Beta Gauntlet IV
- Thread starter superslug
- Start date
MaskedFrog
Chieftain
I am still working with Quin as a leader. I think Industrious is a big help to get the early wonders necessary as I am not patient enough to wait until I get a start with stone and/or marble.
The key to not having war is to make sure all civs are friendly with you. Do this by signing open borders with every civ as soon as you can. Also trade techs early and often. If a civ asks for a tech, give it to them. If they demand you switch to a religion or a civic, you can make a decision base on the situation. Generally I find you can turn them down and the -1 will not hurt you.
Also make sure you do not select any agressive civs for your opponents. You need to select people like Asoka, Ghandi, Mansa Musa, Cyrus and others that tend to be more friendly.
The key to not having war is to make sure all civs are friendly with you. Do this by signing open borders with every civ as soon as you can. Also trade techs early and often. If a civ asks for a tech, give it to them. If they demand you switch to a religion or a civic, you can make a decision base on the situation. Generally I find you can turn them down and the -1 will not hurt you.
Also make sure you do not select any agressive civs for your opponents. You need to select people like Asoka, Ghandi, Mansa Musa, Cyrus and others that tend to be more friendly.
1060 AD.
Still with Liz, still using a completely different strategy from you all (I think).
Tried a Plains map. Lots of forest, river, grassland, but resources were sparse. I was right up against the edge of the map too, so I couldn't chop forest in one direction.
I went for a Stone start this time, but wasn't patient enough to get one with gems or gold too. Maybe with that perfect start I could get sub 1000.
Still with Liz, still using a completely different strategy from you all (I think).
Tried a Plains map. Lots of forest, river, grassland, but resources were sparse. I was right up against the edge of the map too, so I couldn't chop forest in one direction.
I went for a Stone start this time, but wasn't patient enough to get one with gems or gold too. Maybe with that perfect start I could get sub 1000.
BlueRenner
Warlord
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2001
- Messages
- 121
Bah, another 960AD game.
I had such high hopes too. I completed the UN in 780AD, several turns before I had done so in previous games. But then those turns were wasted as I sat and waited.. and waited.. and waited for elections to be called. And then waited.. and waited.. and waited for the Diplomatic Victory to be declared. I wasted a full 10 turns, 6% of the game, just sitting there. Highly annoying.
I've tried and discarded Elizibeth. Philosophical just isn't powerful enough for this gauntlet. I'm back to Catherine.
- Bill
I had such high hopes too. I completed the UN in 780AD, several turns before I had done so in previous games. But then those turns were wasted as I sat and waited.. and waited.. and waited for elections to be called. And then waited.. and waited.. and waited for the Diplomatic Victory to be declared. I wasted a full 10 turns, 6% of the game, just sitting there. Highly annoying.
I've tried and discarded Elizibeth. Philosophical just isn't powerful enough for this gauntlet. I'm back to Catherine.
- Bill
I did a search but came up with too many answers that don't apply. What triggers the secretary general vote and what triggers the diplo vote? I first thought it was only on certain years, the *50's, but I have won on other years as well. And it doesn't seem to be consistent how long you wait between the secretary general vote and the winning vote.
fluffyflyingpig
Warlord
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2005
- Messages
- 116
Hmm, someone should test in world builder or look in the xml and find out when exactly UN votes are held. I'd guess 780 was a voting year, or very close to one. Tough luck Bill. Still, UN in 780 looks to be miles ahead of everyone else, nice work.
nihil8r
space . . . madness
Big_Ben said:
Persia and Egypt ...
I am always signing open borders, but then the other civs get mad at each other and want me to cancel my open borders with their hated enemies. If I don't, I'm not their special friend anymore.
On the plus side, what I've learned from this will really help my huge warmonger games. I've been trying Frederick for this one, seems very good for a regular game with the combo of culture and GP production.
BlueRenner
Warlord
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2001
- Messages
- 121
I did some testing with the world builder. It seems that 780AD, 860AD, and 940AD are all election years. I have previously gotten a 1020AD win (election in 1010AD). Above is a 1060AD win (election in 1050AD).
Pretty conclusive evidence for an election every four turns.
This means I missed getting a 880AD win by a single turn. A bit galling.
- Bill
Pretty conclusive evidence for an election every four turns.
This means I missed getting a 880AD win by a single turn. A bit galling.
- Bill
These gauntlets are a lot of fun. I've only played the last 2. It's a shame that they both are just a mad dash up the tech tree. Especially this one. It should be about learning diplomacy. This gauntlet would be a lot more fun/educational if it were against random opponents. In fact, I think all the gauntlets should have random opponents. I'm tired of the same boring bunch. Maybe they can't tell if you hand picked them or if they were random so they just let you pick them. If so, Firaxis should indicate on the settings screen whether opponents were random.
...and I'd like to see barbarians required.
game on
...and I'd like to see barbarians required.
game on
Regardless of the technicalities of us being able to check this, all that would happen is some players would keep creating new games until they got the opponents they wanted anyway!WastinTime said:
That's a possibilityWastinTime said:
.
Dianthus said:
I disagree. Especially on this large map, you'd be half way through the game before you even knew who your opponents were. And it would be extremely rare to get exactly the 5 opponents you want. About 1 in 500,000 chance I think.
