GOTM #10 *Spoilers* Thread
- Thread starter FACEMAN
- Start date
Ribannah
Fighter Druid
You can't get much better than that. 
But I notice that your hill is not the same as mine, I founded Paris on the one directly north of yours.
I didn't want so many mountains ... of course, I got a fourth one after all and the mountain I ran away from would develop Iron later in the game.
But I notice that your hill is not the same as mine, I founded Paris on the one directly north of yours.
I didn't want so many mountains ... of course, I got a fourth one after all and the mountain I ran away from would develop Iron later in the game.
Serg
Engineer
Thank you for the good words, la fayette. I'll win in any case. I didn't have GA and GL(until recent times) but expect the conquest victory somthing around 500AD. I like Aeson's score formula.
Zachriel
Kaiser
Pardon my luck.
I agree my early Great Leader was a lucky break, though it almost ended my game right there. After the shock wore off, and remembering that it was a Regent level game, I almost quit!
However, luck is relative. What are the chances of a Great Leader on the first Elite combat of a game? Well, 1/16 for a non-militaristic Civ, of course. Having played six GOTM's what are the chances for at least one Great Leader on the first Elite combat of the game in any of the six games? 1/3.
(In any case, I'm sure you'll trump my score due to your much earlier conquest victory.
)Zachriel
http://www.zachriel.com/gotm10/
la fayette
King
The challenge I chose was close to the one chosen by nbarclay (but I guess it worked much better for him than for me ).
I named it 'Gengis Khan' and it was as follows: no early attack, no change of government (stay in despotism), no bargaining with other civs, rush with knights (I didn't specify whether I would allow myself to upgrade those knights to cavalry; finally I did upgrade, to avoid boredom in the endgame).
I did not get anything really interesting from huts and grew quietly until I got Chivalry, took Tenochtitlan in 320AD with my first 4 knights available, and then waited more than 5 centuries and many battles (probably more than 50) won by elite knights until I got a GL.
My big mistake was that I did NOT build a FP until then, and the productive capacity of my civ wasn't high enough to do much better than recover from losses (number of knights fighting oscillating between 15 and 20 until I used Napoléon (hello Zachriel ) to build my FP around 900AD.
After that, it went fine, but it was much too late for a good game.
Domination in 1315AD (the slowest rush I ever played, I suppose
).
).I named it 'Gengis Khan' and it was as follows: no early attack, no change of government (stay in despotism), no bargaining with other civs, rush with knights (I didn't specify whether I would allow myself to upgrade those knights to cavalry; finally I did upgrade, to avoid boredom in the endgame).
I did not get anything really interesting from huts and grew quietly until I got Chivalry, took Tenochtitlan in 320AD with my first 4 knights available, and then waited more than 5 centuries and many battles (probably more than 50) won by elite knights until I got a GL.
My big mistake was that I did NOT build a FP until then, and the productive capacity of my civ wasn't high enough to do much better than recover from losses (number of knights fighting oscillating between 15 and 20 until I used Napoléon (hello Zachriel
) to build my FP around 900AD.After that, it went fine, but it was much too late for a good game.
Domination in 1315AD (the slowest rush I ever played, I suppose
).
Zachriel
Kaiser
Just for the curious. Being careful not to count defeats or retreats, but only victories; and counting 48 elite victories, here are the results:
There is a 1/22 chance of getting no Great Leader.
There is a 1/5 chance of getting at most one Great Leader.
Then again, there is a better than even chance of getting at least 3 Great Leaders.
The expected value is 48/16=3 Great Leaders.
Serg
Engineer
I won my GOTM at 390AD with 6000+ points. I have time to get 2 GL but it could be more because I not used my second GL: no free wonders to build and no matter for army - the war at that edge of map was ended. 
la fayette! Why you wait for the knights or cavalry? I have used horsemans only.
I hope the next GOTM will be harder (but no large map).
la fayette! Why you wait for the knights or cavalry? I have used horsemans only.
I hope the next GOTM will be harder (but no large map).
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2001
- Messages
- 20,062
I had decide to go from the beginning for a cultural victory via 20000 points. Reading the posts, I failed to get fastest cultural. It was due to two critical mistakes.
1) I should have moved Paris one more to get ocean access - allowing me to build the colossus, lighthouse, etc.
2) I got my first army, but attacking without it being full strength. The army died, and I lost building the heroic epic sooner which would let me won quite a few turns earlier.
