GOTM Techniques, Cheats, Rules & Discussion Thread

[starlifter]

One more question? Whats with this "key civ" thing, why do they do it that way, just curious?

It was Brian's decision when deciding how to solve some of the "shortcomings" of Civ 1. Short answer: "The Poor Get Richer."

What does that mean? Let Brian Reynolds explain why he did it, in his own words:

The Poor Get Richer: The Ancient Art of Game Balance

Help The Poor Get Richer: Civilization II

Build systems into your game which keep the game competitive for as long as possible. Avoid formulas which allow the "rich to get richer." Getting ahead in the game should (properly) give the player a greater chance to win, but it should not make it easier for him to further increase his chance to win. Rather, just as the further we stretch a rubber band the more it resists, the farther ahead a player gets the harder it should be for him to increase his lead. Likewise, the more a player has fallen behind the easier it should be for him to begin catching up-again, our game system's "rubber band" pulls the player back toward the competition.

Example: As work began on Civ2, we observed that in the original game victory was very often decided in the "Age of Chariots." Here was this glorious game featuring material from throughout the course of human history, yet most decent players were effectively winning without even getting beyond the classical era. Players used chariots to rapidly conquer several nearby opponents, building a larger population than the other players, and then switched to a "peaceful" strategy and used their larger populations to blast rapidly through the technology tree.

Players ahead in the technology race had the first crack at building "wonders" and "improvements" which had the effect of further increasing their lead in the technology race-many wonders directly or indirectly increased research speed. Then, as the time scale proceeded from "B.C." to "A.D." the technology cost for all players suddenly doubled-again working to the advantage of players who had been able to research more technologies at the "cheap rate" and effectively locking out those players who were already behind by imposing a further penalty on top of their already bad situation. A winning player rapidly eclipsed the opposition and the rest of the game (often a considerable period of time) consisted simply of mopping up.

With some care and tuning, a technology race can be changed from the "Rich get Richer" to a "Poor get Richer" situation. Moreover, this can even be done in a way which also pays homage to our common sense historical intuitions. We know from history that nuclear weapons were extremely difficult to develop and required a massive and unprecedented investment by the Americans who first developed them. But nuclear weapons having once been developed, a far lesser investment was required for their duplication and imitation by other powers.

Translated into game terms, this means that technologies should be much more expensive for the first power to develop them, and then increasingly easy for other powers to copy. That way, players who are ahead in technology have to expend increasingly large efforts to maintain and increase their lead-they are paying the expensive first-research cost while the trailing players are paying the cheaper "catch up" prices. And the further behind a player falls, the longer a time period passes between the initial discovery of a technology and the player's attempt to research it-cumulatively reducing the cost to "catch up."

The rules of the game should work to keep the game competitive for as long as possible. Players have the most fun when the game is a tight contest, so our game systems should help keep players who fall behind "in the race" and try to prevent players who get ahead from simply "running away with it."

Source: http://www.gamespy.com/devcorner/april01/reynolds/index4.shtm

The "rubber band" is the Key Civ concept, which adjusts Civ science outputs based on dynamic references. If you get ahead of the reference civ ("Key Civ"), your cost goes up even more, and those that are behind see their costs go down.

BTW, the credit for discovering just how Civ 2 adjusts tech costs is an guy named Samson (Apolyton) who figured it out when playing OCC last year. People had a general idea before, and I remember just giving everything to everyone to speed science in the "old days", but now it's much more useful with the "Key Civ" knowledge.

Samson's Discovery of Key Civs (at Apolyton):

posted April 22, 2001 11:04

Hi all.

It has been known for a while that giving away techs can reduce your beaker cost. Also, there always seems to be one Key Civ to whom tech-gifting triggers the beaker reduction. What has been unclear is the relationship between the Key Civ and the Human Civ. How do you know which civ to give techs to in order to effect beaker reduction? I think I have found the answer to this.

I hestitate to post my conclusions for two reasons. First, early announcements of "findings" often turn out false. And secondly my answer is pretty ridiculous, in my own opinion. Nevertheless, here it is.

The relationship between the Key Civ and the Human Player involves the Power ratings and Turn positions. Each civ's Turn Position is determined by its color:

1 White
2 Green
3 Dark Blue
4 Yellow
5 Light Blue
6 Orange
7 Purple

Power Ratings are reported by the Foreign Minister:

1 Pathetic
2 Weak
3 Inadequate
4 Moderate
5 Strong
6 Mighty
7 Supreme

The Key Civ for tech-gifting can always be found occupying the Turn Position
which corresponds to your Power Rating using the above numbers. For example, if your Power is 'Inadequate', the Key Civ will be Dark Blue.

