Lowest Scoring challenge GOTM X

[col]

For those of you who can't beat SirPLeb or CB (ie 99.9% of us) in the highest scoring stakes, here's a new challenge.

WIN with the LOWEST score by any means.

Should be fun. Bad luck everyone .....

 

[cas]

I'm up for that.

Regent doesn't really represent much challenge anyway when you're used to Emporer/Deity and I hate milking for high score.

Any rules around abandoning cities or starving population ? Think it would be a rather cheap tactic to found cities for production (of military during a war for example) and then disband/starve them later.

If you build a city, you should keep it. But that's just my opinion.

cas

 

[Phillip_martin]

My preference is that only games submitted under the normal GOTM should count. ie. this is not a seperate competion just a spin on the current one

My thinking is that :

- People may still want to continue to submit to GOTM and one full game a month is all they can manage (that's me)
- It encourages someone in a stuggling game to go for that unlikely victory (albeit with a low score)
- we can let Matrix do all the collating of stats I have already had a play with flipping the current GOTM results table upside down

What do you think???

 

[col]

Regent isn't a challenge to win any more and I don't like milking either. (whats the inverse of milking???)

My intention was that this was just a bit of fun based on GOTM. Like Phil, I've enjoyed snatching an unlikely win from the jaws of defeat.

This 'competion' just extends that. There is an element of brinksmanship since if you do too well too soon, your score goes up. If you don't then you might not win! The worse things are going the better!!

Since your score is averaged over the game, I dont think abandoning cities late on will make too much difference. You will need to play out to near 2050 to avoid getting too much bonus - but that means stopping other civs winning. Its a whole new strategy ball game - and I figure that some of the inverse lessons learned will actually benefit my play!

One school of thought is that a OCC type game will give the lowest score.

We'll see.

Cry Havoc and let slip the puppies of War. Do your worst Phil!

 

[col]

Well finished - and typically didnt do too well at scoring low!
I over dominated I'm sure - making certain of the win before reining back.
Score was 2***

 

[cas]

I'm at about 1700 right now in the middle of the industrial age. My strategy is working pretty good so far, with one possibly fatal exception: XXX beat me to Newton's Univ by 5 turns in the 1600's. I didn't micro-manage the timing of new discoveries and build cycle right for about 20-40 turns and it cost me dearly because my main city could not queue shields for Newtons (nothing larger than Courthouse left to build) and now XXX is producing techs too fast while I am paying too much for them. If I can build TOE, I might be able to balance things somewhat.

Unlike you (col) I chose not to dominate early...been living on the edge of extinction the whole game. Not sure if I will win or lose at this point, but it has been MUCH more fun than playing a regent GOTM the normal way. Bravo for the novel and fun suugestion.

I should be done by Friday. Approximately what date did you win and what victory condition ? I would assume diplomatic in the late 1900's...?

cas

edit: Took out the name of a civ in GOTMX and replaced with XXX since this isn't the spoiler thread. oops.

 

[col]

I could have won by any means BUT Diplo (too much warmongering early on!)

I won in 2050 with a histographic win. I wasnt brave enough to walk along the fine line between defeat and victory - I did only have Paris at the end though...


I find Regent easy but have no chance of challenging CB and SirPleb so it made the game more fun - AND I found out more about what affects score!

Next time I'll have a MUCH lower score - learned a few tricks this game.

 

[Sullla]

Amusing how you guys are so interested in getting the lowest winning score for this game. I like the idea! I mentioned before the possibility of a OCC game here, and on Regent that would be a breeze. Starting position looks pretty good...maybe I'll have to spend a few hours playing one out. My last OCC game produced a score of only 570 points. Maybe I'll have to see if I can "better" that...

 

[col]

It is fun - I like the idea of other goals in a game than simply trying for a highest score. I HAVE enjoyed getting mashed in an "always at war game" you may be familiar with - I learn more from variants about core Civ3 than just playing the same kind of game over and over.

I intended to try a 5 city strategy - but chickened out!

Good luck!

 

[cas]

What does OCC stand for ? One City ...

I remember reading that other thread but I don't remember ever seeing OCC spelled out. I'm not good at divining all these acronyms.

cas

 

[Phillip_martin]

Originally posted by Sullla
Amusing how you guys are so interested in getting the lowest winning score for this game. I like the idea! I mentioned before the possibility of a OCC game here, and on Regent that would be a breeze. Starting position looks pretty good...maybe I'll have to spend a few hours playing one out. My last OCC game produced a score of only 570 points. Maybe I'll have to see if I can "better" that...

Sulla with an excellent web page (both Sulla and Zachriel add a great dedal to this forum by doing this) has convinced me that a OCC (One City Challenge) can result in a cultural victory

Thanks Sulla for providing insight into your games.

I should also give credit to the other competion "Epic" for coming up with variations on the current scoring system.

Anyway, that still leave the lowest score "Conquest", Domination", "Diplomatic" and "Histograph" to go for

 

[Sullla]

Game finished! Played in one day in three sittings (I love OCC games). 20k cultural victory in 1902AD, for a grand total of:

581 points

Not too shabby, eh? I'll have a report up probably sometime tomorrow, but for now I'll leave you with this screenshot:

 

[Phillip_martin]

Originally posted by Sullla
Game finished!

So is this your GOTM submission for this month??

 

[col]

Nice one Sullla! Now we'll have to think of another competition we can have a chance of winning .......sigh
I'm going to have another go at this.

I'll second Phil's remarks - I've followed your games with interest - and as a teacher (and a bloody good one) - I think your critiqued Emperor game is probvably the best Civ lesson I've seen anywhere.

OCC = one city challenge. I really got into this in Civ2 but havent tried it much on Civ3 - I'm sure it will sharpen up my trading skills to get enough luxuries / resources to survive and prosper.

 

[Sullla]

Report is up! Go here to read the writeup.

 

[col]

Nice one Sulllllllllllllllla -

- so now I'll have ANOTHER go and see if I can make it on OCC.

 

[col]

Well I had one more OCC go and followed your opening research / build strategy - although placed Paris one square away from you - on coast and on river of course.

Won with 20k culture in 2014! Score 274. Just shows how low you can go!

The fact that I took longer was more a reflection of the fact that I'm not as good as you are - especially at trading which is what I spent most of the game doing!

City was on 60 culture per turn for ages, then 67 near end (not sure why it increased. )

When Apollo predicted 2015 finish at about 1800 I thought I had no chance but raging world wars slowed everyone down. UN was built 3 turns before finish but no votes ever held. Maybe I could have held off but was so relieved to win that I didnt think to try to extend. I thought someone was bound to launch at any time.

Thanks for the tips.Sulla.
If we ever get this one in the tournament, I'll know how to tackle it. It IS nail-biting though.

 

[cas]

Hehe. Just finished...score of 282 in 2047AD.

I had already decided on the one city culture win, but I had some other small cities for support (1-3 pop).

Found it very useful to remain in anarchy and mobilization to stop or slow down the culture once I hit 1950.

cas

 

[Sullla]

I'm glad to see everyone is getting a kick out of this thing. Who cares about high scores? Getting the lowest score, now that's a challenge!

 

[col]

We'll soon need a Hall of ill-Fame.
Wonder what the lowest possible might be??