20000 culture in 1888. 100000 would have hit just 3 or 4 turns later
Look over the reports, I see that I was one of many to get nailed by the barbs.
I also had a very similiar layout on wrapping around the lakes.
My game stayed peacefull until ~1210 AD. Germany declared war. My empire at the start of the war.
The war lasted until 1420 AD. The Aztec got a couple of cities, including them recapturing a flipped city that I lost. The war began with Knights, and saw Cavalry at the end of the war. At this point, Germany was banned to 1 city on an island circled in red.
The game stayed in war mode, as the Iroquios declared war toward the end of the Germany war. The Iroquios were attacking via a RoP with Rome. War was declared on Rome ~1555 AD to let me get at the Iroquios faster. Rome collasped under my cavalry incredible fast. 1600 AD saw the end of Rome.
War weariness was really taking a toll. I decided to make peace with the Iroquios in 1680 after I captured the Gem source to add another luxury. However, at this point they were a non-power, and had just 4 cities left.
War broke out again in 1715 AD. I declared war on the Aztecs. This was one of the shortest wars I ever fought. All of the Aztec cities fell in just a couple of turns.
I got Russia to declare war on me in 1750 AD. I had a MPP setup with England. War with America begin a couple of turns latter. America concentrated on England an took England pretty much out of the game for me. I never had to declare war on England. I realized I had a chance for 100000 pt culture win around this time (I missed by just 2 turns!), so I made the decision to stop tech research, and concentrate on buying culture buildings. Russia was elimated in 1778 AD. Looking at the map, you can see how much England has already shrunk in size. I did NOT want to win by domination, so I began a 100% scorched earth policy. You can see the big no mans land between France and America.
I decided to take the Iroqoius off the continent ~1788 AD. America had some huge cities, but SoD of artillery with Cavalry was taking out all of the American cities despite him having infantry. The wars ending 1812 with the continent free of all
civs but my own. The created the most anti-climatic ending I have had in a long time, and the rest of the turns flew by. My final position looked like this. I never saw tanks this game, as my money was rushing culture buildings with token scientist research. I have never won by 100000 culture, and had to try. The game did end with me having the top 5 cities. Final
score was 3,376 - Joan d'Arc the Magnificent.
1) I should have moved Paris one more to get ocean access - allowing me to build the colossus, lighthouse, etc.
2) I got my first army, but attacking without it being full strength. The army died, and I lost building the heroic epic sooner which would let me won quite a few turns earlier.
20000 culture in 1888. 100000 would have hit just 3 or 4 turns later
Look over the reports, I see that I was one of many to get nailed by the barbs.
I also had a very similiar layout on wrapping around the lakes.
My game stayed peacefull until ~1210 AD. Germany declared war. My empire at the start of the war.
The war lasted until 1420 AD. The Aztec got a couple of cities, including them recapturing a flipped city that I lost. The war began with Knights, and saw Cavalry at the end of the war. At this point, Germany was banned to 1 city on an island circled in red.
The game stayed in war mode, as the Iroquios declared war toward the end of the Germany war. The Iroquios were attacking via a RoP with Rome. War was declared on Rome ~1555 AD to let me get at the Iroquios faster. Rome collasped under my cavalry incredible fast. 1600 AD saw the end of Rome.
War weariness was really taking a toll. I decided to make peace with the Iroquios in 1680 after I captured the Gem source to add another luxury. However, at this point they were a non-power, and had just 4 cities left.
War broke out again in 1715 AD. I declared war on the Aztecs. This was one of the shortest wars I ever fought. All of the Aztec cities fell in just a couple of turns.
I got Russia to declare war on me in 1750 AD. I had a MPP setup with England. War with America begin a couple of turns latter. America concentrated on England an took England pretty much out of the game for me. I never had to declare war on England. I realized I had a chance for 100000 pt culture win around this time (I missed by just 2 turns!), so I made the decision to stop tech research, and concentrate on buying culture buildings. Russia was elimated in 1778 AD. Looking at the map, you can see how much England has already shrunk in size. I did NOT want to win by domination, so I began a 100% scorched earth policy. You can see the big no mans land between France and America.
I decided to take the Iroqoius off the continent ~1788 AD. America had some huge cities, but SoD of artillery with Cavalry was taking out all of the American cities despite him having infantry. The wars ending 1812 with the continent free of all
civs but my own. The created the most anti-climatic ending I have had in a long time, and the rest of the turns flew by. My final position looked like this. I never saw tanks this game, as my money was rushing culture buildings with token scientist research. I have never won by 100000 culture, and had to try. The game did end with me having the top 5 cities. Final
score was 3,376 - Joan d'Arc the Magnificent.
