Inca Empire filter for the Hall of Fame Tables

Do you want the HoF Staff to add an Inca checkbox to the HoF Tables?


  • Total voters
    31

Sun Tzu Wu

Deity
Supporter
Joined
Mar 26, 2007
Messages
7,920
This thread started as a question to the "HOF Questions and Answers Thread" on how to filter out Inca Empire (and its Quechua) from the Hall of Fame Tables:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=11902760&postcount=1245

The Inca Empire (Huayna Capac; Quechuas) is not allowed in Gauntlets or Elite Quatrromaters. There is also a filter or check box for Excluding the Inca Empire for the Ad Hoc Query.

How does one filter out Inca Empire games from the Hall of Fame tables?

However, shulec, started a previous thread over a year ago, "Box to Exclude Inca from Main HoF Table", requesting the same Inca filter (I wasn't aware of that thread until today):

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=433375

Please read these two threads first and come back to this one and read it to the end and then use the poll attached to this thread to say whether you are against or in favor of having an Inca filter for The Hall of Fame Tables.

Please note that the Hall of Fame Staff determines whether or not there will be an Inca filter, irregardless of what the poll results might be. The Hall of Fame Staff will make a decision that is in the best interests of promoting The Hall of Fame to new players and fulfills the needs of both new and veteran HoF players. It is safe to assume that the poll may have some effect on their decision, so please vote the way you really feel about having or not having an Inca filter and on the evidence provided on both sides, but not on how you may happen to feel about the proponents (pro or con).

Thanks for participating in the discussion and the poll.

Sun Tzu Wu
 
No. The information is available in the Ad-Hoc query if you want to see tables without Inca. I don't see any value for having this filter in the main table as Inca are allowed for HOF submission and so they should be included in the main table.

The Ad-Hoc query presents HoF table data on a single HoF slot basis. Using the Ad-Hoc query to manually present this data as the Main HoF Table displays it requires 9 (Difficulty levels) * 9 (Victory Conditions) * 6 (Map Sizes) * 4 (Game Speeds) = 9 * 9 * 6 * 4 = 1944 individual Ad-Hoc queries. Now one has to take the result of each of those 1944 queries and enter it into a spreadsheet or others means of approximately showing the data in the format that the Main HoF Table would with the Inca filter.

Thus, the Ad-Hoc Query is an impractical substitute at best for a real Inca filter that directly operates on the Main HoF Web Page.

Sun Tzu Wu
 
No. The information is available in the Ad-Hoc query if you want to see tables without Inca. I don't see any value for having this filter in the main table as Inca are allowed for HOF submission and so they should be included in the main table.

just a question... the problem you see with such checkbox is "design decision" problem or more "we don't have time to adjust pages" problem?

I still can't see what the obstacle here is.
Making such checkbox should be relatively easy (dunno the tables you have designed, but I would expect adding something like "civilization <> 'Inca'" should be possible and checkbox is in html) and I don't see a harm in making such checkbox, it's just another filter in SQL... the same as I can make now filters for various things (victory condition, difficulty, speed etc).

What are the dangers the HOF team sees in adding such "just another filter"?

I could see that demanding making sub-tabpage with Incas filtered out could be more problematic.
 
Any Inca filter on the regular HoF is a back-door ban of Inca.
As you all are no doubt aware, the main HoF table has no filter. OK, fine, you can filter by expansion, but that is because the rules change

Options such as 'No Barbs' or 'Raging Barbs' are an exploit. You try winning a RL DV HoF game without 'No Barbs' turned on.

Maps that are contiguous are an exploit for domination, conquest & religious. You try winning a RL DV HoF game with a map that is not contiguous.

I want a filter/ban to exclude all games that were won with 'No Barbs' turned on.
I want a filter/ban to exclude all games that were won with 'Huts' turned on.
I want a filter/ban to exclude all games that were won with contiguous maps.
....
where does it end?

Actually, I think I know.
Ban/filter all games that use exploits I do not like.
Allow all games that use exploits I do like.


Elite HoF players already have the EQM system, which explicitly excludes Inca and is a much better gauge than the HoF anyway.

Is seeing your name up in flashing lights really that important? Nobody look at me
 
I voted no....nuff said.

Moderator Action: Keep it polite and on topic please.
 
just a question... the problem you see with such checkbox is "design decision" problem or more "we don't have time to adjust pages" problem?

Neither.

neilmeister said:
Any Inca filter on the regular HoF is a back-door ban of Inca.

...

I want a filter/ban to exclude all games that were won with 'No Barbs' turned on.
I want a filter/ban to exclude all games that were won with 'Huts' turned on.
I want a filter/ban to exclude all games that were won with contiguous maps.

This is more why we don't feel this is necessary.
 
You try winning a RL DV HoF game without 'No Barbs' turned on.

I could do that if you'd like. RLDV is so fast, that barbs won't invade. There would only be a couple roaming around for easy free experience. Hmmm...maybe you've just discovered a new strategy.
Sorry, off topic.