Science beaker cost is the product of two things: the number of Acquired Techs (+1) that you have and a Tech Multiplier. One of the determinants of the Tech Multiplier is your relationship to the Key Civ as found by the above method. If you have the same number of Acquired Techs as your Key Civ, you get the nominal Tech Multiplier and pay an average cost. If you have fewer Acquired Techs, you pay less. If you have more, you pay more. By giving a sufficient number of techs to the Key Civ you can reduce your beaker cost.

If your Power rating corresponds to your own Turn Postion, you will always have exactly the same number of techs as yourself and therefore will always pay the average cost. You can give away techs till you're blue, it won't help. Well, it might. Power ratings are in part determined by how many techs you have. So giving away techs may lower your PR and get you out of the 'dead spot'.

If you're planning to spend a lot of time being 'Pathetic', don't choose White! Same for 'Supreme' and Purple. I know, this seems like a ludicrous design. Maybe that's why it has proven so illusive.

Let me know if you have questions or if you can show this to be wrong.

samson

P.S.

My testing was with V2.42, deity, 7 civs. I haven't tried fewer civs yet.

Also, this finding may explain the 'destroyed civ' phenomenon. When a civ is destroyed, your Power Rating may change. If the destroyed civ occupies the Turn Position corresponding to your new PR, you will be much higher in techs (since they now have none) and would have to pay the highest possible beaker cost.

Samson's follow-up:

posted April 23, 2001 08:23 (at Apolyton)

Thanks, all.

EST - The 'eureka' moment is recorded in the log of my 'size 1 OCC' game posted here also. In playing that game I tracked all beaker counts to be sure I was paying the minimum cost. Whenever the beaker cost went up, it was because the Key Civ shifted from Romans to Babs or vice versa. After awhile I noticed that this happened at the same time as my Power rating changed from Pathetic to Weak. I used this 'tell' in the game but didn't understand the connection until late in the game when I jumped to Inadequate and the Key Civ switched to the French whom I had been ignoring. My beaker cost got clobbered. That's when the connection hit me. I left the game for a couple hours and did some testing. When the theory proved true I couldn't stop grinning.

I've tracked this through two games now and found it explained all beaker count increases and decreases. It also held up through a number of Cheat Mode test cases I devised. Then I went back to some save games of odd beaker bumps I had. Bingo! The topper was that it explained the 'destroyed civ' phenomenon neatly, too. If this isn't the answer, it's damn close.

As to strategy, I think it will change my play even in OCC. Tech gifting does three things: it lowers your beaker cost, it improves AI attitude and makes alliances possible, and it slows down AI research. The last of these is not always desirable in OCC because it means you have to do more of the basic research.

My future research strategy for all games, including OCC, will be based on three things:

1) Accurate beaker minimum cost tables
2) Tracking the Key Civ
3) Embassies with all AI

By knowing the beaker minimums and the Key Civ, I can control my research costs, getting the maximum benefit with minimum impact on the AI's research ability. I will still gift techs to AI to get alliances and maintain relations, but only give the minimum needed, not every tech I acquire. By establishing embassies I can see what tech each AI is working on. I can give that tech to that Civ immediately if I have it. If they are researching something new to me, I will leave them alone (suspending my tech gifting) to allow them to complete their research as quickly as possible. In this way I can pay the minimum for my research and utilize with maximum efficiency the AI's own research efforts. In theory, I could effectively control seven lines of research simultaneously. In practice, two or three or four perhaps.

samson

Samson's post discovering How Research is Computed (at Apolyton):

posted April 23, 2001 18:25

Hi all.

The Key Civ discovery allowed me to run some controlled tests on the numbers of beakers required for researching new technology. I think I understand how the cost is calcuated now. Some of this stuff is already known, but I will repeat it here just to have the whole mechanism described in one place.

The cost of researching a new technology (the beaker count) is the product of two factors. The first is the Tech Number which you are researching. This is the number of Acquired Techs you have +1. Acquired Techs are all techs you have received in gameplay from research, huts, trades, gifts, or steals. It does not include your starting techs.

The second factor is a Base Tech Multiplier to which either a bonus or penalty can be added. The formula would look like this:

Cost of Research = TechNumber X (Base + Penalty/Bonus)

The Penalty/Bonus is based on how far ahead or behind your research is compared to your current Key Civ. That relationship is quantified by comparing your TechNumber to your Key Civ's TechNumber. If you are the same you receive the Base Tech Multiplier with no Penalty or Bonus.

