Fastest Huge Chieftan Domination

[xeroyne]

I've submitted a few mediocre games to the HoF, and I'm working on two others a bit more seriously- a huge C3C Deity map and a Standard Monarch map.
I thought it would be a fun break to play the Mayans on a huge map on Chieftan to see how quickly I could get 66% of Population and Land. I was suprised not to see this submitted to the HoF already.
I'm thinking that I won't reach it before 1000AD (maybe that's impossible on a huge map?), but likely before 1400.

Maybe someone else here would like to try this out?

 

[bed_head7]

Was doing one as Inca. It should be possible well before 1000AD, I think. I wonder where that game is now.

 

[xeroyne]

On a huge map?
You'd have to settle/conquer some 200 cities in 200 turns.
I haven't figured out the ideal math for it yet, but I'm guessing 1400.
I'll get to about 1000 tonight.

 

[bed_head7]

Okay, two cities by 3950BC, and if we're only looking at good maps, that is two settler factories. That is about 25 settlers produced by 1000BC! 20 settlers by that point doesn't even take an extraordinary map, just a settler factory at the capital and a food bonus or two elsewhere. You don't need military, just settlers. Expand around the AI. If you happen to get an SGL, for either the Pyramids or ToA, depending on when it comes, then I do not think that 1000AD is a problem at all, plus, I think playing to 1000AD is 215 turns.

 

[Methos]

Okay, two cities by 3950BC, ...

How is that possible? I'm not saying your wrong just curious as to how you do it.

 

[bed_head7]

Inca have a scout. If you pop a hut on the second turn, you might get a settler. If the settler is in a decent spot for a city, I might just found where it stands. And that is how you get two cities by 3950BC.

 

[xeroyne]

I must be doing it wrong, then. Maybe Inca is really a better choice for the chance of that second early city.
I have only basic defense in all my cities and at 1000AD only have 24% of the land. (I've eliminated 2 of my 8 opponents, and another AI defeated America)
Needless to say, I suppose, I don't generally win by domination or conquest.
This may be a wasted HoF run unless I milk it 'til 2049.

 

[superslug]

This may be a wasted HoF run unless I milk it 'til 2049.

If it fills a slot, it's not a waste.

 

[bed_head7]

It'll get a slot for you anyone. Perhaps I am overestimating growth, too? Let's see, 135 turns from 1000BC to 1000AD, between 20-25 towns at 1000BC, increasing at about one town/turn or two, as long as you are building only settlers and workers. That should only accelerate. You estimated 200 towns needed, which sounds about right. I don't play huge much. I don't know. 1000AD seems pretty reasonable to me if you get ToA.

By the way, most would consider the Maya a better choice than the Inca. Faster workers is much better than scouts. I just like the Inca.

 

[xeroyne]

See, here may be the problem: after about 20 cities, the rest are only producing with minimum effectiveness (a worker every 5 turns and a settler every 15).

I think I'm going to restart tonight with a better map.

 

[Gyathaar]

Because of this discussion I decided to try it (thou on warlord instead of chieftain since I lack warlord difficulty win), and even with very sloppy play (played it all in one sitting), I won in 280AD.

 

[bed_head7]

That is about what I would have thought. Even a fifteen turn settler from ten towns, five turns workers from five, plus a couple four turn or six turn or eight turn settler factories, will really add up quite quickly. I hadn't done one though, so his 1000AD mark made me a little cautious to suggest BC was possible if done well.

 

[BlackBetsy]

It strikes me that the main lag is getting the settlers to their new city sites more than settler production.

 

[Gyathaar]

Yes, getting the settlers to the front the biggest problem...

I did not have goodie-huts on, and since I played maya, I had low chance of getting SGL and didnt get one for pyramids in 1125BC. This was used to rush pyramids (and thus start golden age), and the almost finished build on pyramids was switched to ToA, which comleted in 730BC.

I had switched to republic in 1350BC, so the golden age was not despotic btw.

After the initial core setup of 6 cities with +5 food was set up to pump settlers and workers, all worker labor was primary fokused on the pyramid city and then roading to the outer borders of my empire.

I did pretty louse work at expanding, and at 1000BC I only had 22 cities and 6 settlers
mainly due to completing pyramids, Colossus, and almost MoM, FP and ToA by then.

After the golden age my core cities started pumping out horsemen (and later knights), and the more corrupt cities started building settlers..

From around 700BC or so, I always had 30+ settlers in transit towards my outer regions, and my military units was killing off every AI I was encountering as I expanded.

As the AIs was surrounded by undefended cities, I lost a few cities, but they were just recaptured or replaced by a passing by settler if razed.

 

[xeroyne]

Interesting. I'm dismissing the idea of a military in my next attempt. That should improve my finishing speed quite a bit.