Zur
Freaky lozur with spikes
Pls. let us know how you completed the game so quickly. I have been building nothing but settlers and military but have only conquered 1/4 of the world at the same date. If I could complete the game consistently by 400AD, I would be able to submit GOTM on time finally!
thefrenchzulu
Warlord
He probably win by conquest. You can do it on a Pangea map at this level.
As Serg said, he used horsemen. I recon lots of them. I folllowed the same strategy, but could only break their backs by 340AD.
At this stage I did a quick score calculation and found that 6000 score is good, but that you could get more through milking. So damn sad, but I milked a few thousand more points winning in 2050AD...
I also built settlers and spearmen to create more cities while conquering. Early territory helps for score.
To serg:
What's wrong with a horsemen army? I had one!
I had about 8-9 leader during the game.
I didn't use my last one till building a spaceship in 2050AD.
I nearly regretted that horsemen army, cause I built the heroic epic and nearly won by culture. In 2005 I had 95000 and had to sell all my culture producing improvements!
Interesting thing is that I sat on the domination line for most of the game, around 20 tiles off. I only had culture producing improvements in 15 of my cities. That mean no libiraries! I still managed 11 Future techs!
As Serg said, he used horsemen. I recon lots of them. I folllowed the same strategy, but could only break their backs by 340AD.
At this stage I did a quick score calculation and found that 6000 score is good, but that you could get more through milking. So damn sad, but I milked a few thousand more points winning in 2050AD...
I also built settlers and spearmen to create more cities while conquering. Early territory helps for score.
To serg:
What's wrong with a horsemen army? I had one!
I had about 8-9 leader during the game.
I didn't use my last one till building a spaceship in 2050AD.
I nearly regretted that horsemen army, cause I built the heroic epic and nearly won by culture. In 2005 I had 95000 and had to sell all my culture producing improvements!
Interesting thing is that I sat on the domination line for most of the game, around 20 tiles off. I only had culture producing improvements in 15 of my cities. That mean no libiraries! I still managed 11 Future techs!
Serg
Engineer
Hi Zur!
As many other players I had settler from western hut and founded the second city nearly. Got Pottery from second hut and Ceremonial Burial from third. I sent 5 warriors (3 from Paris and 2 from Orleans) in different directions for exploring and huts then start building settler in Orleans and granary then settler in Paris. Founded Lions and start settler in 2550BC on west from Orleans and start granary in Orleans and so on. Only border's cities have the warriors internal cities immediately were connected by the roads with luxuries to prevent disorder. And build settlers, settlers, settlers...
In 1500BC I met all the civs and knew 3/4 of the main continent.
Some huts gave me additional warriors hence my exploring was very fast. And NO war.
In 1000BC I had 14 cities. 4 center cities have granaries for fast growth and start building barracks. External cities continue building settlers. After barracks I started building the horsemans. First couple attacked Aztecs and wipe it out. Aztecs respawn to the jungle on south-east edge of continent between Iroquois, Russia and England. I reached them and killed.
One half of my cities build horsemans, other half - settlers. Only one temple in Orleans.
The next target was Russia. I got a ROP with Russia and took its main cities in one turn. I kept one Russian's city Yakutsk becouse this city was placed at respawning area of the map to prevent other civs from respawn.
In the end of ancient times I stop my science and take moneys only.
Next step was attacking America and Iroquois simultaneously. At that moment I had ~40 horsemans and could to permit oneself two-way war. Further Rome and England. Only at that moment I got my first GL and rush FP under internal sea where there are many own cities. But it didn't signify already. When I have war with Rome Germany declared war on me and fasting own end.
As many other players I had settler from western hut and founded the second city nearly.
Got Pottery from second hut and Ceremonial Burial from third. I sent 5 warriors (3 from Paris and 2 from Orleans) in different directions for exploring and huts then start building settler in Orleans and granary then settler in Paris. Founded Lions and start settler in 2550BC on west from Orleans and start granary in Orleans and so on. Only border's cities have the warriors internal cities immediately were connected by the roads with luxuries to prevent disorder. And build settlers, settlers, settlers...In 1500BC I met all the civs and knew 3/4 of the main continent.
Some huts gave me additional warriors hence my exploring was very fast. And NO war.
