GOTM 168 Spoiler

Wow! I am very impressed Major with your launch in 820. I did not even think a launch before 1000 is possible here.
 
Agreed !

I think today is the deadline for this gotm. If there are no objections very soon, I'd like to explain how we chose this map ... a different kind of spoiler info.
 
Thanks a lot! Pretty much everything went as planned in my game (including discovery of railroad and corporation during the same turn) and we had an offshore trading partner with an insatiable demand for hides we could numerously supply.

Agreed !

I think today is the deadline for this gotm. If there are no objections very soon, I'd like to explain how we chose this map ... a different kind of spoiler info.

Yes, please. Was York's demand for hides part of the plan?
 
@Major: No, I did not actually look at the map, so that I could play without any real advantage.

This is the map used in GOTM12 from 2002. Some of the players were Smash, Duke of M, chofritz and mercurios. I tried to pick one that did not include many players who are still active.
You can compare your results with theirs by looking at the results in the Archives:

http://www.civlovers.com/content/civ2/gotm/civ2gotmstats12.shtml

Also, here is some of the spoiler talk from 2002:

http://forums.civlovers.com/showthread.php?t=16029

If you read carefully, it seems that one player accidentally cheated by replaying his game many times, not knowing the rules. If you discount that game, the fastest finish by conquest was 950bc and the fastest by landing was 1350ad. In hindsight it may not be fair to compare then and now. There were far more players for one thing, and I suspect that many were competing for Gold, perhaps more seriously than we do. It appears to me, from quickly scanning some saves, that those playing for Green just struck out with horsemen, popping huts, and trusting to luck. And this worked well for a couple of players. I hope you enjoyed it and maybe find the comparison interesting.
 
If you read carefully, it seems that one player accidentally cheated by replaying his game many times, not knowing the rules. If you discount that game, the fastest finish by conquest was 950bc and the fastest by landing was 1350ad. In hindsight it may not be fair to compare then and now. There were far more players for one thing, and I suspect that many were competing for Gold, perhaps more seriously than we do.

I calculated my score and I would have won silver, there is quite a gap to Smash's game. I had a look at the saves and his game seems highly ambivalent to me: By 1 AD he has taken out all AI cities except for one that he kept alive until the end and that was not his key civ, it was an English city. It somehow violates one crucial rule I have learned: If you go for space, don't kill your key civ! And "Smash" is a name I came across when flipping through the ancient knowledge that was handed down to us by the internet that never forgets, so I think he should have known better. Furthermore, he has been using airbases within the city radius, that would not be allowed nowadays. He has stored airplanes there to fulfil the rules back then though...

And I have been aiming for gold as well. Green was out of reach, with conquest allowed, no respawns and Peaster and Grigor playing! ;) That means a BC finish for sure! So I followed my developed strategy for gold: Launch the biggest spaceship as early as possible. And then increase the score with wonders and/or population.
 
I would have finished exactly at the middle of the pack Major, and fifth for the green star. I went for EC like Peaster, but I didn't pop the hut on the 1st turn for whatever reason (so delayed horse exploring unit) and didn't think of going for the size 1 trick either. The lack of exploring units early on turned out OKish because I managed to conquer Leipzig as an advanced base to the Mongol homeland (would not have happened otherwise since the Germans would not have gotten to build the city) but I as unsuccessful at boxing the Mongols in as well. Maybe I could have given Peaster a more competitive run for Green despite my lack of enemy maps if I size 1'd.

FINAL PART OF MY LOG. I am not in the running for Green if what Peaster said about finishing in BC years is true.

Interturn: Bab capital moved to Nineve. Geez louise, doesn’t it cost 1000 gold to move your capital like that? Or was it just coincidence?

950 BC: Seville settlers. The Trireme will pick it up and settle it for another base near the English. Spot city of Ur: My Vet horsie loses to a fortified warrior? No city walls… Hut spotted, but can’t pop it yet for no passengers in the Trireme.

