Writeup: 100k-150AD-America-C-L

[Elear]

Nice find anyway! Good on you for explaining it.

 

[agonistes]

Hmm, imo having the "Elmsworth Agreement" named after him is a much better reward then being in the HoF for an early victory. Congratulations.

I enjoyed reading your recap. It certainly expanded the utility of trade negotiations for me. Very cleverly done.

I am curious why you chose such a victory. Looking at the map at the end of the game, couldn't you have achieved a much earlier victory through conquest? Once you had handicapped the other cities, you merely had to build roads to the other civs and conquer them. Just curious, I'm sure I've missed something as your strategy is very organized.

Again, grats on a nice maneuver. It's never an exploit the first time.

 

[Lord Emsworth]

I'm intrigued by the logistics of getting that many cities built at optimal speed, in a situation where food's the limiting factor and cash seems pretty close to unlimited (never thought I'd see a Civ3 strategy that looked quite so Civ2ish). before you get to the point of being able to ship chain, what sort of balance are you using between settler production and worker production ? Going by the healthy-looking road network in the earlier screenshots, and on the assumption that if you're using settler pumps in the centre of that empire, some investment has gone into speeding up their routes to unoccupied land - that victory screenshot's just a little crowded to really look closely at the roads.

For the settler-worker balance I would say that from some point on I used all the food I could get to build settlers exclusively, an no more workers at all. Towards the end I even joined workers to cities to be able to build more settler.

At the beginning I would say that I build a few workers more than I would normally do in a game because I needed to build a traderoute and hook up luxes and resources pretty quick.

"and on the assumption that if you're using settler pumps in the centre of that empire,"

I built settlers everywhere I could, not only in the core.

 

[Lord Emsworth]

I am curious why you chose such a victory. Looking at the map at the end of the game, couldn't you have achieved a much earlier victory through conquest? Once you had handicapped the other cities, you merely had to build roads to the other civs and conquer them. Just curious, I'm sure I've missed something as your strategy is very organized.

In HoF games you know how you are going to win before you have even started to play, as opposed to deciding on a victory condition while you play. Sure, I *could* have conquered the world easily, but that was not how I set up the game.

What also is important in HoF games is that the absolute finish date means little. What means a lot is the finish date relative to the victory condition, map size, and difficulty level. So that a finish date of 1200 AD for Conquest, Tiny, Regent is not very good, while a finish date of 1200 AD for 20K, Any, Any is pretty darn awesome. Likewise here, a finish date of say 600 BC for Conquest may be OK, while a finishdate of 150 AD for 100K is ... ahem ... shattering.

 

[Lord Emsworth]

Oh, and by the way, lest anybody thinks that deliberately breaking a traderoute or bringing an MA to an end in order to make cash is something new, it is not. I have done this stuff seemingly hundreds of times before. I also described the basics already some time ago in this thread:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=165935
And I know of other players who have used that kind stuff independently of (and probably before) me, even here in the HoF and in GOTMs.

What is *new* is that this is stringently applied to a 100K victory AND that the deals build up on each other.

 

[rysingsun]

Oh, and by the way, lest anybody thinks that deliberately breaking a traderoute or bringing an MA to an end in order to make cash is something new, it is not.

About a year ago I specifically linked Emsworth's original writup in a query to the HOF staff asking whether the technique was legal for HOF attempts. It was declared legal. So yes the technique has both been around and been known to the staff all this time. What is a bit fascinating is that having been in the public eye so long nobody besides emsworth has really done much to perfect the technique as he has.

OK enough of that. Now I have a question:

I thought the ai civs never gave gpt during the ancient age. What's up?

 

[Chamnix]

If you give the AI gpt first, then they will give gpt back to you.

 

[AutomatedTeller]

btw - the only way this is illegal is if you are putting free cash into the game.
It's not an exploit to give an AI 50 gpt and get 50 gpt back, then break the original agreement IF the AI has 50 gpt. They may have to disband units and buildings, but they can send you the money. of course, they might just declare war.