Posts: 1,922
Threads: 68
Joined: Mar 2004
Hi,
thanks for the report! 
Killercane Wrote:I never even considered trying to get more than 3 cities on the list, but perhaps even getting all 5 was possible by rushing the temple and library as early as possible. I hadn't considered it either, since two of the cities were so shield-poor. Too bad nobody tried very hard, maybe it would have worked? As it were, the best way was hoping that a capital would have been captured/razed during a war, removing it from the top 5 list. Even if a male civ leader would have been eliminated in the process, it would have gained the player an extra point (+2 for the top 5 city, -1 for the missing vote).
I would have had a fourth city in the list if I had played on until (IIRC) 2033AD, but only because the Ottoman capital had been eliminated earlier. I lacked the patience for that, though.
-Kylearan
There are two kinds of fools. One says, "This is old, and therefore good." And one says, "This is new, and therefore better." - John Brunner, The Shockwave Rider
Posts: 1,922
Threads: 68
Joined: Mar 2004
Hi,
microbe Wrote:I didn't complete the game. Spain was big and the only way to get it to vote for me was to trim it down, and so I declared on her. I thought I might get her back to liking me by MA and MPP and it didn't seem to work so I gave up. Is "not getting optimal results" really a good reason to give up a game? 
-Kylearan
There are two kinds of fools. One says, "This is old, and therefore good." And one says, "This is new, and therefore better." - John Brunner, The Shockwave Rider
Posts: 1,922
Threads: 68
Joined: Mar 2004
Hi,
I've compiled results for this Epic. I've looked through the reports and made sure that all scored the same way, i.e. counting their own vote as a point.
Mach: 253
Rik Meleet: 252
Kylearan: 251
Jester: 250
Killercane: 250
Ronald: 250
LKendter: 248
Dwip: 206
Masterty Guy: 155
Scores were very close together, which was to be expected given the scoring mechanism and the easy difficulty. The main difference between the top games were if civs got eliminated from the game, and if capitals got captured/razed to allow more cities in the top 5 list.
-Kylearan
There are two kinds of fools. One says, "This is old, and therefore good." And one says, "This is new, and therefore better." - John Brunner, The Shockwave Rider
Posts: 803
Threads: 46
Joined: Mar 2004
Kylearan Wrote:I hadn't considered it either, since two of the cities were so shield-poor. Too bad nobody tried very hard, maybe it would have worked?
Well a lot of us failed to read the below correctly. It doesn't say each of the 5 pillars Babylon in the top 5, but *any* city. If I had a couple of the shield heavy cities such as the one by the furs forest try I have no question I could have taken all 5 of the top slots.
2 pts - EACH additional Babylonian city that ranks in the top five list at game's end.
Posts: 1,922
Threads: 68
Joined: Mar 2004
Hi,
LKendter Wrote:Well a lot of us failed to read the below correctly. It doesn't say each of the 5 pillars Babylon in the top 5, but *any* city.  Whoops you're right, I hadn't realized that... 
Quote: If I had a couple of the shield heavy cities such as the one by the furs forest try I have no question I could have taken all 5 of the top slots.
I'm not sure if a city founded so late would have been able to overtake an enemy capital which had a palace from 4000BC on and maybe an early temple, too. Would have been interesting to try, though, if I only had read the rules more carefully... 
-Kylearan
There are two kinds of fools. One says, "This is old, and therefore good." And one says, "This is new, and therefore better." - John Brunner, The Shockwave Rider
Posts: 803
Threads: 46
Joined: Mar 2004
Kylearan Wrote:Too bad you are so dependant on MapStat, but thanks for participating in this milestone Epic nevertheless! I hope there will be no need for such a tool for Civ 4, although I somehow doubt it...
-Kylearan
It comes down to easy MM, and simpler trading.
My total actions to check potential trades in MapStat is to click the trading tab and read it. Without it I get to hit Shift-D and click on every civ, click lets make a deal, and have to review every civs information.
Do you even want to talk city MM?
Posts: 1,882
Threads: 126
Joined: Mar 2004
LKendter Wrote:Well a lot of us failed to read the below correctly. It doesn't say each of the 5 pillars Babylon in the top 5, but *any* city.
Correct.
Wasn't trying to be tricky, there. The possibility of any ambiguity did not even occur to me. Sorry.
- Sirian
Fortune favors the bold.
Posts: 1,882
Threads: 126
Joined: Mar 2004
Thanks!
Nine results? w00p! That's the most we've had in a while.
Gris is going to be away for a couple of weeks, starting later this week, so we're not planning to put up a new Epic until the end of the month. (Besides, that gives more time for hanging out with the women, drinking the wine, and singing!  For what that may be worth.)
- Sirian
Fortune favors the bold.
Posts: 92
Threads: 5
Joined: Mar 2004
Well, I *did* realize that, and one of my cities (Uruk, built SW of the Royal Palace) made it into the top 5.
But I probably could have done better at rigging my cities so that they came out in the top 5.
Ah, well. 250 is good enough for me. Especially since I didn't just artificially keep all my rivals around, just for the points. Although I *did* do that to the Byzantines. Good lord they were weak.
Jester
Posts: 108
Threads: 5
Joined: Apr 2004
I'd like to reach area 51 before Civ IV comes out. But for now I'll be enjoying myself with wine, women and song. 
@Jester: keeping all civs alive was a cornerstone of my strategy. I did get lucky with 3 female lone cities in my north and the Spanish blocked of on both sides of their part of the continent.
It would have been fun to see if someone succeeded in getting all 5 civs into the top 5. That way that player could afford to get rid of 3 male civs. Rome, Mongols and Ottomans would be excellent as their capitals ranked high in the city list. Anyone wants to try for it ? (not me...)
|