Interturn: Barbs land near Cordoue. Another archer moves near Valencia.

900 BC: I am forced to spend most of my remaining treasury to rush a Phalanx near Valence. Still 8 turns from Monarchy. Tribute from Mongols: War! Kill Legion: my own Legion is vet.

Interturn: Random Mongol Horseman near Babylon: the defender from the size 1 city repels the invasion.

875 BC: Tolède settlers, will build Elephants from now on. Kill Mongol Warrior. Lose warrior attacking Barb Bowmen.

Interturn: Salamanque warrior is attacked by Bab warrior: kills it and becomes vet. Babs abandon Pyramids.

850 BC: Hut gives 50g: well welcomed. Mongol: peace.

825 BC: Kill Barb stack. Barbs show up near Valence. Kill Warrior in Ur: vet. They know Warrior Code bt don’t have the units still.

Interturn: Vet ellie barely survives Bab counterattack, but another unit is shipped in Ur. Valence survives the Barb attack.

800g: Kill Barb leader for 150g ransom. That’s huge! Another ellie rushed in Babylon: after I’m done with the Babs maybe I can build a Trireme to ship my forces to the English. Eleven turns away from HG. No one is in the wonder race. Hut spotted inside the vicinity of Salamanque: that’s embarrassing. Barcelone built.

775 BC: Hut gives ellie! Elephant built in Babylon, but avoid attacking until my vet Ellie is healed up to avoid nasty surprises. I have the money to rush a third one.

750 BC: Warrior near Babylone: no veteran status sadly.

Interturn: Barbs disembark near undefended Barcelone /dead/

725 BC: Rush a third ellie in Babylon.

Interturn: Barcelone taken (not razed) by Barbs.

700 BC: Monarchy > Currency. Kill defending Warrior in Ur with ease: Ur conquered for 31g. The third Ellie was probably overkill, but safety first. Oedo year is 625 BC.

675 BC: Civil disorder in Cordoba: whoops. Will have to build Bowmen in Leipzig to calm the residents. T6L0S4. Kill Bab settler near Ur that’s in the way: my Vet ellie drops dangerously low. Mongols: no tribute.

650 BC: Barcelone size 1. I want the leader, but I don’t know if killing the defender will kill the leader as well (isn’t it considered a supported diplomat? Idk) so back off attacking for now.

625 BC: Kill Warrior defending Nineve. Nineve sacked for 22g: Babylonian civ killed by Spain. Rush horseman in Valence to explore the English homeland as my warrior has Barb problems. Hut spotted on the south pole.

600 BC: I’M AN IDIOT’ I FORGOT TO SWITCH TO MONARCHY. If I had a nickel for everytime that happened...

Interturn: Mongols tell me to scram from Bokhara.

575 BC: Hut spotted near Madrid. And Babylon. Don’t ask. Leipzig settler finishes mining a coal square.

550 BC: After double-checking at least four times, revolution is amorced. Ellie from the Babylon hut: that’s two full triremes that will be available! Horsemen kills Barb bowman near Valence. The Seville settler still hasn’t found a spot. Decide I can’t wait for Barcelone to grow: I don’t want to risk an ellie. Sure enough, there was no chief inside: Vet status, Barcelone is destroyed. RIP. Vet Legion fortifies near a chokepoint leading to the Mongol heartland.

525 BC: MADRID HG. All present and future happiness problems are essentially over. Dunno if it was worth it however. Monarchy. T7L0S3. 12 gold per turn. Randomly, an English horseman near Ur. My rep is Questionable. Leipzig produces 7 shields per turn at size 3.

500 BC: Apparently I didn’t have a peace treaty with the English: peace. I didn’t have an option to expel troops, so hopefully they don’t sneak attack.

Interturn: Sure enough, the English sneak attack. Lose a warrior, my vet ellie and the city of Ur is razed. Shoulda refused the peace treaty and attacked straight away... I really thought I’d be able to expel them the normal way. TIL.