I'm still on the fence about the Inca checkbox. My fear is having people refer to the "real HoF" as the one that excludes Inca (neilmeister's point about back-door ban)

However, I do like the idea of being able to mine the data any way you like by applying a filter to the entire table. The Ad-Hoc query is too cumbersome for this task. I also can see how the Inca Filter (of all the many possible filters...no barbs, etc.) would be the most useful (credibility given by EQM).

Firaxis had their chance to nerf the Inca/Quechua in BtS, but they actually made them more powerful! They added free combat I (after they took away the AGG trait). This makes me think they want the Inca/Quechua to be that good...and I must admit. I love them!

Possible solutions:
So, to give people the data they desire, but not let these unofficial filtered tables clutter or confuse the situation, a button to download a spreadsheet of the filtered data might satisfy. Or change the Ad-hoc query to have 'Any' in the listboxes.

EDIT: I guess my answer to the specific poll question is No, but there are other solutions.
 
Accidentally duplicated this post when trying to edit this one. All original content of this post plus its continuation now appear in the following post.
 
Any Inca filter on the regular HoF is a back-door ban of Inca.
As you all are no doubt aware, the main HoF table has no filter. OK, fine, you can filter by expansion, but that is because the rules change

Options such as 'No Barbs' or 'Raging Barbs' are an exploit. You try winning a RL DV HoF game without 'No Barbs' turned on.

Maps that are contiguous are an exploit for domination, conquest & religious. You try winning a RL DV HoF game with a map that is not contiguous.

I want a filter/ban to exclude all games that were won with 'No Barbs' turned on.
I want a filter/ban to exclude all games that were won with 'Huts' turned on.
I want a filter/ban to exclude all games that were won with contiguous maps.
....
where does it end?

Actually, I think I know.
Ban/filter all games that use exploits I do not like.
Allow all games that use exploits I do like.


Elite HoF players already have the EQM system, which explicitly excludes Inca and is a much better gauge than the HoF anyway.

Is seeing your name up in flashing lights really that important? Nobody look at me

Calling an Inca filter a "backdoor" ban is not a fair characterization. The default setting of the Inca filter will be OFF, which will display the HoF tables exactly as they are today. Players will continue to be able to submit Inca games. The Inca filter will simply allow players of non-Inca Civs to see how they compare to other non-Inca. This not practical with the most popular Civ (Inca) cluttering up the HoF tables.

There are many reasons why the Inca Civ is so popular, almost all of them making the Civ more powerful than other Civs and having virtually no draw backs (vranasm provided in the HoF Fame Questions and Answers thread, a view of the Inca Civ pros in the Strategy and Tips forum which is similar to this list):

1. The Inca Civ has one leader with argubly one of the best pairs of Traits: Financial and Industrious
2. Its unique unit, the Quechua is available t0, gets free Combat I, is based on the Warrior - cheapest unit that can be built and has an awesome +100% modifier versus Archers on both offense an defense. Thus the Quechua is virtually unstoppable on Monarch level and above where the usual AI City defenders are Archers. Also, the free Combat I promotion allows Cover as the first promotion which inflicts even more damage when attacking Archers.
3. Its unique building, the Terrace, based on Granary, gets 2 Culture per turn. That's an awesome bonus for a building that often considered essential for virtually all cities.
4. In the very early part of the Ancient Era when the Quechua is often in full production, the AI have neither the time to prepare defenses against Quechua nor does the AI "understand" fully how dangerous Quechua are. In many areas, the AI views Quechua units as mere Warrior units. In the more tactical areas of the AI, it will not allow its Archers to attack a Quechua, unless then Qurchua is significantly weakened.
5. Experienced HoF users are now using a map script legal for HoF play that occasionally generates maps that have as little as 40% of the land plots that this scripts normally produces. Even the largest land masses generated area smaller than what most other map scripts generate. On Small or smaller map sizes with maximum # of AIs, it is so crowded that some AIs do not even have room to settle a second city. That nullifies the Diety AI's advantage of having a second Settler. Thus a Quechua rush has very little distance to travel and very few cities (1-3) to capture to emilinate an AI Civ.

There is a simple way to avoid too many additional filters beyond the Inca filter. A proposed new filter needs to provide a new way to view the Main HoF Web Page and child pages that matches an existing HoF rule:

1. Inca filter matches the Inca ban in HoF EQM games.
2. Ancient Era filter matches the partial ban on non-Ancient Era games in the HoF EQM.

The Duel Map filter is the remaining filter that can be added that is based on a HoF rule (EQM again), but in this case the Main HoF Table Web Page would have only the Duel Map column removed and this could be viewed as not sufficiently different. Players can have been ignoring the Duel Map column for years due to the HoF EQM ban; such a filter is not really needed.

