GOTM game time question

[Conquistador 63]

there are 27 leaders who declare on pleased and cathy can declare on friendly anyways. However no matter the leader the better the relations you have the lower chance there is that they will declare..

Of course it is the attitude the AI has towards to its target when it decides to DOW that is relevant. That said, I checked the Ori's AI Attitude xls and came to the conclusion that none of the 52 leaders would (decide to) declare war at friendly, not even Cathy. And 25 out of the 52 can (decide to) declare while pleased. Am I misinterpreting something?

 

[da_Vinci]

I don’t know if this is helping, dV. Is that what you wanted? There is no magic involved, really, you just use your fingers to count and that’s it. I am sure that, being so computer-knowledgeable, you will be able to automate the calculations far better than me.

It helps, sort of. I think it is harder than you suggest. For example for diplo ...

Diplo: Spreadsheet. Current beaker output. Estimated beaker output increase over time. Number of beakers remaining to MM. Substract GP bulbs. Divide, you get the turns. Add UN construction time, add the number of turns between SG choosing and victory voting.

You have given the equation: [SUM over j turns til MM] {CBO(j -1) + deltaCBO(j)} = cumulative beakers made until MM from index time.

Beakers to make = sum of all techs remaining to MM, minus beakers from bulbs.

What value for j, given the assumptions about CBO and deltaCBO, and about beakers from bulbs, yields beakers to make?

How is that simple?

Then, time to UN ... Hammer cost of UN, minus hammers from GE if avail, (times number of GE avail), minus hammers whipped or bought or chopped, is hammers needed to build. (Need to know how many hammers city will make, and what total gold production is, to know how many you will buy, and when).

Hammers needed to build / HPT = turns to UN after MM

And not only are the equations complex, but then you have to estimate the terms in the equations.

So I assume you make some simplifying assumptions, and perhaps do a series of iterations? Like you assume an average BPT over the game, rather than try to calculate the series? And if you have tracked these numbers over time, you may have a pretty good sense of what to expect ...

What kind of precision do you get for the "peaceful" victory types?

dV

 

[jesusin]

It helps, sort of. I think it is harder than you suggest. For example for diplo ...



You have given the equation: [SUM over j turns til MM] {CBO(j -1) + deltaCBO(j)} = cumulative beakers made until MM from index time.

Beakers to make = sum of all techs remaining to MM, minus beakers from bulbs.

What value for j, given the assumptions about CBO and deltaCBO, and about beakers from bulbs, yields beakers to make?

How is that simple?

Then, time to UN ... Hammer cost of UN, minus hammers from GE if avail, (times number of GE avail), minus hammers whipped or bought or chopped, is hammers needed to build. (Need to know how many hammers city will make, and what total gold production is, to know how many you will buy, and when).

Hammers needed to build / HPT = turns to UN after MM

And not only are the equations complex, but then you have to estimate the terms in the equations.

So I assume you make some simplifying assumptions, and perhaps do a series of iterations? Like you assume an average BPT over the game, rather than try to calculate the series? And if you have tracked these numbers over time, you may have a pretty good sense of what to expect ...

What kind of precision do you get for the "peaceful" victory types?

dV

Mmmmm, maybe I gave too much detail and made things confusing (aka: no need to divide, ever). The idea is simple: don't use any equation at all. Just use your fingers to add beaker by beaker. When you do it this way, it is not so necessary to make simplifying assumptions.


I can estimate a cultural victory to a +-3 turns margin, quick speed, at 1AD. That's my especiality. Then I always surprise myself by getting a different sequence of GPs that saves another couple of turns that weren't on my calculations... so finally the mistake is a bit bigger.

Much less accuracy in other VCs.

 

[da_Vinci]

The idea is simple: don't use any equation at all. Just use your fingers to add beaker by beaker. When you do it this way, it is not so necessary to make simplifying assumptions.

Hmm ... you could save half the time if you used your toes too ...

No wonder your games take so long ...

dV

 

[jesusin]

No wonder your games take so long ...

Well, yes. You can even think that it is a boring thing to do. But my experience is that I have learnt and become an Immortal player just because of this.

When you do your first calculation you miss by 100 turns. There are so many mistakes you made on it! Each mistake is due to a misconception on the game mechanics or something that you didn't know or something you knew but you "simplifyed" because you though it wouldn't have such a big impact on your victory date. Also, you realise there are things you always do that help nothing at all to your goal. So I think it is an exercise every player should do to improve (at least once in their lives, if not every 5 turns in every single game ).

 

[DynamicSpirit]

"Orgy" Random Event, anyone?

I'm shocked that you could lower the tone so. You realize there's probably grown-ups reading this forum...

 

[da_Vinci]

Well, yes. You can even think that it is a boring thing to do. But my experience is that I have learnt and become an Immortal player just because of this.

