G-Major 100

[kovacsflo]

Actually my 1400 AD game has been excluded. Let me just paste here the thanks-giving e-mail I sent them after getting to know this:

"Right, that's my second submission within some months which is excluded due to the same reason. The crash always happens when there are a lot of units and cities and I can't remember everything I turned with my 100+ units just 12 turns before finish date- I don't think I should rightfully do. You see, it only makes questionable to play in certain type of settings/goals. I spend a lot-lot of hours to my submission and it is excluded just because of that silly reason. If this is the situation, then I don't want to submit games in the future and please delete me from the HoF tables as a potential cheater."

Under these conditions, I really don't want to submit games any more. It wasn't the first time. The crash policy should be against players who try to cheat - and not against the ones who just can't correctly remember what had they turn with their 100 + units.

 

[Sun Tzu Wu]

Actually my 1400 AD game has been excluded. Let me just paste here the thanks-giving e-mail I sent them after getting to know this:

"Right, that's my second submission within some months which is excluded due to the same reason. The crash always happens when there are a lot of units and cities and I can't remember everything I turned with my 100+ units just 12 turns before finish date- I don't think I should rightfully do. You see, it only makes questionable to play in certain type of settings/goals. I spend a lot-lot of hours to my submission and it is excluded just because of that silly reason. If this is the situation, then I don't want to submit games in the future and please delete me from the HoF tables as a potential cheater."

Under these conditions, I really don't want to submit games any more. It wasn't the first time. The crash policy should be against players who try to cheat - and not against the ones who just can't correctly remember what had they turn with their 100 + units.

I'm very sorry to hear that your game was excluded.

Unfortunately, the HoF staff have no choice but apply the crash policy fairly to all players, the vast majority of which are extremely honest people.

I hope that you will continue to play HoF games. I'd suggest saving the game several times every turn, once after every five moves. That way you will only need to remember up to the last five moves to do a crash recovery.

Your Grand Strategy of using Immortals in the Classical Era was brilliant. I hope that you will try another game with Immortals in the Classical Era and tell us about it.

Sun Tzu Wu

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Thanks. I will take a look for sure.

Choosing your era is a bad thing because it eases too much or...? Not sure to understand well the joke aspect...of all the games I barely played advanced starts. But from the only one I played, the AI's look pitiful how to face war on later stages/eras.

The reason it was a "joke" is that later era starts can't really compete with someone who can start in the ancient era and win. Take this gauntlet for example ----> kovacsflo posts a 1400 win date...that's before most later-era starts even have a chance! Even on, say, medieval you'd struggle to simply build and move forces and win with a time remotely competitive to that. You just lose too many turns.

The tradeoff is, of course, that victory is easier.

 

[WastinTime]

Ragnar on Archipelago would be worth trying I think.

That's one option I thought would work too, but on Huge, you can get around in Galleys. It would work on tiny, etc.

My first thought was to go Classical start simply for the visible resources on the start, but since kovacsflo as already put up an amazing date with that strategy, maybe I'll hunt for another.

 

[Kaitzilla]

Actually my 1400 AD game has been excluded. Let me just paste here the thanks-giving e-mail I sent them after getting to know this:

"Right, that's my second submission within some months which is excluded due to the same reason. The crash always happens when there are a lot of units and cities and I can't remember everything I turned with my 100+ units just 12 turns before finish date- I don't think I should rightfully do. You see, it only makes questionable to play in certain type of settings/goals. I spend a lot-lot of hours to my submission and it is excluded just because of that silly reason. If this is the situation, then I don't want to submit games in the future and please delete me from the HoF tables as a potential cheater."

Under these conditions, I really don't want to submit games any more. It wasn't the first time. The crash policy should be against players who try to cheat - and not against the ones who just can't correctly remember what had they turn with their 100 + units.

Sorry to hear your amazing game wasn't accepted. It's a real kick in the nuts when it gets rejected and you know there wasn't any cheating.

I'll give this game another shot and see if I can't beat 1400AD if I find some time.