In 1000BC I had 14 cities. 4 center cities have granaries for fast growth and start building barracks. External cities continue building settlers. After barracks I started building the horsemans. First couple attacked Aztecs and wipe it out. Aztecs respawn to the jungle on south-east edge of continent between Iroquois, Russia and England. I reached them and killed.
One half of my cities build horsemans, other half - settlers. Only one temple in Orleans.
The next target was Russia. I got a ROP with Russia and took its main cities in one turn. I kept one Russian's city Yakutsk becouse this city was placed at respawning area of the map to prevent other civs from respawn.
In the end of ancient times I stop my science and take moneys only.
Next step was attacking America and Iroquois simultaneously. At that moment I had ~40 horsemans and could to permit oneself two-way war. Further Rome and England. Only at that moment I got my first GL and rush FP under internal sea where there are many own cities. But it didn't signify already. When I have war with Rome Germany declared war on me and fasting own end.
Serg
Engineer
Hi thefrenchzulu!
I didn't build the horseman's army because I got my second GL too soon. My army hadn't enough time to reach Germany from England.
If I might have the early GL I think my game was ended under 300AD.
I didn't build the horseman's army because I got my second GL too soon. My army hadn't enough time to reach Germany from England.
If I might have the early GL I think my game was ended under 300AD.
thefrenchzulu
Warlord
SERG
Hell you guys were lucky with those goody huts! I got ceremonial burial from the first and then babarians from the rest! I didn't realy care that much, cause I used them for early horseman training. I used my first GL for the pyramids for quick expansion.
I then built spearman, settlers from two cities, veteran horsmen from the rest! I had about 40 as well. I took the aztechs and germans with them.
I caputured the german great library and then turned on the romans. I upgrade non-elite horses to knight and took the Iroqious and Russians in a few turns.
I then realised that I was on domination limit. I upgraded non-elite knights and destroyed america and chase england from the continent.
I abondoned all american cities and rebuilt them in the most favourable locations! Had 1 city at size 42 most of the game. I played between 10-20 tiles from dominatio after that. I have never abondoned cities before, but in this game with limitied terrtory I had to. No cities in tundra, mountains or jungle. Not until I cleared it.
I did a score calculation and found I could get 7000 points with an early domination win! Though I recon that is a good score and meant average to good play, I got more from milking. I'm praying that they will change the scoring in Civ3, cause that milking took more turns than killing or breaking the AI! I have never milked before, but it just takes too much time. Had some interesting research though. If I should ever milk again, I would have done it completely different with planned city placements!
If you milk, you don't want any cities with more than 20 citisens! I didn't lnow that and it costed me about 1500 point I guess. Happy citisens gives double the score!
In my next gotm I also want an early setter...
Hell you guys were lucky with those goody huts! I got ceremonial burial from the first and then babarians from the rest! I didn't realy care that much, cause I used them for early horseman training. I used my first GL for the pyramids for quick expansion.
I then built spearman, settlers from two cities, veteran horsmen from the rest! I had about 40 as well. I took the aztechs and germans with them.
I caputured the german great library and then turned on the romans. I upgrade non-elite horses to knight and took the Iroqious and Russians in a few turns.
I then realised that I was on domination limit. I upgraded non-elite knights and destroyed america and chase england from the continent.
I abondoned all american cities and rebuilt them in the most favourable locations! Had 1 city at size 42 most of the game. I played between 10-20 tiles from dominatio after that. I have never abondoned cities before, but in this game with limitied terrtory I had to. No cities in tundra, mountains or jungle. Not until I cleared it.
I did a score calculation and found I could get 7000 points with an early domination win! Though I recon that is a good score and meant average to good play, I got more from milking. I'm praying that they will change the scoring in Civ3, cause that milking took more turns than killing or breaking the AI! I have never milked before, but it just takes too much time. Had some interesting research though. If I should ever milk again, I would have done it completely different with planned city placements!
If you milk, you don't want any cities with more than 20 citisens! I didn't lnow that and it costed me about 1500 point I guess. Happy citisens gives double the score!
In my next gotm I also want an early setter...
Serg
Engineer
thefrenchzulu!
Yes, the early settler is very useful. You've conquested the world by other way then I did but took the excellent result.
I never milk my GOTM because havn't enough time for that. Achieving the early win also gives much fun.
Damn time! I played all GOTMs and was leader (compare with AI) in all of them but ended only 4 because I hadn't time to play. So much work.
Yes, the early settler is very useful. You've conquested the world by other way then I did but took the excellent result.
