How Often do you Finish Your FFH Games?

[Avahz Darkwood]

The late game tends to be a bit of a bore to me at times so when I know I am going to win I either end the game or cheat to bring back some interest...

 

[Sarisin]

I don't finish most games just because my computer can't handle late game and I can't force myself to play only with few civs.

Vitek, this is me EXACTLY!

I would much rather enjoy playing on a huge map with beaucoup AI civs at Epic/Marathon speed than anything. However, I really know that when it gets to be the later stages of the mid-game, I am done. My computer just cannot handle all this and I am beset upon with long waiting times between turns, CTDs, and, well, some boredom.

Yeah, this is probably the first computer game I can remember that is outstanding in the run-up, but not so great as it goes on. A final result doesn't seem to be necessary. I have to say I really don't care if I win or lose...it is the fun experience of the game itself that matters to me. I don't think I ever said that before about a game.

Maybe if I can ever get a better machine to avoid that late-game slowdown, etc. I might finish more games.

But, for now, I just load up my favorite specs and play until I simply cannot any longer.

 

[westamastaflash]

I've got a Core 2 6600 @ 2.4 w/ 2 GB of ram and the game still runs slow with huge maps. Perhaps its time to upgrade the processor... ram.. everything...

 

[Nimbus]

I usually play until the lag between turns becomes unbearable. With .032 I switched from Huge maps and 19 civs to Large maps and 10 civs. The end result is that I get to play about another 100-120 turns than what I usually get. For the same amount of turns in vanilla I would usually be finished with a game, here it is just mid-game and the only real, viable win conditions are either tower of mastery or altar of lounatour wins, which is disappointing.

 

[wig]

Thank you for this, I had forgotten that back before I started writing code I proposed an alternative set of Victory Conditions which are MUCH lower, so that you have to struggle quickly to get yours before the AI gets theirs. Having them as an option may be worth testing out now that I can easily convince someone (that would of course be myself) to write the needed code.

That sounds like a great idea, Xienwolf. I'd be interested in seeing what you come up with.

My biggest gripe with the victory conditions is with Domination. I think the two percentages should be swapped, so that it requires 66% of the population and 47% of the land mass to achieve victory. Why should I need to go settle a few tundra cities to win if I already have 2/3 of the world's population under my rule?

 

[loffenx]

Thanks for the tips, Nikis-Knight and westamastaflash. That should help alleviate the micromanagement side of the problem. To me its a bit of an rp-problem too, the newly conquered lands doesnt feel like "my" lands, playing as the elves for example i just can't wait to get back to my dark forest and cuddle with the shadows. It's alright with the Calabim though since you can play it out as a quite brutal occupation

 

[Webrider]

I have played about 10 - 15 games across 2 computers. Both top of the line, hardware.
I have never had trouble with lag between truns, the old one gets about 15,000 win 3d marks this one gets about 21,000. But mid to late game I always get to a point the game crashes. I always use the latest FFH patch. Maybe its just luck. I know it is a work in progress but I would like to be able to finish a game. I take that back I did finish one game on time victory, right when the game was starting to get good. I have always disabled time victory since.

 

[Pyr0mancer]

I have played about 10 - 15 games across 2 computers. Both top of the line, hardware.
I have never had trouble with lag between truns, the old one gets about 15,000 win 3d marks this one gets about 21,000. But mid to late game I always get to a point the game crashes. I always use the latest FFH patch. Maybe its just luck. I know it is a work in progress but I would like to be able to finish a game. I take that back I did finish one game on time victory, right when the game was starting to get good. I have always disabled time victory since.

Is Hyborem happening to spawn around the time your game crashes? Try playing a game with Hell Terrain turned off, or Compact Enforced, and see if it still crashes. Hell terrain's been known to cause issues even on good machines.

 

[tharg]

I usually stop a game when the next patch comes, however now the updates have stopped comming I have just finished a couple.

