G-III Nu

Marsden

Keeper of the HoF Annex
Hall of Fame Staff
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
4,024
Location
Thulcandra
Hello and welcome to the newest Gauntlet for HOF III.

  • Mapsize: Any
  • Difficulty: Any
  • Condition: Conquest

The G III Gauntlet will be a bit different this time. The Difficulty and size are up to you but the win condition must be conquest. Additionally, to be qualified for this Gauntlet, your submission must qualify to be on a conquest table. If the game does not make the appropriate conquest table it will be accepted (in accordance with other HoF rules of course) but not qualify for this Gauntlet.
Have your submissions in by April 14th, and good luck and Good Hunting.

Because of the nature of this Gauntlet, we've prepared a small strategy/faq here.

What settings should I use?

Standard doctrine for early conquest is tiny low difficulty, but those charts are all full and very difficult to qualify for. Larger or more difficult charts might be easier to chart, but would cause a later date. The choice is yours.

While ties are always possible, in this Gauntlet they are more likely to occur, how are ties in the fastest finish tables handled?

By score if possible, if not then by submission date. So any new entry that ties a current slot on a table must beat it for score as well or by default it will not replace the current entry.
 

superslug

Still hatin' on Khan
Moderator
Hall of Fame Staff
Joined
Jan 5, 2003
Messages
11,431
Location
The Farm
Moderator Action: The Nu Gauntlet is open.
 
Joined
Jan 26, 2007
Messages
830
Location
Asheville, NC
This one might be wild. I just won a 3300BC conquest on chieftain with the Inca. Of course this falls well short of making the tables since 3650 and a good score is required for both chieftain and warlord tiny maps.:blush:

Is it best to try those small maps until a great time is achieved or try a table like small regent where one has a chance to make the tables? Might be a lot of entries since these quick conquests don't take too long.
 

Tone

Deity
Hall of Fame Staff
Joined
Feb 2, 2003
Messages
4,548
Location
Singapore
I started with Tiny Monarch a short time ago. Did a quick PtW Jag rush against the English and Spanish getting a 3150BC win. Not a #1 slot but it has charted @ #5.

Seems to me that the mid-level tiny tables have spaces open that will be quicker than small maps.
 
Joined
Jan 26, 2007
Messages
830
Location
Asheville, NC
Well, I have a game just submitted that would place #6 on the small monarch chart. A 1625AD conquest victory with the Incans against the Egyptians, Spanish, and Indians. I'm sure this time will be beat repeatedly, but at least the bar is set. The funny thing is I thought I was playing Regent.:lol:

I set research to zero at the start and only built chasqui scouts at the capital. Here is my start position:
IncaStart.JPG
Not great, but sufficient for eventual two-turn chasquis. I popped an early warrior from a hut who explored south, while my scout went northwest. The warrior explored jungle and finally died to a barb warrior, but that revealed that a civ was through the jungle. Next, I a city on a river by some floodplain which would rush a few chasqui's. By 3300BC, I had contacted Egypt and Spain and sent my first two chasqui's to Egypt. Thebes was only defended by a single warrior and was destroyed in 3000BC kicking off my GA.

I then sent my chasquis to the south and two slaves building a road east to speed along rushed chasqui's from Thebes. Spain had two cities, but one was undefended and only two warriors in the capital. I destroyed their second city, captured a slave and killed a warrior on the first turn of war. On the second turn they had a spear, but two chasquis redlined but killed it. In 2670BC two chasquis attacked and killed the warrior destroying the Spanish.
Spanishdestroyed.JPG

I still hadn't contacted India, but I knew they were through the Jungle southwest of Cuzco. In 2670BC I had six chasquis and sent them to find the Indians. The Indians were contacted by ~2300BC by two chasquis. They had two cities, both defended by warriors. I had a chance to kill them then, but both of my chasquis retreated from their attacks on the warriors doing no damage.:cry: The next turn they were defended by spears and their unhurt warriors killed both my chasquis. But, I kept rushing chasquis to the scene defeating their warriors on the way, eventually getting a stack of 12 chasquis on a hill two squares from Delhi when I started to attack their city. I captured Delhi the next turn, but a premature attack on their final city only promoted their spear to elite. After several turns of healing and gathering more chasquis the Indians were finally destroyed in 1650BC for a 1625BC conquest victory. My final army was 15 chasqui scouts.
Indians Destroyed.JPG
Not the best map since my chasquis had slow travel through the jungle. Not the best strategy, either. Hm, PtW jag rush? Ten shield jag warriors do sound pretty good, but you lose the starting scout. This game only took 48 minutes, so there is time for plenty of tries. It would be very hard to make the tables on tiny maps below monarch and small maps in general have more room on the tables. Marsden has created quite a gauntlet here.:goodjob:
 
