RFC RAND UHV Discussions

[Barak]

I had 5 cities due to close proximity to Greek and Carthaginian Roman cities. Just was strange i didn't get the empire size requirement. I'll play around with it in WB.

 

[AnotherPacifist]

I got the largest empire criteria with 3 Roman cities, and far away (i.e. more than 10 tiles away from my capital) conquests: Athens, Babylon and Uruk. All of them have expanded crosses. Maybe it's the number of cities you have to own? (China often has 5 cities by 450AD)

 

[onedreamer]

I've been able to get the Roman UHV once. I said in an earlier thread that Rome needs Independents to conquer to make the UHV achievable. My win actually does more to confirm this than refute it. I spawned 7 squares from the Persians, who just so happened to have already built a nice second city. 3 settlers + 2 Persian cities = requisite 5 cities. Had it been a stronger opponent, say Greece with its Phalanx or even a highly developed ancient civ (walls, tons of defensive units, etc.), I would not have been able to grab their land in time. In my case though, praetorians owned immortals and archers. So yeah, Rome needs some weak neighbor to conquer for the build part of the UHV. There just isn't time to make settlers.

Since you've got the requisites in one game, why saying that Rome NEEDS indipendents to achieve UHV ? The statement is incorrect.

I think most of the players forget that this is RFC RAND, it has to be different from RFC, heh. The more fixed elements, the less it will be random, and then you'll regret to not have a random RFC...
Think about it: how many UHVs would you achieve in RFC without
- map pre-knowledge
- wiki guides
- re-tries

have you guys actually tried to play the same map again after failing an UHV, in order to obtain a better result ? If you want to make a fair comparison with RFC you should. Otherwise, if you want it completely random, then I think that complaining about its randomness is silly. Last thing, even in RFC many UHVs need re-rolling because sometimes they are just not achievable.

 

[AnotherPacifist]

But to get the 5 cities consistently for Rome is often pure luck (if you can find the other civs close by), and it really makes getting the goal with the buildings hard. What Rome should have is a close-by independent city that will appear INSIDE Rome's spawn territory but appearing after Rome has spawned (so that it won't flip automatically), and maybe also 1-2 Celtic cities in future France to simulate RFC. That would be much better than the Celtic galley that I seem to see almost every game now.

 

[onedreamer]

The Indian and Ethiopian UHVs in RFC are pure luck. Instead they are easier in RAND. The Roman UHV is harder. It's not the same game, period. I'd rather work on really buggy/not achievable UHVs that those who merely need luck. Anyways this idea of the indipendent for Rome sounds too crazy. I like the idea of indipendents but one tied to Rome and bound to be conquered for the UHV doesn't make much sense and looks like a nightmare from the programming point of view. Adding 1 settler to Rome at start sounds a ton better...

 

[Zdarg]

I like the idea of indipendents but one tied to Rome and bound to be conquered for the UHV doesn't make much sense and looks like a nightmare from the programming point of view.

From the programming PoV, I see no problem at all. Check all tiles exactly three squares away from Rome. If anybody's culture is present in any of them, do nothing, you don't need independents if there is close neighbour. Otherwise, choose random non-mountain non-water tile among them and build a city there.

 

[ledat]

Since you've got the requisites in one game, why saying that Rome NEEDS indipendents to achieve UHV ? The statement is incorrect.

They don't need to be Independents per se, but I strongly think Rome needs some close at hand cities that can be taken easily and early. I made numerous attempts, but only managed to win when there was a very close, weak neighbor. It was just an unusual start that I started that close to Persia on a huge map. The reason I advocate Independents is consistency. A fourth settler would probably also work, but that actually seems less random than dropping an Independent city somewhere close to Rome. Rome, especially the AI version, may or may not go for the city, which could lead to lead to any number of outcomes for that city.

have you guys actually tried to play the same map again after failing an UHV, in order to obtain a better result ?

