The Vassalage Metastrategy

--original post (introducing Vassalage+Hereditary Rule as a first civics switch)

In the past while playing on Emperor, I've focused on Vassalage+Pacifism as an option for the next civics switch. Although I've proven that in many cases this is a good option to take, I've also realized that other options can be gained without any extra cost in terms of Anarchy. For example, the second civics switch often involves Caste System+Pacifism, which can be done in 1 turn. In some cases, the opportunity of running many specialists may not be available.

In those cases, we use the saved Anarchy from staying in Slavery to enable another switch from Vassalage to Bureaucracy, and we combine that with a switch from Paganism to Organized Religion. Since we've already warred under Vassalage and probably created a few Great Generals, we won't be needing Theocracy. This is why we now have a metastrategy, and the options are clear: 1) Make a switch to Caste System+Pacifism, while staying in Vassalage, 2) Make a switch to Bureaucracy+Organized Religion, while staying in Slavery, and 3) Make a switch to Organized Religion, with the option of staying in Slavery or switching to Serfdom. In all cases, we make significant savings by completely bypassing Theocracy. For option 2), our new Great Generals are settled in our most productive cities to give us the +2 XP bonus.




--addendum 1 (introducing Vassalage+Pacifism as a first civics switch)

After another long period of tinkering and research, I have come to the realization that Vassalage+Pacifism is effective as a first civics switch, as well as a second one. The potential dangers of using this combo, which were previously overestimated, are namely:

1) The need to maintain a large military to prevent an enemy DOW

2) The need to provide extra happiness

3) The need to avoid excessive upkeep costs from having a large military


After putting in some more hours into Immortal-level play, I have found and practiced different ways to counter the above 3 dangers. In summary, they are:

1) In higher-level play, there is actually no need to raise a large army to prevent an enemy DOW. Diplomacy is the dominant factor, not army size, as DanF's findings showed us. The main concern then becomes having a quality army that can win battles, assuming they actually happen. Gaining the +2 XP from Vassalage helps in this regard, because it allows for a small, but strong army.

2) There are many other "Ways Into Happiness", as coined by Cabert, besides using Hereditary Rule. These ways include resources, religion, leader bonuses (Charismatic), and unique building bonuses. The proper combination of the above factors will often keep your cities out of unhappiness, assuming that war weariness is not excessive.

3) A large military is not always necessary to defeat AI armies, even on higher levels. The main consideration is the tendency of the rival AIs to produce large numbers of units. This tendency varies greatly depending on the personality of each AI leader and situational circumstances. Even when the rival AI leaders raise large armies, it is still possible to control the size of one's own army by balancing unit production with unit losses. Excessive unit production can be avoided in many cases by correct assignment of city production and tile/specialist usage.


4) If all else fails, one can use a Golden Age to enable a smooth entry into Hereditary Rule and smooth exit from Pacifism. If necessary, the Golden Age can also be used to exit from Vassalage, if conditions permit. The means of starting a Golden Age are improved greatly if one wins the Music race, which provides a free Great Artist to the winner of the race.


The process initially outlined in The Vassalage Metastrategy called for using Vassalage+Hereditary Rule as a first civics switch. This new addendum to the strategy adds the option of using Vassalage+Pacifism as the first civics switch, emphasizing GPP production instead of happiness.
The decision of which branch to take will depend on a few factors:


1) The necessity of having Hereditary Rule to counter unhappiness

2) The economic liablility of maintaining a large army
under Pacifism

3) The potential for diplomatic bonuses from Hereditary Rule

The above three factors support the use of Hereditary Rule instead of Pacifism.


4) The possession of a spare Great Person to trigger a Golden Age

5) The capacity to employ a large number of specialists

6) The means to win battles with a small army

The above three factors support the use of Pacifism instead of Hereditary Rule.


After all is said and done, the Golden Age triggered by the spare Great Person (if available) will enable a free civics switch into Hereditary Rule and out of Pacifism. Even without the spare Great Person, a 2nd civics switch can still be done with only 1 turn of anarchy, provided that only 2 civics are changed. For example, it is possible to use the 2nd civics switch to do Despotism->Hereditary Rule and Vassalage->Bureaucracy, with only 1 turn of anarchy, if a spare Great Person is not available.

