GOTM 23 Final Spoiler

[toller pretzl]

1 Future Tech gives 1 health and 1 happiness. And these happinesses are represented by an "OH YEAH".

Aha. So if I understand correctly, you can keep researching Future Tech until the cows come home. And you researched 72 of them..

 

[Jimmy Thunder]

until the cows come home.

That's what Lawrence is hoping!

(Yes, you are correct in thinking that toller)

 

[Frederiksberg]

Well, I can only see three options for you poor suffering souls...:

1) Accomplish eptathlete again but on Challenger level (looks like Balbes is already trying); or

2) Use your genius to figure out how to get highest Cow score a whole lot faster; or

3) Patiently await BtSOTM.

In my opinion a "real" eptathlon would be interesting. By that I mean a succession of GOTMS where only one victory condition per game counts in the eptathlon competition. It could be implemented within the normal GOTM framework by designating an "eptathlon victory condition" to each GOTM. The idea would be to increase the competition for that specific victory condition. I think it would be interesting to see all the best players going for just one single VC.

By the way, LC, aren't your GOTM23 final spoiler long overdue? Any particular reason .

 

[Erkon]

All of them?
I'll list the most representative ones, please ask for any particular data your are interested in.

Pott 2500BC
CoL+CS 595BC
Alpha 430BC
Constr 235BC
Educ 35BC
Astro+Econo 11XXAD
Biolo 1280AD
Lib+Radio 1352AD
Compu 1412AD
Rocket 1520AD
Indust 1571AD
Fussion 1658AD
Ecolo 1709AD

The Education date is rather early, while the Astronomy date is late. This indicates that you have filled up with lots of tech in between. I assume that you focused on infrastructure techs rather than military techs. Was your target preliminary commerce & beakers techs? How do you rate the production techs compared to the commerce & beaker techs? (such as guilds, chemistry and replacable parts for the workshop bonus)

Frederiksberg - don't expect neither LC nor Gnejs to publicly announce their dates! Imagine if their shame if I beat them with my lousy game!!

 

[jesusin]

The Education date is rather early, while the Astronomy date is late. This indicates that you have filled up with lots of tech in between. I assume that you focused on infrastructure techs rather than military techs. Was your target preliminary commerce & beakers techs? How do you rate the production techs compared to the commerce & beaker techs? (such as guilds, chemistry and replacable parts for the workshop bonus)

You are right, that was the worst part of my game. As I said in the spoiler, after killing 2 AI and securing Liberalism, I relaxed too much. My techpath 1AD-1100AD is not anything to brag about. (Well, after all, what can you expect from someone who stops researching at Liberalism in 99% of his games).

All game long I concentrated on commerce and beaker multipliers. Production and military techs were rated zero compared to commerce/beaker techs, that were rated 10. For example, I only research Guilds because it was on the way to banking (mercantilism+banks). The only exception was chickening out and researching Archery when I saw a barb Axe.

 

[da_Vinci]

In my opinion a "real" eptathlon would be interesting. By that I mean a succession of GOTMS where only one victory condition per game counts in the eptathlon competition. It could be implemented within the normal GOTM framework by designating an "eptathlon victory condition" to each GOTM. The idea would be to increase the competition for that specific victory condition. I think it would be interesting to see all the best players going for just one single VC.

There is a drawback to that regarding the global rankings ... if all the best players compete for the eptathlon VC, then there is less competition for the other VC and duffers like me can get inflated speed points going for the other VC (or for that matter, inflated score points when the VC is not dom or conquest).

Hmmm ... or maybe that makes it a good idea (for me)

dV

 

[Frederiksberg]

There is a drawback to that regarding the global rankings ... if all the best players compete for the eptathlon VC, then there is less competition for the other VC and duffers like me can get inflated speed points going for the other VC (or for that matter, inflated score points when the VC is not dom or conquest).

Hmmm ... or maybe that makes it a good idea (for me)

dV

You're probably right. But the idea of only one valid VC appeals to me because it would make it easier to compare the best players. An alternative would be to create some special "editions" of GOTM with only one allowed VC. In my opinion it would be more prestigious to win such a game so it might create some interest among the better players to compete. And for the rest of us to measure our skills against their games...