 

[kovacsflo]

Sorry to hear your amazing game wasn't accepted. It's a real kick in the nuts when it gets rejected and you know there wasn't any cheating.

I'll give this game another shot and see if I can't beat 1400AD if I find some time.

Actually I just submitted a 1140 AD game with no crash, hopefully it will be accepted. I used similar strategy as I did before, but this time in a more efective way. And actuqlly I really had a luck just one turn before the end: Hatsepsut, who was the most remote and weakest leader, has offered to be my vassal state

 

[shulec]

Excellent game! I am happy you got your official entry!

 

[Manco Capac]

Actually I just submitted a 1140 AD...

:suicide: I have lost any faith on this gauntlet for myself.
I could've imagined 1400 AD reachable, but 1140 AD, it just blows up my mind.



BTW, you just entered in my list of the most dangerous rivals...

 

[kovacsflo]

:suicide: I have lost any faith on this gauntlet for myself.
I could've imagined 1400 AD reachable, but 1140 AD, it just blows up my mind.



BTW, you just entered in my list of the most dangerous rivals...

It was accepted and now I hope no one will beat my result and in spite of the fact that I am not submitting games to gauntlets too often I would prove my abilities.

After my 1400 AD I didn't think 1400 AD possible either, but I could more effectively select where and when to send my groups, when can I attack more than one AI, and actually, the fact that Hatsepsut offered me to be my vassal saved me about 6-7 turns.

Now I should get some AP victory as this is far my weakest point... Whenever I try, whatever I do no one votes for me... It's so annoying...

Hey, Tachy, why did you change your avatar? That girl with yellow eyes was so cool, from which cartoon or movie is she from?

 

[Sun Tzu Wu]

Actually I just submitted a 1140 AD game with no crash, hopefully it will be accepted. I used similar strategy as I did before, but this time in a more efective way. And actuqlly I really had a luck just one turn before the end: Hatsepsut, who was the most remote and weakest leader, has offered to be my vassal state

Fantastic date! Congratulations kovacsflo!

Some rambling on my lack of success with "Immortals in the Classical Era":

I tried following your lead using Immortals in the Classical Era, but I never got much traction with it. Usually it was bad luck versus the Raging Barbarians. I've lost several ~97% battles and I do expect to lose a few of those, but not so many.

Maybe Pangaea is not such a good map to use; its land mass is only about 10-20% larger than Terra Map's Old World. However, the Pangaea maps I've been playing are rather irregular and often elongated where some strips of land are barely 5-6 plots wide.

In one game, I encountered just two Barbarian units with much open area around my capital. It almost seems that my power rating was high enough to deter Barbarian attacks, but I think the case was really the Barbarians simply settled enough cities and became quiescent.

The key seems to be spamming cities and spamming Immortals in the beginning, but it can be hard to do while Raging Barbarians are trying to pillage and even take your capital.

In a recent game, Huayna Capac was down to 1 city, before I eliminated him. He lost his Confucian Holy City to the Barbarians, probably shortly after it become a holy city.

Perhaps, I didn't research Mathematics -> Construction quick enough. Maybe Aesthetics -> Literature for Heroic Epic is a mistake, but it seems reasonable to double the military production of one's strongest Hammer city. It also seems that one needs to research Currency to build Wealth and some Markets in addition to getting a second trade route.

I was mainly using Cyrus in these games for his Charismatic (faster promotions and more happiness) and Imperialistic (more Great Generals and more Settlers per Hammer spent) traits, although I can see the appeal of Darius I's Financial (faster Research) and Organized (cheaper Courthouses and Civics) traits.

I also had some success with Gilgamesh and Vultures in the Classical Era start. I used a few Woodsman II or Woodsman III Vultures as Scouts that Barbarian Axeman can rarely defeat, assuming one's smart enough to end their turn on a forest or jungle plot.

Again, congratulations on a game well played!

Sun Tzu Wu

 

[Manco Capac]

It was accepted and now I hope no one will beat my result and in spite of the fact that I am not submitting games to gauntlets too often I would prove my abilities.

