Civ V - Beta 4

[LordTC]

I agree that hut luck is important.

I disagree with warrior rush because they can't get to the far away civs. T53 literally gives you 16-17 turns to kill everyone with your horses and it takes half of those to reach everyone. I think it's much better to go scout, settler, 2x scout if you can fit both in, 2x war chariot, spam chariots or horses depending on which resources you have. The initial war chariots & your warrior can take an undefended city.

The map also has fixed spawn points and very similar landmarks - mountains to the west & forest to the east. That covers 5 of the 8 spawns. The 6th spawn has one river, the 7th & 8th have two rivers and you have to scout for whether you're top mid-left or mid bottom. So it makes it easy to scout the right civs, and as soon as you meet someone you can move on to the next.

Also, some civs seem to save gold up more than others. Siam/America/India definitely do. I imagine any of the non-expansionist ones would have more gold.

Warrior rush is wrong because you get your 2nd city from the AI who hasn't built it on top of horses and you will need horsemen to take all the enemy civs capitals out by turn 56.

 

[killercane]

Warrior rush is wrong because you get your 2nd city from the AI who hasn't built it on top of horses and you will need horsemen to take all the enemy civs capitals out by turn 56.

Eh no you will have 3 cities, you still build a settler to put on horses. By having 4 warriors all far away AIs you DOWed early will give you peace with all their gold and gpt to subsidize the cost of buying warriors or scouts.

 

[NoImagination]

I agree with you in general, but:

At this point if you're trying to beat this start:
(0) Build scouts then settler, then horse.
(i) Restart if you're near an edge of the map
(ii) Restart if you can't get a settler out by turn 25.
(iii) Restart if you can't get your first horseman by turn 39.
(iv) Restart if you can't find all the Civs by turn 50.
(v) Restart if you can't win by turn 56.

(i) You can find this out before turn 5, so not such a big deal
(ii) You can get pre 25 without huts. I think you can complete settler on 21? Can do 15 with a good start of course. You have to switch to settler as soon as you are pop 2 AND you have your first scout out.
(iii) I'd say this should be more like 36-37
(iv) This should be turn 36-37 too - you need them all so you can buy 3-4 horses
(v) I already got 53 turns, so I'd aim for that instead

I'm fine with exploity, that's the way these challenges will inevitably turn out. It's the same for beta 3.

 

[NoImagination]

I'm prepared to be persuaded by 4 warrior rush, but the best form of persuasion is to beat 53 turns. I don't think it's useful because 2x chariots seems better to me due to time issues (settler + 2 or 3 scouts then 3 warriors is going to take you up to turn 35 anyway) and due to distance issues (warriors can hit 2 nearby civs before your time's up and they'll be the easy ones to reach that you could kill with 2 horses built on turn 50)

 

[Sun Tzu Wu]

Thoughts on an Optimized Strategy/Logistics/Tactics for the Domination Victory:

I don't plan to play this Beta Gauntlet, but I am enjoying the discussion of how to optimize the Domination Victory under the current settings.

The optimization would be much more useful and more meaningful, if the difficulty level were the highest rather than King Difficulty Level.

I'm disappointed that no one seems to have considered Forest Chopping as a means of generating more Hammers.

I'm also surprised that few have considered starts with sufficient (4) Horses in the initial seven Hexes as better than no Horses at all. I would consider it a strong advantage to capture the first Capital rather than waste time building a Settler to claim Horses (or to claim more Horses).

What really really surprises me is no one has seriously seen how to manipulate the Diplomatic system to "bribe" other Opponents into capturing other Opponents Capital. Each such successful Diplomatic Effort means one less Capital to capture. If you are not working Diplomatically to push other Opponents to take their Neighbor's Capital, you are really not optimizing your Domination Victory. This is where real gains to achieving an extremely early Domination Victory can be made.

I frankly expected better optimization of the Domination Victory than what I have been reading. Of course Civ V is new and completely unbalanced and will likely change drastically in the next few years. Otherwise, as currently implemented, Civ V could actually kill the Civilization series, at least among serious Civilization fans.

I do admire all of you putting effort into an optimized Strategy/Logistics/Tactics for breaking the 50 turn barrier. However, the barrier is quite probably even lower than that, say easily turn 40 as Civ V is currently implemented and with full Diplomatic prowess in force. Don't forgot you are allowed to use chose an optimal Map with some optimality in Civ position, Opponents, Leader and especially Diplomacy for achieving this.

