HOF V Update Discussion

[Denniz]

The Civilization V Hall of Fame has been updated. 95 games were accepted since the previous update.

Congratulations to Foamfollower for the highest Firaxis score of the update with a King, Domination, Marathon, Duel, Great Plains, Huns (Attila) [G&K] game for 47300 points.

Ludwitch was the most active player during this update, submitting 23 games.

Only 1 player was brave enough to take on Deity this update:
TractorBoy - Jan 2019 AD, Turn 689, 13027 points, Deity, Science, Epic, Standard, Pangaea, Siam (Ramkhamhaeng)

Gauntlet Results:
G-Minor LVI - Domination, Warlord, Standard, Archipelago, Standard, Any Leader [G&K] (check options)

1st jamgdz55 - 475 AD T-134

2nd Dancognito - 520 AD T-136

3rd FeiLing - 820 AD T-151

** New Gauntlets Starting **
G-Minor LVII - Science, King, Standard, Lakes, Standard, Babylon (Nebuchadnezzar II) [G&K]

 

[Denniz]

A number of players earned

Gold Medals this update:

Fastest Finish (Date):
Crafty1 - 2260 BC, Turn 29, 4712 points, Settler, Domination, Quick, Tiny, Great Plains, Siam (Ramkhamhaeng)
Crafty1 - 3100 BC, Turn 15, 3500 points, Settler, Domination, Quick, Duel, Ice Age, Russia (Catherine)
Dancognito - 1500 AD, Turn 140, 5623 points, Chieftain, Diplomacy, Quick, Small, Lakes, Rome (Augustus Caesar) [G&K]
sanabas - 1780 AD, Turn 266, 2830 points, King, Culture, Standard, Small, Arborea, Celts (Boudicca) [G&K]

Score:
TractorBoy - 13027 points, Jan 2019 AD, Turn 689, Deity, Science, Epic, Standard, Pangaea, Siam (Ramkhamhaeng)
TractorBoy - 17702 points, 2003 AD, Turn 423, Emperor, Science, Standard, Standard, Great Plains, Egypt (Ramesses II)
Crafty1 - 16038 points, 1862 AD, Turn 201, Settler, Domination, Quick, Duel, Pangaea, Songhai (Askia)
Crafty1 - 16017 points, 1888 AD, Turn 214, Settler, Domination, Quick, Duel, Pangaea, Siam (Ramkhamhaeng)
Crafty1 - 16785 points, 1815 AD, Turn 188, Settler, Domination, Quick, Duel, Lakes, Mongolia (Genghis Khan)
Crafty1 - 18209 points, 1765 AD, Turn 178, Settler, Domination, Quick, Duel, Lakes, Arabia (Harun al-Rashid)
Crafty1 - 14268 points, 1868 AD, Turn 204, Settler, Domination, Quick, Duel, Ice Age, Russia (Catherine)
Crafty1 - 23453 points, 1845 AD, Turn 194, Settler, Domination, Quick, Duel, Highlands, Songhai (Askia)
Crafty1 - 21659 points, 1854 AD, Turn 197, Settler, Domination, Quick, Duel, Highlands, Rome (Augustus Caesar)
Crafty1 - 12600 points, 1854 AD, Turn 197, Settler, Domination, Quick, Duel, Fractal, Japan (Oda Nobunaga)
Crafty1 - 13601 points, 1854 AD, Turn 197, Settler, Domination, Quick, Duel, Continents, Iroquois (Hiawatha)
Crafty1 - 16518 points, 1934 AD, Turn 237, Settler, Domination, Quick, Duel, Archipelago, Greece (Alexander)
keg - 12724 points, Jan 1966 AD, Turn 583, Chieftain, Domination, Epic, Large, Arborea, Celts (Boudicca) [G&K]
Peets - 15246 points, 1948 AD, Turn 244, Chieftain, Diplomacy, Quick, Small, Lakes, Rome (Augustus Caesar) [G&K]
sanabas - 2830 points, 1780 AD, Turn 266, King, Culture, Standard, Small, Arborea, Celts (Boudicca) [G&K]


Veni Vidi Vici News

The following players have joined the ranks of those completing all the VVV categories. Congratulatons!

nerovats (8th - G&K)
Sir Bugsy (19th)

 

[Crafty1]

Congrats to the participants in this last update and to those joining the VVV!