Yeaaah, that's the attitude! I like it. I believe you more than ever now. The settings themselves were a very intelligent braining storming. I just also noticed a certain dominations victory on huge from some months back won under similar settings; looks like you really have a long experience on deity huge.

After my 1400 AD I didn't think 1400 AD possible either, but I could more effectively select where and when to send my groups, when can I attack more than one AI, and actually, the fact that Hatsepsut offered me to be my vassal saved me about 6-7 turns.

I really like the fact you keep details away from the game descriptions; I beg you to continue like this otherwise many people will just copycat you. Down to the very little detail. Already, strategically-wise for the best settings is a huge help for us; now we have to figure out the rest.
At least for me, I want to figure it out. And since the game results won't appear before the end of the gauntlet, that is even better.

Now I should get some AP victory as this is far my weakest point... Whenever I try, whatever I do no one votes for me... It's so annoying...

We sure has this in common...

Hey, Tachy, why did you change your avatar? That girl with yellow eyes was so cool, from which cartoon or movie is she from?

I see someone not often receiving PM's or reading them. Anyways, just look around the "Log off" button up the page, a notification bar will direct you to these.

The key seems to be spamming cities and spamming Immortals in the beginning, but it can be hard to do while Raging Barbarians are trying to pillage and even take your capital.

Sure about the settings.
After a little invasion of one axeman and a warrior, no more barbs encounters.
As if the raging barbs option was neutralized.
Anyways, that was the feeling of the fledgling first attempt.
Think more about the climate setting and try to be around the jungle belt!

Perhaps, I didn't research Mathematics -> Construction quick enough. Maybe Aesthetics -> Literature for Heroic Epic is a mistake, but it seems reasonable to double the military production of one's strongest Hammer city. It also seems that one needs to research Currency to build Wealth and some Markets in addition to getting a second trade route.

I go straight to math. Then, when I capture a forest dense capital, I chopped mad 30 immortals.
Although very very risky to see the AI gets Monarchy, I let the Huts one in hope for a math popping or something juicy for later trades. At least, the popped techs are interesting now compared to a ancient start and we are at tech parity with the AI.

Indeed, on a classical start, hut hunting is very attractive given the free archer and the scout! The AI will have two scouts at the start, not much of a difference.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Early thoughts:

Moving the capital for horses inside isn't a loss at all.
Just change civics meanwhile. OR and Slavery.

The archer! You know what I am gonna do with this.

I start with a warrior for the same purpose as the archer.

 

[kovacsflo]

OK, if you wish, I share you some more tips: Darious is OBVIOUSLY better than Cyrus. Tech is a keypont, having maths, construction and feudalism is a crucial point.

At the first some turns, scout your territory with the scout and the archer. Start to build pasture or road to horse. Start to build a barrack. Go back with your archer to capital after a few turns. Try to think over from which direction will be more barbs attack, defend that point. Take care of the horse, food resources can go, but not the horse.

If you have built more than half of the barrack before getting horse, finish it, otherwise swap to your first immortal. Don't build archers or warriors. Immortals ASAP. 1 or 2 of them needs to stay at capital against barbs before AIs build their 3rd cities. Whenever you have one single immortal available, go and attack one of the AI-s to get 1-2 workers and/or destroy stategic resources. Early rush only can be done if there is no spearmen in cities what you want to conquer.

You are getting closer to maths and have some workers now. Build road to the nearest city you want to conquer and keep in mind that you are abou to do something anti-environmentalist.

Time has gone, you discovered maths and AIs built their 3rd cities, some of them is close to you. AIs are vulnerable at this time, attack them wo hesitating. 3 immortals enough if there are 2 archers. Even 2 is enough if the city is just being found (one more hint about settings: check "no city razing". If you don't understand why, stop reading).

After conquering a city and not having enough immortals to get another city, just make peace and choose another AI to attack. There might be some barb cities to conquer as well.

