The Histographic Challange

[EMan]

Sea Tiles had better add to score or I'm wasting a lot of time on my huge Histographic games in the HOF!!!

Seems like I tested that once and there's been much discussion on the subject.......That's part of the reason that Archipelago is a must when going for the optimal high score.

Please don't tell me Sea Tiles don't count for score!!!

 

[Calis]

At least I think that the citizens, who work the tiles count towards the score...

 

[EMan]

Yes, I'm sure you're right about Happy/Content/Specialist citizens working Sea Tiles.........But:

They don't add to the score as in owning territory ...

Sea Tiles we're talking about here...........Are you 100% sure that Sea Tiles do not add to your "Territory Score"?

This is a quote from SirPleb's War Academy article "Maximizing Your Score":
"There are 3 kinds of water tiles: coastal, sea, and ocean. Ocean does not matter here, it is not included in your territory nor in the domination limit. Sea is important though - it counts toward increasing your territory but does not count towards the domination limit. So getting more sea inside your territory is a good way to increase score."

Is he wrong about sea tiles inside your territory increasing your score?

 

[Chamnix]

I think I may get struck by lightning or something for suggesting such a thing, but I think SirPleb was actually wrong .

I just did a very quick test about sea tiles and came to the conclusion that sea tiles do not give territory points. I played this start twice:



The first time, I moved south and settled. The second time, I moved northeast and settled. Both times I ran no luxuries or science, the lone citizen was a taxman, the worker was disbanded, and I built wealth.

After 10 turns, both starts had 72 points when culture expanded. I reset the citizen to a taxman. Here is the situation after 12 turns in each:





The inland one that had no sea tiles scored 81 after turn 11 and 89 after turn 12.
The one having sea tiles scored 76 after turn 11 and 80 after turn 12.

 

[Bartleby]

Doesn't SirPleb correct himself later in the thread (or someone corrects him)?

You get no points for the sea tiles per se, you do get points for happy citizens working them (as has been repeadedly stated in this thread already ).


edit:

Edit: description of sea tiles below corrected, 2002/6/3
There are 3 kinds of water tiles: coastal, sea, and ocean. Ocean does not matter here, it is not included in your territory nor in the domination limit. Sea can be important - citizens working on sea tiles count as happy citizens and produce food. But sea tiles do not count toward your territory score nor toward the domination limit. (They do count in your land area as shown on the F11 display, but not toward score.) Coastal tiles can be worked and count toward territory score and the domination limit.

 

[Spoonwood]

SirPleb's initial thought could still work out correctly in the long run. One extra sea tile *could* mean that you get to Longevity (and Cure for Cancer) a single turn faster, since sea squares give you as much commerce as roaded river squares if I remember correctly.

 

[Chamnix]

I think sea tiles only give 1 commerce base (2 in Republic).

It is still possible that sea tiles are advantageous. I think the relevant calculation is food per domination tile. After you take all the obvious tiles, then you are probably looking at about 3 food per tile for an additional inland city. If you can get an additional sea tile while only needing 1 additional coastal tile, then you are adding 4 food and only 1 domination tile. If you have to add several coastal tiles to get 1-2 sea tiles, then it is not worth it because it will be less than 3 food per domination tile.

You just have to pick your spots where the sea to coast ratio is best, and fish and whales are helpful also.

 

[Aerinon]

I think it is true that sea tiles do not count directly toward your territory score. I found that domination tiles+happy citizens*2+not unhappy citizens gives a highly accurate estimation of your internal score. SirPleb's calculator does the reverse calculation and figures out about what your internal score has to be for the increase you are seeing on each turn. They are within a reasonable range of each other. (It would be easiest to see on Chieftain where the difficulty modifier doesn't give you as big a range for possible averages.)

However, happy citizens are by far the biggest component of score, and sea tiles help get that up because they don't count toward the domination limit. Territory is secondary because that's mostly determined at map creation time and how fast you can reach the dom limit. I think the art of extra happy population will be the main distinguishing factor in score at the highest levels. Enough theory though, I don't have the time or patience to put it into practice, but that's the way the math looks to me.

 

[EMan]

Thanks guys for the input on Sea Tile scoring.

Bartleby, I was quoting from the current War Academy article by SirPleb and didn't know it had been updated in a thread.

Chamnix, like you, I had to do a test and used the Editor for the first time! I knew in my heart that the Big Boys knew the way it was ( ), but had to test it, too.

Well, that does put a new light on the Histographic Scoring, especially in light of Sea Tile city expansion, to distance 3+ tiles from the nearest city, being of no score value.

Hmmmm.....Better late than never!

 

[Spoonwood]

The analysis above and especially Chamnix's analysis:

It is still possible that sea tiles are advantageous. I think the relevant calculation is food per domination tile. After you take all the obvious tiles, then you are probably looking at about 3 food per tile for an additional inland city. If you can get an additional sea tile while only needing 1 additional coastal tile, then you are adding 4 food and only 1 domination tile. If you have to add several coastal tiles to get 1-2 sea tiles, then it is not worth it because it will be less than 3 food per domination tile.

seems to suggest that a pangea with fewer domination tiles might have just as much scoring potential (faster growth implies earlier citizens, plus other advantages to a pangea mpa) as an archipelago with more domination tiles. Or does it? Could continents pay off?