Therefore, if the HoF Staff decided to implement the Inca filter. They have an extremely solid argument against future filter requests. If the filter is not supported by a current HoF rule, its not going to be implemented. The only filter request that this argument doesn't dirdctly defend aganst is the Ancient Era filter whose player demand is yet to be determined, but probably far less than the demand for the Inca filter.

The EQM system is great for the purpose it serves, but it was never indended for viewing the all the best games at once; only the Main HoF Main Page can manage this and it is really a spectacular example of the finest web interface for its purpose that I have ever seen. I really mean it; its a true work of art. Another limitation of the EQM system is it doesn't show one's current status until one has nearly at least one game in every EQM slot (room for two games) which is not at all comparable to a HoF slot. One would need to complete several dozen EQM games before one can compare one's EQM performance to others. For HoF, one needs to complete only one game to compare it to other players games (in the same table).

Sun Tzu Wu
 
I see no problems with Inca unfiltered.

Also, I would like if everything could be filtered, without discrimination. But that'd have some point if thousands of people played HoF and some specialized in using some civs. If I wanted to challenge some games like that, filters would help me find them.

You don't try to beat the game in HoF but you beat other people playing Inca (if score for example). Inca are actually only balancing thing between your and other player's game.
I'd like if HoF games didn't favor persistence, luck and free time, but that is simply impossible with random map generation.
 
one thing about Teraces I found today, but certainly heard/read before, is that you can actually capture teraces in cities meaning you retain culture building which is actually against the rules of game in a sense.
 
one thing about Teraces I found today, but certainly heard/read before, is that you can actually capture teraces in cities meaning you retain culture building which is actually against the rules of game in a sense.

Actually, Terrace is not the only capture-able building that goes against this generality.
 
Bottom line: Inca are valid for all Official HOF tables. Allowing a filter would create a situation where it would appear that there were separate Offical HOF Tables for non-Inca games. There are not. So no filter.

The filter exists in the ad-hoc. That will have to be enough.
If you want to lobby for something, you should be suggesting improvements to the ad-hoc query. The Official tables are what they are.

Also, the Poll result don't really tally the group that is allowed to vote for HOF policy changes:
  • HOF Staff for filter = 0
  • HOF Staff against filter = 2
I voted no, BTW. :mischief:
 
Well personally I think there should be an Incan/Huts HoF, and a non Incan no huts HoF. But the Huts matter to me more than the Incans. Yes the Incans can get a very strong position just off of their warrior, but getting stuff like Tachies turn 17 HBR from a hut is really what skewers the tables.
 
If you want to lobby for something, you should be suggesting improvements to the ad-hoc query. The Official tables are what they are.

Also, the Poll result don't really tally the group that is allowed to vote for HOF policy changes:
  • HOF Staff for filter = 0
  • HOF Staff against filter = 2
I voted no, BTW. :mischief:

I belive I did point out that the poll is not binding on the HoF Staff who alone determine whether there will or will not be an Inca filter. I did that in the first post of this thread. However, it is good to remind everyone of that fact.

Ok, are you willing to put up a page similar to the Main HoF Web Page that would interface with the Ad-Hoc Query to provide an experience similar to the real Main HoF Web Page and child pages?

It seems me that would be much easier to add an Inca filter to the Main HoF Web Page and be easier for all players to understand and use than any extension of the Ad-Hoc Query for the same "look and feel" of the Main HoF Web Page and child pages.

Thank you,

Sun Tzu Wu
 
Is it not possible to export all HoF data every month into a spreadsheet format when the HoF tables are updated?
If the whole HoF tables are just put into a spreadsheet, one can create a table from the spreadsheet and filter out as he wishes without having to actually modify the HoF tables on the site.

As for creating a filter for non-Inca Civs, I do understand STW's reasoning behind it and I do agree with him since I have played HoF maps and have just been put off from submitting anything because...well my games suck :lol:

But the Incas are a part of Civ and thus the HoF, any filter may lead HoF down a slippery slope which is why I will vote no. However, I do think we should be able to get a spreadsheet with all the data IF someone wanted to look at filters. Very easy to filter out via excel these days.
 
If you want to lobby for something, you should be suggesting improvements to the ad-hoc query. The Official tables are what they are.

Also, the Poll result don't really tally the group that is allowed to vote for HOF policy changes:
  • HOF Staff for filter = 0
  • HOF Staff against filter = 2
I voted no, BTW. :mischief:

:lol:
 
The HoF table is only about the fastest games in Civ4, played within the rules. (not always as implemented, but as intended)

Why does it matter if the top games are all Inca?

If every single top game on the HoF is Inca, why is that bad?
 
<snip>
Therefore, if the HoF Staff decided to implement the Inca filter. They have an extremely solid argument against future filter requests.
<snip>

So, if the HoF staff buckles and implements the filter I want, then they will be able to argue against any future filter requests.

:crazyeye::crazyeye::crazyeye::crazyeye:
 
Top Bottom