If you beg from William you'll get yourself dqed
So demanding things is fair then?
If you beg from William you'll get yourself dqed
- Since we can't beg anything from Willem, I'd rather get Mysticism for Bronze Working, then get Animal Husbandry from Math after Willem learns Writing on his own... we're still getting the tech, but then we can get something better in trade for Math than "just Mysticism"
I'm not sure why you're changing your mind now.You better wait till the discussion in the maint thread is over. We're waiting for the lawyers right now.
You may never 'beg' from Willem
Does demanding count as begging?
Yes. There is a section in the rules about it. No begging or however you want to call it from William or any other AI you buy info from.
I'm not sure what knowing that number does for us in terms of calculating whether other AIs know a tech or not.Looking at the code it seems like the monopoly value for masonry is 300.
As far as I can tell William has met a fourth AI who does not know masonry.
This wording also changes the ability for players to sell Resources to Willem for Gold per Turn, as doing so would be taking Gold (cash) via a diplomatic action.Lets make it easy: You may not take cash from William via diplomatic actions.
Oh, and we need to take Sailing this turn if we don't want to delay The Great Lighthouse.Trade writing, bronze working to Elizabeth for sailing and archery. or only writing for archery?
We must learn Masonry over the course of the next 4 turns to avoid delaying The Great Lighthouse. 3 turns of putting Hammers into a Lighthouse that total less than 30 Hammers, 1 turn of whipping said Lighthouse, and then we'll need to know Masonry by the start of the following turn for the overflow Hammers to get captured in The Great Lighthouse itself.We might choose to wait with masonry for 5 turns
Yes, and we lose 0.75 Flasks at 100%.I'm trying the PPP now and it seems to me that we are loosing 0.87 flasks at 90%.
That's why I faked it by editing Isabella's land, but I didn't upload an updated version of the test game reflecting that fact, as I saved over my changes. I'll have to put out an updated version of the test game when I get some more time, even if it only gets used to give us a more accurate Turn 60 test game.Seems like the test game as bot positioned our opponent such that we get trade routes.
It's as good of an idea as any.Shall I do the tech trades in the real game and we can see what our real commerce rate will be?
I worked out the math earlier. The net result is +4 Food and -4 Commerce, due to the extra Food gained in the Granary itself kick-starting our growth from Size 3 to Size 4. Food seems more important at this stage, as it would be great to get City 3 to Size 4 and then 2-pop-whip another Worker.Not convinced that not working crabs in city 3 is a good idea. We seem to gain 1 food while loosing 2 commerce.
He's our insurance if a Barb Archer wanders near to us... everyone can hide behind him in his fortified position with a 125% Defensive bonus (Forest + Hills + River + Fortification) or at least 100% if a Barb Archer wanders across of the River without attacking and then attacks.Warrior 1 could start moving east on turn 57 since workers will be spawnbusting.
With 3, 2, and 3 for Foreign Trade Routes (I don't know why the test game put the weaker Trade Route in City 2, which has a Library), we seemed to be able to get Masonry -> Priesthood in 3 turns... but, even if it takes 4 turns, that's just 2 less Hammers going into The Oracle.Me testing this was 6 beakers from finishing Priesthood. But it might just be that I did not setup the foreign trade routes.
That square is where Fur City can actually work 1 Cottage on behalf of the capital. Although the game allows us to settle within 2 squares of another City if that City is on another landmass, there are no Cottages that we could work for the capital by being closer, we take away 1 potential Cottage square that the capital can work, and then we end up just overlapping a ton of squares with the capital.I think we should unload the worker on the tile that is north of the fur. It will give us more hammers and we can chop the tile east of fur into a granary in the fur city.
He only has a couple of turns to escape, assuming that we don't Close Borders with Shaka, as City 4's Cultural Borders should lock him in as soon as the City gets settled, but yes, I agree with you that if Shaka's Scout breaks free, we should keep our Scout in the north-east instead.If Shakas scout manages to escape isolation we will lack fogbusting in the northeast. Shall we just hope for the best in that case? I think we should keep the scout in the east if that happens.