If you on a lower TechNumber than your Key Civ, then you receive the Bonus. The Bonus is the same no matter how far behind you are. On a medium map it is either a -1 or -2 depending on the TechNumber (see chart below).

If your TechNumber is higher than your Key Civ's, you are penalized a +1 to the Base Tech Multiplier for every 3 techs which you are ahead of him. In other words, if you are even or ahead by one or two, your penalty is 0. If you are ahead by 3,4, or 5 techs then your penalty is +1. Thus, the higher the TechNumber which you are researching the farther ahead it is possible to be. If your Key Civ is stuck in the Bronze Age while you are researching Space Flight, you will be paying an enormous penalty in beaker costs.

Here is a chart of TechNumbers, Base Multipliers, and Bonuses for the first 20 techs.

Tech# Base Bonus

01 10 0
02 11 -2
03 11 -1
04 12 -2
05 12 -1
06 12 -1
07 12 0
08 13 -1
09 13 -1
10 14 -2
11 14 -2
12 15 -2
13 15 -2
14 15 -1
15 15 -1
16 16 -1
17 16 -1
18 17 -2
19 17 -2
20 26 -2

All TechNumbers above 20 have a Base of 26 and a Bonus of -2. The Minimum Beaker Cost for a given TechNumber can be calculated from this chart and that Minimum can be achieved in gameplay by lowering your TechNumber relative to your Key Civ through tech-gifting.

One important consequence of the fact that the Penalty/Bonus is based on TechNumber, rather than total techs, is that Starting Techs are critical in determining how much you will pay for research in a game. If you have fewer Starting Techs than your Key Civ, then you can only get the Bonus when that Key Civ actually is ahead of you in researching. You can never reach the Bonus through tech-gifting alone.

On the other hand, if you have more Starting Techs than your Key Civ, you can easily get the Bonus without even giving away all of your techs. Starting Techs are an enormous advantage not just at the start, but throughout the whole game as they determine your ability to reduce your science cost.

If you start with NO techs, and the other civs all have them, you may be paying research penalties the entire game, even with aggressive tech-gifting.

samson

Sources:

Samson discovered how Cost of Research is computed; his name, and terms like "purple", "gift*", "research" are good ways to search. Names like Smash, Sodak, and Starlifter are good ways to narrow searchs at CFC. Here are some source links:
Apr 2001 Key Civ (Samson)
Apr 2001 Cost of Research (Samson, Apolyton)
Jun 2001 (Caravans, purple civ, etc.)
Aug 2001 (Cost of Research)
Oct 2001 (Cost of Research)
Jan 2002 (Key Civ)

 

[starlifter]

When searching CFC for some things today, and also other BBSs, I've noticed that several items have been discussed in non-GOTM forums. Since GOTM palyers may come from any background, I'll add these five for reference. I will also add my 2 cents after explaining them and giving the facts.


25. Missile Patrol - use Cruise & Nuke Missiles to explore, patrol. Yup, you can fly your missiles around to explore and patrol. Most people probably know about this, but I found some old posts that were surprised about it. As a real-life missile tester (USAF), I can say we don't launch missiles, nor can the perfrom recon missions.... but the big picture is that this is a game, and the units are not 100% accurate with real life anyway.... we even don't launch them to new cities for depolyment, after all. So if you want to patrol with 160s nukes instead of 60s Fighters or 80s Stealth, go ahead... you only get one space of visiblity, which is not much in late game, LOL.

Summary: Allowed, and well known. Hilarious, in my book, when you think of it. But it's an air unit, and air units fly in Civ 2.



26. Incremental Rush Buy (IRB) - Buy cheap unit (like warrior), switch (e.g, Phalanx), buy, switch (archer); buy, switch (e.g, engineer), buy it. This incremental process saves gold, compared to just Rush Buy (RB) all unit shields (to 40s, in this example) at once. This only works with units, not improvements, wonders, or SS parts (cost is fixed for these). This is a common practice, but at one time, people used to discuss whether or not it should be done. The only real disadvantage is the amount of "real time" to micromanage it. The AI does not RB or IRB; it has special rules for how it generates production, so it's not comparable. All human players should know how to do this, but it's listed for completeness anyway. Follow the link in my Signature block ("Acronyms") for even more info .

