Poll on Greatest HOF Game Ever - Nominations

[BlackBetsy]

I'd like to take a poll on what people think is the greatest game in the HOF. There are some achievements that I think are just so outstanding, they should be recognized. Achievements that suggest the person played a nearly perfect strategy against a level / map that amazes even good players. A HOF'ers HOF game, as it were. Maybe limit it to 8 entries and have a tournament? This forum is not as popular as it was in 2005, obviously, but we do have some quality players still around and I think it's worthwhile. Maybe people who are still active can message old HOF'ers to participate and vote?

There are games I'd like to nominate. I think @Spoonwood's Standard Sid 100k game with an end date of 1350AD is stupefying. 100k is tough already, and winning it on Sid that early boggles my mind - its a conquest AND 100k game at the same time.

@Moonsinger's 400 AD Sid Conquest also sticks out for me. It's 12 turns before the best Demigod score!

@Drazek's 93k game has to be nominated.

 

[Spoonwood]

LulThyme's 0 point game deserves mention. It was the first loss, and something that I feel that many others would just pass up. In fact, I remember reading someone saying that they didn't feel it worthwhile to play for the Hall of Fame unless that they could get a number one. I think that person lost interest in the Hall of Fame soon after. LulThyme also wasn't afraid to lose. Some people, such as the shrink David Burns, think that we learn best from our mistakes. Perhaps not much got learned from LulThyme's 0 point game for LulThyme, but at the very least LulThyme seems to have had an idea that failure might not be all bad. Or that some failure might not be all bad and can get used to learn something.

Moonsinger's 100k Tiny Sid game sticks out to me.

I feel that my 20k Huge France game ends up better than the standard 100k game that I played. For starters, I have the belief that if you asked people 20 years ago if Sid 20k pangea 60% was possible that they would tell you 'no' in no uncertain terms. I had started a 20k pangea game also a while back (and the save is on the forums in my Z is for Zulu thread), but didn't finish. Sometimes the hardest thing about this game can consist of finishing a game. It also has a more engaging write-up that I can tell people enjoyed. On the other hand, I didn't fight infantry in that game during the main wars phase, instead my soldiers fought rifleman and weaker units.

The pace of Drazek's conquest in his 93k goes very, very quickly. That entry speaks for itself in terms of quality in terms of it's value in my opinion.

SirPleb's Standard Diplomatic Chieftain game had a good writeup, and I think served as inspiration for other low level diplomatic and spaceship finishes. The linked threads and games by DaveMcW, Sandman, and Ronald in SirPleb's thread also deserve mention.

What's been your best game there BlackBetsy?

For anyone else reading this, what has been your best game?

I feel like this sort of question better functions to facilitate discussion.

Also, I remember asking questions about quality of games a little more than a year ago now. CKS, I think, had an insightful comment:

It isn't obvious what sort of good outcomes you should be looking for, though, because some people are going for finish date, others for score, others for non-game goals (5CC, always war, no war, limits on trading, etc.) that just happened to make a table, whatever.

Like, I know I have a OCC spaceship game on some table. I might have even done that more than once, since that's what I seem to remember (though maybe I only submitted one). If I had had more than one city, I would have had a different goal. So, how do we compare a game with a deliberate goal like OCC to one that allows for anything in the rules? It also ends up difficult to tell when someone might use some sort of variant goal like playing Monarchy... or automating workers (those people I find stupid... and they find me a jerk for saying such probably or insisting that they view me as a jerk).

Let me see... I think it's here?

Edit: I did play another OCC spaceship game before that, but it no longer charts. The writeup still exists though.

 

[Bartleby]

Spoonwood already mentioned it in passing, but I'd also nominate DaveMcW's fast Spaceship game, it was the first game of that type that caught my attention.

For anyone else reading this, what has been your best game?

A long time ago I submitted an all-ways win at Huge Monarch Histo, not on the charts anymore, that I was happy with. I also submitted (for one of the Gauntlets) a 5cc 100k that unfortunately didn't chart because it was counted as a 20k win.

 

[Spoonwood]

I think Gyathaar's Sid standard diplomatic game was the first that used trade route pillaging to get stuff at low cost from AIs.

 

[superslug]

LulThyme's 0-point game once motivated me to do a Chieftain run where I never once built a military unit.

For me, the gold standard is always going to be SirPleb's first milk run on Sid. I know the score has been beaten out several times, but his balance of high-level play and storytelling in the forum simultaneously demonstrated how terrifying Sid can be but also how it can be beat. The top of the tables pages looked horrible when there were 0 Sid entries. If HOFrs couldn't do it, who could?

