Time games

[Seraiel]

I'm pretty sure that your 2nd post doesn't belong to this thread ^^ .

 

[Seraiel]

Omg, I just finished my 3rd time-game.

I still wonder where the fun WastinTime talked of should have been ^^

59.5k points on a Standard / Normal / Ice Age map.

100h+ played and the only challenge in the whole game was getting the GLH ^^ I'm so happy that it's over *sigh*

 

[Seraiel]

That was the last game I needed for "League of Nations" btw.

 

[Noble Zarkon]

Many congratulations, inching closer!

 

[Seraiel]

I'm just playing the next time-game, this time a medieval one for Rock of Ages.

Last turn, I spread Sushi too fast, so I couldn't keep up with building Courthouses / Banks / Grocers / Markets to pay for further expansion. I didn't want to accept that, so I microed all cities (70) to produce more bringing me up from -80 / turn to +300 / turn. I then microed a decent part of my cities again, to keep producing Settlers instead of going while building Wealth, bringing me down to +70 / turn. I found that was not enough, so I used the "Fail-Exec-Method" to give me another 1000 on the next turn.

All in all, this took me over 1h.

Seriously, with all due respect, but there just is no possibility to play a game fast, other than submitting an inferior result. I'm 160T away from victory and am still at only 35% land. I don't even know, if the cities I settle now will have enough time to grow, so there simply is no space for the other way (expanding slower, spreading Sushi slower, doing less micro) .

But yes, time-games are fun ^^ .

 

[Seraiel]

Trolololololol.

I'm just playing with Exec-Failgold, and it's like godmode. I have the Kremlin and Factories (on normal speed) and 2 pop give 120 * 50 cities = 5k+ on demand. The cities which I whip have citizens because the other civs run Emancipation. When I 2pop-whip an Exec I lose no tiles that are getting worked, only some population. Cities that are smaller even lose population towards the limit, so they can produce a turn more of Wealth. I believe it doesn't even matter too much that I stack up whipping anger like +8 because once the Sushi-spread, which is causing me to have that huge economical problems, is over, I can switch to Emancipation and get an instant of 6 / city. Then I'll probably also be short before reaching Future-tech solving all of my problems permanently.

The only thing that's slightly annoying is, that only Execs in cities that were aquired later than the 5 that build the Execs give Failgold, cities that were aquired before the 5 cities building the Execs keep their production so would still be able to 1T an Exec once another one has been used. This somehow limits the method because one will want to produce the Execs in the first few cities, and once those have too much one will take cities that were aquired later.

Still a completely lol-method.

 

[Seraiel]

Has anyone ever thought of this trick?

When wanting to spread Sushi fast, the whip is usually the only choice. It does conflict with the other Civs running Emancipation though, so how about this:

T1 (Slavery then switch to Emancipation after whips) : Whip Execs in all cities. Build Execs in paket of 4's in cities that were aquired the latest first, then the whips in your earlier cities don't go away.

T2+: Release packets of 4 Execs in a backward order of city-aquiration.

 

[Seraiel]

I believe if always only releasing 4 Execs, going in backwards order isn't even needed. With 1 Exec being available but never built, every "stored" Exec could be #5 so wouldn't cause Failgold.

 

[WastinTime]

Right, you need a 5th exec to trigger any failgold. Order only matters when your goal is to get the failgold out. In your case, you're trying to preserve the execs instead.

So in other words, build the 5th in the capital to ensure you flush all the failgold. Glad you're enjoying my trick. Do you find it to be an exploit? or not that abusive?

 

[Seraiel]

For me, it's using standard game mechanics, so no exploit. As cold-whipping is a big part of it, I actually even doubt that the conversion-rates from to are that extreme, though Kremlin and Factories do make it powerful in time games. This method actually is so powerful, because it's the only method I know of, that converts into . It's also an amazing way to make the core-cities pay the extreme expenses for the newly settled non-courthouse cities. Additionally, the core-cities lose pop while the newly settled one gain pop resulting in all cities reaching about the same size once settling is finished, which is great for maximising population.

 

[Seraiel]

I think I now know where the fun lies in time games. I just settled 10 cities in 1 turn, next turn it's even gonna be 17! Expansion at this rate is crazy, it's maybe 20T since I was at 30 cities (all conquered) , now I'm at 150! I asked myself how I should be able to get enough cities as the time was continuously passing, but once corps were in and I had enough transport-capabilities, everything went through the roof! If only there weren't the limit of 5 Execs / turn .

Question: Is Archipelagio really the map with the most Sushi-resources? I still remember WT having had something like +59 / turn from Sushi in his 90k time-game while I only had +40 / turn in my highscore game on B&S, but with the game lasting longer, getting more Food (through Conquest and more settling) probably would be np on B&S, so I'm thinking about playing the next game on that mapscript. Should be easier when at least the core-cities are landlocked, Archipelagio was pure horror from the production perspective. I even had to micro Engineer and Priest Specialists in every city to be able to produce anything!

 

[Noble Zarkon]

Question: Is Archipelago really the map with the most Sushi-resources?

I've been looking into it since it was raised on here and it seems to give a slightly higher ratio of food to land. Archipelago seems well suited for the smaller maps (like the Duel map WT got his 98k on) - did try it on a Huge map and 10 civs on different land masses was an absolute pain, think I'll stick to B&S for them!