Right, so, by now you should have about 5-6 cities. AI-s are all alive (except maybeone of them). You only have lost some few immortals, but to continue, you need to produce some catapults (tech rush again). With catapults, more heavily defended cities can be conquered. You don't need to totally destroy an AI, that's just waste of time. Get heredity rule from an AI (they will hopefully trade it to you for construction). Get feudalism quickly. This is the most important thing at this moment. If it seem you won't be able to get feudalism before one of the AIs possibly willing to capitulate, get alphabet and produce tech in cities, start a golden age, whatever.

Right, now organize your further attack plan. Attack in the direction where more AIs can be reached (saves a lot of turn). After feudalism I research paper, maybe it is not best way. If you have ivory, research horseback riding to get elephants. Your army is still mainly cats and immortals and need some development. Attach some few axemen and spearmen. Continue to build immortals in distant cities. The vast majority should produce cats and swordsman/elephants.

Attack only one AI at a time, collect as much troops as you can (but if there are some which is so far away, don't waste your time). Attack always the weakest AIs weakest and closest cities. If you are lucky enough, the attacked AI might capitulate w/o a though battle if he loses 1-2 cities in the first 1-2 turn of attack.

OK, now you are getting stronger and stronger. Give some of your techs and resources to your vassals, and they will help you a bit. Sometimes they even conquer cities.

Your are about to have some macemen, but it's not that important as long as AIs doesn'T have longbowmen. You are closing about the end, about 4 AIs left. Now you can think about fighting against more AIs. It's really up to the situation. Apart from that, this part of the game is the less strategical. So many units to control... Just send them to one or more "meeting points".

And... then a chess table will be shown, and submit your game, but not if it is better then mine

 

[Sun Tzu Wu]

OK, if you wish, I share you some more tips: Darious is OBVIOUSLY better than Cyrus. Tech is a keypont, having maths, construction and feudalism is a crucial point.

...

Thank you for your great write up!

Your Classical Era Immortal Strategy using Darius I is obviously the best, since you have proven it with a great date (1140 AD).

How many Civs are you at war with for the purpose of pillaging their land, especially Copper and Iron mines plus Horse pastures and Ivory camps?

Sun Tzu Wu

 

[Sun Tzu Wu]

I go straight to math. Then, when I capture a forest dense capital, I chopped mad 30 immortals.
Although very very risky to see the AI gets Monarchy, I let the Huts one in hope for a math popping or something juicy for later trades. At least, the popped techs are interesting now compared to a ancient start and we are at tech parity with the AI.

Using Tribal Villages for any early Era start for a mainly military game is a mistake on Deity level. There are at least 10 AI leaders in a Huge game. An AI leader can also pop Alphabet and take you to the cleaners, simply wipe you out technologically speaking. For non-military games, Tribal Villages still benefit the AI Leaders more, but the player can leverage that for increased technology trading and stealing, gaining some proper. (That doesn't mean Tribal Villages shouldn't be banned for turning Civ IV into a crap shot. Win craps three times in a row = get three free technologies and you have a good chance to complete a virtually unbeatable game; being lucky three times popping huts is not a good reason for winning a #1 game. The fact the Vanilla Civ IV can't even turn off Tribal Villages is an abomination beyond belief.)

Realistically speaking, Tribal Villages are here to stay, legal to use and I use them myself to gain at least extra Wealth in non-military games. However, in Military oriented games, you really don't want your opponents to become more advanced than you, so I strongly suggest that they not be used in this context. Since Astronomy is the largest technology that can be popped, later Era starts are not affected much by Tribal Villages.

It is far better to steal Workers with the Archer, before returning for capital defense.

Sun Tzu Wu

 

[Manco Capac]

^
Alpha can't be be popped.
All I wish at best if it happens is math. If it doesn't happen, I let the game rolls like it was nothing until something goes really wrong...and it has nothing to do with barbs. That way the capital's forests won't waste 10 each. The next early capital always has math just in time to avoid losses.