Summary: It's a known, approved, and widely used technique in GOTMs, and I personally do not consider it any more shady than founding your capital city, LOL



27. ZOC Avoidance (Zone Of Control) - Move ground units thru a ZOC with the help of a dip, spy, caravan, freight, plane, partisan, missile, helicopter, paratrooper, explorer. Most gound units are blocked from moving freely in congested areas of non-allied players. However, the listed units can be used to "lead the way" and let units like Crusaders, Armor, and Howies to slither into an area. At one time, some people were discussing if this was intentional. I'll add two things. First, the AI can't do it... actually, it "could", but does not intentionally do it. Second, I'm personally convinced this is an intended use of tactics (e.g., not a bug of any sort). But in case anyone did not know you could do this, I'll add it.

Summary: It's a known, approved, and widely used technique in GOTMs, and I personally find it no more questionable than building your first settler.



28. Double Left-Clicking Explored Terrain - use the mouse left button to double click terrain that you have explored. Normally, a terrain status pops up if the terrain look empty. However, if seemingly empty terrain does not respond with a popup window describing the terrain type, then a city has been built in that location sometime since you last explored it. I was unaware of this, and so I tested it today, and it worked in 5.4.0f.... so it's a working technique. I've never used it, and don't plan to personally, but it sort of falls in with Map Clicking.

Summary: Allowed, by default. I presume most don't know about this, since I didn't until now. Somewhat shady in my book, but not be of practical value to me personally.



29. Paratrooper Scouting - Use the paratrooper arrow (the cursor) to "see" if unit is on a land tile. You hover the paratrooper arrow over the drop zone (landing tile) --- if it becomes an X, then an unseen unit occupies that tile. I tested it today with 5.4.0f, and it does indeed work, so this is another new one one me, too. This one might be of slightly more tactical value than #28, but to me personally, not at all since I don't think I've ever reached full modern combat in a GOTM.

Summary: Allowed, by default. The secone new thing I learned today. To me, it's in the category of Map Clicking and Double Left Clicking.... somewhat dubious, but I'm personally not on a crusade about it.



Well, none of these new 5 are "hot potatos", but might be of interest to some players.

 

[GaryNemo]

I use #26 IPRB also to build improvements. Usually the Barracks is available, or maybe Harbor, or Colosseum. When a few production has accumulated from the first turn, the cost is low. Then I let normal production finish the job. When you say it does not work with improvements, I guess you mean there is not the same dramatic cost savings as with regular units.

Also, I am leary of upgrading my civ2.exe - I know it.

 

[starlifter]

by Gary Nemo:

I use #26 IPRB also to build improvements. Usually the Barracks is available, or maybe Harbor, or Colosseum. When a few production has accumulated from the first turn, the cost is low. Then I let normal production finish the job. When you say it does not work with improvements, I guess you mean there is not the same dramatic cost savings as with regular units.

Actually, there is probably some slight confusion about the difference between RB, PRB, IRB, and IPRB. I've got a lot of exact details and examples posted in the link in my Sig. Block:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?postid=365092#post365092



The IRB refers to saving money by incrementally buying one row (sometimes two) of shields of a unit at a time. This is because one full row (10s) costs 25g. Buying 2 rows at a time costs 60g (compare to 25g+25g). So you save gold by buying in the smallest increment possible. So the cheapest price per shield is 2.5g for unit shields.

BTW, the IPRB is just the IRB, but not buying the unit to completion... you let the city's natural shield production finish the unit, thus saving the 1 turn of wasted output that is inherient in the IRB.

On the other hand, there are 3 other categories of production: Improvements, Wonders, and Spaceship Parts. Assuming there is at least 1 shield in the Prod Box, one shield costs 2g for Improvements, and 4g for Wonders and SS Parts. This cost does not change no matter how many are bought at a time. Hence, IRB and IPRB terms are meaningless, unless someone just likes clicking the mouse and passing the time. The 2 terms that apply to these 3 categories are only the RB and PRB. The RB buys the whole set of shields to completion (thus wasting the regular city's production for 1 turn), or the PRB which does not.

The RB and PRB can also apply to units, but since they usually buy shields in lots greater than one row, these 2 methods waste gold, but save some micromanagement and "real time".


So it sounds like alphabet soup, but when you see me personally refer to the 4 terms RB, PRB, IRB, and IPRB, I try to use them in the right context, even though they are frequently used without precise distinction in many posts. Once in a while, I've been known to make a slip too, though .