Right away, several leader choices come to mind. Now that we've added Bureaucracy and Organized Religion to our list of choices to use for the civics phase after Vassalage+Paganism, I see some leaders that stand out because of their traits and/or unique units/buildings:

1) Hammurabi -
The Aggressive trait makes Swordsmen deadly with Vassalage, and the Organized trait makes Organized Religion especially powerful.

2) Ragnar -
The combination of Aggressive and Financial makes both Vassalage and Bureaucracy valuable. Why not have both? First use Vassalage+Paganism, and then switch to Bureaucracy+Organzied Religion.

3) Shaka -
The power of the Ikhanda and the Expansive trait enables very fast expansion, boosting the usefulness of Vassalage. After some time, Organized Religion will help build Courthouses to provide a completely robust economy.

Given that you're talking about the benefits of lost turns via civics changes, Montezuma would also be a good choice, no? Since you need to burn through the religious techs to get to feudalism (and monarchy) for Vassalage and HR, wouldn't it be viable to go for the oracle for CoL enabling the sacrifical altar and then pursue feudalism for vassalage. You should be able to get several woodsman 3 jaguars who can act as healers so you're not left with the decision of burning a GG for a medic 3. Instead, you can use them as instructors for the +2 xp in your best production cities and not miss more than a couple of turns when it comes to healing your troops. The woodsman 3 isn't as fast a healer as a medic 3 but it will be easier to get more of them allowing a little more versatility with your army. Work march into your stack defending troops and you should be able to keep good chunks of your army on the move pretty consistently. Additionally, you'll have another woody 3 healing the badly damaged troops at the last city conquered. One of the biggest drawbacks I see with pursuing this route is it probably eliminates the possibility of an early rush, which is always fun with Monty. I usually struggle in the early game with him because he needs all of the economic techs making purusing med, poly, priest a lower priority. Escalating the importance of the religious techs will have economic impact but as long as you're not rushing and build a good defense early, the medieval war should be successful and you'll have the advantage of switiching civics without penalty.

johnny_rico said:

Given that you're talking about the benefits of lost turns via civics changes, Montezuma would also be a good choice, no? Since you need to burn through the religious techs to get to feudalism (and monarchy) for Vassalage and HR, wouldn't it be viable to go for the oracle for CoL enabling the sacrifical altar and then pursue feudalism for vassalage. You should be able to get several woodsman 3 jaguars who can act as healers so you're not left with the decision of burning a GG for a medic 3. Instead, you can use them as instructors for the +2 xp in your best production cities and not miss more than a couple of turns when it comes to healing your troops. The woodsman 3 isn't as fast a healer as a medic 3 but it will be easier to get more of them allowing a little more versatility with your army. Work march into your stack defending troops and you should be able to keep good chunks of your army on the move pretty consistently. Additionally, you'll have another woody 3 healing the badly damaged troops at the last city conquered. One of the biggest drawbacks I see with pursuing this route is it probably eliminates the possibility of an early rush, which is always fun with Monty. I usually struggle in the early game with him because he needs all of the economic techs making purusing med, poly, priest a lower priority. Escalating the importance of the religious techs will have economic impact but as long as you're not rushing and build a good defense early, the medieval war should be successful and you'll have the advantage of switiching civics without penalty.

Click to expand...

Excellent point about the Woodsmen III Jaguars. That is definitely a good reason to use a Great General as an instructor instead of a medic. And since Monty is Spiritual, the savings in civics switches are even greater than without it.

Regarding the religious techs, it seems that Priesthood would serve a dual purpose by being the prerequisite for both Monarchy and Code of Laws. Except in this case, the Aztec UB is enabled by Code of Laws. So it seems like it would be beneficial to pursue Priesthood and Code of Laws. After gaining Code of Laws, try to trade it for Monarchy. Of course, you might need Alphabet, so maybe try to trade Code of Laws for Alphabet and then Monarchy.

You're giving up Bureaucracy to save 2 turns of anarchy?

Hahaha!

DaveMcW said:

You're giving up Bureaucracy to save 2 turns of anarchy?