Joined
Jan 26, 2007
Messages
830
Location
Asheville, NC
Okay, I know I'll have to better than this. But, I just submitted a tiny monarch 2230BC conquest that would barely make the chart at #10. It took two tries, but only an 18 minute game using a PtW Aztec jag rush against the Spanish and Indians. I had barbs turned off on an arid, cold, old world to minimize jungle and mountains.

I don't really need to do a write-up since it was a simple jag rush, but here's the start:
AztecStart.JPG

After the Spanish are destroyed:
Spanishgone.JPG

And, the final destruction of the Indians:
Indians gone.JPG

I had a one jag attack on the Indians in 3200BC that failed and again took some time to get enough jags to the two Indian cities. I didn't re-roll too many maps since I still have a few fine points to learn in these types of games. This one probably won't even make the charts by the next update. I expect my submissions for this to slow soon as it will quickly become harder to make the tables with a better time in an easy game, but this is a little addictive for now.;)
 
Joined
Jan 26, 2007
Messages
830
Location
Asheville, NC
Tone said:
I'm finding that the AI is leaving 2 warriors in their capital so I'm only attacking when I have a minimum of 2 Jags.

Yes, this is usually true, but I was hoping for two wins against warriors in a row before the Indians got bronze since all my other jags were fighting the Spanish.

Tone said:
I've done a 3250BC game BTW.

Wow! Very nice time!:goodjob:

Looks like it will take some work and learning the finer points if I'm to have a submission to top that. And I'm sure there will be more from others.:)
 
Joined
Jan 26, 2007
Messages
830
Location
Asheville, NC
So others know what's been submitted to the tables, I just posted a 2710BC tiny monarch win currently #8 or #9 if Tone's 3250BC win was also tiny monarch. A personal best for fastest conquest that might make the tables. Only 13 minutes for this one.
 
Joined
Jan 26, 2007
Messages
830
Location
Asheville, NC
One more personal best PtW Aztec jag rush on tiny monarch with a 3050BC victory submitted. This would place #5 on the table as currently posted now, but will be lower on the update. Spain and India were very close and I used Tone's suggestion and waited for two jags for each attack. I lost only one jag this time.

Here's the final screen shot one turn from victory:
OneTurntoVictory.JPG

All the jags moved forward two spaces after destroying the Indians in this picture. Cuzco could only manage three-turn jags at the start using the river bg and the forest. It did two a turn in the GA. I turn research off and turn the lux-slider to at least 80% to keep the citizens happy for a little higher score. I join my worker to the capital and build only jags, spreading out at first to locate the ai's. I don't know if this is the ideal strategy for this type of victory or not.
 
Joined
Jan 26, 2007
Messages
830
Location
Asheville, NC
Okay, I got a little carried away in posting my results as they happened. This time I at least waited to have two games. :D

Both wins were 3150BC conquest wins on tiny monarch. Settings for all games were Aztecs vs. India and Spain, no barbs, arid, cold, 80%pangaea, default PtW rules. Both would currently place just behind the current #4 3150BC win in score. The second was for 20,890 points. The first game had the best oppurtunity as can be seen in the following screenshot:

Possible3300BCWin.JPG

The first jag in the 3350BC attack had a flawless victory, but the other three red-lined and withdrew against Delhi's last warrior. The next turn I red-lined the warrior, but only managed to promote it to elite, so victory had to wait until 3150BC. This game started with me moving the settler one square to work two forests for two-turn jags and Delhi was auto-razed when I attacked.

