Civ V - Beta 4

[Ozbenno]

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.

*There is no Civ V HOF Mod as of yet, so please play these games in the spirit of the Civ IV Hall of Fame Rules. Please review these before playing.

Settings:

• Victory Condition: Domination (though all victory conditions must be enabled)
• Difficulty: King
• Starting Era: Ancient
• Map Size: Standard
• Map Type: Great Plains
• Speed: Normal
• Civ: Egypt
• Opponents: Any, 7 opponents only, default option (8 civs in total), 16 City States only
• Resources: Standard
• Must Not Be Checked: No Barbarians, New Random Seed, Random Personalities
• Date: 15th November to 15th December 2010

The earliest finish date wins, with score as a tiebreaker.

While each map can only be played once, players are more than welcome to generate new maps and submit multiple games. Also, as everyone is playing their own distinct maps, there is no need for spoiler limitation within the thread. In fact, we encourage detailed posting of strategy and gameplay.

To qualify for this gauntlet please complete your game and post both your 4000BC save and your turn after victory save in this thread.

Good luck

 

[Ozbenno]

As usual, let us know of any bugs or exploits that arise in your games. This is the last of the conditions we will be testing out for the Beta Gauntlets (will leave Time alone).

I've ranked the games by turn finished.

1 NoImagination 53
2 Azalnubizar 56
3 tommynt 58
4 DJMGator13 60
5 sanabas 73
6 twilson1111 86
7 vcdragoon 90
8 f99 90
9 kmtravis 111
10 KingMorgan 112
11 kcd_swede 131

 

[sanabas]

turn 84, 775 BC.

Really, really boring. build was scout, worker, settler to drop next to horses, then chariot archer (war chariot?). Researched to horseback riding. Built & bought horsemen, conquered world.

Big fat exploit of trading stuff to AI for lump sum, using lump sum to buy happiness building or horsemen or 4 more horses from a CS was used a couple of times, partly because I let happiness drop to -10. Should have just razed a couple of cities, which I did the second time it happened.

Start was pretty efficient, wars not so much. Was a bit slow starting the second front, wasted time healing between AIs. So should be easy to trim quite a few turns from that time, though I doubt I'll bother trying.

Small bug saw a friendly CS give me a war elephant.

 

[KingMorgan]

I'll get the ball rolling with a Horsetastic t112.

I settled 2 cities, built 8 horseman, 4 went clockwise, the next 4 counterclock, they met in the middle. I lost my first horse on the last turn of the game, probably used 2 promotions for insta heal the whole way through. Not to say horsman are overpowered

Usuall bug when stealing a CS, AI annoyed cause I wiped out myself. And the resource trading bug if you try to trade 2 lux at the same time. Game crashed around t80.

Any domination victory, panagea type map below immortal will end up as who can pull off the best horseman rush. Game parameters that allow early (pre Astro) domination should be avoided unless horsetastic results are desired.

 

[Ozbenno]

Any domination victory, panagea type map below immortal will end up as who can pull off the best horseman rush. Game parameters that allow early (pre Astro) domination should be avoided unless horsetastic results are desired.

Agreed but the ideas of these beta gauntlets is to encourage participation, widen the pool of potential HOF players. this can be considered a very gentle minor gauntlet

 

[KingMorgan]

Agreed but the ideas of these beta gauntlets is to encourage participation, widen the pool of potential HOF players. this can be considered a very gentle minor gauntlet

Will you widen the pool of players when they see a t84 victory and a single strategy to attempt to beat it?

Joking aside it's a sad reflection on the gameplay and the game as a whole, the lead developer has a lot to answer for.

 

[boehj]

I was keen to do this gauntlet but I've got a house rule of not building horsemen until they're fixed.

Still, it'll be interesting to see how low people will go.

 

[Methos]

I was keen to do this gauntlet but I've got a house rule of not building horsemen until they're fixed.

While it won't be as fast, why not try it with swords and cats, or some other method? I agree it won't be as fast, but it would be interesting to compare.