 

[starlifter]

30. Double Growth - Cities can grow 3 ways:

1. Join.
2. Filled Food Box.
3. Republic/Democracy Celebration.

Cities can be joined up to size 8 in one turn. And with enough excess food, #2 and #3 can occur in the same turn. It probably has happened, but gone unnoticed, in most people's games after Refrigeration at times... it's just a function of obtaining enough food to fill the food box while R/D Celebration growth is occuring (you can also get the food from a Car/Frt).

Summary: Allowed... it is normal game behavior (however, if the FCT is used to force it, then not allowed; but the Double Growth itself is just fine).

 

[Old n Slow]

Searching for that last ai city --

I recall re-looking at open terrain & seeing an irrigated spot -- later found it to be an ai city. Don't know if this is always the case, or a sometimes the case (ie does the irrigated grid show up only on Prince or lower, only after n+1 turns, only if a second square is irrigated etc.).

Similarly, barbarians land & seem to attack obvious targets first -- ususally cities.

I don't think that these are cheats, but intermediate & newbies may want that kind of information.

 

[starlifter]

Rev. 1.05 20Jul02 - Changed Duke's e-mail address to dom@civfanatics.net (old one was Duke@Civfanatics.net).

--------> Send GOTM submissions to dom@civfanatics.net from now on .

 

[starlifter]

Added Rev. 1.06 24Jul02 - Added #31 (Andu Indorin [via Starlifter], Post #28).



#31. The Emissary's Ploy

(Andu Indorin's "Emissary's Ploy")

For those that hate senate interference in a democracy, this pretty much overcomes it. Normally, you cannot allow any face-to-face contact with the enemy after capturing a city of theirs, or the Senate my interfere and put an end to the war, like it or not. With the "Emissary's Ploy", the the human may approach the AI again, whilst keeping a state of war.

Here are the steps:

1. Possess the UN.
2. Capture an AI city.
3. The plundered gold comment is now onscreen (close the popup).
4. The City Status screen pops up (close it).
5. Immediately after closing the screen, press F3. (".... chatter. Now begone!").
6. Now you may have face-to-face contact with no interference.... attack, capture, or whatever you want.

Status: By default, Allowed. Personally, I still use the classic methods of fighting an all out war under Democracy (let the AI backstab you, clear out AI ground units, prevent Partisans, etc. etc.).

 

[starlifter]

Here is more clarification in one place for the FCT, Food Caravans, Food Freight, and Unnaturally Large Cities....

Note: This thread that Old n Slow started is now the best (and most current) place to post general questions & discussion about the FCT, FC/FF, and Unnaturally Large Cities.


The FCT

FCT - Delivering Food Caravans/Food Freight (FC/FF) without the -1 food route penalty in the home city. The FCT is not merely getting a city to grow by filling the food box with FC/FF!

If you add a FC/FF and it does not take -1 from the source city, then do not use that city as a food source. To my knowledge, any city will properly credit the first food route (you will lose a trade arrow route if you have 3 trade route in the source city already). The second route may or may not be credited properly in the source city -- if you deliberately add routes when you know thay are not crediting, then you are using the FCT, which is disallowed in GOTMs. Accidental, or mixed up, food deliveries don't DQ a game, but continuing 'accidents' in a game would likely require an explanation to the Admin (the Admin makes the rulings). FWIW, I have rarely noticed a city credit a 3rd food route properly, even if the 2nd food route was properly credited. In any event, the game is not even theoretically capable of crediting the 4th and succeeding routes, since a source city can only track THREE (3) total routes (of all types) max. A destination food route city can track more than 3 incoming routes. Further testing is needed to clarify the exact behavior of food source cities with the 2nd and 3rd FC/FF deliveries... most people that use non-FCT simply never even try a 3rd or subsequent FC/FF from the same source city, since it really ain't going to work. BTW, it is OK to rehome and deliver a FC/FF... just don't start a FCT system with it.

EDIT: Added test summary from here.

Preliminary Testing of FCT Cases

CASE 1: First source city food delivery to any destination city.

CASE 2: Each Food Delivery from the same source city to different destinations.

     [b]#FRs[/b]:[u] 0 [/u]   [u] 1 [/u]   [u] 2 [/u]   [u] 3 [/u]                          
[u][b]#TRs[/u][/b]         
 0        0/1   0/2   0/3   0/3*    
 1        1/1   1/2   1/2*  ---  
 2        2/1   2/1*  ---   ---  
 3        2/1   ---   ---   ---

Notes:
1. #FRs = # of existing FOOD Routes in source city when food is delivered.
2. #TRs = # of existing TRADE Routes in source city when food is delivered.
3. Result is #TRs/#FRs (e.g., 1/2 means 1 Trade route and 2 Food Routes after the food delivery).
4. * (asterisk) means this is a FCT delivery.