In the last few games I submitted I started attacking with a minimum of three jags, since too many times a two-jag attack lost. Most maps I played had at least a pair of two shield squares to use when I joined the worker. If the ai is close it allows for a more sizable stack of jags to attack first. I tried a few games with sedentary barbs, but this seems to help the ai as well. I'm still not sure if tiny monarch is the best map to try, but it may be for now. I need a break from this for awhile so will try again in a couple of weeks. Best of luck to all who try this. It's both fun and quick to play, at least in doses.:)
 
Joined
Jan 26, 2007
Messages
830
Location
Asheville, NC
This is definitely my last submission using a jag rush, since I don't think it gets any better than this. I played Aztecs vs. India and Spain on a tiny regent map, 80%pangaea, arid, cold, old world using default PtW rules.

I rolled a typical start capable of producing two-turn jags seen here:
AztecStart.JPG

As usual, I joined my worker to the capital, turned the lux-slider to 100%, having my citizens work the cow and furs. After producing my first jag and moving west-northwest to the mountain, I spotted the Spanish as seen here:
SpainSpotted.JPG

I moved one northwest and one north in 3850BC for a 3800BC attack against an undefended Madrid destroying them that turn. I also produced my second jag and moved him one west and south and spotted the Indians as seen here:
IndiaSpotted.JPG

In 3750BC I moved the second jag two south to be in position for a 3700BC attack against an expected warrior. To my surprise, Delhi was also undefended as shown:
Undefended.JPG

This led to a 3650BC coquest victory for 17,139 points and would currently rank #9 on the tiny regent conquest table. Looking in the HoF index it appears the Inca are the civ to try next.:)
 

Tone

Deity
Hall of Fame Staff
Joined
Feb 2, 2003
Messages
4,548
Location
Singapore
It's a completely different ball game when the AIs don't start with any free units. That's why the Incans work on low level tiny maps. I'll give them a go at some point as well but I've had several games where I could have taken the number one slot on Monarch with a bit more luck so I'll carry on playing a couple of half hour sessions with that set up for now.
 

Marsden

Keeper of the HoF Annex
Hall of Fame Staff
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
4,024
Location
Thulcandra
I don't know if this will help but when using Inca set the world 3 byo, the Chasquis use hills and mountains like plains, just avoid forests and jungle.
 
Joined
Jan 26, 2007
Messages
830
Location
Asheville, NC
@Tone
Monarch certainly does feel more like a real conquest and good luck on going for a number one on that table. That would be a nice achievement, imo.

@Marsden
I do agree 3byo world is the way to go for the Incan strategy. Its benefits outweigh the slight drawback of limited visibility more often. The main thing is that the other civs have to be pretty close. Choosing the right direction to go is important, too. I've been using cold and arid worlds as well to minimize jungle, but every map has some.

While the Aztec strategy was fairly straightforward, the Incans seem to have more than one strategy that will work. Do you rely on luck and try to use your initial explorer to pop a warrior from a hut near a civ found early? Or just disband him, join the worker and rush a chasqui scout on the first turn. If you pop a settler near the capital is it worth it to just join the capital as well for a pop-rushed chasqui every other turn? I don't really know the answers yet. I just used MapFinder to generate a few dozen floodplain-wheat or two-hut starts to find out. These games go pretty quick and trying a few dozen starts to see how close you get takes less than half the time of most games.
 
Joined
Jan 26, 2007
Messages
830
Location
Asheville, NC
I don't have any more submissions yet, but I played about 150 games using the Incas on tiny regent maps. I've had four 3500BC victories and many more just short of that.

After playing a few games to learn what to do, it occured to me to take a look at Eman's #1 game found in the HoF Annex. Popping a warrior from a hut was definitely the key. Even though the Inca are clearly the best civ to use for this strategy, other civs can do it as well as many already know. Recently I've had close attempts with both the C3C Aztecs and the C3C Zulus as seen in the following screenshots:

