Treating Histograph Victory as a win

homeyg

Deity
Joined
Jan 12, 2004
Messages
3,631
Do you all treat histograph victories as true wins, when you have other victory conditions enabled? I'm just wondering because I'm about to win my first Emperor game, but I'm not going to have time to get the conquest victory. I am high enough to get the histograph victory, though.
 
I do, as you have to earn those points through expansion and conquest.
 
If I played the best, either that be because I destroyed everyone, built the spaceship first or at 2050 I had the highest score, one based on how well I did throughout the whole game, it's still a win.
 
Hell yes. If you've got the patience to play all the way to 2050, and have the highest score, you deserve to win.
 
A win is a win.
The important thing is: Did you do better than in your last games?
Where did you show up on your Hall of Fame?
If you show up in the top three every time, that means you did good.
I only feel I've lost a game if I don't show up on the list.
 
If you show up in the top three every time, that means you did good.

With respect i have to disagree with that. IMO the score system in CivIII is seriosly flawed. Most of your score you get for population and territory, which leaves every peacefull approch way behind in score. Two days ago a made a short OOC (one city challenge) on regent and won a cultural victory somewhere mid 19 century. I got 830 points. Filling the map with cities on chieftain can get several thousand points, but is this a greater achivement? I think not so.

So judge your game on how hard was it to win, not how patient you were by milking the score. A first win on a higher difficulty is always a great achivement, even when its showes at place 6 it highscore.
 
Top Bottom