 

[BlackBetsy]

LulThyme's 0-point game once motivated me to do a Chieftain run where I never once built a military unit.

For me, the gold standard is always going to be SirPleb's first milk run on Sid. I know the score has been beaten out several times, but his balance of high-level play and storytelling in the forum simultaneously demonstrated how terrifying Sid can be but also how it can be beat. The top of the tables pages looked horrible when there were 0 Sid entries. If HOFrs couldn't do it, who could?

I mean, who couldn't love this one? Definitely should be in the vote.

 

[BlackBetsy]

What's been your best game there BlackBetsy?

I can't say that I think any of my games are impressive. Recently, I thought I played the 970 AD Russian Regent Diplo game well; I felt pretty good about doing a pretty fast science game even though it was only a #4. My Huge Monarch Domination game is still #5 on that Board after 19 years, and I thought at the time it was pretty solid, even though it's been thrashed as a #1 by Ozymandius, twice (@Chamnix beat it for #1 only a month after I submitted it).

So many of the games I see are beyond my comprehension - @templar_x has done some amazing things and @Bartleby putting in that domination #1 in 2024 on a crowded board, that's amazing. I'm just not in anyone's league - I just yap about my play more than anyone.

 

[superslug]

I can't say that I think any of my games are impressive.

Seriously? The next time I hit the Publish button on the staff side of the server, your name is going on the Sid tables.

 

[BlackBetsy]

Seriously? The next time I hit the Publish button on the staff side of the server, your name is going on the Sid tables.

Very kind, but I just was standing on the shoulders of giants with that one. The score is less than half of what @Lord Emsworth did in their Small Sid Histographic game. Modify it to Huge (2.56x for territory size) to compare with the Huge Histographic games and it's around a 25k score, which is only 40% of SirPleb's 8th (and last) place Huge Sid Histographic game. Yes, I'm very pleased to have won a Sid game, but by no means do I consider it excellent. I probably played too cautiously mid-game, and my military performance was pretty mediocre - the first Egypt invasion was poorly planned and executed and I wasted probably 40-50 turns of the game on it.

I think my key "ah-hah" moment was the second Egyptian war, in which I learned (even though I had read @SirPleb's thread I still didn't understand this) how the Funnel of Deception brings out an AI's army from its cities and makes conquest easy on the 4-5 troops left behind in the cities. The only thing I think I did well was to absolutely cripple the AI's tech pace through wars and trading. All in all, I think the key to beating Sid is simply understanding the mechanics of the AI weakness's well enough to make the AI essentially irrelevant. I don't think the Sid AI Mongols won any battle offensively against me until I put an Army on an incense colony, which apparently the AI treats like the Army defending a city. I didn't know that and lost an army. That's all I lost the entire game to the Mongols on defense. The entire Mongol army, the strongest in the game, had no impact on the outcome of the game other than to slow the Mongol tech pace through unit support. In that way, really, the Mongol army was working for me, not Genghis Khan.

I do actually think some consideration has to be given to Lord Emsworth's Small Sid histographic game as one of the greatest ever. The advantages of a Sid civ are bigger on smaller maps (3 settlers vs. 1, unit support). Their 25,480 score on 6,400 tiles actually translates to 101,920 on a Huge map, which exceeds @Drazek's 93k. Yes, they had fewer opponents to conquer, but it merits consideration.

Also, @Obermot's 1025 BC Tiny Sid Domination is truly impressive. Think about it - that's 79 turns! Sid AI start with 3 cities, so they were starting at a 3 to 1 disadvantage. Obermot had to build troops and take cities before any of the true exploits were even available - Military Tradition wouldn't be available to build Armies, and I don't think the pillage trade route even comes into play much in a fast conquest/dom game. @Moonsinger did a 975 bc game as well (2 turns slower) as a 850 bc game (7 turns slower). [ Between conquest, 100k, domination and histographic, hard for me not to think of @Moonsinger as the greatest Civ 3 player ever, with apologies to @Spoonwood, who who have to be considered as well.]

 

[Spoonwood]

I do actually think some consideration has to be given to Lord Emsworth's Small Sid histographic game as one of the greatest ever.

Around when he played that game, he talked about how the AIs won't attack a (veteran) infantry in a fortress with an artillery (before tanks). Though, the 1000 AD save doesn't have evidence of him using that idea.