Comments on Alleged Exploits:

I do think we need to be very conservative about declaring certain things as being exploitative. Maximizing the rate of capturing Capitals (personally or by proxy) is what we must aim for and anything deemed legal by the Game Designers should not be declared exploitative and thus prohibited. Only those things the Game Designers themselves would ban should be considered exploitative and thus prohibited; many such things may not rise to the (complaint) level needed to motivate the Game Designers to fix them; at such times, the HOF needs to step in and after sufficient discussion either bless the alleged "exploit" as ok to use or to ban it and design the HOF module to actively make it impossible to use (assuming this is feasible to do).

Good luck to all Competing!

Sun Tzu Wu

 

[killercane]

Thoughts on an Optimized Strategy/Logistics/Tactics for the Domination Victory:

I don't plan to play this Beta Gauntlet, but I am enjoying the discussion of how to optimize the Domination Victory under the current settings.

The optimization would be much more useful and more meaningful, if the difficulty level were the highest rather than King Difficulty Level.

I'm disappointed that no one seems to have considered Forest Chopping as a means of generating more Hammers.

I'm also surprised that few have considered starts with sufficient (4) Horses in the initial seven Hexes as better than no Horses at all. I would consider it a strong advantage to capture the first Capital rather than waste time building a Settler to claim Horses (or to claim more Horses).

What really really surprises me is no one has seriously seen how to manipulate the Diplomatic system to "bribe" other Opponents into capturing other Opponents Capital. Each such successful Diplomatic Effort means one less Capital to capture. If you are not working Diplomatically to push other Opponents to take their Neighbor's Capital, you are really not optimizing your Domination Victory. This is where real gains to achieving an extremely early Domination Victory can be made.

I frankly expected better optimization of the Domination Victory than what I have been reading. Of course Civ V is new and completely unbalanced and will likely change drastically in the next few years. Otherwise, as currently implemented, Civ V could actually kill the Civilization series, at least among serious Civilization fans.

I do admire all of you putting effort into an optimized Strategy/Logistics/Tactics for breaking the 50 turn barrier. However, the barrier is quite probably even lower than that, say easily turn 40 as Civ V is currently implemented and with full Diplomatic prowess in force. Don't forgot you are allowed to use chose an optimal Map with some optimality in Civ position, Opponents, Leader and especially Diplomacy for achieving this.

Comments on Alleged Exploits:

I do think we need to be very conservative about declaring certain things as being exploitative. Maximizing the rate of capturing Capitals (personally or by proxy) is what we must aim for and anything deemed legal by the Game Designers should not be declared exploitative and thus prohibited. Only those things the Game Designers themselves would ban should be considered exploitative and thus prohibited; many such things may not rise to the (complaint) level needed to motivate the Game Designers to fix them; at such times, the HOF needs to step in and after sufficient discussion either bless the alleged "exploit" as ok to use or to ban it and design the HOF module to actively make it impossible to use (assuming this is feasible to do).

Good luck to all Competing!

Sun Tzu Wu

Chopping would require a research detour and most starts are forest poor.

Depending on another AI to capture a cap, while a good idea, would be hard to do and a waste of resources better directed elsewhere imo.

 

[NoImagination]

Chopping isn't very useful because you need mining - which has to happen after HBR - and you need every worker turn to connect luxuries so that you stay above -10. It's vital that you have met all 7 civs by turn 35, so you can't delay early scouts.

The AI also never has enough to capture a capital that early. I've rarely seen the AI with more than two units by turn 50, which is obviously not sufficient.

 

[Sun Tzu Wu]

Chopping would require a research detour and most starts are forest poor.

Perhaps, researching Mining first would delay Horseback Riding too much.

Sorry, I didn't notice that the Gauntlet specifies "Great Plains" Map. I mistakenly thought the Map Type was "Any" like Beta Gauntlet #3. Being forced to use a "Great Plains" Map does severely limit one's options for Chopping units.

In my opinion, it is somewhat futile to develop an optimal Domination Victory Strategy for the "Great Plains" Map. A "Great Plains" Map is unlikely to be the best Map for a Domination Victory

Surely, there are better Map Types for a Domination Victory.

Depending on another AI to capture a cap, while a good idea, would be hard to do and a waste of resources better directed elsewhere imo.

The biggest problem here is no one really understands Civ V's diplomacy system very well and it may also be more random in nature than Civ IV was.

Also, you may be right about hiring AI Leaders as "Mercenary Allies" may be more costly than doing the deed (capturing Capitals) yourself. I just don't think anyone has seriously investigated this possibility to know for certain.