I never milk my GOTM because havn't enough time for that. Achieving the early win also gives much fun.
Damn time! I played all GOTMs and was leader (compare with AI) in all of them but ended only 4 because I hadn't time to play. So much work.
la fayette
King
Serg
Waiting for knights was a challenge I gave to myself. I don't think it is a winning strategy.
Anyway, you conquered REALLY early!
Did you change government or stayed in despotism?
Zachriel
Very interesting chart, indeed (with some odd remembrances from Laplace-Gauss and the like, some 40 years ago )
Waiting for knights was a challenge I gave to myself. I don't think it is a winning strategy.
Anyway, you conquered REALLY early!
Did you change government or stayed in despotism?
Zachriel
Very interesting chart, indeed (with some odd remembrances from Laplace-Gauss and the like, some 40 years ago
)Serg
Engineer
la fayette!
I discovered Monarchy in 690BC and immediately change the government (5 turns). It makes my cities more productive and force its growth. Well, the units supply stands harder but decision of this problem is very simple: more cities, own and alien.
I discovered Monarchy in 690BC and immediately change the government (5 turns). It makes my cities more productive and force its growth. Well, the units supply stands harder but decision of this problem is very simple: more cities, own and alien.
Arrrr, finally had time to submit a game. Looks like other folks are going to blow past me on score. I went for Domination from the start, and thought it would be easier if I allied with the Aztecs vs. everyone else. Looking back, I should've invested more in science to reach Military Tradition sooner, once I finally did get that the game was completely in the bag. I liked the map, it got a little boring at the end, but I was pleasantly surprised that a Regent game could be so fun. Nice pick, Matrix!
btw- I got a settler from the first hut. Built Orleans, dedicated it to the Pyramids. Helped a lot.
btw- I got a settler from the first hut. Built Orleans, dedicated it to the Pyramids. Helped a lot.
pilferman
Steve McQueen as Bullitt
Well, for my first GOTM since #1, I didn't do too bad. I won by domination sometime in the 1800's (I forgot exactly). While I despise milking games, had I known about Mapstat at the start of this game I would have scored much higher. Oh well.
My strategy for this game was the same as it is for my normal games; fast (peacefull) expansion, improve cities, wait for someone to attack, wreak havoc on aggressor, use left over military for world conquest. Perhaps I should change my strategy a bit for the next GOTM to see just how high I can score.
LKendter--Your map looks virtually identical to mine; even with the Germans being the first victim, and even the dates. You won slightly earlier and with a very slight lead in points. Congrats, I guess.
My strategy for this game was the same as it is for my normal games; fast (peacefull) expansion, improve cities, wait for someone to attack, wreak havoc on aggressor, use left over military for world conquest. Perhaps I should change my strategy a bit for the next GOTM to see just how high I can score.
LKendter--Your map looks virtually identical to mine; even with the Germans being the first victim, and even the dates. You won slightly earlier and with a very slight lead in points. Congrats, I guess.
I am very late posting in this, but that is what drove me out of my first attempted GOTM. I have only played a few games of Civ3 (they take too long <grin>) and I got wiped up in my first attempt. 15 hoursemen showed up in a northern city and wiped me out.
I restarted (not to submit, but to try) and I managed to hold my own, but I am not aggressive enough and am the smallest of 5 remaining, with a reputation for giving in. I did beat back the Russains, but whenever the Germans decide to beat on me I will probably be toast so I doubt I will continue.
I also got barbarians from both goody huts, and all the civs were at war with me. Not very fun, especially when I have really limited time to do this.
We need a GOTM series for amatuers.
The replay went better, and I am not in a bad situation in technology, I just don't think it is worth the time to play out and see if I can manage a win.
GOTM11 seems a bit too hard for me to tackle, so I will live with possibly trying other games.
Brad
Well, I got sucked back in a finished the game. Since it didn't matter, I restarted at two points: Once when I got a war with Germany I could avoid before I was really ready, and then when I accidently started a war when I "took" the wrong worker. (With no warning.)
I got a spaceship victory in 1999. Germany had successfully beat up all but the Americans, and was attacking them then. He probably was almost in a domination victory. He also was a bit ahead in culture. I never could place a spy with him.
Brad
I got a spaceship victory in 1999. Germany had successfully beat up all but the Americans, and was attacking them then. He probably was almost in a domination victory. He also was a bit ahead in culture. I never could place a spy with him.
Brad
