ALC Game 14: Mongolia/Kublai Khan

Pre-Game Thread

Starting Position (this post, below)
Round 1: 4000 BC to 3970 BC
Round 2: 3970 BC to 3940 BC
Round 3: 3940 BC to 3280 BC
Round 4: 3280 BC to 2080 BC
Round 5: 2080 BC to 685 BC
Round 6: 685 BC to 205 BC
Round 7: 205 BC to 605 AD
Round 8: 605 AD to 1316 AD
Round 9: 1316 AD to 1574 AD
Round 10: 1574 AD to 1628 AD
Post Mortem

The idea of the All Leaders Challenge is that I'm going to play a game with each of the Civ IV leaders--mostly the less popular ones--that I haven't tried before. With the help of all the posters who participate, I will attempt to make the most of the leader's unique characteristics: traits, starting techs, unit, and building. Aside from the leader, the other game settings are kept constant, at their defaults, for the sake of comparison--although I'm introducing a couple of variations starting with this game (see below). I will post the saved game files, screenshots, and status reports here as the game progresses. Everyone then has a chance to chime in with their strategy ideas, or voice their frustration (or glee) when I make a mistake.

Everyone is invited to offer opinions and advice, and to make your own attempt at playing the same game. But if you do play a "shadow game", I kindly request that you refrain from posting spoilers--i.e. any facts or even hints about the map, opponents, and so on--before I'm there myself. I'm trying to play the game as authentically as possible.

In this ALC game, I'll be playing as Kublai Khan, leader of Mongolia. I'm playing the game using the Warlords expansion pack (complete with the 2.08 patch). The difficulty level is Monarch, the map is Fractal , and the speed is Epic .

Here are all of the game settings:



And here's a look at the start:



Well, that's a start that suits Mongolia well, doesn't it? I've got a camp resource (fur) that allows us to utilize one of the starting techs (Hunting); not only that, there's two fur tiles (the Settler is standing on one), so we have something we can trade early on. I also have an Agriculture and and Animal Husbandry resource, so I think that should be our initial tech path--especially since there are no hills visible for mines.

That could be the only trouble with this starting location for the capital: a lack of production, especially as the forests get chopped. We'd need a combination of Metal Casting, Guilds, and Replaceable Parts for decent workshops to compensate for the lack of hills. I'm thinking of sending the Scout N and then NW to reveal that NE tile, though I doubt it's a hill. From that final resting place, what other tiles will he reveal? Should we consider moving the Settler if, on this turn or the next, we can get a hill or two?

On the other hand, I'm usually inclined to settle in place. I don't mind founding on top of furs, as I rarely work those tiles. If the capital's production is lacklustre, we can use all that food to run specialists and focus the city on that purpose instead while other cities pick up the slack.

Other things to note: we're obviously at the southern end of our land mass, indicated by the snow-dusted trees on that grassland tile to the west. There's some sort of land mass--peninsula, island--to the east. And if we settle in place, this is one of the few starts I've seen where the capital would NOT have a fresh water bonus. Finally, though we have fish available, we don't start with Fishing and it's not on our early list of techs to snag. So I wouldn't mind giving up the fish for now, though I'd have to move the Settler quite a distance to leave them for another city later on. I'd prefer to not waste them by leaving them in the city's 3rd or 4th ring, if possible.

So let's discuss where to move the Scout, and if we should settle in place or look for and move to a location with better production. I will move the Scout soon, post the results, and we'll make a final decision about the Settler, then I'll get on with the first round. The save is below.

Hmm, interesting start. I'd settle 1W for the fresh water, and move the scout up to that northern forest. You'll still have plenty of health/food resources around to make for a good specialist city.

You also lose a forest if you settle in place.

damn either a tough start or a great one depending on how you look at it. early production often comes from whipping, and you have cows corn and fish.. all good for generating people to sacrifice
frustrating thing is you start 2 techs away from BW

so we go to suggested tech and building path.

if you settle in place, you get 2f 1h 2c from the furs, and lose a decent commerce tile but so what if your going to end up running a SE.

I would settle, and go with a worker first.

tech path would depend on if you are going to go for the great wall gambit linked off of futurehermit's thread.

if you are you need to get the wall up before you drop your 2nd city. so tech and build path might be good to go
archery, mining, bronze (switch), masonry, AH, AG, writing, HBR, fishing, pottery, alpha,

build worker, archer, archer, great wall, settler, library,

have the 2nd city produce your 2nd settler if at all possible so you can run scientists with the goal of getting to 40% sci 60% eng when your GPP is close to full.. will require some micro.

settler and library probably from a combination of chops and whip. remember you will probably need to chop the wall and the library in order to pull the gambit off by 1000bc

AH before ag so you can see if you have horses nearby and to hook up the cows, which add hammers and food rather than corn which is just food.

thats all I got for now, the gambit is the best suggestion I can make

if you move west you gain fresh water, b ut lose cows.. which is a bad trade IMO
NaZ

Settling 1 W doesn't seem like a good choice since it not only loses the cows, but it will make the fish unworkable by any city. Giving up that much food just to get +2 health doesn't really make sense. Unless you want to just take a chance on getting really good resources in the western part of that city's fat cross I think you should either settle-in-place or move the settler further.