Chopping isn't very useful because you need mining - which has to happen after HBR - and you need every worker turn to connect luxuries so that you stay above -10. It's vital that you have met all 7 civs by turn 35, so you can't delay early scouts.

I understand why you think Mining must be after Horseback Riding, but it really needs to be the first, so your captured Workers can start Chopping Forests as early as possible. Note that you might adjust by having more War Chariots and fewer Horsemen.

The AI also never has enough to capture a capital that early. I've rarely seen the AI with more than two units by turn 50, which is obviously not sufficient.

Are you sure an AI can't be cajoled into building a Military strong enough to take another AI's Capital?

Finally, I'm wondering "Raging Barbarians" or other optional settings might made an extremely early Domination Victory easier to achieve.

Sun Tzu Wu

 

[DJMGator13]

Just finished a 60 turn game. I errored by making peace with 5 AI's for a bunch of gold after the initial "Sell everything 6 times". This cost me 5 turns as I had to wait at the borders on 2 fronts for the peace deals to end. I had an ideal map setup to challenge the 50 turn mark as no AIs were deep in the western mountains. I also had 4 horses in my intial city radius and I settled the 2nd city ontop of 4 more horses.

 

[tommynt]

can u guys up there maybe stop the ridic discussion?

as long as hof does neither used fixed starts (it wont due to gotm) nor disable huts, the winning factor "luck" will allways be as important as the factor skill.

Thats why I decided it wasnt the place for me - if u want talk about "perfect" ie skill game then there are better places then this gaunlet

doing a -t60 win does show u got some clue of the game - all else is just being more or less lucky

 

[Sun Tzu Wu]

as long as hof does neither used fixed starts (it wont due to gotm) nor disable huts, the winning factor "luck" will allways be as important as the factor skill.

I agree that the HoF will never adopt "fixed starts". However, everything else is on the table for discussion.

There may or may not be enough Players to support a HoF ban on Civ V Ruins. If the the HoF rushed a decision on this issue it would probably favour optional Ruins. However, I see more and more Players favouring a ban on Ruins in the HoF, so that might actually happen.

The absurdity of Ruins is they are considered "fun", but they totally break the idea that skill is needed to Win HoF Ranking. This is especially true for Civ V's Domination Victory and Civ IV BtS' Religious Leader Diplomatic Victory (HoF Religious Victory). These Games are so short that luck in Ruins/Tribal Villages can dominate the HoF Ranking.

Ruins like Tribal Villages are simply Random Number Generator Candy that add nothing to the Game, except occasional quantum jumps between Game States. You can get a free Technology for being lucky in a game that requires 5-10 Technologies.

Civ IV's Conquest and Domination Victories also suffer from Tribal Villages being permitted, because due to starting Technologies, as little as Animal Husbandry or Bronze Working will suffice for a strong early Military unit like War Chariot or Axeman, etc. Sometimes The Wheel is also needed to connect a Horse/Copper/Iron resource.
Getting any one of these Technologies from a Tribal Village is Game breaking, since only 1-3 Technologies are needed to complete the Conquest and Domination Victory.

Sun Tzu Wu

 

[KingMorgan]

My personal view is that is Gauntlet is not really suitable for developing an overall domination strategy, the map and difficulty level mean that huts could play a large part in the winning time. The fixed spawn points will also automatically disadvange a large number of starts, the player that is preapred to restart the most will have a higher chance of winning. It has alway been appealing to me to see the same results at point in time, using different strats, this gauntlet is very narrow, confining the player to almost identical approaches. Full credit all participants for posting some immpresive games and early finishes.

 

[boehj]

can u guys up there maybe stop the ridic discussion?

[...]

Thats why I decided it wasnt the place for me - if u want talk about "perfect" ie skill game then there are better places then this gaunlet

That's what a strategy forum is for, no? No discussion would pretty much render this place useless.

As to the second point, if this isn't the place for you then why are you still here?

 

[NoImagination]

I understand why you think Mining must be after Horseback Riding, but it really needs to be the first, so your captured Workers can start Chopping Forests as early as possible. Note that you might adjust by having more War Chariots and fewer Horsemen.

That doesn't work because you need your first horsemen on turn 35 or so. You under estimate their value that early.

Are you sure an AI can't be cajoled into building a Military strong enough to take another AI's Capital? Finally, I'm wondering "Raging Barbarians" or other optional settings might made an extremely early Domination Victory easier to achieve

Yeh, I'm sure. Go try it. And we already talked about raging barbarians - they don't capture villages anymore. I'm not sure why I'm debating this with someone who by their own admission hasn't actually tried to play this challenge. And Randomly Capitalises words. And signs his name.