Good point, I keep forgetting this is Civ4, not Civ3WastinTime said:
.BlueRenner
Warlord
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2001
- Messages
- 121
I think we have to be very careful about the random factors we introduce into the gauntlet. I agree with Dianthus in principle, though I also agree with WastinTime's rebuttal. Players would not be able to restart over and over and over effectively to essencially choose their opponents, but the best games will still be those in which the AIs line up perfectly. Basically, its not a strategic element anymore, its like another goody hut. And it matters... a lot.
Barbarians, on the other hand, I think should be on. They are random in a micro sense, in that they don't appear in the same places at the same time, but they are very consistant when viewed over time. Consider also that the AI always plays as if barbarians are on, so turning barbarians off gives the player a huge advantage over the computer.
How does a Large Continents Domination with Barbarians on Monarch sound for the next game? I likes it.
- Bill
Barbarians, on the other hand, I think should be on. They are random in a micro sense, in that they don't appear in the same places at the same time, but they are very consistant when viewed over time. Consider also that the AI always plays as if barbarians are on, so turning barbarians off gives the player a huge advantage over the computer.
How does a Large Continents Domination with Barbarians on Monarch sound for the next game? I likes it.
- Bill
BlueRenner said:
I see your concern here. Let's assume we go with random opponents on all gauntlets. I believe that getting a lucky set of opponents has a minimal effect on any win condition other than Diplomatic. Even on Diplomatic its arguable. You can get agressive civs to vote for you too, you just need more planning. Something more than just giving away tech. In order to have Diplomatic Gauntlets require some diplomacy, and eliminate the luck factor, we could require a few specific opponents, or maybe require two aggressive civs of your choice, or maybe just having each leader trait represented, e tc...you get the idea. Too complicated?
BlueRenner
Warlord
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2001
- Messages
- 121
Well, look at it this way. If we were doing a peaceful builder gauntlet (Space Race, Cultural, Diplomatic) and I saw Alexander was in the game, I would immediately restart.
Alexander attacks based on weakness, nothing else. In a builder game, to maximize your time you build a minimum of troops. This means that you will get invaded unless you build a military.. and if you spend time building a military, you're going to be behind the guy who isn't.
Besides, there are ripple effects. Once aggressive civs enter a game that is ideally peaceful, the AI starts taking sides and you start accruing negative modifiers for having agreements with [somebody's] worst enemy. It quickly spirals out of control and you find yourself in war.. and behind. It just doesn't work.
In violent games (Domination, Conquest), I'm all for Random civs... but then, it doesn't matter. All civs are more or less equally bad at fighting. A human player rolls over them with ease.
I'd be fine with the gauntlet rules dictating your opponants, which is something I think will become very important once we have to start cycling back through the victory conditions, but I think requiring Random opponents is just adding another factor into the Regenerate/Restart grind, making the perfect, lucky start all the more valuable.
Heh. How about an "Always War" space race victory? That'd be fun.
- Bill
Alexander attacks based on weakness, nothing else. In a builder game, to maximize your time you build a minimum of troops. This means that you will get invaded unless you build a military.. and if you spend time building a military, you're going to be behind the guy who isn't.
Besides, there are ripple effects. Once aggressive civs enter a game that is ideally peaceful, the AI starts taking sides and you start accruing negative modifiers for having agreements with [somebody's] worst enemy. It quickly spirals out of control and you find yourself in war.. and behind. It just doesn't work.
In violent games (Domination, Conquest), I'm all for Random civs... but then, it doesn't matter. All civs are more or less equally bad at fighting. A human player rolls over them with ease.
I'd be fine with the gauntlet rules dictating your opponants, which is something I think will become very important once we have to start cycling back through the victory conditions, but I think requiring Random opponents is just adding another factor into the Regenerate/Restart grind, making the perfect, lucky start all the more valuable.
Heh. How about an "Always War" space race victory? That'd be fun.
- Bill
fluffyflyingpig
Warlord
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2005
- Messages
- 116
Meh, the game is random enough as it is, why make it more random? The more random the game, the more it favors those with the most time to restart. If people are going to restart anyway to try and get the best possible games, why fight it?
Hmm, UN votes every four turns. That's what I had suspected, but nice to confirm. Looks like the earliest time will be below anyones predictions, 880 looks possible, to miss that by 1 turn--ouch. Guess I'll try another game now that I have some time.
Hmm, UN votes every four turns. That's what I had suspected, but nice to confirm. Looks like the earliest time will be below anyones predictions, 880 looks possible, to miss that by 1 turn--ouch. Guess I'll try another game now that I have some time.
Enough said. I'm sure a true diplomatic gauntlet will come around some day. Back to business...
1020 AD win.
I think Liz is required for my strategy, so I played her again.
It's not about getting a lot of Great People, it's about getting an EARLY GP.
I had stone, corn, fur for a start. Not spectacular.
I did not even have gems/gold, but made good use of the one Fur. Can you believe I researched Hunting first? I'm all about a quick start. I disagree with the comment that free techs from huts are meaningless. I only got 1 free, BTW.
I'm certain I can get a 960 soon...although I expect someone to have 880 by then.
1020 AD win.
I think Liz is required for my strategy, so I played her again.
It's not about getting a lot of Great People, it's about getting an EARLY GP.
I had stone, corn, fur for a start. Not spectacular.
I did not even have gems/gold, but made good use of the one Fur. Can you believe I researched Hunting first? I'm all about a quick start. I disagree with the comment that free techs from huts are meaningless. I only got 1 free, BTW.
I'm certain I can get a 960 soon...although I expect someone to have 880 by then.
Similar threads
