HOF Questions & Answers

My game also auto-updated. I take it that means any games I submit won't be accepted, at least right now?
 
I have submitted a game with the patch. It got parsed just like all the other games. I don't see why it would be rejected.

Interestingly the version is shown as SV8, not different from the other games. Im not sure if the HOF parser can even detect the difference.
 
Apologies for the confusion when I said I cannot submit I was referring to the site database corruption issue that affects me and anybody that joined over the last 6 months, not to the patch update. Patch should not be a problem except that results cannot be compared pre and after patch in both the GMajor and GMinor as both are affected significantly by the patch changes.
 
Cromagnus said:
So, not a huge issue, IMHO.
Click to expand...

Let's see, you play BNW, not vanilla. So why would your opinion matter? In my opinion it is an issue. My initial question still stands: has some consideration been given to accounting for these patches in the HOF?
 
Sir Bugsy said:
I read through all 21 pages and I didn't find anything that addresses this. I play vanilla (yes, I am a dinosaur). I have found that with each new patch, it becomes harder and hard to play at the higher difficulty levels. For example, the going rate for selling a luxury is now down to 200G or less. Very early it was as high as 300G. These successive changes makes it nearly impossible to challenge games played on earlier patches.
Click to expand...

Hello Sir Bugsy, I am also a dinosaur. At some point culture, diplomacy and science victories were pushed way further forward in the tech tree. Some of the Wonders were altered for less effect and the structure of RAs became less profitable. As a rule of thumb; medal winning entries entered before 2012 involving such players as vexing would be impossible to compete against.

When going for a domination victory (standard size or larger), happiness is your biggest head ache, from the games conception up until some time in 2012, players had the luxury of three extra happiness per city from court houses (3 more than listed). This good bug was rectified some time in 2012, just about the same time as G&K was introduced. It is still possible to gain a domination victory even on Deity level, but competing with other guys from the HOF score board is an impossibility. Duel and tiny remain largely unaffected by the changes!

Sir Bugsy said:
I'm not sure how it can be done, but has some consideration been given to accounting for these patches in the HOF?
Click to expand...

It would be great if the VVV and all the HOF entries for Vanilla could be scrapped. We could all start again on a level playing field, I certainly wouldn't mind.:)
 
NiceOneEmlyn said:
It would be great if the VVV and all the HOF entries for Vanilla could be scrapped. We could all start again on a level playing field, I certainly wouldn't mind.:)
Click to expand...
I can hear the wailing and gnashing of teeth from here. :crazyeye:
 
Sir Bugsy said:
Let's see, you play BNW, not vanilla. So why would your opinion matter? In my opinion it is an issue. My initial question still stands: has some consideration been given to accounting for these patches in the HOF?
Click to expand...

I'm confused by this comment. BNW has separate HOF tables. They intentionally delayed adding BNW to the HOF until it was "stable" and given that this is the only significant patch in over a year, I don't really see the issue. What does this have to do with vanilla? Every expansion is affected by this, yes?

Clearly making Sacred Sites faster to obtain will affect BNW Cultural HOF finish times, but it doesn't affect vanilla at all. So... huh? Were you not referring to the most recent patch? If you're referring to changes to vanilla that occurred after BNW was released, yes, this is unfortunate, and I don't see how the HOF staff could possibly deal with that.

I mean, you'd have to have 20 different sets of HOF and VVV... 11 version of vanilla (one for each patch), 7 versions of G&K and 4 versions of BNW.

Wiping out the tables is completely pointless. With Civ 6 on the horizon, and CivBE already out, the number of people playing HOF Civ5 is going to be less and less, just like the release of G&K and BNW reduced Vanilla HOF play.

If you wipe out the tables, everyone who had invested in those tables will have no reason to continue investing. So it'd be like 2 people playing HOF... Seems counter-productive, doesn't it?