Anyway. I vote for no huts in future challenges. They're by far the worst source of luck.

 

[Sun Tzu Wu]

That doesn't work because you need your first horsemen on turn 35 or so. You under estimate their value that early.

Just play the first few (10) turns of a Game and continue only those in which you get Mining from a Ruins. Although, arguably it is this is a technique that may be outside the spirit of the competition, but it is perfectly legal. Furthermore, it still allows early Horsemen (Horseback Riding by about turn 35).

Yeh, I'm sure. Go try it. And we already talked about raging barbarians - they don't capture villages anymore.

Sorry, I didn't explain why I thought "Raging Barbarians" would be such a useful setting for this Beta Gauntlet. It's not because I expect they would capture Capitals. However, "Raging Barbarians" may make it easier for the Player to capture Civ's Capitals. I have heard that Civs in Civ V deal with "Raging Barbarians" very poorly. The expectation is that Civs that are struggling to survive or at least advance in Technology would be easier to capture.

I'm not sure why I'm debating this with someone who by their own admission hasn't actually tried to play this challenge. And Randomly Capitalises words. And signs his name.

Your first point is valid. However, I do have a fairly good Civ IV HoF record with regard to Domination Victory. Also, we all know that the Civ V Military AI is far less formidable than the Civ IV Military AI, due primarily to Civ V's single military unit per Tile and the AI's lack of basic Defensive/Offensive Military operational knowledge and or the ability to apply it. In any case, I'm just trying to be honest about my lack of experience with Civ V Domination Victory. However, I don't believe that what I have to say in this thread necessarily lacks value.

As to your last two points, they are without merit ...

I don't randomly capitalize words. I do capitalize words that I want to emphasize, usually nouns that name Game elements. Do you expect all posters to abide by all English literary rules? My capitalization style comes in part from the German (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deutsch) language where nearly all nouns are capitalized. While I realize that my capitalization does strongly deviate from the English literary form, I do think that in a forum context, it doesn't deviate too far. I hope my posts aren't as bad as those who post in lower case only, don't spell check and have a overtly hostile attitude with anyone who objects to their lower case defined defiance.

Just be happy I don't use Chinese Kanji (漢&#23383 with its total absence of all grammatical endings in my posts. I solemnly wish I could use the language of my homeland, but then only an exceedingly small minority of you would understand anything I said.

While I can understand English majors becoming upset by my unorthodox Capitalization rules, denigrating someone because they sign their posts is Draconian. It actually undermines (by association) your other arguments for (possibly) not responding to my posts.

Anyway. I vote for no huts in future challenges. They're by far the worst source of luck.

I agree with you, but I would go further and advocate banning Ruins from Civ V HoF entirely.

Sun Tzu Wu

"The general who advances without coveting fame and retreats without fearing disgrace, whose only thought is to protect his country and do good service for his sovereign, is the jewel of the kingdom."

 

[NoImagination]

You're just trolling now.

 

[KingMorgan]

You're just trolling now.

No. You are the Troll.

Sun makes a very worthwhile contribution, well thought out and detailed responses. Your contribution to the discussion is lessened by your insults at the end. I would have hoped a Mod would have had a little word in your ear before now.

 

[NoImagination]

Infact, I'm going to delete that response. I don't care about this and it isn't a particularly productive use of my time.

 

[tommynt]

That's what a strategy forum is for, no? No discussion would pretty much render this place useless.

Ya but the discussion and the gaunlet game itself is about a gamble not a strategy - thats why it doesnt fit

 

[killercane]

Ya but the discussion and the gaunlet game itself is about a gamble not a strategy - thats why it doesnt fit

Well that is why we are discussing alternatives to get to under 50 turns. Such as warrior rush, buying war chariots to produce two army groups and clear the plains while your horses come online and clear the woods/mountains far. This strategy lowers your initial scouting greatly (but you already know where the AI are) but also lowers your gold income to buy the last horses since you spent money on getting war chariots out immediately.

It would all work if it werent for those darn woods and rivers. War chariots are great for their cost but you need a critical mass of them immediately starting at turn 20 and it is critical you get the gold on time.

Current thinking is 3 warrior rush nearest civ, hold off on declare until you can get 3 uncontested initial shots at the cap with no enemy warrior in range and a heal saved up from barbs to use and then go on the split war chariot/warrior groups but this is all moot with the new patch so in the end, who really cares? This is not a good game and I have doubts about the patch.