475 BC: Hut near Madrid: settlers. Valladoid founded offshore with the Seville settler. Traitor English horseman is killed off.

425 BC: Rush a Phalanx in Valladoid. Pop hut: Currency (what I’m currently researching)

400 BC: Start researching Writing. Still T7L0S3.

350 BC: First Trireme built in Babylon. Run into English Horseman near Valladoid.

Interturn: Lose my Horseman to the English. Barbs disembark near Madrid, an ellie will have to be diverted.

325 BC: Build Saragosse on a hill near the Mongol empire. There is now a road between Leipzig and Saragosse.

Interturn: Mongols warn us to leave Samarkand. I’ll wait to attack until another Vet ellie in Leipzig gets built. I have no clue where the English are anyways.

275 BC: English horseman spotted near Valladoid. Looks like the English are on continent 6, quite a ways away from Babylon (Seville less so)

Interturn: Horseman is defeated by Valladoid Phalanx and is vet.

250 BC: The Leipzig ellie is in position: decide to attack next turn. I have six ellies, two of them Veterans. Pop hut near Valencia: Barbs! Sorry mate, but the nearby ship’s full. Kill Barb bowmen near Madrid: vet.

Interturn: Mongols warn us to leave their territory.

225 BC: My heart is pounding as I click on “Cancel treaty” Only one Bowman was defending Samarkand. Kill defending Legion in Bokhara. Take Bokhara, Samarkand for 54g/Iron Working/Barracks and 47g/The Wheel/Barracks. Meet Mongols: they’re kinda pissed and want war.

Interturn: Mongol legion near Samarkand. No sign still of the English.

200 BC: Cadix built on forest because I want a canal city in the English heartlands just in case. Defenders are rushed in both Bokhara and Samarkand. Karakorum spotted: size 4. Vet ellie kills Legion and takes minimal damage. Vet ellie kills Settler and takes non-minimal damage. There is a river between Samarkand and a square near Karakorum: easy. As long as they don’t build city walls. Kill Barb stack near Madrid: the city is safe.

175 BC: Civil disorder in Salamanque: didn’t notice the city was size 4. Barbs kill Warrior in Cordoue: there is another defender but Elephant rushed nevertheless (only 8 gold) Trireme spots English troops on continent 6 quite a ways away from Cadix: 2 stack killed. Warrior spots the city of Hastings near Cadix: crucially enough, it is reachable by sea. Thank you canal city.

Interturn: Warrior in Cordoue defeats attacking Bowman and vet. I’m seeing Mongol units from the south of Bokhara: maybe another city to the south of their former mainland?

150 BC: London spotted: kill another 2-stack. Kill Phalanx and Warrior defending Karakorum: Karakorum taken for 66 gold. Following a road south of Bokhara, the city of Nishapur is spotted. Canterbury spotted.

Interturn: Trireme shows up near mine near London, but does not attack. Ellie survives a warrior attack from London. With an enemy trireme nearby and 2 low health ellies, I have to bail.

125 BC: I don’t want to kill the settler near Nishapur because he’s building a road and the surrounding terrain is not very convenient (I could use it) Kill Mongol warrior east of Samarkand: another ellie is sent to investigate. Rush a second Trireme in Babylon. I should’ve done this sooner but I was expecting more resistance from the Mongols and wanted to save some cash for RBing Phalanxes.

Interturn: Barb unit gets killed east of Samarkand. Yep, I knew it.

100 BC: Hail English: nope. Should’ve extorted for a cease-fire then sneak attacked later on. Another Trireme built in Babylon, but the city’s done now. Kill defending Phalanx in Nishapur. Start building Triremes in Karakorum and Bokhara. BTW, I still don’t know Trade and probably never will. Holy Jesus I got lucky.

Interturn: Counterattack from Nishapur kills an ellie.

75 BC: Spotted the Mongol city of Kashgar with an ellie, another one on the way. Rush ellie in Cadix. Kill Warrior in Nishapur: the city is razed.