 

[boehj]

While it won't be as fast, why not try it with swords and cats, or some other method? I agree it won't be as fast, but it would be interesting to compare.

Actually, that's a really good idea Methos. Cheers! I'll probably have a game tomorrow.

 

[sanabas]

2nd attempt, turn 73, 1080 BC.

Compared to the first game:

Things that slowed me down: started in NW corner, so it was a long walk to the last couple of AIs.

Start location wasn't quite as good, had one plains wheat, one sheep, one horse tile. A 3 food tile + 2 more 2 food/1 shield tiles will help plenty.

Was a bit disjointed with wars, was hard to guess exactly how many horses were needed for each AI, so a couple of times I had horses detouring for one city, when they could have bypassed it and gone directly to the next.

Game crashed on turn 51.

Didn't use exploit of selling stuff for cash then declaring straight away. Did sell one resource to China for 300 gold, but it was when I'd just met them and well before I declared. Didn't even steal workers from CS, the one I declared on my war chariot bombarded the worker instead of stealing it.

Things that made the win quicker:

Popped the wheel from a goody hut.

Didn't attack any city other than an AI capital, completely ignored their other cities.

Completely different stuff that may or may not have helped:

Build order was worker, settler to get the horses online quicker. Didn't bother with a scout, just had the initial warrior explore. Put my first policy into +1 food in the capital, rather than the honour tree, meant that when my initial worker completed, my capital was size 3, not size 2 for building the settler.

I reckon somewhere around turn 60 will win this.

 

[Pizlenut]

Agreed but the ideas of these beta gauntlets is to encourage participation, widen the pool of potential HOF players. this can be considered a very gentle minor gauntlet

I dunno, this game is too easy. Im actually thinking I can probably beat it on immortal or at least give it a fairly decent run, and I was previously never able to beat anything too far better than monarch in previous games (take your pick).
Er point being, im the "casual" type of player you were probably going to pick up, and no I don't feel like participating when horsemen = win in 80ish turns.

I did however get a game that had all 3 victory conditions met, minus the culture victory (half way through that) by 1930 in a marathon game against 17 level 6 AI on large map. Not as cool as 80 turn horse rushes, I'll admit, but my victory seems about as hollow.

Point being... its going to be hard to put together "challenges" if the game fails to be challenging itself and its going to be even harder to get participation when the challenge is defeated in such an absurdly simple manner.

just a few ideas -
try to win without using city-states.
try to win without range units (horse rush already beats this... sigh)
try to win without strategic resources
you can only annex cities
can't build your own workers
can't build your own cities
no diplomacy
workers have to be automated

things like that... tie the hands behind the player back... they will still win because the AI will be busy slamming its head against a wall in the middle of its tactical phase - but at least it will take longer

 

[LordTC]

As already mentioned earlier, there is no reason to play any strategy other than horse rush in this version. If the game speed were marathon there might be some merit to using an early warrior rush upgrading to swords and keeping on going, but as it is right now this is just execute a basic strategy as fast as possible. It would also make more sense to let people play from a fixed save, since start position is such a big deal, I guarantee anyone who gets a zero horse start is not winning.

 

[Augustus Bob]

I dunno, this game is too easy. Im actually thinking I can probably beat it on immortal or at least give it a fairly decent run, and I was previously never able to beat anything too far better than monarch in previous games (take your pick).
Er point being, im the "casual" type of player you were probably going to pick up, and no I don't feel like participating when horsemen = win in 80ish turns.

same for me.
Yeah i've always been a HUGE civ fan, although never a really good one, which is why although i've come to this place often, i never posted or tried for the HOF. I couldn't go over monarch, and then again would only win some games, always trying to figure out which angle would work this particular time.