Hahaha!

Click to expand...

No, you've missed the point completely. In the last paragraph of my 1st post, I mention Bureaucracy as one of the options available, but my point is that I can switch to Vassalage and then Bureaucracy without adding any extra Anarchy from the religion civic switch. This is because the switch to Hereditary Rule can be combined with the switch to Vassalage without adding any extra Anarchy.

Ok, you're delaying Bureaucracy for a long time to save 1 turn of anarchy.

I still wouldn't do it.

I occasionally delay the switch to HR in favorable starts (LOL mass happy resources! Haha!). Games where I can do this without cap trouble...yeah...they tend to be really easy games.

I wouldn't delay bureaucracy either, and I'd only use vassalage for full-out war at the expense (or should I say temporary complete disregard) of tech.

DaveMcW said:

Ok, you're delaying Bureaucracy for a long time to save 1 turn of anarchy.

I still wouldn't do it.

Click to expand...

Not really.

Here is the comparison you're trying to do. We can break the timeline into 3 phases: Phase 1, Phase 2, and Phase 3, defined by which civics we have at the moment. They are:

Phase 1
option1&2: Despotism+Barbarism+Paganism

Phase 2
option1: Hereditary Rule+Bureaucracy+Paganism
option2: Hereditary Rule+Vassalage+Paganism

Phase 3
option1&2: Hereditary Rule+Bureaucracy+Organized Religion

For both Phase 1 and Phase 3, both option1 and option2 have the same civics combinations. Only in Phase 2 are the civics different. Notice that I haven't constrained Phase 2 to be a for a long duration. In fact, it can be for a short duration if needed.

Unless you mean that Bureaucracy and Organized Religion should be switched together, even for option1...but it's not clear whether that's what you want.

My typical warmonger game goes:

Phase 1
Despotism+Barbarism+Paganism

Phase 2
Hereditary Rule+Bureaucracy+Theocracy

OK, got it.


By taking this route, you are giving yourself a few constraints:

1) You need Theology to unlock Theocracy (unless you build a certain wonder).

2) You're forcing yourself to adopt a state religion as soon as you adopt Bureaucracy.

3) Assuming Normal speed, you need 1 extra Anarchy turn because of 3 civics switches instead of 2.

4) You're forfeiting the possibility to use Organized Religion.


By comparsion, a different option is to use what I described earlier:

Phase 1
Despotism+Barbarism+Paganism

Phase 2
Hereditary Rule+Vassalage+Paganism

Phase 3
Hereditary Rule+Bureaucracy+Organized Religion.


Your Phase 2 happens approximately the same time as my Phase 2&3. Let's call these Phase 2D, 2A, and 3A.

During Phase 2D (the time equivalent of 2A and 3A), you need the following:

1) Theology

2) a state religion, costing you 1 turn of Anarchy

3) 3 civics switches, costing you 2 turns of Anarchy (assuming Normal speed)




During Phase 2A, I need the following:

1) 2 civics switches, costing me 1 turn of Anarchy (assuming Normal speed)


So during Phase 2A, I have accumulated 2 fewer Anarchy turns than you, and don't need to get Theology or a state religion.




During Phase 3A, I need the following:

1) a state religion, costing me 1 turn of Anarchy

2) 2 civics switches, costing me 1 turn of Anarchy (assuming Normal speed)


So during Phase 3A, I have the same number of Anarchy turns as you, but here is where the comparison gets more complicated.

During Phase 2A, I was preparing for war and probably gained a few Great Generals. I settled some of those in my high production cities to gain a +2 XP bonus. Of course, you could have done the same as well but the difference is that the +2 XP doesn't gain you a new promotion. You could also switch to Organized Religion, but that would cost you 1 turn of Anarchy.

More importantly, I haven't constrained myself to get Theology and could have put my investment elsewhere.


Sure, it's a major difference of strategies we're comparing here, but to say that yours is better than mine is rubbish.

Artichoker said:

More importantly, I haven't constrained myself to get Theology and could have put my investment elsewhere.

Click to expand...

And I haven't constrained myself to get Feudalism, which costs 40% more than Theology and can't be bulbed.