Interturn: Scout ellie is killed by Mongol legion.

50 BC: Writing > Literacy. Invasion force goes for Hastings, but there’s a (…) settler blocking the shoreline.

Interturn: Cadix Trireme gets attacked by English Trireme: barely survives (phew) and vet. Settler leaves frontline. Warrior survives attack by English warrior.

25 BC: Kill Warrior defending Hastings: Hastings sacked for 22g. Lose a horseman attacking another horseman inside a forest. Kill an English warrior near Valladoid. Kill Phalanx in Kashgar: but not the Legion… I’ll have to use a Trireme from Samarkand to ferry the troops quickly enough.

Interturn: Lose Warrior to English and Elephant to Mongols.

1 AD: Attack Londres: kill two Phalanxes. The city is defenseless. Revenge kill English Horseman.

STATUS BY 1 AD:
Cities: 14 Gold: 18 Techs: 16 (currently researching Literacy) Units: 45 Government: Monarchy
Wonders built: Hanging Gardens
Germans: Dead
Babylonians: Dead
Mongols: Likely to be dead next turn
English: War, no embassy. London captured very soon

Interturn: English counterattack from London kills an ellie.

20 AD: Kill Warrior in London. London taken for 51g. Again, I forget to let them beg for cease-fire and break it later… I’m really not used to EC despite my quick pace. Kill Legion in Kashgar and raze the city: Mongols still not dead?!? Rush Horsemen in Babylon.

Interturn: Barb legion kills Phalanx in Valence, but an ellie is ready to counterattack.

40 AD: Find the English city of York 3 squares north of London. Kill the 2 Phalanxes defending, losing an ellie in the process. York conquered for 57g. Hail English: they apparently don’t even have the money to pay tribute and vow to continue war. Use a makeshift ship chain to get ellies in the woods near Canterbury (please no counterattack) Trireme departs from Karakorum. Kill off Barb legion near Valence.

Interturn: English legion kills an ellie near Canterbury, but horseman is killed by defending Ellie.

60 AD: Mongols: peace. Doesn’t seem like giving them techs has any effect on their behaviour. I can’t find the Mongols anywhere. BIG problem. Kill defending Legion in Canterbury at the cost of a horsemen. Again, I need to wait for a settler to build a road. Kill Warrior near Nottingham. Accidentaly move my Trireme the wrong way.

80 AD: Road completed near Canterbury. Will not attack it because I need the ellie to attack Nottingham. Take Canterbury for 90g.

100 AD: Attack on Nottingham delayed because I accidentaly attacked a Settler with my Vet ellie.

120 AD: Mongol warrior spotted! The city of Tabriz is found. Kill Phalanx in Nottingham. Nottingham sacked for 46g. ENGLISH CIV DESTROYED BY SPAIN. Very close to the end. Dunno how good it’s compared to the rest, but holy I got lucky with the Berlin sack. Sell Barracks in Samarkand. Start rushing Warriors in cities with unhappy citizens to maximise my points. Cancel peace treaty with Mongols and kill Warrior. Kill Barb legion near Madrid.

140 AD: Attempt an attack on Tabriz: my horseman is defeated by a lone Phalanx. Sell Leipzig barracks to buy a Temple in Madrid. Kill Barb Legion near Madrid.

160 AD: Madrid Temple. Kill Phalanx in Tabriz: Mongol civ destroyed by Spain. That’s it! T3L7S0. Bonus score (do we include that?) 1152. Otherwise it’s 125.

FINAL STATUS (160 AD)
Cities; 17 Gold: 43 Techs: 16 still Units: 64 Government: Monarchy
WoWs: HG
Everyone wiped out. This land is safe.


