- Joined
- Mar 26, 2007
- Messages
- 7,920
Sounds great! Which Map size? Any Map types? Any Opponents? Any other restrictions?
I can't wait for it to start!
Sun Tzu Wu
Gauntlet Suggestions
- Thread starter Ozbenno
- Start date
Sounds great! Which Map size? Any Map types? Any Opponents? Any other restrictions?
I can't wait for it to start!
Sun Tzu Wu
Mesix
Obergruppenführer
Leave those details (map type, map size, opponents, speed, etc.) to the HOF Staff to decide.
Sorry, we aren't set up with check for number of settlers built. But that does seem like an interesting variant.
How about Conquest with no city razing or vassals?
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2007
- Messages
- 7,920
This may not be as difficult as it first seems.
Currently, the best strategy for Domination on Deity Marathon Tiny-Standard Maps is conquer and keep (nearly) every City. In the Games I've Played doing this, I have razed very few Cities. The trick is to shutdown Research after the Techs needed for the main Military unit are completed, accumulate Wealth after Research shutdown, build a City busting stack(s), and capture the Cities quick enough to avoid STRIKE until Domination occurs. In most of these Games, I've not needed more than about 6 Settlers to hasten Domination near the End; However, the Settlers were needed only to achieve domination a few turns early. There were plenty of captured Cities just coming out of disorder to win Domination without a single Settler in most cases; one just needs to wait a few turns for Domination to occur.
Your idea will probably work as you expect on difficulty levels below Deity where the AI starts with a single Settler as opposed to Deity where it starts with two Settlers and consequently fills all Land much faster.
Sun Tzu Wu
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2007
- Messages
- 7,920
Assuming Deity Marathon:
I agree that Conquest with No City Razing and No Vassals may be more Difficult than Domination, but only on larger Maps (Standard-Huge).
In a few of my Domination Games, I've almost needed to hold back my troops from capturing the last AI City and triggering Conquest rather than Domination, but I believe these were primarily Tiny maps and maybe some Small maps. In a very recent Tiny game where I was going for Conquest/Domination, the final Civ collapsed very quickly and I could win Conquest about 10-20 turns early than Domination, so I went with the earlier Conquest Win.
Although I've never used the No City Razing option, I've been selecting No Vassals option for all of recent Games, because Conquest/Domination can be much more difficult when a weaken AI Civ becomes the Vassal of a strong AI Civ. (No Vassals is also a must have Selection in a Religious game, because break off Colonies can make the Win much slower.)
Sun Tzu Wu
How does a quick, OCC, some hard difficulty, no tech trading, space colony with always peace or war (the option where all civs are permanently at peace with some civs, and always at war with others) sound using BtS. The idea is that you won't be able to keep up with technology with those you are at peace with, and must rely on spies to get most of your techs. When space race starts you have to use your spies to sabotage your opponents production to prevent them from finishing first.
On another note, why not just allow players to choose their difficulty and award first place to those that finish on the most difficult setting (with date being the tie breaker, and score being a further tie breaker)?
On another note, why not just allow players to choose their difficulty and award first place to those that finish on the most difficult setting (with date being the tie breaker, and score being a further tie breaker)?
babaBrian
Rock Chalk!
That sounds like an interesting and challenging gauntlet; however, No Tech Trading must not be checked for it to be a valid HOF game. Bummer.
I don't think your idea is bad, but I imagine it would ruffle some of feathers. A slight variant that would be less concerning to some, would be to post in the gauntlet results something like "And here are the games that were submitted with the same settings but on a lower difficulty level". So people can feel a part of the action even if they aren't to a certain playing level yet. However those games won't be scored or counted in the QM or EQM as a gauntlet game. Since it is extra info only and not really changing the competition, it shouldn't bother anybody. I would expect it to help more novice players have incentive to improve and help some of the experts see others that are improving and help them along. However, it would probably mean more work for the HOF staff, and those benefits might be minimal. I'd be interested to hear their thoughts on the idea.
