Contest : Earliest win date

The_Dwarf

Chieftain
Joined
Sep 20, 2008
Messages
89
Since there are some major exploits the game becomes a little odd currently. If you know what you are doing there is no real threat of loosing and that kind of steals the fun.
So I thought it might be a good idea to turn the cheesy exploits into some fun by making a contest who can get the earliest winning date on the highest difficulty level.
What do you think ?
 
Nice idea. :)

Lets add another contest to the mix: highest score REF/independance victory.

Thats allready 2 contests and both can be interesting. :)

(Also those 2 cater to different kinds of players and both can be achived by exploits...)

difficulty? Only really revolutionary? Or whould conquistador be ok so we don't exclude a large chunk of the players? Or any difficulty so anyone can give it a try?
 
bah... i had the same idea.. actually i wanted to make it first then challenge the others :p
agree on hardest difficulty and normal speed.
 
@ mzprox: Somewhat in 1595 for me (revolutionary of course). Guess thats rather late overall (already beaten by 25 turns normal speed). I also probably could have won faster...

PS: Why normal speed as well? I don't think the_dwarf suggested using normal as only possibility. The costs scale just fine... And i do wan't to explore at least a bit of the map... And normal seems to rushed. Only suitable for multiplayer imo.

I guess if we get it down to about Turn 50-60 (normal speed) it might even be fast enough for multiplayer if people don't know what you are up to. :p (and cannons are not that bad for defense as well actually :p so rushing is not all that effective vs. a fast-WoI strategy. But im not multiplayer enough to give it a try.)
 
LOL! The speed cheats have nothing really to do with the costs scaling.

I think you missed the whole point entirely...
 
Spoiler :


Turn 42 on Revolutionary large map standard speed. The king was kind enough to land most of his forces on the indian settlement, so my cannons could kill him easily.
 
And I thought turn 90 win was pretty fast, I clearly overexpanded with 3 cities, lol. Must try again, but beat 42 turn will be pretty hard, btw did you reload after bad ruin result or was just lucky?

For score, first can somedoby explain how it exactly works. When I try play Col like normal game with axpansion and so on, I get easy lead in everything, have bigger land mass and such, but computer usualy have bigger score.
 
I reloaded once after losing the first war of independence and declared two turns later after purchasing two more cannons I think. At revolutionary difficulty you should only pop ruins with a seasoned scout, the bad results are far too numerous to risk it.
 
For me just the war was like 15 turns :). i had to wait for the king a lot to land, Did You have only one wave from the king?. also the luck that they pput all their forces into the native village, getting an elderstatesman early.. these are hard to beat. Btw playing with the Dutch has better potential i think, since they start with a merchantman.
 
Yeah I doubt 42 is easy to beat. I managed another win on turn 43 though.

I think the king added manowars twice, so he could ship his forces over to die more quickly. Bolivar is a must in my opinion. The extra +50% combat bonus is just too great. A merchantmen would be nice, but since most of the time is lost travelling to and from europe the extra +1 move should not be that significant.
 
@ obsolete: You certainly have a point here, but seem to have missed my point that nowhere! in the opening post there has been a limit on which speed to play (and as long as its added what the game in question used it should be allright? After all here is nothing to win and such a contest shouldn't be to exculsive should it? Imo to much forced regulation ruins the fun in it. Thats fine in tournaments). I guess mzprox got that one wrong. (and date also scales with speed.).

Also bells and the likes (for getting sentiment) work like just like other costs and scale fully so that part hardly works any faster (datewise) even though you are likely to actually start the whole thing a bit faster.

@ Turinturambar: Could you give it a try on marathon to see how fast (datewise) you can get it done there? Gratz to the record i doubt someone will top that but nontheless try.

Also on another note, have you tried that in multiplayer (unless you hate / dislike / don't do multiplayer)? That should easily be fast enough without another player beeing able to reliablly! counter (especially if you arm yourselves to the teeth anyways).
That at least should prove that the harassment by other players (at least if the conditions are right) while completely ignoring the WoI isnt always the best idea...
 
@ Turinturambar: Could you give it a try on marathon to see how fast (datewise) you can get it done there? Gratz to the record i doubt someone will top that but nontheless try.

Also on another note, have you tried that in multiplayer (unless you hate / dislike / don't do multiplayer)? That should easily be fast enough without another player beeing able to reliablly! counter (especially if you arm yourselves to the teeth anyways).
That at least should prove that the harassment by other players (at least if the conditions are right) while completely ignoring the WoI isnt always the best idea...

I just tried it on marathon and finished on turn 94. Could probably go a bit quicker as well. It's easier, because you can hit more villages/ bring more treasures back home, so you don't have to waste as much time trading and can declare independence sooner.

I also managed to beat my record on normal speed by one turn.

The tactic could work in mp, it's cheesy as hell though and I don't really see the point in playing it out. You are defenseless in the first 20-25 turns, but you could simply trade a few muskets less and have a soldier ready for defense.
 
Im aware that its possible earlier in slower gamespeed. 31,3 Turns still souds very very neat (given that some aspects just don't go faster relatively even in marathon). :)
Which date is that (since that was the constest given by the OP)?

(It should qualify for this thread, and everyone who cares actually reading that thread will get the difference between marathon and nomal without us explainig in detail, or ask otherwise im sure. As long as we allways add what speed we played that is.)


On multiplayer: Well that is if you find completely ignoring WoI and going all out harassing less cheesy. (or by luck or knowlegde don't play with people utilizing those kind of things on large scale.)

I for one find that far more cheesy in a game not all so much about warmongering and my words / encouragement were only to prove those people boasting its the only way / "its your own fault if you don't do such a thing" + you won't have a chance otherwise, wrong. And if someone says "if anything is in the rules its ok" why argue if he / she isn't competent enough to win then with that all-so-hot strategy? :p

If you play with nice competitiors thats something else of course.


And since you have no "as early-as possible without regarding anything else" goal unlike in this contest its alright to buy a cannon or 1-2 Soldiers early for sure. No record to beat there. :) Turn 50 should still be fast enough to make it hard for even a rush to counter (since they shouldn't know beforehand were you are on the map and what you are up to.)
 
Im aware that its possible earlier in slower gamespeed. 31,3 Turns still souds very very neat (given that some aspects just don't go faster relatively even in marathon). :)
Which date is that (since that was the constest given by the OP)?

It's January 1523 AD
 
I am still at 120 turns normal, u guys are good
 
Top Bottom