I don't have Organized Religion, but you don't have Bureaucracy.

I fail to understand your GG argument.

DaveMcW said:

And I haven't constrained myself to get Feudalism, which costs 40% more than Theology and can't be bulbed.

I don't have Organized Religion, but you don't have Bureaucracy.

I fail to understand your GG argument.

Click to expand...

But my Phase 3A does have Bureaucracy, which is what I was trying to point out earlier. It's my Phase 2A that doesn't have Bureaucracy.

Here is the GG argument. Assume that you stay in Theocracy. You will gain GGs, and so will I. If I settle those GGs, my 3 XP cities are boosted to 5 XP. If you settle them, your 5 XP cities are boosted to 7 XP. But the payoff is much less in your case since you used Theocracy to boost your cities to 5 XP, and the GG boosts them only 2 XP higher, to 7 XP.

As for Feudalism vs. Theology, bulbing it requires a Great Prophet, something that might not be readily available. And it's virtually a dead-end tech, unlike Feudalism which unlocks Longbowmen and enables a long line of techs.

Artichoker said:

But my Phase 3A does have Bureaucracy, which is what I was trying to point out earlier. It's my Phase 2A that doesn't have Bureaucracy.

Here is the GG argument. Assume that you stay in Theocracy. You will gain GGs, and so will I. If I settle those GGs, my 3 XP cities are boosted to 5 XP. If you settle them, your 5 XP cities are boosted to 7 XP. But the payoff is much less in your case since you used Theocracy to boost your cities to 5 XP, and the GG boosts them only 2 XP higher, to 7 XP.

Click to expand...

I can switch from Theology to Organized Religion in phase 3, if that's really required.

DaveMcW said:

I can switch from Theology to Organized Religion in phase 3, if that's really required.

Click to expand...

Sure, but that now costs you 1 extra turn of Anarchy, something I don't need to suffer.

In fact, if I traded for Theology, I could also make Phase 3A Hereditary Rule+Bureaucracy+Theocracy instead of Hereditary Rule+Bureaucracy+Organized Religion, if I really wanted to use that option. It wouldn't cost me any extra Anarchy turns, unlike for you since you already took an extra Anarchy turn by choosing to do 3 civics switches the 1st time.

And most of your investment in Theology would have gone to waste if you decided to make that decision.

Of course, I forfeit the option of using Theocracy, but assuming that I've built a sizeable military in Phase 2A, and have some settled GGs to supplement new military production, that won't be necessary.



Before we go any further, I'd like to mention that I'm not trying to attack your strategy at all, but merely trying to defend my own by pointing out the differences in our strategies.

Artichoker said:

As for Feudalism vs. Theology, bulbing it requires a Great Prophet, something that might not be readily available. And it's virtually a dead-end tech, unlike Feudalism which unlocks Longbowmen and enables a long line of techs.

Click to expand...

Why are you comparing Feudalism and Theology by different method. Either compare them with bulbing or compare them with straight research. Feudalism can't be bulbed. Thus the only comparison research-wise is number of turns it takes to reasearch.

Which "long lines of techs" does Feudalism enable that CoL/CS doesn't? Especially since both method are going to require CS anyways. Theology is not a dead-end tech. In fact, the only way to DR is through Theology. One can get to CS without researching Feudalism. Both Feudalism and Theology helps with Liberalism race. So mainly the difference between the two is 1 with possible religion and 1 without. Other differences are minor. Founded religion depends on your winning strategy, might be useless. (Found Christian and build AP for hammer bonuses that's applicable to building units as well. Own religion means only you benefit most of the hammer bonus from AP's religion buildings. That's at least 4 hammers bonus, that doesn't require a citizen and food, at every single city with temple and monastery. Heck, they're so cheap to build I use the bonus to build my forges. I prefer to build the AP in my own religion because of relativity. If I capture AP with dominate religion, most of other AI will have hammer bonus. If I capture AP with another minor religion, I have to spend time spreading the religion afterwards manually. Early founded religion have better chance of spreading itself naturally via road and trade routes when players cities are religion free.). By the time you get your Feudalism, I am ready to hurry my AP with my GE. Even without GE, when I finish AP my other cities will be forged and enjoy the 4 hammer bonus at every city (because the long it takes you to do Feudalism). In addition, if I founded Christianity I have the option of using GP for the shrine. It also opens up opportunity for me to take DR and possible found a religion there if I fail with theology. And get a head start on the S. Market at the shrine city, which will likely to be Wallstreeted as well. All that potential bonus for researching Theology early. Sidenote on founding Theology, it's usually at a better city for building Wallstreet later because the earlier one founded the religion, the more time that city and it's cottages has to grow. In my experience, when I found Taoism or Islam, it's usually not at one of my first 6 cities.