Looking back at my game, and especially at the logs that everyone else posted, I kinda regret not going for the size 1 trick and popping the hut on the first turn. My growth from Madrid itself was kinda slow compared to Peaster’s growth in his game (I’d say we were similarily lucky) Growth was coming mainly from conquests and from the AT Seville’s settlers. Granted, the decision to build HG didn’t make things any better, but it did help control unrest a little bit. Nothing else was needed in the end, not even MPE. (and that’s with no one wanting to trade maps... in hindsight getting MPE instead of HG would have done more harm than good) Assuming everything else doesn’t change, the size 1 trick leads to much earlier growth and earlier conquest of the Mongols+English.

The sneak attack on the Germans was initially a good idea, but soon turned into a lucky idea when the horse survived three attacks by Warriors on good health thanks to the vet status. Rarely has a barb outbreak changed the course of an EC so much. I razed Berlin, took Leipzig, and gained a forward base of operations against the Mongols. I rushed the Barracks maybe a little bit too early, but it ended up not mattering.

The Babylonian attack, on the other hand, was soo freakin lucky. Killed the defender with a sneak, like usual, barely survives the counterattack. It’s been a regular story throught this game: vet status when both units have attack/defense power of 1 is so important, and often vet ellies survived when they really shouldn’t have. IIRC I only built a single barracks in Leipzig (captured 2 in Bokhara and Samarkand) and it was enough: but not here. Was able to hold Babylon since they didn’t know HBR, and apparently they didn’t think of building Archers in their cities either when I initially gave them Warrior Code. So I had enough time to rush 3 more ellies (initially only one, but it died attacking a Warrior. Unlucky setback)

The Mongols were rather easy, but the last few cities were outside their homeland which stretched the game out for 3 extra turns. From Leipzig, I sent a settler to build a city on hills, and built a road as I went, which allowed for easy reinforcements. Probably didn’t need to wait for that long, but I was afraid of a sneak attack killing a big stack. Hindsight 20/20, I probably could’ve gone earlier, but don’t really remember if I had the money for it.

The English were finally pretty hard to crack. Being an offshore civ, there were some delays to getting the troops from the mainland and the Babylonian campaign veterans to the fray, and I had trouble finding them as well. I wasn’t really able to make big progress until the Bab troops arrived, as attacking from the West through the woods left me open to counterattacks. Lost a few ellies that way. But the sea troops had much more success as the Englishmen’ right flank was pretty much only grassland. Lucky that they didn’t attack my London-bound Trireme however: you don’t survive it each time.

Overall, I finished about 15 turns later than Peaster, so no green star for me. He got Monarchy earlier than me, which helped: he didn’t get junk techs from conquering the Germans early on. He was able to raise taxes much earlier than me (still don't believe he actually got Poly from an AI) and expanded faster with the size 1 trick, getting Poly as well from the Mongols. I had pretty good hut luck (and a timely barb leader capture) and insane war luck (that vet horsie is the real MVP) but it seems I straight-up didn’t have enough cities to conquer as quickly as he did. GGWP.
 
700 BC: Monarchy > Currency. Kill defending Warrior in Ur with ease: Ur conquered for 31g. The third Ellie was probably overkill, but safety first. Oedo year is 625 BC.
...
600 BC: I’M AN IDIOT’ I FORGOT TO SWITCH TO MONARCHY. If I had a nickel for everytime that happened...
You are allowed to go back for this kind of mishaps. You clearly planned to switch but forgot and ended the turn too quickly. The only caveat is you have to recreate chance outcomes which becomes too cumbersome if you do not notice it right away. When this kind of thing happens to me in early game I usually go back to the auto save, in late game it is usually too much trouble and not worth the real time.
 
Huh, so it counts for execution oversights like these too? I thought that rule was limited to misclicks only, like in GOTM 167. TIL.

Wouldn't have made a difference anyways. IIRC autosave only gives the option to go back 1 turn in the game (so it would have left me at 625 BC, during the Oedo year, but with no revolution and no option to switch lest I get 4-turn anarchy) Dunno if that's modifiable in the game files somewhere.
 
