HOF games giving you any bad habits?

[pholtz]

Don't get me wrong, I am enjoying the HOF games, but I do find that they give me some bad habits.

1. Taking too many risks the first part of the game. After all, if I get a bad result, I can always restart.

2. Restarting if I find after the first few 1000 years if the map isn't all I hoped it would be.

3. Getting a bit flustered playing a normal game and not being sure what victory condition to persue.

4. Leaving my civ open to barbarians

I recently played my first Archipelago map game as Portugal, I was playing on a standard map, quick speed, Prince level. I had no idea what to expect, all options were random. My start wasn't good, I ended up sharing a small island that only had room for 4 - 5 cities, I eventually crammed 7 in with too much overlap. (Other civs either shared much larger islands or had one the size Vicky and I had for their very own.) Bronzeworking, no copper. Animal Husbandry, no horses. In any HOF game I would have hit the reset button. Instead I had a blast playing a game that will score terribly on the HOF.

I had two things going for me, stone, and at my second city position.. just a bit removed, marble. Playing Prince level, I was able to get Stonehenge, the Pyramids and the Oracle built and slingshot CoL. At the same time, I started a war with Victoria by stealing one of her workers, and kept a Warrior encamped on a forested hill. I had to do this to slow her down and prevent her from sending out settlers in my direction as there was very little room to expand. I managed to found two more cities, one with 3 gems, and trapped her into a corner. She built only two cities with overlap in her area. My army consisted of Warriors and Archers. After settling my 4th city, I asked for and got peace.

Then had a heart attack when I saw her with an Axeman. I finally found some Iron and started making my own army, but we were very evenly matched, until she let Julius Caesar's fishing boat though her territory. I established good relations with him and managed to trade for Ivory. Eventualy my army of Elephants and Axemen conquered her two cities. Then I discovered Optics using Carracks, and completed the conquest as she had founded one more city very close by in a poor land area with only fur to recommend it (Galleys would have been sufficient).

But at Quick speed, things go by very fast. It was 1440 already. I was able to update all my Axemen to Maces, and my Carracks were beginning to explore. But I was beginning to seriously doubt I had the time for a Domination or Conquest. It was 1745 before all my Carracks had met all other Civs and I decided to go for a Cultural Victory.

It wasn't that easy. My neighbors inluded JC, Carthage and Japan. The other two were Russia (Peter) and America (Lincoln). So unlike all my other cultural victories I couln't count on peace unless I kept my army up. But eventually, in 1912, I got my first "on the fly" cultural victory. It was very satisfying.

Looking at the HOF, I'll be surprised if I get 5 points for it. But it still was fun!

But then looking again at the HOF, no one has a quick Domination Victory at that level and size, and the only Conquest Victories are the Modern Era starts of the last Gauntlet. I wonder if I play a Pangea or Great Plains map, if I can beat those times, and what I could turn in for a Domination. Yes HOF does teach some bad habits, but it makes for fun challenges too.

 

[Thrar]

I hear you. A year or so ago, I played a lot of HoF games, but found myself getting frustrated when things didn't go well, and restart a lot, in search for the perfect game or at least the best I could do.
A little later, to get over that feeling, I had decided to play every game to the end, good or bad. I'm not going to get on any HoF table with that, but I feel much more enjoyment when playing the game, and that's what matters most to me.
I still submit my games, and participate in gauntlets occasionally, trying to play as well as I can with a random start and what I consider natural settings (e.g. random opponents, barbs turned on, aggressive AI). And I still enjoy the discussion about settings and strategies going on here, it gives a lot of incentive to think about how to play!


Other than that:

Then had a heart attack when I saw her with an Axeman.

well, girls...

 

[Mistfit]

I think it also makes it much more difficult to play poor starting locations. I know I never play them in a HoF game so I have little experience of how to maximize a poor start.

 

[CliftonBazaar]

Before I played HOF games I used to reload a game if a war went horribly wrong; now I have to play it out - but it has made me a lot better player.

 

[Harbourboy]

I agree with everything here. HoF has made it almost impossible to play XotM properly.

Having said that, HoF has completely cured me of my nasty offline habit of replaying when the RNG goes against you. I never even think of doing that now.

 

[BLubmuz]

The points you listed are part of the HoF.
Yes, i find more difficult the XotM, since before to actually play a game for the Hof i first try to regenerate until the start *seems* good. But often a good starting point goes with a poor land for your first cities, or you can have bad luck with the GHs (mainly at Warlord and below), or not have stone, marble and some happiness resources at a reasonable distance.
Thus, my typical HoF game is preceeded by some regeneration, then some 50-60 turns spent in some 4-5 games and finally the game i will finish, often picking between the best of those attempts.

Bad habit? perhaps, mainly if you want participate in XotM, but this way you are almost sure to have a good game.
Lost ability to recover a bad start? sure, but you have to compete against good starts, and the game knowledge is also due by your ability to evaluate the map to plan the best city sites for your game goals.