 

[EMan]

For Max. Scoring purposes, 2 Grassland tiles = 2 Coast tiles + 1 Sea Tile. (8 Base Points = 6 Base Points + 2 Base Points.)

I think the higher the Dom. Limit, the higher the scoring potential.

Archipelago would appear to give higher Dom. Limits than Pangaea maps.

I agree that faster growth is most important.

There are some key factors that contribute to this:

1. Starting Position (Viz. Must have Settler Factory + Another Settler/Worker Factory.)
2. Early SGL, to build The Pyramids.
3. Build/SGL Temple Of Artemis for rapid territory expansion.

I wish you were right about Pangaea maps.........'cos they're a lot less mundane to play!

P.s. BTW, I don't think Longevity or Cure For Cancer are factors in Histographic Victories.

 

[AutomatedTeller]

You might be able to score higher on a pangea map on lower levels, where your expansion speed is the main driver. I'm not sure you could on Sid, because the tech pace might kill you.

 

[EMan]

My experience is that the difference in Domination Limits between Pangaea & Archipelago is too great to be compensated by the Growth Factor........But, I hope to be proved wrong!

 

[Spoonwood]

Rysingsun's (sp?) standard Deity histographic game had a score of 25k and it played on a pangea map (with 7 opponents). I don't mean to say that's high, because I don't know really, but if you *want* to believe pangea maps better, that might allow you to think so.

 

[Chamnix]

You might want to look at this thread to see just how large the difference in domination tiles is likely to be. For a successful milk run, you are probably at the domination limit for 300 or more turns. You also have to figure that for the first 80 or so turns, your score will be pretty similar regardless of landform. Pangaea might be slightly better because your settlers may be able to walk from the core in all directions instead of being cut off by water in one or two, but 60% archipelago does have very large landmasses at times, so I can't believe the score difference would amount to much of anything at that point.

That leaves a lot of points you have to make up in the other 160 turns to compensate for getting a lot fewer points for 300 turns. I agree with EMan that I think the domination limit makes much more difference than the potentially quicker conquest.

 

[Spoonwood]

I don't think pangea has advantages in just potentially quicker conquest. Things like the Pyramids only work on your continent, more food for larger cities and faster growth, getting workers to new towns faster to plant, chop, rail, and irrigate, etc., the greater possibility of finding a more central location for a post-wars palace swap to minimize the effect of corruption over your entire empire perhaps (hence a little more commerce in cities where you might have captured wonders, a more efficient luxury slider, more commerce during the post-wars phase and so on), etc. Maybe archipelago works out better, especially if it the "archipealgo" really ends up more like a pangea... but there's really plenty to consider here.

 

[Elear]

What you say about Pangaea is true, but the trouble is that for all those things you gain on pangaea, you are still only catching yourself up to the bonuses of the domination limit on Archipelago 60 percent. Then, if the 60percent Archipelago player has anything good at all (many easily-obtainable luxuries, good landshape, fast start, ideally-spaced opponents, good leader luck...etc, et c.) then you will almost always lose out on score.

It's more likely that I'd choose pangaea for a more convienent game (tactically) and generally easier milk run, even if I knew my points would be hurt for it. For example, if you are going for a table with only one entry in it, it may make more sense to do pangaea if you are just trying to earn some slots.

 

[DWetzel]

I think that the wonder effects depend a great deal on level, as well. On lower levels, you have a lot more control over where they end up (because you will build most of them). Assuming you started up on a relatively large landmass, those wonders should provide the benefits needed without too much issue. After that, on lower levels you'll be rolling well enough to not need them much. It's just a matter of getting population in place.

Also at lower levels, by the time you are ready to really get rolling on a secondary island (even an unoccupied one), you probably have enough cash flow to rush granaries or whatever else you want, and absorb the cash impact. Not that you really need much in those outlying towns--maybe a granary (although if you are in worker add-in mode, you don't even really need that), a marketplace for sure (maintenance paid by Smith's), an aqueduct and hospital where applicable, and that's about it.

I'm only up to the early 1300s on my Regent game (on continents), and science isn't a big issue at all. In fact, I realized far too late that I have been pumping science far too hard in the early game. I'm researching Rocketry in 5 turns at 0% science on a Large map. In the early 1300s. I think I'll get quite a few future tech points just by accident. Had I put a lot more specialists to taxmen, I'd VERY comfortably been able to rush everything I needed as towns were created.

 

[Marsden]

Talk about peanut gallery, but my comment to this recent discussion is: I tried a huge game as the Maya and was doing ok, but I had no horses or iron and that's a killer with those stupid JTs so I quit. Upon retiring I discovered my 60% Archepeligo was one massive pangea! Everything was conected by at least a one tile chokepoint. That would have been a great map if I had almost anyone else. But no archers for early wars = . That's the last time I've bothered with them, Iroquois are my goto tribe for most things now.

 

[Marsden]

This is your 1 day warning.

All entries for challenge #3 have to be in by tomorrow. Any after will not be considered for the challenge, but will be accepted to the Hof otherwise, of course, if acceptable.

Next challenge will likely start for February to May, firm announcement to follow, three a year with one month off between should continue to be the rate.