It appears to me, from quickly scanning some saves, that those playing for Green just struck out with horsemen, popping huts, and trusting to luck. And this worked well for a couple of players. I hope you enjoyed it and maybe find the comparison interesting.

Yes, a good idea and most interesting.

With so many players of quite a range back then it probably felt easier for folk to join in, although I am only guessing that since I am a comparative newcomer; it was well past 100 by the time I came in.

So we have amongst others a high scoring and splendid landing game from the Major, and a strong early conquest game from Peaster. I can see from Peaster's log that the EC king didn't feel the game was as strong as it might have been, but it was far too fast for my game to bear comparison. With grigor taking a different target this time it may be another discussion before we feel we have learnt more about EC on such small maps.

My own game I considered fairly unremarkable. The summary may be that I struck out with horsemen (my hut gave the first), trusted to luck, and when it didn't all work out magically the result was... unremarkable. It was a few turns quicker than Jokemaster's - and I can believe the reasons for that are as Jokemaster suggests his delaying the pop of the first hut and getting to Monarchy later (partially down to the sort of accident that most of us have at some time or another.) My 150 BC stands historic comparison, but is ordinary by today's measure. The score will come in at just over 300. It could have been a little higher if I'd waited one more turn for a trophy wonder, but by then I thought (correctly) that the game had only a bit part in the overall play.

I do not mean to suggest however that it was mainly a question of luck. Partricularly I was slapdash over working out where the English were. And I may well have gone astray very early. When I check the logs to see how people began, and see Peaster and Ali founding Madrid in 3950, and grigor and the Major in 3850, I feel I may have made an eccentric choice of location by founding in 3900.
 
I calculated my score and I would have won silver, there is quite a gap to Smash's game. I had a look at the saves and his game seems highly ambivalent to me: By 1 AD he has taken out all AI cities except for one that he kept alive until the end and that was not his key civ, it was an English city. It somehow violates one crucial rule I have learned: If you go for space, don't kill your key civ! And "Smash" is a name I came across when flipping through the ancient knowledge that was handed down to us by the internet that never forgets, so I think he should have known better. Furthermore, he has been using airbases within the city radius, that would not be allowed nowadays. He has stored airplanes there to fulfil the rules back then though...

The best GOTM players at that time were probably Smash and Starlifter and I am grateful to both for their Civ2 lessons. But I prefer Smash's style and perhaps can defend it here. I think he was playing mainly for gold via massive expansion - check out his final save. If so, he did not need research speed, so he did not need a Key Civ. Personally, I would have gone for conquest instead of landing, but the differences are minor, and perhaps his additional research allowed him to build WoWs (for the points) that I could not have built. I think he shifted more towards conquest in his later gotms, which generally leads to shorter games.

Ali and I were aware that were some rule changes, such as the airport thing, but decided to let that go.

And I have been aiming for gold as well. Green was out of reach, with conquest allowed, no respawns and Peaster and Grigor playing! ;) That means a BC finish for sure! So I followed my developed strategy for gold: Launch the biggest spaceship as early as possible. And then increase the score with wonders and/or population.

Unfortunately, IMO the "best" gold strategy involves not speed primarily, but a long period of fairly fast growth, which can get a bit boring [to me, at least]. Starlifter carried this out approx 8-10 times with very good results. Smash got tired of that style [which gets pretty mindless after a while] and had some fun instead. He lasted longer and won more gold [and green] in the long run. So, arguably his style was better than Starlifter's. I feel that I took Smash's style a step further - in the green direction.

Now Ali is King. It would be interesting to hear his thoughts on all this !

In this gotm, my preferred style does not match the small map very well. I finished in 725bc (IIRC) which is OK, but slower than some of the 2002 players who just "went for broke". It seems grigor was not really trying for green this time, and I expect he would have beaten 725bc if he had tried.

To me, one curious feature of this map is that Big Trade seemed to pay off in some games, such as Major's. I did not think this was likely on a small map with few continents. So, I dismissed that idea from the start, and went for green.
 