CASE 3: More than one food delivery from the same source city to the same destination city.

Preliminary Summary:

Case 1 - Allowed
Case 2 - Allowed (if no FCT).
Case 3 - Disallowed (because of FCT).

There are many "systems" of implementing the FCT, like:

1. Rehoming lots of FC/FF to a single city and delivering them all over (Classic FCT).
2. Setting up a FC/FF swap between two cities.
3. Creating lots of size 1 cities, deliver FC/FF without the FCT, kill the cities, and repeat (routes die when the source city dies).
4. Having one or more cities produce and deliver lots of FC/FF (either through shield production or RB/IRBs).
5. The 3-city rotation descrbed by Ming.
6. There are likely other variants of the FCT.

All such FCT systems are disallowed in GOTMS. However, the FCT is allowed in some places, like the Civ 2 HOF and mega games. Shadowdale's 26,271 game used refined FCT techniques... the FCT is the only way to achieve mega-scores (above approx. 16,000 on random maps).



Full Food Box Growth

A full box can be obtained by (all 3 ways are permitted in GOTMs):

1. Adding natural (including food routes) food surplus until the food box is full.
2. Adding FC/FF until food box is full (never takes more than 2 to fill a box).
3. Reducing city population (thus decreasing box size, rendering the smaller box full).

Note: #2 is not (necessarily!) the FCT but... #2 is related to the FCT if the sources caravans are repeatedly from the same city.



Unnaturally Large City

Unnatural City - A city whose size exceeds that which can be supported by the combination of it's own food plus the incoming food routes. Also, any city growing with a food deficit is quite unnatural.

Note: with proper incoming food routes, a city can be larger than it would be without them (e.g., a +4 could support 2 more citizens). A proper incoming food route will add a food route to the source city, including a -1 food and replacing an existing trade route. A city can have only 3 routes (food or trade), max.

 

[Ali Ardavan]

Originally posted by starlifter
You can determine the supply and demand (& city size) of undiscovered Capitals by using the Trade Advisor --> Supply & Demand --> Select Cargo. ...
But.... there is another issue in addition to what Old n Slow mentioned. Once you discover a city, if you don't "update" it (your units, map swaps, Apollo, etc), you won't see the city size change on your map when the city size actually changes.... but you can look here to discover the "true" sizes for discovered cities. This particular aspect is not how I would have programmed the game, as it does seem inconsistent (e.g., map not being updated, but tediously looking thru trade advisor can yield the true city size).

I disagree. I tried this multiple times this weekend and the city size I got from Supply&Demand was the same as the outdated one on the map. I did this right before moving a unit adjacent to the city. As soon as the map updated so did the Supply&Demand screen.

 

[starlifter]

I've gone back and tested, using 5.4.0f.


Case 1: AI has multiple cities, no contact, no map discovery.

Result: With Trade, the trade advisor reports the the capital city & size only. It does not matter if the AI has Trade. The size is accurately updated as the city size changes in gameplay.


Case 2: AI has multiple cities, no contact, I have discovered the capital city.

Result: TA reports accurate size info of city. The map does not. For instance, when the AI city grew to 3, the map still showed 2.

In neither case was the TA reporting info on undiscovered non-capital cities. In all test cases, including more varitions on techs, the results were the same.

What exact version of Civ are you using? Maybe zip and attach the .SAV and the rules.txt of the game. If there is a difference in versions, we should make sure people know (even though this particular technique is pretty insignificant in gameplay anyway).

 

[starlifter]

Rev 1.07 is posted:

Rev. 1.07 25Jul02 - Added Key Civ, Tech Gift links & info in Post#21; distill Purpose & Scope

 

[starlifter]

Added Rev. 1.08:


Rev. 1.08 26Jul02 - Moved Notes & Revision History to next post because newly added links rapidly approacy the 15,000 character post limit; wording clarifications on some FCT items; Added asterisks to #10 & #11; Added #32 (OCC & Paulicy); Added #33 - Zero Turn Revolution (by Xin Yu via SL)


#32: GOTM OCC & The Paulicy - There are a few special OCC-only rules, which are explained in the Paulicy for OCC games. A GOTM may be played as OCC or standard, at the player's option.

The most notable GOTM rule exception is game reloading for huts that result in advanced tribes while playing OCC:

1. Before you enter a hut, save the game.
2. Enter the hut.
3. If the hut is an advanced tribe, then immediately reload, and try again. Continue until the very first result that gives anything except an advanced tribe.


