HOF Questions & Answers

[Peets]

dual games don't give much points

 

[NiceOneEmlyn]

dual games don't give much points

Thanks.

Perhaps my question was misunderstood. Lets just say I entered 1,000 different dual games to the HOF, would they all count towards the total VVV score?

 

[zenmaster]

Probably because I thought I had already done it.

Its BNW now. Thanks

Thank you so much!

 

[zenmaster]

Thanks.

Perhaps my question was misunderstood. Lets just say I entered 1,000 different dual games to the HOF, would they all count towards the total VVV score?

Any games with the same basic settings (Map/Level/Speed/Civ) would be duplicates, only the "best" game at that setting would count, as far as I know. All games with different settings would count, I'm pretty sure.

 

[Peets]

Thanks.

Perhaps my question was misunderstood. Lets just say I entered 1,000 different dual games to the HOF, would they all count towards the total VVV score?

Yes, all your games count.
But if you play all the same type then your average doesn't go up much. So each game will give you even less points.
So the best is to play a lot of different settings to raise your average faster.

For example:

Tempi Trophy (speed)
I have played quick and standard games making my score:
Score 261,2
Average 124,2

Quick: 105.9 (max 124,2)
Standard: 155,2 (max 155,2)
Epic: 0
Marathon: 0

If I would play a standard game, my points won't go up much since I'm already at max.
If I play a quick game, I have some room to go up.
If I play a epic or Marathon then my score will rise a lot since I'm far away of the max.

Though, each game my average will rise. with 1/4 of the points of each game since there are 4 different settings.

 

[NiceOneEmlyn]

Yes, all your games count.
But if you play all the same type then your average doesn't go up much. So each game will give you even less points.
So the best is to play a lot of different settings to raise your average faster.

For example:

Tempi Trophy (speed)
I have played quick and standard games making my score:
Score 261,2
Average 124,2

Quick: 105.9 (max 124,2)
Standard: 155,2 (max 155,2)
Epic: 0
Marathon: 0

If I would play a standard game, my points won't go up much since I'm already at max.
If I play a quick game, I have some room to go up.
If I play a epic or Marathon then my score will rise a lot since I'm far away of the max.

Though, each game my average will rise. with 1/4 of the points of each game since there are 4 different settings.

Thanks peets. I don't fully understand the reasoning behind this format, it would seem to be pointless playing the VVV in the manner I intended to play. Lets just say for arguments sake that I took on every single dual dom game that has been entered so far and beat them all! From what you are describing some of my entries would be a waste of time! It would seem to be the case that we all need to be some sort of mathematical genius to fully understand the concept?

The old vanilla/G+K style scoring was simple but flawed in respect of accumulating points via gold silver and bronze only, as a consequence a lot of the participants had nothing to show for their hundreds of hours of effort. The scoring system for BNW is just about as flawed as the game itself seems to be! Play on the HOF dual and if you don't find archery from a ruin within two turns then you restart until you do. All the victory types seem to have major flaws which have been highlighted in different areas of the Civ directories. At least with vanilla we had to work hard for our victories, and the games were less dependant on the outcome of ruins etc etc.

Don't get me wrong by maybe thinking that I am undermining this BNW version of the game and that I may be undermining the intelligence of those that play the game, far from it, there are some amazing pathfinders out there and they help pave the way for the rest of us sheep to follow.

 

[zenmaster]

Thanks peets. I don't fully understand the reasoning behind this format, it would seem to be pointless playing the VVV in the manner I intended to play. Lets just say for arguments sake that I took on every single dual dom game that has been entered so far and beat them all! From what you are describing some of my entries would be a waste of time! It would seem to be the case that we all need to be some sort of mathematical genius to fully understand the concept?

Well, setting out to play and beat all the duel domination games would win you a ton of medals. That would put you high on the Overall Medals list in the HOF. What's wrong with that?

Are you expecting to play only duel domination games and then be ranked in the Veni Vidi Vici ahead of people who play all victory types and map levels, proving their mettle in all facets of the game? THAT makes no sense and would truly be flawed!

The old vanilla/G+K style scoring was simple but flawed in respect of accumulating points via gold silver and bronze only, as a consequence a lot of the participants had nothing to show for their hundreds of hours of effort.

Ummm...yes.... exactly....and you still think the VVV is worse ????? I really don't understand how the VVV is not an improvement. You yourself just explained the flaw of the old system above.

