HOF Rules Discussion
- Thread starter Darkness
- Start date
- Status
It's not a silly question neapol1s. We are currently reviewing all of the existing submissions, and that .sav is one that has already been picked up on (along with others). We're intending to update the tables with a number of games removed as a result of this review process, along with the new submission system, sometime next year (hopefully early next yearneapol1s said:
).Svar
King
neapol1s said:
There is no doubt that he disabled domination. According to Crpmapstat he is 1835 tiles over the domination limit and the city with the least culture (New Lagash 2) was founded in 1265 AD. New Lagash 2 has 1616 culture and an influence of 4. All the cities have at least an influence of 4 so they have all been there for awhile. Ther are other cities that were founded after New Lagash 2 but they have higher culture.
The answer to your question is that it is an obvious mistake allowing the entry.
As Dianthus mentioned, there are other games in the current HoF table that do not hold up to the criteria. Those players will be notified this weekend and the tables corrected with the next update.
Many of the HOF Lists are EMPTY or mostly empty......As a keen HOFer, it leaves me with a feeling that the HOF has in some way been "Devalued" since we expanded the HOF from simply High scores.
A lot of people made so much noise about how they didn't want to spend the time milking games....and here we are with Fast Finish spots available in the majority of the Lists.
So here's a suggestion:
If we have less than 10 entries for a List, allow UP TO 10 entries from any player.......Let's get those Lists FILLED!!
If, for example, we have a keen CivAddict like boogaboo (or EMan too) who plays 10 games on an empty List and fills it....then comes along another player who submits for that List....that game WILL make the List, irrespective of score or End-Date and the #10 "boogaboo game" will drop off!
(If 2 or more players have more than 2 games in the List, the LOWEST RANKING 3+ game will be deleted)
What y'all think, 'slug, boogaboo et al?
A lot of people made so much noise about how they didn't want to spend the time milking games....and here we are with Fast Finish spots available in the majority of the Lists.
So here's a suggestion:
If we have less than 10 entries for a List, allow UP TO 10 entries from any player.......Let's get those Lists FILLED!!
If, for example, we have a keen CivAddict like boogaboo (or EMan too) who plays 10 games on an empty List and fills it....then comes along another player who submits for that List....that game WILL make the List, irrespective of score or End-Date and the #10 "boogaboo game" will drop off!
(If 2 or more players have more than 2 games in the List, the LOWEST RANKING 3+ game will be deleted)
What y'all think, 'slug, boogaboo et al?
boogaboo
Josef Popper 4ever
Enjoyed reading this suggestion, but I think it is a technical issue, and perhaps a difficult one.
I'd prefer to be neutral on this
I wouldn't give more than 2 great games usually, and have deleted countless "good" ones.
I think people will fill the gaps, especially since I'm soooo near going to standard-size maps
Somepeople like to do cultural victories for example, and they compete among themselves for this.
If comes a new player, he'll have their best scores, but can still get in if the list ain't full and he ain't a fool
So... I don't see a problem, but wouldn't mind filling some "good" games either.. your suggestion just seems a more complicated technique.
I'd prefer to be neutral on this
I wouldn't give more than 2 great games usually, and have deleted countless "good" ones.
I think people will fill the gaps, especially since I'm soooo near going to standard-size maps
Somepeople like to do cultural victories for example, and they compete among themselves for this.
If comes a new player, he'll have their best scores, but can still get in if the list ain't full and he ain't a fool
So... I don't see a problem, but wouldn't mind filling some "good" games either.. your suggestion just seems a more complicated technique.
Maybe I'm simple-minded....BUT what's complicated about it!
P.s. It would be nice to fill the gaps BEFORE Civ 4 comes out!
P.s. It would be nice to fill the gaps BEFORE Civ 4 comes out!
Interesting idea, EMan, but even if it is technically possible I'm not going to do it. It would make the tables less straightforward, more confusing and convoluted. I think that hypothectical situation would damper activity more than encourage it.
Do try and maintain your enthusiasm though. I've only announced some of the details of the enhanced Hall of the future I'm trying to build, and the day will come soon we'll have a "product" that will deserve "marketing".
Do try and maintain your enthusiasm though. I've only announced some of the details of the enhanced Hall of the future I'm trying to build, and the day will come soon we'll have a "product" that will deserve "marketing".
Maybe I'm not understanding you or vice versa!superslug said:
All I'm saying is: If we have a List with slots Empty, why not ENCOURAGE (viz. motivate) people to fill 'em?!
A REAL example where, under the current system, an "intervention" (Manual or Automatic) will have to be made:
List: Tiny, Warlord, 20K Cultural Victory
This List currently has 2 entries, mine & LulThyme.
The "new" Submission List has 2 more entries from me that beat my existing End-Date.