You could settle 2W of the corn tile on turn 2 if that tile is not hill or forest. That site looks like it would be freshwater, and would be able to work the corn, but the rest of its fat cross is unknown. You could also settle 1 N of the corn (although on turn 3), which would be freshwater, and could work both the corn and cows and allow the furs to be hooked up after it gets its second border expansion. Once you move the scout we should know a little more about the value of that site. Either of these sites would leave the original settler site available for a later city (although with some overlap).

If you do decide to settle-in-place that city will make a very nice GP farm, but you'll probably want to move the capital at some point.

Validator said:

Settling 1 W doesn't seem like a good choice since it not only loses the cows, but it will make the fish unworkable by any city. Giving up that much food just to get +2 health doesn't really make sense. Unless you want to just take a chance on getting really good resources in the western part of that city's fat cross I think you should either settle-in-place or move the settler further.

You could settle 2W of the corn tile on turn 2 if that tile is not hill or forest. That site looks like it would be freshwater, and would be able to work the corn, but the rest of its fat cross is unknown. You could also settle 1 N of the corn (although on turn 3), which would be freshwater, and could work both the corn and cows and allow the furs to be hooked up after it gets its second border expansion. Once you move the scout we should know a little more about the value of that site. Either of these sites would leave the original settler site available for a later city (although with some overlap).

If you do decide to settle-in-place that city will make a very nice GP farm, but you'll probably want to move the capital at some point.

Click to expand...

But 1W connects him to a river, and who knows where that goes? Personally I like having my first city always next to a river if possible in one movement. It might be long enough to connect a second city, save improvement time by not having to build a road right away.

I haven't played a shadow game but for some reason, I get the feeling you'll have A LOT of Coastal Cities... It's just a feeling so getting the Colossus may help you with the Commerce Deficit because your capital has a lot of water tiles, assuming you settle in place, you'll have 9 Water tiles (excludes fish) within your Capital's Fat-cross. Which isn't very productive in the later stages of the game for a capital. You could always move your Palace later in the Game I guess.

I Still recommend by early Writing==> Library Strategy for a Early GS for an Academy, for the Research advantage/bonus. It'll definitely Help in the Research of HBR if you decide to go through that route.

My opening would be, assuming I Settle in place

City build ==> Scout ==> Worker ==> Work boat ==> Warrior (Optional, You can use one of your nearby Scout as a Temporary Defender) ==> Settler ==> Library

Research==> Arg ==> Fishing ==> AH ==> Writing

Settle in place and move the capital later if you want to take advantage of Bureaucracy. You have three health resources so health won't be an issue for a while. Eventually you'll get a harbour and another 2 or three health. Settling 1W is a bad idea as the (effective) +2 food from the fish will make up for the +2 health even if you run over the limit, and below the limit it's pure bonus.

Don't settle in place! Dude, those are plains Furs. One has a forest and the other is on a river. They're like Gold mines. If you're careful, there's even a chance a forest will grow on the other one before you encamp it.

Waste the Fish. Settle 1NW or go wild and settle on top of the Corn.

AH/Scout/Worker first. Cows rule, and if by chance a Scout popped HBR from a hut it would be game-endingly awesome.

Definetly don´t waste the plains fur by settling on it. If not for the fish it would be an easy call indeed.


IMO, you should move the scout to the northern forest and the settler exactly one W and then decide where to settle. I dislike both the settling on the fish and the wasting of the fish.

Rancid Sushi said:

But 1W connects him to a river, and who knows where that goes? Personally I like having my first city always next to a river if possible in one movement. It might be long enough to connect a second city, save improvement time by not having to build a road right away.

Click to expand...

If he settles-in-place all he needs to do to connect to the river is road the tile to the west. I don't see that saving 3 worker turns is worth wasting a fish.

Heh, I forgot Mongolia starts with The Wheel.

I haven't played CIV in 3 weeks.

The question for me would be: do you want a commerce city, or a GP farm? For the latter I'd settle in place, for the former I'd move 1N.
You'd lose the fish in this last case but you'd be able to work both furs, plus you'd gain what looks like a grassland river tile to the west. Even if you were to cottage everything up you'd still have sufficient food for at least 2 specialists, which would suit Kublai's Creative trait (= cheap library) rather well.