 

[LowtherCastle]

By the way, LC, aren't your GOTM23 final spoiler long overdue? Any particular reason .

I thought I made it clear in my first spoiler that I screwed it all up and was ready for my aWard. I don't even remember the painful details too much.

Basically, I tried a strategy of sending units to the farthest away Civ and doing pinchers back to the start. Either I did it really badly or it doesn't make sense on a linear map like that. Anyway, I know that my date is a bit worse than Erkon's, but I forget. I think it's something like 12XXs AD.

So I was a WIMP ROYALE.

 

[da_Vinci]

You're probably right. But the idea of only one valid VC appeals to me because it would make it easier to compare the best players. An alternative would be to create some special "editions" of GOTM with only one allowed VC. In my opinion it would be more prestigious to win such a game so it might create some interest among the better players to compete. And for the rest of us to measure our skills against their games...

I agree with your points in favor of the "one eptathlon VC", and the question is whether the upside outweighs the downside.

To be fair to other players, I think the original eptathlon must remain intact, unless we revoke those already given. Maybe your suggestion becomes an "ultimate eptathlon" award. Only problem there is that only those with the original eptathlon are likely to compete for it, as the rest are working on the basic eptathlon. And the basic eptathlon gets progressively easier to achieve as more of the better players attain it and move on to ultimate eptathlon (is that a good or bad thing?)

dV

 

[Gnejs]

I thought I made it clear in my first spoiler that I screwed it all up and was ready for my aWard. I don't even remember the painful details too much.

Basically, I tried a strategy of sending units to the farthest away Civ and doing pinchers back to the start. Either I did it really badly or it doesn't make sense on a linear map like that. Anyway, I know that my date is a bit worse than Erkon's, but I forget. I think it's something like 12XXs AD.

So I was a WIMP ROYALE.

Hehe. You know what, LC? I screwed up even worse than you did.

All was going well in the BC's but somewhere after my successful archer-rush of Rome I started to make a series of terrible mistakes. I had intended to whip a settler in Rome and settle at or even on the horses east of Rome. But for some reason I changed my plans when I spotted horses at Paris. I guess I was wary of the maintenance cost from having too many spread-out cities. This delayed my horse archer by roughly 40 turns...

Here is a brief timeline of my downfall:
1300 BC (turn 90): capture Rome
745 BC (turn 117): waste 5 archers in a failed attack on Beijing
445 BC (turn 137): waste 2 swords in a failed attack on Beijing
415 BC (turn 139): capture Paris
340 BC (turn 144): capture Beijing
100 BC (turn 160): DoW Monty
85 BC (turn 161): my two CR3 swords meet Montys two shock axes in the open...
10 BC (turn 166): waste 4 swords in a failed attack on Washington
170 AD (turn 178): capture Washington
320 AD (turn 189): waste 2 swords and one axe in a failed attack on Shanghai. I also lose access to Iron and horses in Beijing and Berlin due to chinese culture and barb cities appearing on my roads. My solution? Research Sailing and archer-rush a barb coastal city.
380 AD (turn 192): discover Sailing and capture said barb city.
410 AD (turn 194): First English city captured
620 AD (turn 208): Finally capture Shanghai, almost 100 turns after the first DoW on China.
860 AD (turn 224): capture London
1202 AD (turn 257): last continental Aztec city falls. But Monty still has one city on an island, and my nearest costal city is Canterbury, quite far away. I stupidly razed Montys only coastal city. And the first galley that I cunningly whipped in Nottingham as soon as I spotted the island city was disbanded when my units went on strike for one or two turns. Out of the scores of units I had, it just had to be the one unit I couldn't replace that was disbanded.
1256 AD (turn 266): Finally, a galley makes it to Montys last city and I can raze it.
1262 AD (turn 267): conquest victory. Phew!

Research:
AH (3580 BC)
BW (3010 BC)
Archery (2680 BC)
Wheel (2380 BC)
IW (1180 BC)
Agriculture (955 BC)
Horseback riding (580 BC)
Fishing (350 AD)
Sailing (380 AD)
Pottery (395 AD)
and that's all... not quite up to the pace of jesusin or Balbes.