Now i've played one cvi 5 game at each level of difficulty, only to find that with each game i was winning even faster (less turns!) made it past deity in 140 turns, small map, and the only thing that would slow me is that the AI would build 5 units every turn it would seem, flooding the available space, but would just as well put catapults in front...

i finished my game by sending alex to capture someone else, then move in on his teritory the turn he captured the other's capital.

so i'm real disappointed. cause i could go in this HOF thing and come up not too bad. but no challenge to it. so until they:
- put horses as less dangerous
- make cities tougher to capture
- teach the AI to move his units where they should and to actually ATTACK yours when they're in trouble, as opposed to leaving archers sleeping when they have options...
- remove the AI's ability to own 15 cities when i can have 2

well until then i'm looking to buy some other game... maybe i'll go back to civ 4... this really is the first big civ disappointment for me.

 

[stormerne]

When you have a horse rush and you're going for quickest domination with many wins likely below 100 turns, it REALLY makes a difference where you start as there's no chance to make up the turns if you're unlucky.

Just started a game with NO horses in sight. Anywhere. Dropped a second city on top of two horses quite a way off. Needed a third city a very long way off to get any more. Nearest city state with any turned out to be miles away. Admittedly that has never happened to me before, and although the rush progressed well after that and victory was assured, it was pointless trying to go for anything quicker than 80 turns.

Full marks to sanabas by the way , but even experienced horse rushers are sufficiently at the mercy of the map generator to make this gauntlet unlikely to reflect any true measure of skill. I'll probably have another go - I can't imagine how it would be possible to get a worse start! - but I guess it's a learning experience for gauntlet setters.

 

[Methos]

Point being... its going to be hard to put together "challenges" if the game fails to be challenging itself and its going to be even harder to get participation when the challenge is defeated in such an absurdly simple manner.

Gentlemen and Ladies, you need to remember that the HOF isn't just a competition against the game, but against your fellow HOF'ers and even yourself. While I agree that the horse rush is the only valid strategy to win this gauntlet, remember, you're trying for the fastest date, not to win the game. I haven't even played this gauntlet yet (trying to finish Gauntlet 3), but already just from reading other posters progress I've already seen ways to shed turns off when I do play this Gauntlet.

Yes, this will be a quick game, but it makes it easier when playing another game to fix past mistakes. For those who enjoy this type of competition, its a great thrill when you've beat your past best submission, even if its only by a turn or two. Look back over the past three gauntlets and study the fastest players. What do you see? You see them pointing out their own mistakes and observations and then retrying using the experience they just gained. And what happens? They beat their own date and the cycle continues.

I understand that this type of competition isn't for everyone, but its something many of us enjoy and I hope that many more will come to enjoy it too. I think the hardest part is concluding who you're playing against, rather then what.

It would also make more sense to let people play from a fixed save, since start position is such a big deal, I guarantee anyone who gets a zero horse start is not winning.

One of the fun aspects is trying different map combinations. We've seen in the past that not any single type of map is the best option, but its how the map is played. If we chose the map everyone started from, then we're limiting player strategies.

One of the things I find really enjoyable is learning from my own experience and that of others, on the best way to shave off a few turns here and there and to be able to get that faster date.

 

[tommynt]

We've seen in the past that not any single type of map is the best option, but its how the map is played. If we chose the map everyone started from, then we're limiting player strategies.

One of the things I find really enjoyable is learning from my own experience and that of others, on the best way to shave off a few turns here and there and to be able to get that faster date.

You totaly contradict yourself here: on one hand u say the most interesting thing is "how the map is played" on other u want different maps to be played. With different maps u can never find the "best" way to play a map. The best thing to "shave turns here and there" is with these setting to restart until u get dream land and good huts not to play better. Also how does a choosen land (map is choosen anyway) does limit player strategies?


Well a thread of mine which did propose use of a fixed map for each map got closed for "trolling" - WTF!

Just make a poll about if and i m pretty sure that 75% of guys would prefer "trolling" over randomnes.

People talk about games and "strats" in here - but without knwoing what their land did look like - how the civ and CS distribution and so have been this is all totaly useless. And no1 cares in enough to load saves (apart maybe the ones from top 2 guys) - thats just a fact.