 

[LUEser]

I usually only continue playing when one or more of the AI civs becomes a huge/powerful nation and at least poses a threat whereas they often expand and then just sit in their cities for eons leaving no challenge for any invasion. That and the speed of the game, I feel as though on normal, the build times feel right but research is too fast and vice-verse for epic.

 

[[NWO]_Valis]

Under the 30% mark. Have to less time to play lately and patches come to often

 

[JDexter]

I've been with FfH right from the beginning and I don't think I've completed (in any way) more than one or two games (out of at least 20 serious games and many more that I abandoned when I noticed that the world sucks or a significantly new patch was out).

The reason is most of the time that I end up simply conquering what's next to me without big problems. Well, since I don't like loosing units I tend to reload and that just takes so long - especially later on with the slow turns. If the challenge level is too low I loose interest and want to try a new game. Tuning up the difficulty doesn't really help, probably because I don't enjoy the game as much anymore.

If we could get back trophies the motivation to finish would be way higher though!

 

[Bringa]

I have yet to properly "finish" a game, as in trigger a victory condition. Especially in multiplayer this is just not very interesting, unless you ninja a culture/tower victory. Everything else it just comes down to one huge war and you know when you've lost, so why keep playing.

 

[Vanion]

I can't remember the last time I actually finished a game, so I voted "never". I THINK it was one of my first FfH games, where I won an Altar victory, which I switched off after that.

There are a number of reasons for that...

1. I really LOVE the exploration part of the game. Exploring the surroundings of your capital, finding the first few great settling spots, expanding your empire, meeting the other civilizations, all that makes up the part that excites me most about Civilization. This isn't exactly a FfH thing, but carries over from vanilla civ, but I think it's the most important reason.

2. Like other people said, the performance tends to become somewhat unbearable in the late game, at least when playing large maps with about 13 civs like I do frequently. I hope the performance improvements with 0.33 alleviate this, though.

3. I hate playing games where the outcome is already decided, either because you or your enemies are too strong. When that happens, I normally start anew.

 

[Caradoc]

I declare a 'points' victory when I have as many points as the next two opponents combined, and I have done this many times. If I am doing a serious roleplay, I like to select only one victory condition and play it out all the way. I will also play to the finish if the Armageddon Clock gets past 40 and I am good or neutral.

 

[avalonnn]

I find I'm more likely to finish if I allow a domination victory . . . or if the AI builds the Altar.

I've played one Altar victory and a few Mastery victories and many conquest victories, but generally prefer Dominiation -- because you get there faster.

If you are disabling Domination vicotories, I can see why you'd finish fewer games.

 

[Darksaber1]

I've never won a Domination victory. In the closest I've ever had I had 90% of the world pop, but only 30% of the land. (Oh yes, did i mention their were still 6 civs in the game?)

 

[texdionis]

75-99%

I like quiet games, in fact it's unlikely for me tryng to play harder than warrior level because it's too stressful for me having too many AI willing to wipe me off as soon as possible.
But one thing that annoys me is the lack of new techs in the late games, that's the reason why I tend to retire from the game when I come to the turn before getting "Future tech n. 2", even if I costantly low down the science rate during the game.
I really would like more techs for the next updates

 

[Nikis-Knight]

The reason is most of the time that I end up simply conquering what's next to me without big problems. Well, since I don't like losing units I tend to reload and that just takes so long - especially later on with the slow turns. If the challenge level is too low I loose interest and want to try a new game. Tuning up the difficulty doesn't really help, probably because I don't enjoy the game as much anymore.

I'd like to humbly suggest that you would solve some of your problems if you didn't reload. It's hard losing a cherished unit, but if you don't have the possibility, a lot of the challenge is gone.

 

[Randolph]

I've got a Core 2 6600 @ 2.4 w/ 2 GB of ram and the game still runs slow with huge maps. Perhaps its time to upgrade the processor... ram.. everything...

Sorry to get on a tangent, but this brings up a question I've been wondering about: What is usually the speed bottleneck with CIV games? I know in general with games its usually the GPU, but with CIV it seems like it might, at least in part, be straight CPU processing (all that AI and rules calculations), in which case it might be worth looking into overclocking.