 

[Spoonwood]

Between conquest, 100k, domination and histographic, hard for me not to think of @Moonsinger as the greatest Civ 3 player ever

Moonsinger is a regular class octathlete. You stand as a veteran octathlete! And maybe someday an elite octathlete. According to HoF ranking, you end up as a better Emperor level player than her, and a better Chieftain level player than her. Her best Deity game is a number 6 position. You have one game better than that. Tone and myself have quite a few Deity games better than that. Her best Demigod game stands at number 5. Again, you have higher placing entries, and so do more than one other person... @Aigburth, @Bucephalus, @Takeo and I think I could find some others.

@Lanzelot @templar_x and many others are better at GOTM and COTM than me. For "greatest civ III player ever" what should or should not count in the first place? Maybe only GOTM and COTM entries should count since they play the same map, while HoF entries vary by map.

@EMan has the greatest number of total points for HoF entries as listed in the Statistics section. Of course that means he or someone else could argue that he's a better player than me (and I could probably counterargue in some way also...)

@CKS is a better HoF player than any non-quartermaster, and @Markstar with his lone HoF entry. CKS is also a better player than me. He has a 3403 Small histographic entry. My small histographic entries (not published yet) scored 1051, and 622 points.

Sure, maybe you can't do what Moonsinger did or make a better entry than her on the tables she played. But, she hasn't submitted a game in years. She also can't do what you've done Blackbetsy, at least not say before the end of September! She can't win a standard histographic Sid game. Or a Demigod Huge 100k game. Even if she started today after reading my message, it's doubtful she could do so within a day or two. Do you think that she could sometime in the more distant future? Well she simply can't if she does other things with her life than play civ III and she classified playing civ III as an addiction a while back.

Moonsinger's best Large entry has position of 6. Your best large entry has positon of 2. Her best diplomatic entry stands at 6, while yours stands at 4.

CKS's best diplomatic entry has a position of 5. Moonsinger's best diplomatic entry has position of 6. For the past 13 or so years (CKS's first 5th position entry dates from 2010), CKS thus has a claim as a better player than Moonsinger. CKS is also an elite octathlete, while Moonsinger stands as a regular class octathlete.

 

[BlackBetsy]

All excellent points @Spoonwood, maybe I was too flip in saying that. I did say with apologies to you! You position on top of the QM board is a statement of how impressive your game is across all conditions.

 

[BlackBetsy]

I think based on responses to this post, maybe there is a category for "best executed game" and a category for "most groundbreaking game." So while @SirPleb's Histographic Sid game is now #8 on the list, it would definitely be considered for most groundbreaking game, like his Diplo game. And Drazek's 93k might not be groundbreaking (other than for score) but it would be considered for its pure excellence in execution.

So far, in the "most groundbreaking" category, I'd think we'd have nominations for
@SirPleb's Going for Sid 64k histo gam
@SirPleb's fast Chieftain spaceship game
@LulThyme's 0 point histographic game
@Gyathaar's Sid Standard Diplo game

And for "best executed" game, we'd have:
@Spoonwood's Standard Sid 100k game
@Spoonwood's French 20k game
@Drazek's 93k game
@Lord Emsworth's 25k Small Sid Histographic Game
@Moonsinger' 400AD Huge Sid Conquest Game
@Obermot 1025 Tiny Sid Domination Game

 

[Bartleby]

Minor correction to your list, it was DaveMcW who pioneered the fast research games.

For best-executed games, the fastest launch currently is by Kuningas, at 530 AD on Large Chieftain.

I think Eman should be included in best-executed, for his milking games, #1 from Chieftain-Emperor on Huge maps.

I guess it's not to easy to judge excellence for 20k games because the element of luck with SGLs is so large.

 

[BlackBetsy]

Minor correction to your list, it was DaveMcW who pioneered the fast research games.

For best-executed games, the fastest launch currently is by Kuningas, at 530 AD on Large Chieftain.

I think Eman should be included in best-executed, for his milking games, #1 from Chieftain-Emperor on Huge maps.

I guess it's not to easy to judge excellence for 20k games because the element of luck with SGLs is so large.

Yes, I think DaveMcW should be there.

Kuningas's fast launch is a good nomination. I think finding an Eman game makes sense.

I do agree that excellence / approach on 20k games is hard to measure for the "luck" element. Tone's best games were just orgies of SGLs at low levels, for example. @Spoonwood's 20k execution was at Sid and a little bit more than collecting SGLs.

I re-read @Spoonwood's thread on his 20k game and the 20k game aspect was good, but his manipulation and wars against the Sid AI from a tiny, flat starting position is something to behold. How he pulled off a win from that starting location, I'm not sure.