On that note I thought it would be interesting to see how people compared in the VVV based on the smaller categories, Tempi, Inferno, Machiavelli etc…

Machiavelli example

I notice that these sub sections still rank players based on the overall order. I wondered if it would be possible to add some sort of a filter so that, for example, I could compare how people rank whilst playing as Augustus Caesar in the league of nations, or perhaps a Deity games in inferno.

It should still be based on the points system currently in place but only show the results of interest.

Hope this makes sense and keep up the good work on the HoF.

 

[TractorBoy]

I notice that these sub sections still rank players based on the overall order. I wondered if it would be possible to add some sort of a filter so that, for example, I could compare how people rank whilst playing as Augustus Caesar in the league of nations, or perhaps a Deity games in inferno.

There was a thread on the HOF forum, I think it was called VVV scoring suggestions. If you read through then you will see that it does look as if Denniz & co are thinking of making a few changes some time in the future. Right now I would imagine they have a lot on their plates with the new BNW! It could be that the value of duel games will be demoted on the VVV, that is why I have started playing standard size games in recent months. My hope is that if any changes are enforced then I will still be at the top.

Congrats on your accumulation of points thus far, looks as if you will move into fourth place on the next update! It's nearly a year since I last entered a Settler game on the HOF and I'll be damned if I can remember the tactics involved for low level score games, I do know that the tactics change enormously through each level and it takes a game or two to find my feet. What I love about score games is the fact that they are not an exact science of precise timings. Playing for a date victory, some of the top players are able to gain Deity Culture victories in an hour or so of game play (fair play to them). The last four games I have entered have averaged 30 hrs a piece and some of those have been culture victories but with a difference, conquering everyone except one Capital and owning every hex on the planet!

I wasn't aware of this until 2013, but it seems that low sea level increases the score potential. So I am still learning and I think with a little practice I could be pushing your scores quite close. I just don't know if I really want to go down that road especially if the above mentioned changes come in to force!

EDIT
If duel games are devalued then only one VANILLA Deity game will hold it's original value, all the others that reached a gold medal standard (six contesting), were of the duel game variety. I would feel very sorry for you after all the efforts you have put in, my argument has always been - if the scoring rules have been set and enough people contest then the person winning an individual game deserves the reward for their efforts!! You only have to look at the VANILLA HALL OF FAME results to see where contestants have competed. Deity, Immortal and Emperor are very low on the list.

 

[Crafty1]

Thanks for the info tractorboy, I will try and look into that thread after this quick reply.

If they are in favour of changing the value of medals based on #opponents then so be it in my opinion. After all, they are indeed far more challenging and deserve greater rewards.

If I recall I think Civ4 HoF operated in a similar manner.

What would be really fun, and possibly spur greater interest in all of the games, is to change the VVV somehow to reflect both level difficulty and # opponents. Maybe this is what you are meaning and I will look for that post.

It will not bother me, it is the mere fact that there are games of a certain type out there that others can compete against.

As for the tactics changing as you progress through the levels, I have tried a chieftain game or two and think I my settler tactics could be compared with '...does not compute' to harder levels. Definately harder and also harder with more opponents.

Still, it is all good fun and I hope others join in on the vanilla game at some point.

Quick note to confirm the low sea level option, it does indeed create more land, or can do, which in turn not only increase land points but maybe even more city locations. However, not all maps have this option such as great plains.

I will now look for that thread and post there if needed.

 

[TractorBoy]

If they are in favour of changing the value of medals based on #opponents then so be it in my opinion. After all, they are indeed far more challenging and deserve greater rewards.

I totally disagree with you.

If some of the best players on the site have contested against each other, then does it really matter what level they were playing?

If the answer to the above is no, then why change all the scoring criteria just to suit some of the cry babies?

EDIT
I don't give two hoots about how they arrange the scoring system for any new games like G&K or BNW as long as they stick to their guns, if we all know what to strive for then we won't waste our time playing valueless games!!

After what I saw with the VANILLA, I will definitely bide my time before I ever put in a concerted effort in the future.