More standardised HOF conditions?

[SHard]

Just sort of asking what everyone thought about standardising the HOF conditions a bit more? Everyone knows the way to get a huge score is to milk a huge map, but not many people have the time, or in my case, the processing power to do this. Perhaps it is discouraging people to take part in the HOF? Maybe if there was more standardised conditions (eg; Standard Random Map, 7 opponents) then more people would participate. I know milking would still be the main way to acheive a high score, but at least on a standard map computer power won't stand in anyone's way.

I'm not suggesting abolishing the current high scores, but maybe adding a new standardised hall of fame also? Players who acheive such huge scores on their huge map games have nothing but respect from me, but I feel discouraged to even try for the HOF when I already know there is no hope of me getting anywhere near a top place.

 

[superslug]

I understand where your frustration comes from, the games do take a *long* time. I've was playing for six months trying to come up with something that would make the list before I started beta-testing.

There is one thing you might want to take heart in though. If you download enough of the posted games, you'll realize that a good portion of them are set for small maps (tiny are banned). With the Aztecs and some luck, you can get a significant number of points off the early win bonus. It's been done several times.

It's not all milking.