Personally, I'm shocked and somewhat dismayed that they made significant tweaks to the social policy structure without fixing other balance issues at the same time. If you're going to make changes of this magnitude, it should be part of a broader effort. In other words, fix a bunch of issues at once... like repairing in enemy territory or any number of other unbalanced things about the game.
 
Cromagnus said:
I'm confused by this comment. BNW has separate HOF tables. They intentionally delayed adding BNW to the HOF until it was "stable" and given that this is the only significant patch in over a year, I don't really see the issue. What does this have to do with vanilla? Every expansion is affected by this, yes?

Clearly making Sacred Sites faster to obtain will affect BNW Cultural HOF finish times, but it doesn't affect vanilla at all. So... huh? Were you not referring to the most recent patch? If you're referring to changes to vanilla that occurred after BNW was released, yes, this is unfortunate, and I don't see how the HOF staff could possibly deal with that.

I mean, you'd have to have 20 different sets of HOF and VVV... 11 version of vanilla (one for each patch), 7 versions of G&K and 4 versions of BNW.

Wiping out the tables is completely pointless. With Civ 6 on the horizon, and CivBE already out, the number of people playing HOF Civ5 is going to be less and less, just like the release of G&K and BNW reduced Vanilla HOF play.

If you wipe out the tables, everyone who had invested in those tables will have no reason to continue investing. So it'd be like 2 people playing HOF... Seems counter-productive, doesn't it?

Personally, I'm shocked and somewhat dismayed that they made significant tweaks to the social policy structure without fixing other balance issues at the same time. If you're going to make changes of this magnitude, it should be part of a broader effort. In other words, fix a bunch of issues at once... like repairing in enemy territory or any number of other unbalanced things about the game.
Click to expand...

The point is that they are playing and discussing vanilla HoF.
 
bostich said:
I am still confused whether UI mods are allowed or not.
Click to expand...

According to the Hall of Fame rules (Here) there currently aren't any approved mods. Therefore, I would assume UI mods fall under that restriction.
 
Ah ok. Thanks. That is a very useful information.

So user generated content that has to be put in the mods folder is not allowed, but user generated content that can be put in the DLC folder is fine.
 
Hi,

just a very small question-- Is there any reason the "Gods & Kings + DLC" scores still appear by default in the Civ V HoF when you go the page? Brave New World is the latest, "most current" way to play...

More of a UI issue, as I would guess most people currently adding or checking scores are using Brave New World. As such, it is annoying to have to click the dropdown box every single time I want to check the BNW scores.

Just a minor request to make Brave New World the default choice on the menu.

Thanks.
 
zenmaster said:
Hi,

just a very small question-- Is there any reason the "Gods & Kings + DLC" scores still appear by default in the Civ V HoF when you go the page? Brave New World is the latest, "most current" way to play...

More of a UI issue, as I would guess most people currently adding or checking scores are using Brave New World. As such, it is annoying to have to click the dropdown box every single time I want to check the BNW scores.

Just a minor request to make Brave New World the default choice on the menu.

Thanks.
Click to expand...
Probably because I thought I had already done it. :blush:

Its BNW now. Thanks :goodjob:
 
I Am a complete novice at this BNW version of Civ5. As of yesterday, I kick started my VVV entries with a string of eleven duel domination games which covered the eight different levels. I am now wondering if I have done the right thing! Is there some sort of upper end threshold on the number of entries for a certain type of game whereby only the best scores count?

Easiest points obtained were from Hun deity great plains marathon. I am surprised it has been allowed.:lol:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

aafritz17
G-Minor CCXXIV
Replies
4
Views
481
aafritz17
aafritz17
aafritz17
  • Sticky
G-Major CLIII
Replies
2
Views
1K
billybgame
B
aafritz17
  • Sticky
G-Minor CCXXVI
Replies
0
Views
362
aafritz17
aafritz17
aafritz17
G-Minor CCXXIII
Replies
2
Views
513
aafritz17
aafritz17
aafritz17
G-Major CL
Replies
2
Views
603
aafritz17
aafritz17
Back
Top Bottom