Some other noteworthy mistakes:
Razing the gold and corn at Rome just turns before capturing the city. I didn't even have Agriculture researched so this resulted in huge delays before Rome was up to speed again.
Making way to many attacks at marginal odds in the hope of a lucky break.



Sorry LC, but I believe I will claim the Wimp of the Weak award with this abysmal performance.

 

[Conquistador 63]

Space race, launched in 1819, ages later than Jesusin & Balbes. I guess my worst mistake was using Oracle for Construction instead of CS slingshot. I think I'll try harder next GOTM.

 

[Frederiksberg]

Sorry LC, but I believe I will claim the Wimp of the Weak award with this abysmal performance.

Slow down! How do you know that 1262 > 12XX. Maybe you are shared Wimps? Anyway LC has claimed the title "Wimp Royale" so why don't you let him keep that?

Only problem there is that only those with the original eptathlon are likely to compete for it, as the rest are working on the basic eptathlon. And the basic eptathlon gets progressively easier to achieve as more of the better players attain it and move on to ultimate eptathlon (is that a good or bad thing?)

Where will the good players move if there are no new events to win?

I think we need more "Big Events" like the SGOTM's and a single VC game played like the GOTM's is one out of many options.

 

[LowtherCastle]

Slow down! How do you know that 1262 > 12XX. Maybe you are shared Wimps? Anyway LC has claimed the title "Wimp Royale" so why don't you let him keep that? 1208 AD. Ah...yes...now that's satisfying...no, not losing the aWard to Gnejs...no...satisfying is disappointing good ol' Frederiksberg...

Where will the good players move if there are no new events to win?

I think we need more "Big Events" like the SGOTM's and a single VC game played like the GOTM's is one out of many options.

That's why I think they should have a separate Eptathlete competition for the Challenger versions.

 

[Thrallia]

Space race, launched in 1819, ages later than Jesusin & Balbes. I guess my worst mistake was using Oracle for Construction instead of CS slingshot. I think I'll try harder next GOTM.

oooh...that means I didn't have to try to beat you for the diplo...is it possible that I might unexpectedly win the diplo award? I haven't seen anyone else post diplo victories, and I find it hard to believe that my date would win. I think I'll probably go for diplo in GOTM24 just in case

 

[da_Vinci]

And the basic eptathlon gets progressively easier to achieve as more of the better players attain it and move on to ultimate eptathlon (is that a good or bad thing?)

I have rethought the logic here ... perhaps the original eptathlon stays constant even if the eptathletes move to an "ultimate eptahlon", because new good players are arriving or developing. In fact, without some other venue for the elite players, the eptathlon gets harder over time to achieve for other players, as the number of elite players increases, unless the elite players get bored and leave.

dV

 

[Vynd]

you know, OR allows you to build missionaries without monasteries even if you don't have a state religion.

That did slip my mind this game. I probably could have shaved a few turns off if I didn't need any monasteries in my secondary cities. But the more I think about it the more I wish I'd concnetrated more on Great Artists and less on religion, given the circumstances I was facing. I could have stuck to a smaller empire with lower maintenance and I wouldn't have needed to spend such a long time generating cash instead of culture. Ah well, it's a tribute to the quality of the game that even when it comes to a specific victory condition like Culture there are many different strategies to choose between.

 

[Thrallia]

oooh...that means I didn't have to try to beat you for the diplo...is it possible that I might unexpectedly win the diplo award? I haven't seen anyone else post diplo victories, and I find it hard to believe that my date would win. I think I'll probably go for diplo in GOTM24 just in case

actually...I won't be winning any diplo award this time, even if I did have the fastest time. Apparently I forgot to submit my game

 

[DynamicSpirit]

@Lawrence: The thing I like about Berlin in your picture is the 442 beakers/turn without a single cottage That and the single warrior defending it...

That, and the way the +126 great-people-points/turn looks like it's still leaving ages till the next great person

 

[Lawrence]

That, and the way the +126 great-people-points/turn looks like it's still leaving ages till the next great person

Yes. Way over 10000 points for one. And I did ran out of great scientist names so that each of them can only be named as "Great Scientist" in the end.