I have been playing CiV for about a month now, but I have not submitted any HOF games despite being a longtime HOF member. I have been content to check off Steam Achievements and play though scenarios rather than taking the time to set up games to compete for HOF. I was trying to figure out why I do not feel inclined to participate in CiV HOF up until now, and here are some of the things that I feel are too restrictive (when compared to Civ 4 HOF). I've always felt that the HOF should be more inclusive rather than exclusive allowing for more variety of players and play styles.
The following list is in the order of how these restrictions are listed in the official rules.
1. Versions which can be played.
Civ 4 accepts games in 3 different versions to include players who have Vanilla only, Warlords, or BTS expansion. CiV only allows Vanilla and excludes players who have DLC or the GOTY edition unless they are willing to disable features of their game.
2. Number of AI players (and City States)
Civ 4 allows the player to adjust the density of opponents on the map to allow for different play styles. As an example, on a large map, the player could choose to have between 8 and 14 civs on the map. CiV HOF submissions only allow the default setting to be used. It would be nice to be able to adjust the number of AI players and to both increase or decrease the number of CS in the game for different playing styles.
3. Allowable Civilizations
Civ 4 allowed all civilizations to be played (but Inca Quecha rushes were banned from EQM games). CiV restricts both player and AI opponents to Vanilla + Mongolia. This is somewhat related to #1, but deserves special recognition here for this reason. I feel that it should not be a requirement for me to alter the version of the game that I own as a prerequisite for HOF submission. I would like to be able to allow the game to randomly select my opponents (or even my civ) and to be able to use all official content released by the publisher of the game. If there are exploits related to a particular civilization, they should either be addressed by banning a particular exploit or allowed with the understanding that all players can use said features so there is a level playing field.
4. Starting Era
In Civ 4 HOF, any starting era is acceptable (although most EQM requirements require an Ancient Era start. In CiV, only Ancient Era starts are acceptable.
5. Game Settings
There are more game setting options in Civ 4 then in CiV. One of particular interest is the Barbarian settings. In Civ 4 the player can play with any level of barbarian activity. In CiV, no barbarians is banned. With the AI inability to handle barbarians very effectively, I would think that Raging Barbarians in CiV would be considered more of an exploit than No Barbarians. IMHO, both should be allowed with the understanding that all players can choose to have none, some, or lots of barbarians to suit their style of play.
The following list is in the order of how these restrictions are listed in the official rules.
1. Versions which can be played.
Civ 4 accepts games in 3 different versions to include players who have Vanilla only, Warlords, or BTS expansion. CiV only allows Vanilla and excludes players who have DLC or the GOTY edition unless they are willing to disable features of their game.
2. Number of AI players (and City States)
Civ 4 allows the player to adjust the density of opponents on the map to allow for different play styles. As an example, on a large map, the player could choose to have between 8 and 14 civs on the map. CiV HOF submissions only allow the default setting to be used. It would be nice to be able to adjust the number of AI players and to both increase or decrease the number of CS in the game for different playing styles.
3. Allowable Civilizations
Civ 4 allowed all civilizations to be played (but Inca Quecha rushes were banned from EQM games). CiV restricts both player and AI opponents to Vanilla + Mongolia. This is somewhat related to #1, but deserves special recognition here for this reason. I feel that it should not be a requirement for me to alter the version of the game that I own as a prerequisite for HOF submission. I would like to be able to allow the game to randomly select my opponents (or even my civ) and to be able to use all official content released by the publisher of the game. If there are exploits related to a particular civilization, they should either be addressed by banning a particular exploit or allowed with the understanding that all players can use said features so there is a level playing field.
4. Starting Era
In Civ 4 HOF, any starting era is acceptable (although most EQM requirements require an Ancient Era start. In CiV, only Ancient Era starts are acceptable.
5. Game Settings
There are more game setting options in Civ 4 then in CiV. One of particular interest is the Barbarian settings. In Civ 4 the player can play with any level of barbarian activity. In CiV, no barbarians is banned. With the AI inability to handle barbarians very effectively, I would think that Raging Barbarians in CiV would be considered more of an exploit than No Barbarians. IMHO, both should be allowed with the understanding that all players can choose to have none, some, or lots of barbarians to suit their style of play.