All this HOF thing would be WAY more interesting with fixed map and no huts - so every1 is playing the same "Gaunlet" - instead of totaly different games - just cause u have a put victory condition - games cant be comparaable. And neither the players with best strats can be discovered - like that its mainly about restarting as often until u get the paradis land and godlike huts.

As said a discussion about something with a knwon "topic" is just way more productive than a discusion about unknown.

 

[boehj]

All this HOF thing would be WAY more interesting with fixed map and no huts - so every1 is playing the same "Gaunlet" - instead of totaly different games - just cause u have a put victory condition - games cant be comparaable. And neither the players with best strats can be discovered - like that its mainly about restarting as often until u get the paradis land and godlike huts.

This is interesting. In my own games I'm tending to switch off huts these days. Apparently they'll be getting a slight nerf in the upcoming patch so you'll no longer see BC-era Mech Inf rolling around, which I think is a good thing.

But for me, these Gauntlets are about me playing against myself. I can understand that at your skill level that there's a bit more to it, but I'm happy just to beat my old time.

Random maps aren't that much of an issue because even if I were given the same map over and over again I couldn't really exploit it as my basic game play is so poor and inconsistent that it wouldn't make any big difference. Also, I can't be bothered reloading maps. Is there even such a thing as paradise land in CiV? It all seems the same to me. [Semi-serious.]

 

[Sumorex]

All this HOF thing would be WAY more interesting with fixed map and no huts - so every1 is playing the same "Gaunlet" - instead of totaly different games - just cause u have a put victory condition - games cant be comparaable. And neither the players with best strats can be discovered - like that its mainly about restarting as often until u get the paradis land and godlike huts.

As said a discussion about something with a knwon "topic" is just way more productive than a discusion about unknown.

Think what you're after is the Civ Rev Game of the Week structure. It's just a different animal from what the HOF competition has always been. You could surely start in the General or Strategy forums and try to set up a competition like that I'd bet.

As to randomness, even with the same map and no huts you will still have randomness inside of the game. Did you win or lose that close combat? Did you get an Engineer or Merchant from the Educated Elite social policy? Did that military city state gift you a horseman or an archer or a spearman? So while you've reduced the randomness you haven't eliminated it, and it could make a huge difference in a game like Beta 3... I'm pretty positive the winner of that gauntlet is going to be the one that gets an Engineer from a city state. Totally random.

Whether we're having a discussion about knowns or unknowns really is the up to the poster and those that read the post. There is plenty of good information that can be gleaned from any start. From tech choices given your starting resources to peaceful vs warmongering starts given initial conditions. I will agree that if we all played the same map we'd have more in depth discussions.... about that particular map, but I mentioned that earlier.

I guess I just like the set up. If I want to play the same map as everyone else, I'd go play Game of the Month or shadow one of the many games in the other forums. Here i like rolling the dice.

 

[avl8]

Reading about new HOF' target i smell the blood.
The bloody restarts "woot finally got horses" and the bloody restarts "omg i finally got my best hut of wheel tech".
This is going to be much bloodier that getting start with marble/wheat and a long river!

Seriosly, HoF guys should add a setting about "no huts" for these "less than 100 turns" gauntlets.
Going to beat my previous record only because i havent got the right hut makes me cry.

Im ok with educated elite randomness or taking risks attacking uphill barbarians. Not ridicoulous hut that just gets me free 58 beakers 1/10 times or gets me +30 culture 1/10 times.

 

[Methos]

You totaly contradict yourself here: on one hand u say the most interesting thing is "how the map is played" on other u want different maps to be played.

I'm not contradicting myself, you're just missing the point, though I believe its due to both of us using different definitions for terms were using.

If you disagree with the way the HOF and/or GOTM is played and desire a different way to compete, then feel free to search for others of like mind in the Civ 5 General Discussions forum. The HOF has run very successfully the way we currently do it for both Civ III and Civ IV.

Now, let's take the discussion back to this gauntlet and drop the OT discussion, please. Feel free to PM me if you still wish to discuss this topic.