Under my proposed Rule change, you would simply add the 2 new entries. Under the existing Rules, you will have to be aware that I have more than 2 entries in the List and remove the appropriate one!
Which is easier?
P.s. Is there a Maximum of 2 entries per player on the High Score List, even if entry-per-Victory-type does not exceed 2?
........Well, you did say "....maintain your enthusiasm...."!
And Finally, I'm eager to see the Fruits of YOUR Labors, 'slug.......It's GREAT to see your enthusiasm too!
That day is not here yet, but it is coming. I'm not content to merely maintain the HoF, I want to see it grow. In the long run, I'd like to rival the GOTM and have a core group of diehards ready to play as soon as we can get the CivIV HoF going.EMan said:
The server will automatically pull your third one off the table.EMan said:Under my proposed Rule change, you would simply add the 2 new entries. Under the existing Rules, you will have to be aware that I have more than 2 entries in the List and remove the appropriate one!
Which is easier?
It hasn't in the past, but we were able to fix that recently. For example, if someone had three Sid/Huge/milk games that qualified for the top spots of Domination, Conquest and Spaceship (common milk win conditions), those games would each get the #1 spot on those tables, but only the highest scoring two would show up on the general score table.EMan said:
I'm with you on that one, 'slug!superslug said:
Re filling up lists, would it be possible to allow gotm games into the HOF? Many of these are very strong games, with varied finish types, and the objection that gotm is heavily modded seems to have faded away. You could easily fill up the standard sized world lists very quickly this way. It would seem fair to me, as the maps generated by mapfinder which most people submit here, will be easier than those played in gotm.
. It probably is better keeping them separate, although clearly some players try both.
I have the utmost respect for the GOTM and the enjoyment it provides, it's just that it's very different from the Hall of Fame. The advantage of the GOTM is that everyone plays the same map and can do so on a monthly basis. The advantage of the Hall of Fame is that you can throw out as many maps as you want, and there's no time limit. We also offer significant more variety.
Since, I was reviewing a thread where an HOFer was Pop-Rushing, I thought I'd take a quick look at the current state of the HOF Rules.
No mention of Pop-Rushing....that's fine with me.
However, I noticed that only a few Utility Programs are "allowed".
There are several out there that are a good substitute for Manual Labor!
2 immediately come to mind:
1. Tech Calculator by Grey Fox: Calculates number of turns to Research a Tech
2. SirPleb's Date/Score Calculator.....Great for checking the number of turns to a specific date and projecting score when Milking.
Also, there are Utilities for estimating Cultural Victory win dates. (I don't think Apollo works for Conquests[?])
No mention of Pop-Rushing....that's fine with me.
However, I noticed that only a few Utility Programs are "allowed".
There are several out there that are a good substitute for Manual Labor!
2 immediately come to mind:
1. Tech Calculator by Grey Fox: Calculates number of turns to Research a Tech
2. SirPleb's Date/Score Calculator.....Great for checking the number of turns to a specific date and projecting score when Milking.
Also, there are Utilities for estimating Cultural Victory win dates. (I don't think Apollo works for Conquests[?])
Civ Assist will calculate projected win date for 20k victory I think..
for my 100k game I just used a normal calculator (100000 - current culture) / (current culture - culture last turn) = number of turns till you win unless you rush more culture (round the number of turns up, not down)
Assuming you can keep linear growth in culture per turn, then you can check what culture per turn you need to gain every turn to finish in X turns by umm.. I think this is correct:
((100000 - current culture)/X - (current culture - culture last turn)) " 2/(X+1)
for my 100k game I just used a normal calculator (100000 - current culture) / (current culture - culture last turn) = number of turns till you win unless you rush more culture (round the number of turns up, not down)
Assuming you can keep linear growth in culture per turn, then you can check what culture per turn you need to gain every turn to finish in X turns by umm.. I think this is correct:
((100000 - current culture)/X - (current culture - culture last turn)) " 2/(X+1)
MOTH
Emperor
Gyathaar said:
This calculation can always be a bit to long as it does not take into account the upcoming doubling of ancient culture buildings. Civ Assist manages this in the 20K win department, but I'm not aware of any utility that does this in regard to 100K wins.
EMan said:
That is one comment I have to make.
Whatever you are doing with streamlining the use of the database is great, but one thing is I think the Rules could use some updating.
Whenever there is a decision made in a thread about some unclear point, there should be an update to the rules, to make it official. (Im thinking of the going bankrupt and losing only one building at level higher then chieftain, if it is legal on chieftain etc.. but there are TONS of others...)
The concerns behind utility restrictions ar trainers, cheat-programs, .sav editors, and sometimes spoiler information. Calculators on the other hand are no problem whatsoever.EMan said:
- Status