I stole workers (by pair almost all the time) but my archer never return to my capital. The mercenary is instead roaming indefinitely around for opportunies. Interestingly, the AI's looks like an immortal one.
Unless starting next to the tundra strips, I never had huge problems with barbs. At most two barbs, then a warrior for my capital to defend.

I am not targeting anymore #1, I can't beat someone who has like 10x more experience than me on deity. Deity is still my achille's heel.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

OK, if you wish, I share you some more tips[...]

I really like the fact you keep details away from the game descriptions; I beg you to continue like this otherwise many people will just copycat you. Down to the very little detail.

a.k.a. I wish you keep for yourself your secrets so I can learn by myself. Why the secret: to avoid copycat.
Still it was a good reading and glad my personal opening resembled to yours, same for tech path.
The only point I forgot is no city razing to keep 1 pop cities from autorazing. I was too concentrated to capture high forested capitals. And yes, with some tweakings, it happens to capture some early with few losses. Then, I chop mad with math finally online.

 

[Sun Tzu Wu]

No popping Alphabet from Tribal Village? What a shame. I guess that would be too overpowering like popping Technologies that found a Religion would likewise be too overpowering. Too bad the game designers didn't realize that popping any technology would be too overpowering. Tribal Villages are just too much raw luck to be in a serious Strategy game.

Unless starting next to the tundra strips, I never had huge problems with barbs. At most two barbs, then a warrior for my capital to defend.

I could use a dozen MPs to control Barbarian traffic as you can see in the attached screen shot below:

Spoiler :

Sun Tzu Wu

 

[Manco Capac]

Hum...looks like you are playing an ancient start with a suboptimal civ. You are handicaping yourself way too much. Did you crowd the AI's to a point we barely have any barbs. BTW, the interesting fact with classical starts is the free turns without barb.

I am serious the barbs doesn't pose any threat at all under good conditioning. My latest attempt was a dangerous one given the proximity to the large tundra/ice belt, but Izzy was even more northern, thus she was the punching bag. I even saw HC losing a city forever to the barbs.
Gandhi was stuck for a long time with 2-3 cities.

I say again: it is not special to see few barbs although raging barb under good settings, it is getting a determinist pattern over three attempts (will choose the best after five stop points to end it).

---------------------------------------------------------------

Oh. Hi, Kovac. Have Just noticed you.. Did you ever read the messages, out of curiosity? ^^

 

[Manco Capac]

Such a good attempt to scrap. I don't even know where are the remaining 10 AI's.

Anyways, by your convention, is it a decent advance or not enough?
Had Feudalism by 1 AD.

Spoiler :

This terra map is really not favorable. I have a guess the remaining civs are next to Gandhi, but they are so far away, it simply becomes impossible to push further the conquest.

 

[Sun Tzu Wu]

Hum...looks like you are playing an ancient start with a suboptimal civ. You are handicaping yourself way too much. Did you crowd the AI's to a point we barely have any barbs. BTW, the interesting fact with classical starts is the free turns without barb.

What is optimal and sub-optimal is mostly a matter of opinion, until we see who has the #1, #2 and #3 games at the end of the gauntlet. It is my opinion that the Chinese may be the best civ to play in this gauntlet; have you tried playing them?

There are arguments for minimum opponents and other arguments for maximum opponents. Which is best depends on whether one's plan is peaceful expansion and economic development earlier and war a bit later or start with an early rush.

Both ancient and classical starts at normal speed do not have Barbarian military units until about turn 12.

I had a classical game where there where only two early Barbarian units (Spearman and Archer), but it wasn't a good start for other reasons.

I am serious the barbs doesn't pose any threat at all under good conditioning. My latest attempt was a dangerous one given the proximity to the large tundra/ice belt, but Izzy was even more northern, thus she was the punching bag. I even saw HC losing a city forever to the barbs.
Gandhi was stuck for a long time with 2-3 cities.

Its fine to say two Immortals is enough for home defense, but how do you handle the Spearmen when all you have are Immortals? I had a about six Spearmen in one game; not all at the same time, but you have to take them out soon or deal with 2-3 or more at the same time.