The scoring system for BNW is just about as flawed as the game itself seems to be! Play on the HOF dual and if you don't find archery from a ruin within two turns then you restart until you do. All the victory types seem to have major flaws which have been highlighted in different areas of the Civ directories. At least with vanilla we had to work hard for our victories, and the games were less dependant on the outcome of ruins etc etc.

I don't think you understand the sound thinking behind the VVV. If you want to win a gold medal in a certain short game type like duel domination, sure you can map reroll to oblivion. Do you know how long that takes? The VVV rewards you not for infinite map rerolling but for playing many games of all lengths and types to completion. There is no way you can possibly "reroll" your way to a high VVV standing. Not enough time to seek the perfect rerolls on short games and map rerolls can't replace strategy, tactics, and experience on games of any reasonable length. The only games that can be "ruins dependent" are short domination games and games on the lowest difficulty setting where you can pop Settlers from ruins. Those don't get you many VVV points thankfully but can be fun still for a quick game if you want.

I'm sorry, but to win medals or high VVV standing in non-duel domination games, the gameplay is hard and fun, and the victory types are not flawed. Read up on the gauntlets and the games of the month. BNW is light years ahead of the older versions in my opinion.

If your opinion on BNW differs, that's fine, and I respect that, but that still doesn't explain the logic behind your bashing of the VVV system. The VVV rewards every game you play, and most rewards those who take on the game at all levels and victory types. Isn't that a good thing??? Anyway, there are still the medals standings in the HoF if you somehow can't see the beauty of the VVV. Hope you can still enjoy!

 

[Cromagnus]

I like the scoring system. I hate that it doesn't include some of the newer map types and DOES include some of the more terrible map types, but the scoring system is fine with me. One Standard/Standard/Deity game is worth like 17 Settler Duel games.

 

[NiceOneEmlyn]

If your opinion on BNW differs, that's fine, and I respect that, but that still doesn't explain the logic behind your bashing of the VVV system. The VVV rewards every game you play, and most rewards those who take on the game at all levels and victory types. Isn't that a good thing??? Anyway, there are still the medals standings in the HoF if you somehow can't see the beauty of the VVV. Hope you can still enjoy!

I am not so much bashing the VVV system, more bashing the complexity of how it works. I am totally in favour of all comers scoring points for their efforts. From what Peets has posted it looks as if he has reached a maximum on standard speed games and he is implying that any future games will be of very little benefit. I would like to fully understand how this works!

I had my first BNW game three or four days ago and decided to practice on dual games, it will take me a long time to reach the standards of others (if ever). I am enjoying playing these for the time being. In the next couple of weeks I might move on to tiny games and so forth. I have no idea how to play for any of the other victory types as yet, but I do intend to learn next year?

 

[chuckh89]

Is it at Midnight for the transition dates stated, or is the Gauntlet still in effect until the 'HOF Update" screen is posted with the previous results, and next Gauntlet?

 

[NiceOneEmlyn]

I have now entered 22 dual domination games but nothing else. My confusion lies with the fact that some of these games may not count on the VVV! If I now move up to tiny games is there some sort of limit on how many will count and will they have an effect on the previous dual game entries?

 

[zenmaster]

I am not so much bashing the VVV system, more bashing the complexity of how it works. I am totally in favour of all comers scoring points for their efforts. From what Peets has posted it looks as if he has reached a maximum on standard speed games and he is implying that any future games will be of very little benefit. I would like to fully understand how this works.

I have no idea how to play for any of the other victory types as yet, but I do intend to learn next year?

Ok, questioning the complex formulas that make up the scoring is extremely understandable! [emoji2] Hopefully Peets can shed more light on them for you.

Good luck and have fun exploring the game!

 

[Cromagnus]

22 duel games will all count as long as they are different leaders and/or different map types.

However, your contribution in the "Go The Distance" section is capped because you haven't played the other sizes. (So your avg cap is limited by all the zero's you have in the Tiny/Small/Etc) columns.

So in the VVV summary, your score for "Go The Distance" will be very small.

Not to mention that duel games are worth the least number of points to begin with.

However, if your goal is to complete "Map Quest" or "Leaque of Nations", then ALL your duel games count as long as you're not playing the same civ/map combination.