I actually do this constantly I kept just missing with that Babylonia game. I knew it was achievable from that start, so I just went back to the initial save and gave it another go, but with a few tweaks to my strategy. If I get a start I like, but fail to achieve UHV, I'll at least try once more. If I fail due to something outside my control it is another story, but with near-misses I always try again.



Oh yeah, speaking of unachievable/buggy UHVs. Has anyone completed Germany? In 1940 I had 2/3 (3 Euros and finished tech tree). However, even after 1950, the 6 civs condition was still "Not yet". I'm not entirely sure what constitutes the control condition, but for what its worth I owned the spawn area of either 6 or 7 (Portugal and I shared Spain's location, though I had more of the area) civs.

 

[onedreamer]

From the programming PoV, I see no problem at all. Check all tiles exactly three squares away from Rome. If anybody's culture is present in any of them, do nothing, you don't need independents if there is close neighbour. Otherwise, choose random non-mountain non-water tile among them and build a city there.

yeah this is "easy", though can you explain me the sense of adding an indipendent city near Rome after it spawned just to let it conquer and make the UHV easier ??? This isn't an indipendent city, it's cannon fodder. Just add a settler.... >_>

 

[Zdarg]

though can you explain me the sense of adding an indipendent city near Rome after it spawned just to let it conquer and make the UHV easier ??? This isn't an indipendent city, it's cannon fodder.

Well, Rhye already did exactly this in previous RfC (Mediolanum), so he might do this in RAND as well.
For optimality, I'd prefer another settler too (since random city might appear to be awful), but for flavour reasons ready city is better.

 

[AnotherPacifist]

Historically Rome conquered most of the surrounding tribes and depended heavily on alliances, so I don't see why an "independent" city representing those tribes would be so artificial.

 

[onedreamer]

Persia has done the same exact thing. Any Empire in world's History has done the same exact thing. Also, Mediolanum isn't conquered, it flips.

 

[Zdarg]

Also, Mediolanum isn't conquered, it flips.

But, of course, I meant that imaginative independent city should flip too.

Just yesterday I started a game as Turkey, exactly in between collapsed Greese, collapsed Persia and collapsed Babylonia. It resulted in five independent cities flipping to me, in range up to 6-7 squares from Sogut.

 

[Barak]

With no independent cities, Ethiopia's UHV is actually easier. Its now very possible to found Christianity.

 

[onedreamer]

yeah I've won a nice turtling game as Ethiopia. Euros actually never colonize Africa... the only threats are barbarians and an awful start, this one easily fixed with a restart ^^

 

[AnotherPacifist]

yeah I've won a nice turtling game as Ethiopia. Euros actually never colonize Africa... the only threats are barbarians and an awful start, this one easily fixed with a restart ^^

Is that starting with 1 or 2 settlers?

 

[Zdarg]

Well, today I started a nice turtling game as Mali. I was born exactly between Ethiopia and collapsed India... Second Ethiopian city flipped, and they declared (it was first time anybody declared war to me after flip in RAND), I took their capital just for Dye source and some infrastructure. After that, it was not quite so impossible to take native(!) Dilli guarded by one(!) warrior(!).
Now I am thorn between building a port and turning into missionary factory immedeately or building 2-3 marble-dependent wonders before.

 

[onedreamer]

Is that starting with 1 or 2 settlers?

2 settlers. Did you modify it ? If they start with one it's somewhat tougher. I was blessed with 5 flat + 1 hill flood plains for the 2 starting cities and a nice land around which really tempted me to be colonized

 

[AnotherPacifist]

Yeah, Ethiopia was originally just 1 settler which is impossible.

 

[scu98rkr]

Started a game as USA the other day, within a few turn AI controlled Spain had won its UHV.

I kept playing even with the message Spain have won, within a few more turns every one had declared war on them and they collapsed.

 

[mikeemike]

Since downloading, ive seen at least a couple strange games where ethiopia has founded christianity, and would have won had i not. also, persia almost always spawns south of china and once i saw it found judaism upon spawning. that mad for a weird game