No, I agree it is probably very educational. I meant it takes you long if you count on fingers, rather than using a calculator, or a spreadsheed (but you do really use a spreadsheet, right?).

When you do your first calculation you miss by 100 turns.

I can to THAT with a dartboard ... "my diplomatic victory will be in 1850 AD" and I am within 100 turns without calculating.

Seriously, I do agree with what you have said and can see its value ...

dV

 

[man-erg]

Thanks for the replies.....I guess most of the ideas I am aware of, but not disciplined enough to check every turn, or even every ten turns. You've given me some good ideas on what to pay attention to in next GOTM.

Being declared war on by surprise has ruined a few good starts for me. I didn't know about WHEOOHRN, that's something I'll check in future, for sure!

Regarding the 'calculating ahead', I never do this. Mainly because I have tried it but got it wrong through not knowing game mechanics, so I don't bother any more. It's interesting to hear that others have also found this, but have persevered and used it as a way of learning the detail of the game rules.

Playing military does slow things down for me. I do take care to manage every unit when at war. I *think* I'm OK at this as I can usually fight off the AI with half of its units. However, my economic failings especially at Prince and higher, mean the AI can easily rustle up twice as many units to attack me

This goes right back to Civ1, but one of the trickiest aspects for me is wanting to race ahead and see 'whats next'. I can start slowly and carefully, but after a couple of hours, start to hit 'end turn' far too quickly. Sometimes I even think "I should stop, switch off and carry on tomorrow"...."just one more turn" And before you know it, I've raced through another 50 turns, it's 2.00 AM, and I've gone from an OK position to a terrible position.

 

[man-erg]

In fact, the real time I spend is much longer. When pondering if I should get sailing to settle other landmass or Wri+Alpha to tech trade or BW to conquer my neighbour I can think for more than 72 hours non stop.

Yes, I do ponder exactly those issues - for about 7.2 minutes not 72 hours

In such a circumstance my wife thinks I am watching the film, my boss thinks I am working but in fact I am considering pros an cons all the time.

(I'm posting this from work, so also guilty)

 

[whb]

Well, when I was playing (I'm a Steam+Vista exile now, not happy to completely unsecure my computer to make the HOF mod work), I could never bring myself to do all that constant micromanagement. Actually, I even disliked late wars just because of the number of pieces you have to push! Games were usually 2 or 3 sessions max, about 8 hours playing time (but I often did leave the computer on unpaused while I was elsewhere, making it measure longer). Of course that could explain why I always ranked in the 25-40th range whenever I played

 

[Lanstro]

I understand that some people find it fun to maximise the outcome of every game by taking their time. I find it much more fun to fit in 2 or more games in the same time. So only the most significant decisions take me more than 10 seconds - this hardly ever gets me medals in the xOTMs, but I still do alright.

 

[BigChiefLizzy]

Thanks for the replies.....I guess most of the ideas I am aware of, but not disciplined enough to check every turn, or even every ten turns. You've given me some good ideas on what to pay attention to in next GOTM.

Being declared war on by surprise has ruined a few good starts for me. I didn't know about WHEOOHRN, that's something I'll check in future, for sure!

Sounds like you play very much like I do - in fact I nearly made a similar thread a month or two back, after I was checking the GOTM scores and noticed the hours some people put into one game.. I haven't got the patience

But knowing about WHEOOHRN should help, it has helped me a lot in the past.

Regarding the 'calculating ahead', I never do this. Mainly because I have tried it but got it wrong through not knowing game mechanics, so I don't bother any more. It's interesting to hear that others have also found this, but have persevered and used it as a way of learning the detail of the game rules.

Playing military does slow things down for me. I do take care to manage every unit when at war. I *think* I'm OK at this as I can usually fight off the AI with half of its units. However, my economic failings especially at Prince and higher, mean the AI can easily rustle up twice as many units to attack me

I am playing at monarch level at the moment, which I can win most of the time (though I do pick 'easy' civs to win with, for me the Romans, English, Dutch). Can't do the next level up, always end up not dead, but struggling hard just to keep alive, and mid point on score.

This goes right back to Civ1, but one of the trickiest aspects for me is wanting to race ahead and see 'whats next'. I can start slowly and carefully, but after a couple of hours, start to hit 'end turn' far too quickly. Sometimes I even think "I should stop, switch off and carry on tomorrow"...."just one more turn" And before you know it, I've raced through another 50 turns, it's 2.00 AM, and I've gone from an OK position to a terrible position.

Yep, same here

That and the early rush on a nearby civ, wrecked by wonder lust:-

'Hmm, that's 4 swordsmen built, only need 2 more and maybe an axe to be safe.'

'Ooo have stone in capital, lets stop building units and build the pyramids instead'

 

[da_Vinci]

Of course, the more nuances to the game you know, the more things there are to potentially consider each turn.

So as skill goes up, perhaps time spent should go up along with it? Or at least the potential for spending more time ...

dV