Hall of Fame Rules/FAQ

[CKS]

I'm not the boss, but both of these things seem very much like things that are specifically allowed, and neither of them give shields or gold for nothing, which is what the forbidden exploits do. I think they are fine.

 

[superslug]

Any other active players have thoughts on the matter before I officially yay or nay?

 

[templar_x]

This is not a new thing, or I am totally misinterpreting what the request is about. I think it was very openly discussed by several Top-Players, and in most detail maybe by Spoonwood, if I recall correctly.

We are not talking about "gold out of nothing"-deals here, as they are disallowed. Like double-negative gpt-deals, following the same pattern however.

We are talking about "something for, in the end, nothing"-deals. You can gain WH, techs, gold... for nothing in return. No nice concept, and I really dislike it, but to the best of my memory it was heavily discussed and officially checked - and allowed.

t_x

 

[Kuningas]

Now I thought it more.. It should be allowed.

 

[superslug]

Yeah, I was thinking this wasn't really anything fresh, so yes, it does fit as allowed under current rules.

 

[Spoonwood]

Is it allowed to make a peace treaty with an AI thus AI gives luxurys or resources to me? Then break the luxury route to my capital will result AI declaring war on me giving me War happiness and not losing my reputation.

I believe that's legal under the rule that you cited. Come to think of it, I'm sure it is. I think I've used that almost every single time I've started a war on Sid level. I made a note to Stoertebeker back in 2011:

"2. I think I've used the disconnecting thing to start every war in this game."

I have another crazy idea. What if I make a ROP with luxyres and disconnect my capital this would cause ROP break. I won't lose ever my ROP reputation

Yeah, I've done that several times also. Theoretically, it would come as possible to capture all of the cities without suffering any sort of movement penalty, but I've never done that as it seemed to require too many risks. But, I do recall several times walking onto the AIs territory via the RoP and them having them declare on me. No loss to reputation, since the AIs declare on the human player.

 

[Spoonwood]

The save below has evidence of me actually doing what Kuningas suggests. In that save you can observe that I have units in Russian territory. I also have an RoP signed with them. They declare on me the next turn via some trade route disconnect, my RoP reputation stayed in tact, and the war began. I guess I could show another save with their cities getting captured in 400 AD or 410 AD (maybe I waited a turn for some reason... that sounds doubtful, but it's not impossible), but that can also get checked via the 2050 save using CrPViewer if anyone actually cares to do so.

I would believe that Drazek has used the same tactic also.

At the very least, both of my 80+ HoF games use that tactic, so there already exist games in the HoF using such.

 

[EMan]

Tightening the rules at this point is probably not ever going to happen, because let's be honest, how is this place even still going in the first place?....

I've thought more about what our "Supreme Leader" superslug stated there, back in Post #810, and, I agree it makes sense to have The Rules Frozen For Eternity. For one reason, if you change The Rules now, how many Games that have been accepted into the HOF would then become ineligible?.......And, who would even know they had commited a "Rule Breach" or 'fess up if they did know!?

 

[superslug]

Yeah, I'm just pretty much here to keep the lights on at this point...

 

[templar_x]

I agree it makes sense to have The Rules Frozen For Eternity. For one reason...

"Did you mention the rules? Now, listen. Bit of advice. Tell me the truth if you think you know it. Lay down the law if you're feeling brave. But, Daleks, never, ever tell me the rules!"

couldn´t resist...
t_x

 

[Speedbird 95]

I couldn't find a link to the actual hall of fame, and also had a hard time finding it on google. I eventually found it by guessing the URL.

http://hof.civfanatics.net/civ3

[2nd EDIT] fixed link

Now I have it bookmarked, but a link would be appreciated.

 

[EMan]

I have this bookmarked:

http://hof.civfanatics.net/civ3/

Not sure why your link doesn't work when clicked.....They look the same but must be different!?

 

[jarred!]

Looks like the link text and the link itself are different. The text says .net/civ3 while the link is for .net.civ3

 

[superslug]

I'm not aware of any server errors....

 

[Sir Ferreus]

Hi, I have a random question that might seem obvious but I saw a contradiction on the published HoF. For the "as soon as possible" win condition HoF's (space race, diplomacy, conquest), is it required that the submitted games be a true victory, i.e. another computer civ has not already won by another win condition? I would think so, as otherwise it is a loss. The reason I ask is I saw in Space Race, Sid, rank 10 game, MinutiaRules, submitted 2010-04-07, the 1953 save clearly shows an AI civ that has already passed the global culture threshold, indicating the game was already lost by the time the space ship was built.