On the smaller maps there is usually one decent size land mass and as long as you are on that you should be able to get a few cities there, your capital has to have good production because other places are unlikely to have much until you get to Mining Inc.

 

[Seraiel]

I've been looking into it since it was raised on here and it seems to give a slightly higher ratio of food to land. Archipelago seems well suited for the smaller maps (like the Duel map WT got his 98k on) - did try it on a Huge map and 10 civs on different land masses was an absolute pain, think I'll stick to B&S for them!

On the smaller maps there is usually one decent size land mass and as long as you are on that you should be able to get a few cities there, your capital has to have good production because other places are unlikely to have much until you get to Mining Inc.

On the map-settings WT and I play(ed) on, there is no decent sized landmass with several civs on it, it's 1 landmass / civ because of high sealevel.

So I'm guessing that's just the pain one has to go through, if wanting to achieve a maximum highscore time game.

 

[Noble Zarkon]

I didn't mean having other Civs on your land mass (although that can happen on the smaller sizes if you choose more than the minimum opponents) - what I was talking about was a land mass big enough to have a few cities on it. My most recent HoF game, Arch, Tiny, High Sea Levels my starting land mass had 7 cities on it, 6 which were viable pre-Sushi.

I've just done another quick analysis, of course to be statistically significant you would need to generate 100 Maps of each type and average the results!

Map | Duel - Land | Duel - Sushi Resources | Standard - Land | Standard - Sushi Resources | Huge - Land | Huge - Sushi Resources Arch |140|27|569|96|1,432|168
B&S - Nrml Cnts |252|27|1,142|116|2,866|198
B&S - Massive Cnts |250|29|1,204|106|3,013|253

All with High Sea Level and for B&S Tiny Islands, Mixed in

 

[Seraiel]

I didn't mean having other Civs on your land mass (although that can happen on the smaller sizes if you choose more than the minimum opponents) - what I was talking about was a land mass big enough to have a few cities on it. My most recent HoF game, Arch, Tiny, High Sea Levels my starting land mass had 7 cities on it, 6 which were viable pre-Sushi.

I've just done another quick analysis, of course to be statistically significant you would need to generate 100 Maps of each type and average the results!

Map | Duel - Land | Duel - Sushi Resources | Standard - Land | Standard - Sushi Resources | Huge - Land | Huge - Sushi Resources Arch |140|27|569|96|1,432|168
B&S - Nrml Cnts |252|27|1,142|116|2,866|198
B&S - Massive Cnts |250|29|1,204|106|3,013|253

All with High Sea Level and for B&S Tiny Islands, Mixed in

Does that mean that B&S got the same or even more Sushi resources while having much higher land? Because that would mean that B&S is far superior, as one could ignore the land and found tons of more cities on the islands.

I've once played a time-game on B&S, let me just do a quick check how many cities I was able to found there.

 

[Seraiel]

Just checked the 2 games. Both are standard, and in my Archipelagio game I was only able to squeeze 119 cities onto the map, compared to an astonishing 160 in the B&S's game!

Now it could be, that the formula that calculates the score somehow messes up what I expected in my prior post, because in the B&S game (Marathon) I scored 120k points while I got 60k in the normal one. Marathon afaik scores twice as high (for whatever reason, maybe WastinTime can say something about that) , so it seems like it doesn't matter at all if one takes B&S or Archipelagio.

 

[Seraiel]

To be exact, I had 1.5 times the population in the Marathon B&S game and 3 times the technology-score (future tech 676 ) .

1.5 times the population would mean that with that game, I'd probably scored 90k on normal speed. Forget what I wrote about Marathon games scoring twice as much, it was just more population + a much higher tech-rating.

90k would be in the same league as WT's game. Now that one was on Archipelagio, so I ask myself if a great part maybe is simply random? The table shows 200-250 resources on huge, that's a major 25% abberation! That would mean the difference between +40 or +50 for every city!

 

[Noble Zarkon]

Does that mean that B&S got the same or even more Sushi resources while having much higher land? Because that would mean that B&S is far superior, as one could ignore the land and found tons of more cities on the islands.

I thought it would be the other way - the proportion of resources to land is much higher on Archipelago which should lead to a higher score? Will try and find 2 to compare but have only recently started using Archipelago.

 

[Seraiel]

I thought it would be the other way - the proportion of resources to land is much higher on Archipelago which should lead to a higher score? Will try and find 2 to compare but have only recently started using Archipelago.

I think you're wrong about that. If there's less land, there only can be less cities, lowering the population's score. More land doesn't mean that one settles the land but one settles the islands and gives all the land to the AI, resulting in the AI having 45% with maybe 20-30 cities, while onesself has 55% with 150+ cities.

So the proportion "resources to land" is even better on B&S, because of the above.

 

[Noble Zarkon]

So the proportion "resources to land" is even better on B&S, because of the above.

I'll need to do some analysis but as I understood it the score for population is related to the maximum possible population that could be supported by the aggregate food production of every tile on the map (ignoring corps, supermarkets etc). This is calculated specific to each map generated.

Haven written that out I now wonder - if you have the same amount of food but room for far more cities that's better.

Ironically I always used B&S for Time games but have been experimenting with Archipelago because of this thread!