If your Feudalism phase is short and teching towards CS for Bureaucracy then it's fine. But if Bureaucracy is available and is put off intentionally just because of 1 turn of lost anarchy is not worth it imo. 50% more production gain at capital is most vital.
The commerce bonus you can check on your home screen - how much beakers you gain at research and how many turns it saves you from your current research. At CS, most of the time, my capital is still my best science city if not in close 2nd to my super science city to be. And the 3rd city is way below. So 1 turn of anarchy for 50% commerce and production. @@

I don't follow your GG argument as well. Both way can produce GG and both can be settled for XP and research bonuses.

As long as one switch 2 civics at a time, it's 1 turn of anarchy. If you want to save anarchy there are other ways to do it so you can have even numbers of civics available to change to. Build the Shwedagon Paya early will open Pacifism early for you, for instance. Dave's method for example won't be wasted if he change to Hereditary Rule+Theocracy for building units for a short period of time while researching CS. Then Bureaucracy+Pacifism as soon as CS is complete. The point is change 2 civics at a time. The order and which civic is map/situation dependent.

The game is very hammer dependent, imo. As soon as Bureaucracy is available, I usually change to it asap. Even if it cost me 1 extra turn of Anarchy because I switch with 3 civic change.

Also the diplomatic bonus with other non-war-engaged civs are beneficial when one uses 1 anarchy for the state religion (the dominate one). I can usually get other civs with the same state religion to gang up on 1 civ. It means I don't have to build as many units, do not have to pay as much maintenance on units. I don't have as many units sacrificed in war. Thus the sooner I can war, and the sooner I can end the war. And normally if I decide to attach my 1st GG, I usually have a level 4 unit available to attach to - instant offensive super medic, with leadership the benefit is exponential considering the time it shortens on the length of the war and future war. I mean how nice is it that I fortify 2 axeman next to a target city and go in and take it when it after my allies has done most of the damage and sacrifice for me. The time I saved on Warring is almost usually more than 2 turns, and the shorter the war, the more commerce is saved and used towards other areas. And after the war, because of the (world dominate) religion diplo bonus, I don't have to worry about uping power rating too much and can focus mainly on building infrastructure with hammer bonuses.

And worse comes to worse, if you don't get war allies. At least you don't have to worry about some other AI jumping in and attacking you while you are at war with JC, for example. Brother of faith is a strong diplo bonus in Civ and only increases with time.

Airey said:

Why are you comparing Feudalism and Theology by different method. Either compare them with bulbing or compare them with straight research. Feudalism can't be bulbed. Thus the only comparison research-wise is number of turns it takes to reasearch.

Click to expand...

Hello...I welcome your opinion here, by the way. I'm not trying to assert that my strat is strictly better than Dave's.

I'm not the one who brought up the Feudalism vs. Theology comparison, but was only defending the value of Feudalism as an important tech. In order to appreciate it fully, you need to appreciate the power of Longbowmen, which many people seem to ignore.

Which "long lines of techs" does Feudalism enable that CS doesn't? Especially since both method are going to require CS anyways. Theology is not a dead-end tech. In fact, the only way to DR is through Theology. One can get to CS without researching Feudalism. Both Feudalism and Theology helps with Liberalism race. So mainly the difference between the two is 1 with possible religion and 1 without. Other differences are minor. Founded religion depends on your winning strategy, might be useless. (Found Christian and build AP for hammer bonuses that's applicable to building units as well. Own religion means only you benefit most of the hammer bonus from AP's religion buildings. That's at least 4 hammers bonus at every single city with temple and monastery).