This is the only case in standard gameplay where the game-specific rules not only allow a reload, but require it. This is because in OCC, you are never allowed to possess a 2nd city -- not even for a moment. You can have only one city at all times .

Here are the additional guidelines and rules to play a GOTM OCC:

http://members.home.nl/paulvdb/occ.htm

It's often called the "Paulicy", after the name of the author.



The applicable paragraph from the Paulicy:

1.2.2. ADVANCED TRIBES

If a goody hut results in an advanced tribe you should reload. The easiest way to handle this is to save the game just before you enter the hut. You can then just reload that save and enter the hut again. If you forget to save you may reload the autosave from the beginning of the turn. In that case you must move your units the same as the first time, you must handle all diplomatic contacts the same way as the first time, all battles must have the same outcome (not only the winner, but also the amount of damage) and any huts you entered before the one that gave the advanced tribe must also give the same results as the first time you played the turn.

Summary: Allowed. GOTM OCC should be played by GOTM Rules, except where the Paulicy requires exceptions. Post questions or PM the Admin (Duke of Marbrough) if in doubt.



#33. Zero Turn Revolutions

(Zin Yu's Zero Turn Revolution (ZTR) )

Zero Turn Revolutions - Using Democracy and the Statue of Liberty, it is possible to deliberately trigger a gov't collapse between turns, when a city hits it's 2nd consecutive turn of anarchy. Whis is called a Zero Turn Revolution (ZTR). How: If the SoL is in the city at the top of your city list, only the SoL city will be affected by Anarchy, and the gov't will be restored immediately. Throughout the following turn you can choose any form of Govt anytime, including Fundy and Democracy. Choosing Fundy will allow you to declare war, do dastardly deeds, and even possibly (with the Fundy tech) have a 20-shield unit (the Fanatic) to use in IRBs. There are a lot of downsides also, including loss of science, gold, and shields in the SoL city and those above it; it will backfire on OEDO years (e.g., next turn will be Anarchy thoughout empire, including loss of all gold & science, plus collection of Anarchy gov't resources); it requires close micromanagement; it is not tactical (e.g, you must plan it ahead of time); on teh following turn you must begin the whole cycle again (e.g., the ZTR cannot be used consecutively).

Summary: Allowed, by default. Somewhat shady, but not without cost; similar to the Emissary Ploy in Democratic war effect. Personally, I have never used a ZTR in a GOTM (or in any game, except in tests)... I just prefer the built-in challenges of wars & Democracy.

 

[Ali Ardavan]

Originally posted by starlifter
I've gone back and tested, using 5.4.0f.

Case 1: AI has multiple cities, no contact, no map discovery.

Result: With Trade, the trade advisor reports the the capital city & size only. It does not matter if the AI has Trade. The size is accurately updated as the city size changes in gameplay.

Case 2: AI has multiple cities, no contact, I have discovered the capital city.

Result: TA reports accurate size info of city. The map does not. For instance, when the AI city grew to 3, the map still showed 2.

In neither case was the TA reporting info on undiscovered non-capital cities. In all test cases, including more varitions on techs, the results were the same.

What exact version of Civ are you using? Maybe zip and attach the .SAV and the rules.txt of the game. If there is a difference in versions, we should make sure people know (even though this particular technique is pretty insignificant in gameplay anyway).

First, let me thank you for your usual detailed analysis. And while I am at it, also thank you for posting the links regarding key civ. Very interesting.

I am using single player on Macintosh. My rules.txt has never been changed. The cases I reported all invloved AI cities I had already discovered. I will do more detailed testing this weekend and report.

 

[starlifter]

First, let me thank you for your usual detailed analysis. And while I am at it, also thank you for posting the links regarding key civ. Very interesting.

I am using single player on Macintosh. My rules.txt has never been changed. The cases I reported all invloved AI cities I had already discovered. I will do more detailed testing this weekend and report.

#1: You're welcome .

#2. Since you are a Macintosh user, I'd like to ask if you'd keep a close eye on my tests, in particular to check for incompatibilities (but also for anything wrong in general), as I am totally unable to test Macintosh stuff. If there is any major differences that come to light along the way (as we collect & post more techniques, etc.), we need to note it. We might even need to make a special code notation on the main list to flag it easily for the applicable items.