I'm leaning towards a more commerce-oriented (specifically, science) city myself, for 2 reasons: first, Kublai's traits are not all that hot for research - the cheap libraries nothwithstanding - so you an early commerce-geared city would be a great boon. Second, being aggressive there's a fair chance you'll whack at least one neighbour, taking their capital in the process. Most likely it'll be a suitable GP farm spot too (most capitals are from what I can tell) and possibly a better one at that.
You'll be cursing if you find yourself on an isolated island with stone nearby though

Its worth remembering that its not too expensive to move palace later.

Let's discuss where to move the scout? Did you write this paragraph before generating the map?

Validator said:

Settling 1 W doesn't seem like a good choice since it not only loses the cows, but it will make the fish unworkable by any city. Giving up that much food just to get +2 health doesn't really make sense.

Click to expand...

Well, it's not just the health bonus. Settling on top of the furs on the river turns the city into a 2F/2C/1P. Furthremore, camps don't remove the forrest overlay, so your plains forrest camp will be 1F/4C/2P instead of 1F/5C/1P (the camp on the river). You get to keep the forrest, so if there's another hiding in the fog to the west that's a third health.

I wouldn't make that trade, but it's a little bit sexier than +2


Happy up to size six (with enough heath resources to stay healthy, if they get connected), irrigated corn (6F) plus cows (4F/2P) plus the city tile (2F/1P) covers all of your food needs. Tough to get four specialists into play early, though.

I'm a big fan of Snatty's moving in land idea, for coastal starts, so with that in mind, I suggest moving the scout N to the cows then probably NW to the forest. If you plan to move in land you can do it with the intention of haveing the corn near the capital for food so I suggest moving the settler W then NW up the river.

I'd go with moving the Settler 1 NW and either settling there, or going from what you see there.
That way you'd still snatch all the resources getting good financials in the city with the furs, not to mention happiness, but also the growth would be quite good for whipping, whipping it good.
Frankly, there's no production in sight, so unless you're really into sushi, I'd ditch the fishes and take the chance. Damn fishes.

Additionally, even if there's no mines / other production in sight, there's still the river for watermills for future.

There really is only one place that you could possibly move the scout that would make any sense at all (your plan to move 1N, then 1 NW). Why not do that and then post that screenshot so that this

It's not as if you need our advice to move that scout. And then any thoughts that people have on settling in place vs. moving will be just that much more informed and more likely to be good advice.

Hmmm...tough one. Settle in place, and you're one tile away from fresh water and don't get the whole commerce bonus from the furs. Settle 1N, and you lose the fish. 1W is out of the question (you'd lose the cows and the fish), and anything else would put you one tile off the coast. I'd say move the scout first; if it doesn't reveal anything interesting, settle in place. IMHO +1 in all your cities (+2 in coastal cities with harbors) and 5 (6 with a lighthouse) beats the +2 from the lake. Also, since the food bonuses make this such an obvious candidate for a GP farm, the extra commerce from the furs isn't quite as imoprtant. But keep in mind that I play mostly on prince and am still learning the game, in part from reading your ALC threads, which have been very informative.

VoiceOfUnreason said:

Well, it's not just the health bonus. Settling on top of the furs on the river turns the city into a 2F/2C/1P. Furthremore, camps don't remove the forrest overlay, so your plains forrest camp will be 1F/4C/2P instead of 1F/5C/1P (the camp on the river). You get to keep the forrest, so if there's another hiding in the fog to the west that's a third health.

I wouldn't make that trade, but it's a little bit sexier than +2

Click to expand...

i usually go out of my way (all else being equal) to settle on fresh water, but here i have two conflicting thoughts. if we stay here we get to build a harbor which if we get the other 2 seafood (not unlikely down the road) is +3 health. moving 1W (which =losing cows=yuck, i <3 cows early on, nice food+hammers with pasture) or 1N would give freshwater + harbor = +5 and 5 is better than 3. yes i am indecisive. for me settling on a river to avoid having to build a road isn't a significant factor.

quoting S: "I don't mind founding on top of furs, as I rarely work those tiles." me too in general. but since there are BFC furs they turned into magically delicious plains furs rather than tundra furs which makes them more workable, which to me is a factor. settling in place on plains furs rather than tundra furs is less of an automatic call IMO.

settling in place is a ton of water tho, especially for a capital (altho you can move your palace), and 3 tiles are ocean eww (altho not as eww as for financial). add in that you don't have fishing. but if you move there is no possible way to get those fish in the BFC of a city settled anywhere except on top of those furs. those fish annoy the snot out of me.

disclaimer: i'm OCC addicted atm and therefore biased more than i ought to be about too many water tiles in my BFC since i can't make up for it by having more productive cities later in the game.

scout: N then NW

settler: W then see if there is anything there. im inclined to settle NW and screw the fish. furs on plains provide (without forest or river): 1F,1H,4G