If your goal is to complete the VVV, you have to play at least one game on every difficulty, map type, map size, and map speed, and with each leader. But, you don't have to do ALL combinations.

For example, you could play every single map type, speed, size, and difficulty with Attila. But you'd need 42 more games to win with every leader.

If your goal is to complete the VVV quickly, the best approach (IMHO) is as follows:

You have to play at least 43 games to complete the VVV. Only 20 of them have to be unique map types, but every one of them needs to be a unique leader.

So, starting with Ahmad Al-Mansur, finishing with Harald, play each map type once, all on Settler, Duel, Marathon, winning via Domination.

Now you've fulfilled all map types. Then play 7 more games, each on a higher level, but still on duel, each with a different leader, starting with Harun Al-Rashid and finishing with Montezuma, and start cycling through the map types again.

Now you've fulfilled all difficulties. Then play 3 more games, on settler, duel, marathon, on Quick, Standard, and Epic, starting with Napoleon, ending with Oda.

Now you've fulfilled all speeds. Then play 4 more games on settler, marathon, on Small/Standard/Large/Huge, starting with Pacal, ending with Pocatello.

Now you've fulfilled all map sizes. Then play 4 more games on settler, quick, and win by Culture, Science, Diplomacy and Time, starting with Ramses, ending with Shaka.

Now you've fulfilled all victory conditions, and you can finish out Suleiman through Wu Zetian via duel, settler, pangaea, marathon domination wins.

Grats on finishing the VVV.

This is the way to complete it that requires the least amount of brainpower, but hand picking the conditions for your various higher-difficulty wins would make it easier.

However, not every single one of those wins would contribute max value to the VVV.

To ensure max contribution, cycle *everything*.

IE every game you play should be switching to the next leader, next map type, next map size, next speed, next difficulty, and flipping back to the first option when you run out.

This approach nets the best cap avg, but does not net the most points.

To win the most points, you must either play on high difficulty levels or play games which have been played by a lot of people, and most importantly, you must post the best finish time.

You can tell which approach I favor. I have way more points on Deity than any other difficulty, and I try to post a best finish time at least once every update on a game that has 5+ entries already.

 

[NiceOneEmlyn]

To ensure max contribution, cycle *everything*.

IE every game you play should be switching to the next leader, next map type, next map size, next speed, next difficulty, and flipping back to the first option when you run out.

Thanks very much for all your help.

Cycling everything, does this still apply after completion of the VVV. What I mean is - can we now overload with our favourite type of game whilst still scoring points? You have mentioned that you favour Deity games, so I take it there is no penalty for playing lots of them?

What I am concerned about is something I read on the HOF a couple of years back and it was as follows;

Only the best three games with each leader will count.
Only the best three entries with each map type will count.
Only the best ten entries at each level will count.

The above may not be correct, but it was something along those lines!

Thanks again Cromagnus, it was very kind of you to take the time to help those in need (me).

 

[Cromagnus]

Thanks very much for all your help.

Cycling everything, does this still apply after completion of the VVV. What I mean is - can we now overload with our favourite type of game whilst still scoring points? You have mentioned that you favour Deity games, so I take it there is no penalty for playing lots of them?

What I am concerned about is something I read on the HOF a couple of years back and it was as follows;

Only the best three games with each leader will count.
Only the best three entries with each map type will count.
Only the best ten entries at each level will count.

The above may not be correct, but it was something along those lines!

Thanks again Cromagnus, it was very kind of you to take the time to help those in need (me).

I don't know about those numbers, but I do know only the best game with a given combination counts. Only your best deity-domination-Attila-small-duel game counts.

After you finish the VVV you should focus on your lowest values. For example, last update I had a 44 or something on arborea, and a 21 with Harald so I did a game with those settings.

Otherwise you end up capped. For example, I've played 2000 pts worth of domination games. But domination only contributes 1096 pts to my VVV score because it's capped.

If I really want my Machiavelli score to go up, I need to play more Time games. Unfortunately, time games are really... Time... Consuming... Sooo that score won't be going up much. But a time game worth 200 pts would boost my domination contribution, so is actually worth more like 300 pts to me.

Anyway, that's the idea. Focus on categories that are low in pts, they're capping your score. For this next update I'll probably do an emperor epic large fractal Egypt space game, or some combination thereof that matches an existing game with multiple entries.
I have only 1.1 pts with Egypt, fractal is my lowest points map, epic my lowest points speed, etc.