One of the topics that I'm personally just ironing out this week is the nitnoid details of FCT stuff (e.g, exactly when it occurs with mixed food & trade routes). If you have the time/inclination, I have a test file in Old n Slow's "Food for Thought" thread. In particular, it's important to know if combinations of food & trade routes behave the same as what I've posted.


Thanks .

 

[Ali Ardavan]

Originally posted by starlifter
#2. Since you are a Macintosh user, I'd like to ask if you'd keep a close eye on my tests, in particular to check for incompatibilities (but also for anything wrong in general), as I am totally unable to test Macintosh stuff. If there is any major differences that come to light along the way (as we collect & post more techniques, etc.), we need to note it. We might even need to make a special code notation on the main list to flag it easily for the applicable items.

Time permitting I will be glad to.

Now, let me report on the tests I promised I will be doing on Supply & Demand screen:

I did further testing. Here is what I have found out:
1. Before Trade there is no info via Supply & Demand screen.
2. After Trade the foreign cities in S&D are the capitals and the cities you have had contact with. Non capital cities that possess WOW or are listed among Top 5 do not show up in S&D if you have not had direct contact with them.
3. Even if you posses Marco and thus know about the existence of all foreign cities, the non capital ones you have not had direct contact with do not show up in S&D.
4. The city size reported in S&D is the same as the one you see on the map. When you get an update through repeat contact both get updated.

One exceptional thing I cannot yet explain is this:
In GOTM 17 after I allied with and exchanged maps with the Sioux, I could not only see the cities on my new map in S&D but also cities that had WOW in them. This was certainly not the case before the Sioux contact and not so in other games.

 

[Ali Ardavan]

You have found the last AI city. Should you take it and finish the game or should you wait a turn or two to finish building that WOW, .... Which way would you get a higher GOTM score?

First of all, congradulations for having this choice. This means that you are not running out of real time. I envy you!

Now, to the answer. The GOTM scoring system is complex. It rewards you for a higher base score but it also highly rewards you for finishing early. I just analyzed the formula and here is the answer: For every extra turn you take to finish, you better be increasing your base score by 2% (1.88% to break even) or your GOTM score will not increase.

For example, if your score as reported by the game is 1000, building an extra wonder is worth taking an extra turn. If your score is 1500, simply building an extra wonder is not worth an extra turn. You need to also add 10 content citizens.
--------------------------------

The original posting assumed 420 total turns which is what you get at higher levels. The following is more detailed.

Level      Map size         total turns  GOTM breakeven threshold

Chieftain  ---              570          1.38%
Warlord    Large or Normal  570          1.38%
Prince     Large            570          1.38%

Warlord    Small            520          1.52%
Prince     Normal           520          1.52%
King       Large            520          1.52%

Prince     Small            470          1.68%
King       Normal           470          1.68%
Emperor    Large            470          1.68%

King       Small            420          1.88%
Emperor    Small or Normal  420          1.88%
Deity      ---              420          1.88%

 

[LordValuna]

Originally posted by starlifter
Some have asked about Map Clicking. Here is how to do it and how to interpret it

Since you can ,(another revelation for me) practically make a rough map anyways;
Why cant the person stetting up the GotM toggle the scenario parameters and reveal whole map, once in a while.
All the Black on the map is hard on the eyes (not to mention the poor triemes)

 

[starlifter]

Why not have the map revealed?

Well, map clicking is still up to the individual. Many of these techniques are not ones people use. But everyone should have access to their knowledge, so they are listed.

However, we all have our preferences, and the list of what is allowed and disallowed is not determined by me... it reflects the GOTM rules. LOL, if it were up to only me, I'd change a few. I'm sure we all have various ideas about what we'd each prefer.

Like any idea, if people want the map revealed, they should gain a clear idea, and then take the case to the Admin (Duke of Marbrough), who would then do as he decides (e.g., rule, poll, discuss, whatever).

At this point, revealing the map is not an option, though it could be for a specific game. However, that is a pretty drastic step, and before that was done even for an individual game (e.g., a special rule game, like Fundy Only, Starting Wonder, etc.). It is my gut feel, but not by any means scientific, that people like exploring.


BTW, with patience, you can map click the entire map in 4000BC. I think it was absurd to allow this, but they tried to do it as a "feature" in a late revision, and no official Civ 2 patch has been released for over 3 years to fix it.


You should definitely feel free to discuss anything listed, or even stuff we have not posted yet.

 

[Narz]

If you set up a bunch of food caravans coming from a city and then let the AI capture it, would you still get the food?

I'm sure this would be way more trouble than its worth but I'm just curious.