Possible3550BCVictory.JPG

Possible3550BCZulu.JPG

Iwishedfoawarrior.JPG



I'm currently running mapfinder for all three civs to see if I can produce another submission on the tiny regent table. My money would be on the Incas doing it first, but my heart is with the Zulu. For them I use the Greeks and Babylonians as opponents, start building another scout after joining my worker to the capital. For this to work the Zulu either need to pop BW from a hut or contact either ai to trade for it. I then immediately switch my build to an Impi to use as a fast attacker as in the Inca and Aztec strategy and hopefully use my scout(s) to pop a warrior from a hut either upon settling or a hut near one of the others while the Impi hopefully finds the other ai before time runs out. I suppose any expansionist civ also has a small chance to pop two warriors from huts for an early victory. I've also tried a few searches looking for a map where the Japanese start on horses and could pop rush a chariot, but haven't found one yet. It's a long shot, but I'm still trying. Continued best wishes to all trying this gauntlet, as I would like to see anybody get a submission.:)
 

EMan

HOFer: Milk-Cow?
Supporter
Joined
Jan 25, 2002
Messages
1,935
Location
Denver/Phoenix Born:Hampton Court
It is theoretically possible to get a 3850BC Conquest Victory on levels 1-3, using Incas and Huts. It would take a lot of MapFinder(ing) and a lot of patience, repetitiveness and perhaps nodding off to sleep (I did)......But would get you the Gold Medal! ;)

EMan (Big M).
 
Joined
Jan 26, 2007
Messages
830
Location
Asheville, NC
Wow! Thanks for that info, Eman. Out of 250 maps I did have one popped warrior make a 3900BC kill, but couldn't even find the other civ with my first-turn pop-rushed chasqui. I have yet to see a map with both ai's four turns away, and was beginning to wonder if somehow the program prevented it from happening. The best thing is you wouldn't have to guess which direction, since fog-gazing reveals the direction of the second ai in 3950BC, as I'm sure you noticed. To me, it still seems an expansionist civ could pop another hut right next to the second ai in 3950BC, but that might require more patience than mere mortals possess.:)
 
Joined
Jan 26, 2007
Messages
830
Location
Asheville, NC
I've just concluded my last mapfinder run and decided, in the spirit of competition, to retire from this gauntlet with a best date of 3650BC and score of 17139 that currently would place #9 on tiny regent map. I fully expect, and indeed wish, for this to be beaten if/when others try this excellent gauntlet provided by Marsde.:goodjob:

Thanks are also in order for all those pioneered, mastered, discussed and submitted great examples of the Aztec Rush Strategy and to Civilization Fanatics Center for providing such a wonderful place to learn about all things Civ. Imo, if it's civ it must be good.:)

I just found this link to the1st April Update of 2005. A belated debt of thanks are in order to DaveMcW for being the first to submit a date in fast conquest after 3650BC using the Inca.:hatsoff: Without his example and the dicussion of the possiblities of early conquest that followed in this thread and elsewhere before and since is what makes it possible for someone to achieve nice results quickly.:)

Thanks also to Eman for his discussion on a nice method to achieve optimal results I seem to recall reading, but can't find at the moment.:goodjob: And, of course, as always great thanks to Moonsinger and Dianthus as well for the MapFinder utility which allows civvers everywhere to play with on their desired map type of game.:goodjob:

I just finished the games of my one and only Zulu Mapfinder run looking for a start with a hut and on game/map #23 of 59 maps I achieved a 3600BC victory that was 3 points short of making #10 on the next update. I wanted to submit that game anyway, but in my excitement I accidently hit "good game, I'm done" instead. I immediately did a replay, using a more logical move with my scout and achieved a 3700BC victory as shown in the following screenshot:

3700BCVictoryReplay.JPG

Notice my Impi did not participate in the attack. I'm currently working on a step-by-step write-up of this game sharing the many fine points I've learned in playing this and other fast conquest games. I'll post this write-up/strategy here either before or after the current gauntlet ends, depending. I'm quite sure I've missed something since, as usual trying a gauntlet has taught me more about this great game I don't know. Continued best wishes to Tone and all others who are trying or will try this gauntlet.:)
 

Marsden

Keeper of the HoF Annex
Hall of Fame Staff
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
4,024
Location
Thulcandra
Wow, good work. I'd just like to point out at this time only 3 participants have qualified for this gauntlet at this time. Don't hold back because you don't think you can win, go ahead and submit. I'll be trying a bit later in the month. I will let you know how it turns out.
 
Top Bottom