If I submit a game with that combination, I'll get (close to) full points for it. Close because some other category will become the new cap.

 

[Peets]

I have now entered 22 dual domination games but nothing else. My confusion lies with the fact that some of these games may not count on the VVV! If I now move up to tiny games is there some sort of limit on how many will count and will they have an effect on the previous dual game entries?

All your games count but each dual game gives you less points until you play another type of game which will raise your average faster and your dual games will suddenly be more points.

Is it at Midnight for the transition dates stated, or is the Gauntlet still in effect until the 'HOF Update" screen is posted with the previous results, and next Gauntlet?

Around midnight.

 

[NiceOneEmlyn]

I don't know about those numbers, but I do know only the best game with a given combination counts. Only your best deity-domination-Attila-small-duel game counts.

After you finish the VVV you should focus on your lowest values. For example, last update I had a 44 or something on arborea, and a 21 with Harald so I did a game with those settings.

Otherwise you end up capped. For example, I've played 2000 pts worth of domination games. But domination only contributes 1096 pts to my VVV score because it's capped.

If I really want my Machiavelli score to go up, I need to play more Time games. Unfortunately, time games are really... Time... Consuming... Sooo that score won't be going up much. But a time game worth 200 pts would boost my domination contribution, so is actually worth more like 300 pts to me.

Anyway, that's the idea. Focus on categories that are low in pts, they're capping your score. For this next update I'll probably do an emperor epic large fractal Egypt space game, or some combination thereof that matches an existing game with multiple entries.
I have only 1.1 pts with Egypt, fractal is my lowest points map, epic my lowest points speed, etc.

If I submit a game with that combination, I'll get (close to) full points for it. Close because some other category will become the new cap.

Thanks again.

I have just come across the add hoc query, and as a result I am starting to get the bigger picture. You have only entered 49 games in total but have maximised the value of said games.

CAPPED is the word I don't fully understand, as regards the Civ5 VVV context. Reading between the lines of what you have to say, I would imagine it is something to do with keeping the number of entries for each related category as even as possible.

 

[Cromagnus]

Thanks again.

I have just come across the add hoc query, and as a result I am starting to get the bigger picture. You have only entered 49 games in total but have maximised the value of said games.

CAPPED is the word I don't fully understand, as regards the Civ5 VVV context. Reading between the lines of what you have to say, I would imagine it is something to do with keeping the number of entries for each related category as even as possible.

You have the general idea. Basically the points from your duel games are capped because you haven't submitted many games at other sizes. But that cap only applies to the map size portion of your total score. So you aren't losing out on that many points. Like I mentioned. For example even though I'm capped by 1000 pts for my domination games, that's only in the victory type category. Those games are still providing maximum value in the map type category, for example. It's complicated but you've got the idea.

Here for example are your settler games:

Seq Rank Player Type Date Turn Score ID Submit_Date TRank TScore
1 Silver Medal NiceOneEmlyn Settler Domination Duel Marathon Pangaea Germany (Bismark) BNW 3520 BC 32 5150 8548 2014-12-16 1 29.628
2 Silver Medal NiceOneEmlyn Settler Domination Duel Epic Great Plains Greece (Alexander) BNW 3325 BC 27 14500 8552 2014-12-16 1 29.628
3 Gold Medal NiceOneEmlyn Settler Domination Duel Quick Great Plains Celts (Boudicca) BNW 3040 BC 16 8250 8551 2014-12-16 1 26.327
4 Silver Medal NiceOneEmlyn Settler Domination Duel Standard Pangaea Russia (Catherine) BNW 3000 BC 25 2260 8509 2014-12-11 1 29.628

Your total points should be over 100 for your settler games in the difficulty category but you're capped at 71 because you only have 35 points in chieftain. So submitting a chieftain game would give your 40+ points from settler being uncapped.

 

[chuckh89]

When is the the "Real" deadline for Gauntlets?

Is it at Midnight for the transition dates stated, or is the Gauntlet still in effect until the 'HOF Update" screen is posted with the previous results, and next Gauntlet?

Around midnight.

If the deadline is "around midnight" then "Why do we need to wait 1-3 days before the next Gauntlet is posted?

The HOF Staff's obvious answer,...."Because is takes a large amount of time to compile the previous months results for the "HOF Update page"!! (you ungrateful &#*@!!)