In my current game, I saw a stack of 9 Barbarian Archers and 2 Warriors walk around my Great Wall. I have one Warrior for defense; lost the other two trying to scout amidst all the Barbarian units. I hope to find Copper nearby.

I say again: it is not special to see few barbs although raging barb under good settings, it is getting a determinist pattern over three attempts (will choose the best after five stop points to end it).

Good luck with that. You can post sentries to prevent Barbarian spanning, but I rather like a few Barbarians for gaining experience and enabling Heroic Epic.

Raging Barbarians are very focused. They beeline improvements to pillage and when a bunch group up they will try to take your capital.

They don't seem quite as bad on Classical starts and one can immediately start building either mounted units or axemen/spearmen by settling on Horse or Copper (though with the starting Worker, it would obvious to improve the Horse or Copper after optionally improving a food resource.

Sun Tzu Wu

 

[Manco Capac]

What is optimal and sub-optimal is mostly a matter of opinion, until we see who has the #1, #2 and #3 games at the end of the gauntlet. It is my opinion that the Chinese may be the best civ to play in this gauntlet; have you tried playing them?

No, I haven't tried them. But looking the situation you are in, I would have great difficulty to spawn an empire from such start. Not only you will barely start to raise your army around 2000 BC and a have a decent one around 1500 BC, but the gigantic army of barbarian units will just feed the AI's with XP's, making them harder to dislodge. Cho-ko-nu are for sure a powerful unit, but by the time you get a hold of them, other kind of units, way earlier will have the upper hand: Praets, WC's, Immortals.
And the most discouraging factor is the ancient start by itself. During those 50 turns, you are virtually doing nothing compared to an deity AI.
While a classical start, you start at least with a worker and decent chances to snatch more to almost equalize yourself to the deities for a moment.

There are arguments for minimum opponents and other arguments for maximum opponents. Which is best depends on whether one's plan is peaceful expansion and economic development earlier and war a bit later or start with an early rush.

I can't comment much on this as I am still learning the power to settler a powerful economic basis versus all early war. I have a natural tendency to early wars and the first to wait and then assault has more finesse.

Both ancient and classical starts at normal speed do not have Barbarian military units until about turn 12.

I had a classical game where there where only two early Barbarian units (Spearman and Archer), but it wasn't a good start for other reasons.


Its fine to say two Immortals is enough for home defense, but how do you handle the Spearmen when all you have are Immortals? I had a about six Spearmen in one game; not all at the same time, but you have to take them out soon or deal with 2-3 or more at the same time.

Usually, early in time, many scouts are swarming around, diminishing the early presence of barbs. I deal spears with archers. By T15 , I usually have 3 workers. By T20, I sometimes have 5 workers (4 stolen). All ready to chop chop chop. Losses are present, but another lightly defended capital will make up the loss.

Settling on horses or copper is an interesting possibility, but I haven't done it once.
I think it is not necessary.
Of course, a barb may appear out of nowhere, but bad luck may occur at any time. I even saw a normal deity games where an archer spawned at T20 already entering into my border because of the coast formation, goading my sole warrior. And I was lucky I had that warrior as most people are used to think normal barbs invade around T40.

Good luck with that. You can post sentries to prevent Barbarian spanning, but I rather like a few Barbarians for gaining experience and enabling Heroic Epic.

Raging Barbarians are very focused. They beeline improvements to pillage and when a bunch group up they will try to take your capital.

They don't seem quite as bad on Classical starts and one can immediately start building either mounted units or axemen/spearmen by settling on Horse or Copper (though with the starting Worker, it would obvious to improve the Horse or Copper after optionally improving a food resource.
Sun Tzu Wu

All in all, I have difficulty to imagine an ancient start as powerful as a classical one.
Even before Kovacsflo's description, I tasted the "easiness" of a classical start and how we may abuse the AI.
Anyways, I see you are quite responsive towards me recently...in the negative.
I know I have to learn a lot and the path is quite long...but I haven't give up yet.