Some of the replies to Tackaberry's post of a week ago on this thread started me thinking about the purpose and rules of the HOF, particularly the Deity category.
The stated purpose of the HOF is clear, to provide recognition for those who have mastered this form of CIV2 play. Similar, formal recognition is provided for participants in CIV 3, and in CIV 2 and CIV 3 GOTM's. In less formal types of special game play such as OCC, earliest landing on Alpha Centauri, fastest completion of the MGE WWII scenario playing one of the minor powers and so on there are posted acknowledgements from other participating players. Obviously everyone likes to be acknowledged for good game play. I think CFC and Gonzo should be applauded for their effort to revive a rather moribund CIV 2 HOF.
However, as I looked at the set-up and rules of the HOF, my conclusions can best be summarized by the immortal words of one Vulcan Star Fleet officer: "These are not logical.".
In the years since CIV 2 was released, very able analytical minds have analyzed various aspects of the game. They have dicovered not only the algorithms that drive the game but also ways to take advantage of them and even circumvent them. Simultaneosly, all players have been continuously and successfully looking for ways to beat the system. This growing body of "tricks of the trade" has had to be countered in organized games such as GOTM by creating lists of allowed and not allowed cheats, tricks and shortcuts.
I think that everything must have been well thought out when the HOF was originally set up. However, both the original rules and HOF set-up appear to have been overtaken by new discoveries in game play and by more recent software.
Consider the top three Deity entries. The top two, Shadowdale and Andu Indorin, both used the perfectly acceptable FCT to maximize city size. Starlifter who sits third did not use FCT, I believe as a matter of personal preference. As far as I can tell, no one else on the list used FCT, for whatever reason(s). Considering that the maximum possible score is 39852 when FCT is used (my calculation)and approximately 16000 without FCT (Starlifter's estimate), in my opinion Starlifters achievement of 15,500 out of a possible 16,000 is more impressive than Shadowdale's 26,271 out of 39,852. As FCT can make such a large difference is there really much point to grouping scores achieved using FCT with scores reached without it?
HOF rules state that "Please only play on randomly-generated maps or world maps". To see what whole world maps are available I did a short tour of CIV II sites on the Net and now have ~20 zipped world maps ranging in size from 10,000 squares to a humungous 40,000+ squares. All of us know what a world map looks like and I'm willing to bet that within 20 turns of a random start on any world map most of us would have a pretty good idea of where we started as well as the approximate layout of the rest of the map. This advantage is not available when starting with a randomly generated map.
Furthermore, given the option of playing either on a random 10,000 square map (I assume that use of oversize map generators is a no-no) or a much larger world map, I suspect that many if not nearly all players would opt for the larger map. It offers several potential advantages to anyone trying to run up the score: no need to overlap cities, many more goody huts, longer trade routes, less chance of hostile contact early in the game and so on. As the present rules do not specify the size of world map that can be used, my perception is that the presently allowed choice of game maps creates an imbalance.
I would suggest that:
1. The Deity classification is modified to exclude FCT and allow only randomly generated maps up to 10,000 squares. This would eliminate both of the problems outlined above.
2. That a new "Open" category is created where FCT, all world maps (whole or partial) and random maps greater than 10,000 squares are permitted. Existing entries that no longer qualify for the Deity classification would be switched to Open. No one would lose their entry. This would be an "anything goes" category with minimal rules that hopefully would not need to be modified at some future date. Here one could employ all the tricks of the trade. The presently "orphan" custom map entries could be included. The possibility and consequences of having a single rule, "Do not use the Cheat Mode!", should be considered.
3. That at least 4 game saves, saved at prescribed times, must be included in submissions, as is now the case for both GOTM and the CIV 3 HOF. The Duke of Marlborough (Feb. 24 post)has already suggested that 4000 BC games be saved as a matter of course.
I don't know whether or not the DOM's (Feb. 24 post) advice "Be sure to check the site page and/or this thread to make sure the rules don't change as you are playing your game." is meant to imply that rule changes are coming in the near future. I hope so. The present rules need both clarification and modification.