AutomatedTeller
Frequent poster
A space colony gauntlet with no level selected might be interesting, though.
is settler better, where you can easily take over a bunch of AI's? Or is deity better, where the AI can research right along with you?
is settler better, where you can easily take over a bunch of AI's? Or is deity better, where the AI can research right along with you?
As I understand it the reason many of the options like no-tech trading is not allowed is simply that it shouldn't be turned on when its not specified in the rules, as its easily exploitable (always peace and war are also not allowed anyways). The only option that is off by default which can turned on in most games which can be exploited is Perm Alliances, and most players turn this on if it is allowed. OCC can potentially be exploited as well, by really only on a duel sized map, as otherwise the advantages don't make up for only having 1 city. Always war is allowed as it doesn't give the player any advantages at all.
Just as pretty much every game doesn't allow you to play as the Inca, there is one game where you do play as them. I don't see the problem of requiring an option to be turned on which is normally not allowed to be turned on. My understanding with Gauntlet games is to present a challenge without requiring the use of custom mods.
Just as pretty much every game doesn't allow you to play as the Inca, there is one game where you do play as them. I don't see the problem of requiring an option to be turned on which is normally not allowed to be turned on. My understanding with Gauntlet games is to present a challenge without requiring the use of custom mods.
Unless always peace is turned on along with OCC, higher difficulties will require you to build more defenses or spend more resources ensuring that you aren't attacked then would be gained by tech trading with your rivals (who are harder to trade with at higher difficulties). Go ahead and try it: Play with 0 opponents, no barbs, only space race checked. See how fast you can win.
Interesting idea, I would assume settler would be easiest but don't know the extra tech trading from higher levels might work. Might try this for a minor sometime.
Yea, maybe turn huts off.
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2007
- Messages
- 7,920
The final Score is also weighted by the Win date. The earlier the Win date is the higher the Score multiplier will be and thus the higher the final Score might potentially be.
The largest component of Score is Population and Land is a significant portion. So, what is the quickest way to increase Population and Land? Conquer it, get scores of Happiness and Health Resources, research Biology and Build Farms, Build Food focused Corporations like Sid's Sushi or Cereal Mills. So, essentially the top three will start an early Rush, stopping short of Domination. Research like crazy, since that also adds significantly to Score. Building Wonders is probably not worthwhile, since its only 10% of one's Score; it would be a distraction from being more effective at gaining Population, Land and Technology.
Well, the above is the Strategy for a pure Score Gauntlet where any Victory Condition counts. Requiring a specific Victory Condition would probably amount to a variation on this Basic Strategy by merging in tasks that must be achieved to attain the required Victory Condition. If the required Victory Condition was Conquest or Domination, the variation of the Basic Strategy would be too minor to be significantly interesting. That leaves us with Religious Leader Diplomatic Victory, UN Diplomatic Victory, Cultural Victory, Space Colony Victory and Space Race Victory. Only the two Diplomatic Victories would be significantly challenging, for how does one conquer several Civs without making the rest too mad to vote for your Diplomatic Victory. The others would still be quite interesting; would be nice to see whether a 1,000,000+ Score is possible in Winning a Cultural Victory which normally Scores quite low.
So, I'd agree that such a Gauntlet would be quite interesting.
Unfortunately, Score games always involve milking the Score until one can't gain enough Raw Score to compensate for the loss in the (potential) final Score due to a later Win date. This makes the end-game of Score measured Games quite tedious, if not (quite, somewhat, very, or extremely) boring. Sorry, my lack of enthusiasm for Score Games is showing. But don't let that stop you from enjoying them; even I like to play the occasional one after playing a few dozen (early) Date Games in a row.
Specifying a specific Victory Condition with Score would definitely be a far more interesting Game then just a Score Game where any Victory Condition is acceptable.
Sun Tzu Wu
Sadly, the gauntlet checks can't sort between score and a condition, just one nor the other. We can have a highest score gauntler but it can be any victory condition and if we specify condition, it must be earliest date that wins.