...If so, he did not need research speed, so he did not need a Key Civ....
OK, but if you do choose to keep one AI city alive to go for score, shouldn't it be a key-civ-city? You would get techs faster and eventually launch earlier and/or go deeper into future techs.
Unfortunately, IMO the "best" gold strategy involves not speed primarily, but a long period of fairly fast growth, which can get a bit boring [to me, at least]. Starlifter carried this out approx 8-10 times with very good results. Smash got tired of that style [which gets pretty mindless after a while] and had some fun instead. He lasted longer and won more gold [and green] in the long run. So, arguably his style was better than Starlifter's. I feel that I took Smash's style a step further - in the green direction.
I know that this is probably not the most perfect gold strategy, but I think it is still a very good compromise between high score and not spending too much RL-time. A lesson learned from one of my first GOTMs (Sherwood forest), when I spent 20-30 minutes each turn for nothing.
 
Unfortunately, IMO the "best" gold strategy involves not speed primarily, but a long period of fairly fast growth, which can get a bit boring [to me, at least].
I agree but I would not call it unfortunate, quite the opposite in fact. It is good and essential that the GOTM score rewards you for finishing earlier, otherwise end games will be a very long process of terrain improvement and future tech research and the best games will always end in 2020. But on the other hand, we are playing for fun and not just competition and to me you EC guys are missing a big part of the fun. I actually enjoy building a decent size empire and researching the whole tech tree.

Starlifter carried this out approx 8-10 times with very good results. Smash got tired of that style [which gets pretty mindless after a while] and had some fun instead. He lasted longer and won more gold [and green] in the long run. So, arguably his style was better than Starlifter's. I feel that I took Smash's style a step further - in the green direction.
I have no doubt that you can beat anyone, most of the time, in a head to head competition for EC.

Now Ali is King. It would be interesting to hear his thoughts on all this !
My crown has more to do with my longevity than being the best of the best. I believe I would have been among the top 10 had the best kept playing but definitely not in the top spot or even the top 3. I have not calculated my score in this game but I know Major has beat me and Smash of course beat him. You and some of the other EC finishers are quite likely to end up ahead of me as well.

I finished in 725bc (IIRC) which is OK, but slower than some of the 2002 players who just "went for broke". It seems grigor was not really trying for green this time, and I expect he would have beaten 725bc if he had tried.
Indeed. Big risks do not pay off most of the time, but when they do they put you ahead by a long shot.

OK, but if you do choose to keep one AI city alive to go for score, shouldn't it be a key-civ-city? You would get techs faster and eventually launch earlier and/or go deeper into future techs.
Agreed. I bet you he changed his mind half way through the game which is not that unusual.
I know that this is probably not the most perfect gold strategy, but I think it is still a very good compromise between high score and not spending too much RL-time. A lesson learned from one of my first GOTMs (Sherwood forest), when I spent 20-30 minutes each turn for nothing.
I once did a calculation and it turns out that you need to improve your Civ2 score by about 2% each turn to increase your GOTM score. Anything less than that and your GOTM score actually goes down. It is a useful guide in the end game if you are wondering when to end.
 
OK, but if you do choose to keep one AI city alive to go for score, shouldn't it be a key-civ-city? You would get techs faster and eventually launch earlier and/or go deeper into future techs.

Interesting point, and I am probably not the best player to answer this, since I rarely play this style. But IMO Smash wanted his game to end when he had approx 255 large cities rather than "as soon as possible". He was doing what Ali referred to, growing faster than 2% per turn, pumping up his GOTM score every turn. [I personally do not enjoy this, but if you do, God bless you]. He may have even been tempted by the blue star.

Your point about future techs may be a good one. I am not sure. I seem to recall that they are usually a pretty small fraction of the total score, but I could be wrong.
 
'39 - I missed the reference, thanks for explaining and I enjoyed the poetry.

And now I have a thought to maybe sometime do a 100 year journey spaceship (well 121.6 in fact, says the table.)
 
Top Bottom