Example:
The midway through December HoF Update page was released 12-17 18:34. That means that there is not 16 days (Dec.31) to complete the new minor, but 13 days 5 hours, and 26 minutes. PLUS, I would add another 12 hours (Avg. Minor/Major), because your not going to start a Gauntlet if there is a risk of not finishing before the deadline.

So, lets just say less than 13days!! (And, of course 12 days...if the same situation happened at the beginning of month)


I am not ungrateful, and I am so appreciative of the work that the HoF Staff does to feed our love for this game. But I am asking...

Can we please post the HoF Update Page minus the results one day before the previous Gauntlet is complete?? (Then add the previous months results whenever you have time)

This would give us more time to attempt the current Gauntlet, and give us the option to start on the new Gauntlet if we don't think that we can finish before the deadline.

I also ask that you empathize with some of us "Blue Collar" guys that work on a end of the month priority system. Big business, manufacturing, production, etc. many times work to maximize monthly numbers. That means management will often work employees hard at the end of the month (including weekends) to accomplish monthly goals.

So, when do they get time off? Exactly when there is no Gauntlet posted!! The end of the last day of the month, and 2-3 days starting the next month.

One of the "Goals" stated for choosing Gauntlets is "Maximum Participation", and I believe getting it up earlier would help dramatically. I would assume the HoF page is a standard format, in which you just fill in your data and post,...I don't believe this would be a strain on the HoF Staff, and would appreciate if you would do "your best" to get the Gauntlets to us in a timely fashion.

Here's what I propose, since actually posting the new g-minor probably requires the update... Maybe they could post a preview on the day the minor is schedule to end

If the HoF update is unavailable, a possible solution could be a "Preview". The settings for the upcoming Gauntlet(s) could be announced on the current Minor/Major, so everyone would be informed well before the deadline.

Once again, nobody appreciates the HoF Staff's efforts more than I do, I am just trying to make it better for all that participate. Thanks

 

[Cromagnus]

If the deadline is "around midnight" then "Why do we need to wait 1-3 days before the next Gauntlet is posted?

The HOF Staff's obvious answer,...."Because is takes a large amount of time to compile the previous months results for the "HOF Update page"!! (you ungrateful &#*@!!)

Example:
The midway through December HoF Update page was released 12-17 18:34. That means that there is not 16 days (Dec.31) to complete the new minor, but 13 days 5 hours, and 26 minutes. PLUS, I would add another 12 hours (Avg. Minor/Major), because your not going to start a Gauntlet if there is a risk of not finishing before the deadline.

So, lets just say less than 13days!! (And, of course 12 days...if it is the beginning of month)


I am not ungrateful, and I am so appreciative of the work that the HoF Staff does to feed our love for this game. But I am asking...

Can we please post the HoF Update Page minus the results one day before the previous Gauntlet is complete?? (Then add the previous months results whenever you have time)

This would give us more time to attempt the current Gauntlet, and give us the options to start on the new Gauntlet if we don't think that we can finish before the deadline.

I also ask that you empathize with some of us "Blue Collar" guys that work on a end of the month priority system. Big business, manufacturing, production, etc. many times work to maximize monthly numbers. That means management with often work employees hard at the end of the month (including weekends) to accomplish monthly goals.

So when do they get time off? Exactly when there is no Gauntlet posted!! The end of the last day of the month, and 2 days starting the next month.

One of the "Goals" stated for choosing Gauntlets is "Maximum Participation", and I believe getting it up earlier would help dramatically. I would assume the HoF page is a standard format, in which you just fill in your data and post,...I don't believe this would be a strain on the HoF staff, and would appreciate if you would do "your best" to get the Gauntlets to us in a timely fashion.

Once again, nobody appreciates the HoF Staff's efforts more than I do, I am just trying to make it better for all that participate. Thanks

I think I remember someone saying that once all games have been evaluated and accepted, the actual update & email is an automated process. They press a button and it all goes through.

If I were to hazard a guess, the delay is likely due to increased participation. (More games to check)... But I could be wrong.

Here's what I propose, since actually posting the new g-minor probably requires the update... Maybe they could post a preview on the day the minor is schedule to end, detailing the settings of the next minor, so people who don't want to risk missing the deadline can start on the new minor. GoTM does something similar to this, and it's nice if you've already submitted games, to have something to work on. Especially given the reduced time if the update comes late.