Click to expand...

Guilds. Call that a dead-end tech if you like, but I certainly value it much more than Divine Right.

If your Feudalism phase is short and teching towards CS for Bureaucracy then it's fine. But if Bureaucracy is available and is put off intentionally just because of 1 turn of lost anarchy is not worth it imo. 50% more production gain at capital is most vital.
The commerce bonus you can check on your home screen - how much beakers you gain at research and how many turns it saves you from your current research. At CS, most of the time, my capital is still my best science city if not close to 2nd. And the 3rd city is way below. So 1 turn of anarchy for 50% commerce and production. @@

Click to expand...

Here is where I'll just have to disagree with you. +2 XP in all cities for military is much better than +50% production in one city, by far. On the other hand, the commerce bonus of Bureaucracy can compensate, but without fully mature Cottages this takes some time to realize.

I don't follow your GG argument as well. Both way can produce GG and both can be settled for XP and research bonuses.

Click to expand...

The jump from 3 XP to 5 XP is big because it adds a full promotion. The jump from 5 XP to 7 XP is much less because it provides less than half a promotion.

As long as one switch 2 civics at a time, it's 1 turn of anarchy. If you want to save anarchy there are other ways to do it so you can have even numbers of civics available to change to. Build the Shwedagon Paya early will open Pacifism early for you, for instance.

The game is very hammer dependent, imo. As soon as Bureaucracy is available, I usually change to it asap. Even if it cost me 1 extra turn of Anarchy because I switch with 3 civic change.

Also the diplomatic bonus with other non-war-engaged civs are beneficial when one uses 1 anarchy for the state religion (the dominate one). I can usually get other civs with the same state religion to gang up on 1 civ. It means I don't have to build as many units, do not have to pay as much maintenance on units. I don't have as many units sacrificed in war. Thus the sooner I can war, and the sooner I can end the war. And normally if I decide to attach my 1st GG, I usually have a level 4 unit available - instant offensive super medic, with leadership the benefit is exponential considering the time it shortens on the length of the war and future war. I mean how nice is it that I fortify 2 axeman next to a target city and go in and take it when it after my allies has done most of the damage and sacrifice for me. The time I saved on Warring is almost usually more than 2 turns, and the shorter the war, the more commerce is saved and used towards other areas.

And worse comes to worse, if you don't get war allies. At least you don't have to worry about some other AI jumping in and attacking you while you are at war with JC, for example. Brother of faith is a strong diplo bonus in Civ and only increases with time.

Click to expand...

More often than not, I find it more advantageous to wait until the right moment to pick the right religion, because the choice may not always be obvious at the time.

Artichoker said:

Sure, but that now costs you 1 extra turn of Anarchy, something I don't need to suffer.

Click to expand...

So we are back to my original argument - the only thing I lose by getting Bureaucracy early is 1 turn of anarchy.

Before we go any further, I'd like to mention that I'm not trying to attack your strategy at all, but merely trying to defend my own by pointing out the differences in our strategies.

Click to expand...

On the other hand, I am attacking your strategy by asserting that Vassalage is expensive and useless.

Nothing personal.

"There will be no fighting here. This is the War Room!"

DaveMcW said:

So we are back to my original argument - the only thing I lose by getting Bureaucracy early is 1 turn of anarchy.

Click to expand...

Well, you haven't made it that far yet, because you say that you switch to Bureaucracy and Theocracy at the same time, in order to gain +2 XP during that time (otherwise, you would need to wait until gaining Theology).

In order to ensure early Bureaucracy and Theocracy, you would therefore need 2 techs immediately: Civil Service and Theology, whereas I only need 1 tech immediately: Feudalism, but can wait for the other one: Civil Service.

This is not easy to do unless you bulb it, but that costs you a great person. At a comparable cost, I can also get a great scientist to create an academy in some commerce city.

On the other hand, I am attacking your strategy by asserting that Vassalage is expensive and useless.

Nothing personal.

Click to expand...

Sure, we can go that way if you like, but I'll guarantee that you'll lose in your endeavor.

Nothing personal.