just want to ask you a question. Are you a regular Deity player?
Those things make the difference between 500 BC finish and 1000 AD finish.
If someone was willing enough to post a Youtube video showing him/her actually getting to Liberalism at 500 BC, I think even the Emperor/Immortal players would be happy to see it.
I'm sorry, but that kind of approach is leagues above my skill, and certainly far beyond average.
Regarding Universities, you don't need more of them than you need for Oxford, and you need none of them (and neither Oxford) if you aim for an early domination Victory. High-lvl players regard Unviersities to be actually bad buildings when going for Cuirrasier-mapstomping.
I never said anything regarding Universities being needed for Domination victories. In fact I've played games where I didn't need Universities to get Domination, and truth be told, I also used Cuirrasiers.
I'm not sure where you came up with the thought that you need Universities to get early Domination.
This is just wrong and devalues the games those players have played.
You're taking this too seriously and more than what it was intended to be.
All I can say is I didn't know. I'm starting to hear that Deity is almost completely different from Immortal, so I was quick to assume that -frequent- Deity players would actually finish the game and get a good score without too much trouble. But it turns out that that is not quite the case.
If you want to learn about highscore games, just read the posts in this thread again, Tachywaxon said everything that's important, I repeated lots of that, and after all that help from us, you say "without too much trouble", which just shows that you didn't read thoroughly. As a hint: There are Writeups about highscore-games linked in this thread, in which the players scoring the highest scores were discussing everything needed, there is a guide on scoring extremely high which got mentioned, read them, than you'll know what you'll have to do to score high.
The fact is I don't frequent these forums very often and I haven't been playing Civilization IV too much. It's something I play to have leisure and be a little casual, but casual just doesn't fit at all for the more competitive players.
Perhaps I am ignorant on a lot of these pieces of information because I'm not a daily poster. I jumped face first and quite honestly, all this was intending to be was a thread to post your HIGH SCORE.
We're really branching off-topic here. I might as well hop over to the 'Strategy & Tips' forum to discover things if we're going to keep talking 'Help & Advice' on raising score. Which is not why I made this thread.
One friend (who is also studies medicine) once said to me, the difference between being grown up and being young is, that one is sending lots of information, the other one is receiving more. You are still young (at least you appear to be) , you have to get older a little bit, you can then get young again, meaning, read everything again, no offense has been made at you, every information was given to you.
I don't know what to say about this.
Passing judgment on how old or young one is after getting into debates like this isn't really the best approach.
Perhaps I'm the one to receive information because I'm less informative of Civilization IV.
I was telling you that you're n00b, yes, but I wasn't telling you that you were weak! n00bishness has nothing to do with weakness, n00b comes from new by, someone who is new, you are new, I was new, you are newb, I was newb. Search my posts, you'll find me saying me being n00b various times. Only real n00bs use the term n00b in an insulting way, you can think about that (again, this is no offense XD ).
If that's how you like to see it that way, then perceive it as that.
I signed up on November 2010. Haven't been around long but I'm certainly not entirely new. I'll admit though, I quit posting for about a year and a half, and just recently got into Civilization IV not too long ago. As already mentioned, won a game with Shaka, got a score that was reasonably good for me, and decided to a make a thread based on high scores people have accomplished.
Noticed how I said "nobody starts on Deity" ? Where do you think I did start? (I'll tell you, it was Settler. )
You said that Noble was for new players, not Settler. I only suggested that people who are new to the strategy genre, or the Civilization series for that matter, start on Settler.
I started on Settler as well. Civilization IV was quite a jump from the first two Civilization games. I was never able to play Civilization III unfortunately. The first thing I did when I bought the vanilla game in 2006 was head straight to the Tutorial and hear Sid Meier in the background giving advice.
And yeah. Starting on Deity is just asking for trouble.
===
But all being said and done, I really want this thread to get back on-topic.
) , trying to conquer the complete world once one has reached the score's ceiling (and by that shoot far over the domination limit) , mass-tech-trading with AIs so the overall tech-tempo get's fastened up (ever had underdeveloped friends? gift them all your techs, there might be a chance that they research something you don't have! ) , are just some of the things one has to get comfortable with.
.