 

[jarred!]

To win by culture, you must also double the second place civ's culture value. I haven't checked out the save, but that condition sprung to mind right away.

 

[superslug]

Losses aren't accepted for fastest-finish games. It's theoretically possible to submit a loss as a histographic game on the score tables.

@jarred! is correct about the culture value. Since the game by MinutiaRules was played in Conquests on a huge map, the * minimum * cultural value is 160,000 points. However, any opponent over 80,000 points themselves at the time would have prevented the win from occurring.

 

[Spoonwood]

The 4000bc tool has saved lots of people lots of time over the years, in terms of both staff not having to reject games based on missed settings and players pouring hundreds of hours into a game only to find out it was always a lost cause. Even veterans are encouraged to double check their games before getting too far into them.

I very much like this one lately. One thing I've done when scouting or playing some early turns into maps using some sort of tag like "SRH" for "Standard Regent Histographic". But, then I look for another map and use the same tag carlessly. Being able to check the 4000 BC save to see if it's the one I like feels nice. Also, sometimes I feel like looking at other saves or debug mode for a bit, but I'm not sure if I saved it in 4000 BC with some other tag.

 

[BlackBetsy]

I very much like this one lately. One thing I've done when scouting or playing some early turns into maps using some sort of tag like "SRH" for "Standard Regent Histographic". But, then I look for another map and use the same tag carlessly. Being able to check the 4000 BC save to see if it's the one I like feels nice. Also, sometimes I feel like looking at other saves or debug mode for a bit, but I'm not sure if I saved it in 4000 BC with some other tag.

I started doing this myself before I read this...I usually do "TinyEmpSS" then the # of my attempt (#1, #2, etc) and leave the civ name. So I might have "TinyEmpSS2 Sumerians 4000 bc"

 

[Spoonwood]

If that's the case, did Moonsinger, Kuningas & SirPleb, for examples, use this strategy in their high-scoring Sid games?........or perhaps a Great Library "Borrow", or Spoils-Of-War strategies to achieve the same effect?

Since I know you still come around Eman, I'll respond to this years young comment.

For her first histographic game she definitely talked about the AIs having no beneficiary and thus implying the use of military alliances for gold from AIs when some AI leader gets killed. That qualifies as spoils-of-war. I believe she likely did something similar in her 2nd histographic game.

Now, she couldn't achieve the same effect as trade route pillaging as in during times of peace. But, the Spoils-of-War strategies (e. g. loaning out money for gpt, then using military alliances with gpt which are expected to cancel in a reasonably low number of turns) end up more universal. From my old saves and my current games, I can or apparently have used Spoils-of-War with AIs that don't have an extra luxury or resource. And though perhaps I could give a city away or pillage my own luxuries and have done so in some cases to get more from AIs, spoils-of-war end up less complicated and also does not loose out on food.

Also, arguments like those that rysingsun makes never seem well-thought or true to me. I mean, if I have warriors and workers for trade route pillaging, first they use up their movement points doing that. Resource or luxuries can slip away in a single turn also, and the trading factor I think contributes to that as more likely to happen on Sid level. Also, my empire gets run by a Republic. It costs unit support to pay for those extra workers and pillagers. Of course, one can get back much more gold, but it's not for free.

On the other hand, if you have AI troops in your territory and can force the AIs to declare war on you, *then* use of gpt for upfront goods does work out for free.

The use of trade route pillaging even on Sid also sometimes I think can be a crutch instead of a honed tactic. By a crutch I mean something like a tactic which gets used, but kind of leads you away from a more optimal strategy. The Great Library makes for a better known example. Aeson identified it as a crutch I think in the Four Rules of Wonder Addiction article (he wasn't talking about a 20k game). People can use it on lower levels for technology, but it's not optimal for acquiring technologies in comparison to researching and trading. It can still be something of a crutch on upper levels if one can research a technology more quickly than AIs, since The Great Library can't get used to extract gpt from a tech leader who most likely has the most gpt from selling technologies to other AIs. Trade route pillaging is kind of like that when used for technological purposes in that unskilled use of it might be less efficient than trying to research while using it for other purposes, or keeping it in mind as a backup.