 

[Spoonwood]

How he pulled off a win from that starting location, I'm not sure.

I think it helped that I had every AI on the main landmass always fighting a war with the target AI I tried to conquer. Some AIs did capture some cities from other AIs, but they also suffer a lot of losses that way. Also, the AIs did have a war against each other before that, because I wanted to liberate a luxury resource from Portugal to get their gold and gpt (and technology). As I recall they were trading to Rome, and fortunately China sat between France's empire and Rome's. Thus, I didn't have to send units out to battle against Rome.

Some of the wars felt rather easily. Mongolia and Egypt I think both had weak defensive units when I had cavalry and a few armies charging at them.

I do remember that when I fought India, it required a good bit of care at the start of the war for putting units on the border cities, because there existed so many border cities. The Zulu had many, many units. One could load up the 1000 AD save to get a better idea of that war was like. But, most of their cities were behind a small tile area, and by that time I had plenty of armies, and I could block them off from attacking any cities without much problem.

 

[BlackBetsy]

I think it helped that I had every AI on the main landmass always fighting a war with the target AI I tried to conquer. Some AIs did capture some cities from other AIs, but they also suffer a lot of losses that way. Also, the AIs did have a war against each other before that, because I wanted to liberate a luxury resource from Portugal to get their gold and gpt (and technology). As I recall they were trading to Rome, and fortunately China sat between France's empire and Rome's. Thus, I didn't have to send units out to battle against Rome.

Some of the wars felt rather easily. Mongolia and Egypt I think both had weak defensive units when I had cavalry and a few armies charging at them.

I do remember that when I fought India, it required a good bit of care at the start of the war for putting units on the border cities, because there existed so many border cities. The Zulu had many, many units. One could load up the 1000 AD save to get a better idea of that war was like. But, most of their cities were behind a small tile area, and by that time I had plenty of armies, and I could block them off from attacking any cities without much problem.

I guess your "luck" in that game is that none of the AI really ran away from the pack by wiping out a neighbor and snowballing.

 

[Spoonwood]

He has a 3403 Small histographic entry. My small histographic entries (not published yet) scored 1051, and 622 points.

CKS will also have a Small Regent histographic game better than at least one of my small regent histographic game(s) with the next update. @CKS also has more 100k entries than me easily. 1305 AD for 80k on a small Deity map is not a finish date that I feel at all confident I could beat if I put in a few weeks of effort and thought into a small Deity game.

 

[Lanzelot]

I am not too familiar with the HoF tables and the great achievements there, but I would like to add a few names from the GOTM competition, whose submissions always impressed me. There are of course the old legends, SirPleb, Moonsinger, DaveMcW, Bamspeedy, Aeson, alexman, who laid the foundations for later players to build upon. I think their ground-breaking research should be honored, even if later generations may have surpassed their scores by learning from them and fine-tuning the strategies/tricks discovered by them. (Quoting Newton would be appropriate here: "If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants.")

And from the time since 2007, which I remember first-hand, there are klarius, ignas, I. Larkin, templar_x, PaperBeetle, Più Freddo, Neo666, tR1cKy, Drazek, Memento, Megalou, Kuningas, Chamnix, Garvarg, who all submitted some really really great games that impressed me a lot. (Sorry, if I forgot someone who should also be included in this list! Someone else might be able to help my feeble memory and fill in the missing names.)

I also might add, that not everybody is top notch at everything: some are better at fast war-mongering games (there is a lot to be learned from templar_x and Memento in this regard), while others excel at 20K (in particular Spoonwood and ignas have some pretty impressive 20K victories).

And we should not forget that (what Spoonwood already mentioned) HoF games and GOTM games are quite different and therefore might require different qualities: for a HoF game, the player usually rolls a number of starts and then picks a pretty good one with a few cows, luxuries, a river etc. and then tries to achieve the best/fastest result based on that excellent start position. In a GOTM game, however, everyone just has to play the position that is given to us. On Warlord, this may be a poor tundra start or a small island start, no bonus resources, etc. and the players then have to "fight their way back into the game" and try to manage a win despite the poor start. This may require different skills than playing a HoF game.

Unfortunately, I don't have time at the moment to go through the old GOTM submissions and pick a few noteworthy games, there are just so many of them, even if I only consider the "later times" since I started participating (summer 2007).

 

[Gyathaar]

I think Gyathaar's Sid standard diplomatic game was the first that used trade route pillaging to get stuff at low cost from AIs.

I can't believe no one has beaten this time yet.. as far as I remember I didn't even search for a perfect map, just took the first random one to test the concept