I hope that you mean the south-west. Once the Barbs rush us, which I'm hoping won't be for a while yet, we'll hopefully have replaced Warrior 3 with the Scout, then will have replaced Warrior 1 with Warrior 3, and will have a lure for northern Archers, and I'm hoping that we'll have self-built an Archer for City 3 by that time, but yeah, definitely stop play if the Barbs seem to be rushing us.It seems like the archer in the southeast might be dangerous to us. If it approaches the city I guess I will have to whip an archer. But I can stop playing in that case.
For a nearby AI (one of the 3 that we've met, assuming that the Map Maker didn't pull an evil trick on us and put Shaka's Scout on our continent and Shaka himself on the other side of the world), I'd probably even give in to a Demand for Alphabet.And how should we handle demands? accept all but a demand for alphabet?
I worked out the math earlier. The net result is +4 Food and -4 Commerce, due to the extra Food gained in the Granary itself kick-starting our growth from Size 3 to Size 4. Food seems more important at this stage, as it would be great to get City 3 to Size 4 and then 2-pop-whip another Worker.
That square is where Fur City can actually work 1 Cottage on behalf of the capital. Although the game allows us to settle within 2 squares of another City if that City is on another landmass, there are no Cottages that we could work for the capital by being closer, we take away 1 potential Cottage square that the capital can work, and then we end up just overlapping a ton of squares with the capital.
I'd much rather have Fur City improve a Cottage for the capital, since our settling pattern allows for at most 1 other square to be worked as a shared Cottage from either of Cities 2 and 3.
I think you need to redo you math. It looks wrong since you should not loose 4 commerce from not working the crab for 1 turn.
Okay, working it out:
If we constantly work the Gems Mine, then we can grow to Size 3 on Turn 60, just as the Cow Pasture gets finished.
If we complete the Granary first, we'll have a full Granary (12 free Food) at Size 3 on Turn 64.
So, that's 4 extra turns of working the Crab for 4 turns * ( +2 F + 2 C ) = 8 F + 8 C versus 12 F
Since we have a nice square to work once we hit Size 3, it becomes a lot closer.
+4 F can probably mean growing 1 or 2 turns faster. So, say that it's 2 turns faster. If we, say, worked a Lake for 2 turns, earning +2 C per turn, then we'd simply see a tradeoff of 4 Food versus 4 Commerce.
I'd prefer the Food at this stage, as Food = more Hammers and we'll have enough Commerce from Trade Routes, etc, so sticking to the PPP is the way to go.
We have an insanely fast tech pace, we have Math, and we will have Priesthood in 3 turns' time. We also have a Great Scientist #2 planned. What does that scream? It screams "get Bureaucracy + an Academy in your capital!"I'm not certain we should cottage our capital this game. There seems to be many better spots and moving our capital would lower our distance maintenance. Chopping the forest N of fur will give us the GLH one turn earlier.
With our traits and the GLH we might not need a single cottage this game. Except for all those cottages we will capture.
You're right... I ignored counting several turns of +3 H and - 2 Commerce while at Size 2, treating those values as being relatively equal to each other, since the difference in Food was already factored in above.
In that case, assuming that you value Hammers to be roughly equal to Commerce, working the GH Mine to get the Granary faster is even stronger than I originally roughly calculated.
Please consider both scenarios to Size 4. That's where we see the payoff from the Granary, by getting to Size 4 faster from getting a sooner Granary. In other words, the extra Food earned from getting the Granary sooner can mean an extra turn of working a square at Size 4. If we're not comparing at Size 4, then we're not factoring in the Granary's value at all.You are just confusing me. The question is to work the mine for 1 turn instead of the crabs. We get the granary 1 turn earlier but grows 1 turn later. Since every turn you work the mine instead of the crab you delay growth so there will be no difference in hammers since those hammers will come back when being at size 3 working the mine. Optionally working unimproved cow.
If we work mine the difference is 1 food for 2 commerce.
If we work cow the difference is 3 hammers for 1 food and 2 commerce.
Working cow at size 3 seems to be the best option.