The Emperor Masters' Challenge 3 (on Warlords)
- Thread starter aelf
- Start date
OK, this officially sucks.
Finally caught up reading, I thought this was a good thing -- to finally be able to contribute, but what meets me?
A finished round there's not much to talk about, and NOTHING MORE TO READ
The EMC's are awesome -- it will be -very- interesting to see how this pans out in the next challenge with the patch. Personally had to drop down from a barely-making-it-immortal to destroying-monarch-but-being-annihilated-on-emperor player. Very annoying.
The patch is actually very very good -- but they seriously need to some skilled playtesters who will notice what the changes they make ACTUALLY do (right now they saw how Blake upgraded the AI -- followed the scheme, and didn't REALLY consider consequences).
All they really had to do was remove AI trading bonuses/human trading penalties to avoid what is happening right now, but I'm getting off-topic.
Anyway, as for this game: Nook'em! If nothing else, it'd guarantee victory and give the thread some nice fireworks!
Thanks aelf for wasting 4 days of continuous reading at work (I am the boss so noone can complain
), and for making this great thread!
- Rashkaar
Finally caught up reading, I thought this was a good thing -- to finally be able to contribute, but what meets me?
A finished round there's not much to talk about, and NOTHING MORE TO READ
The EMC's are awesome -- it will be -very- interesting to see how this pans out in the next challenge with the patch. Personally had to drop down from a barely-making-it-immortal to destroying-monarch-but-being-annihilated-on-emperor player. Very annoying.
The patch is actually very very good -- but they seriously need to some skilled playtesters who will notice what the changes they make ACTUALLY do (right now they saw how Blake upgraded the AI -- followed the scheme, and didn't REALLY consider consequences).
All they really had to do was remove AI trading bonuses/human trading penalties to avoid what is happening right now, but I'm getting off-topic.
Anyway, as for this game: Nook'em! If nothing else, it'd guarantee victory and give the thread some nice fireworks!
Thanks aelf for wasting 4 days of continuous reading at work (I am the boss so noone can complain
), and for making this great thread!- Rashkaar
aelf
Ashen One
Round 13: 1904AD - 1950AD (Part 2)
Next city to fall was an old contested one:
I was debating with myself (in my head, of course) if we should raze it. It's small and likely be overwhelmed by Russian culture. But I decided to keep it. If we had our way, we would be winning soon anyway and every little bit helps.
Our blitzkrieg arm really lived up to its name:
Minimal resistance so far. Shaka's defenders were totally pwned by our bombers.
Meanwhile, on the western front, our foot soldiers tried to keep up:
I must say they're doing an admirable job, since the cities they were taking were bigger and better defended. Shaka had a small stack of artillery left, though, so I still had to be careful with troop positioning.
The tanks again:
This was when Shaka chose to throw all the artillery he had left and whatever SAM infantry happened to be nearby at us. He was clever enough not to do it to the SEAL-protected groups. He did it to our tanks. We lost about two, but managed to hold on to Bursa. With this last dismal failure, Shaka was officially dead. We didn't even need to be careful anymore. It would be quick beelining to the rest of his cities from then on. Our spies had revealed earlier that he would take 20+ turns to finish researching Industrialism (WW was killing him badly), so there's nothing new he could come up with.
Meanwhile, we continued airlifting reinforcements in. If Stalin still didn't help Shaka, this would be over very soon.
Speaking of which, the Manhattan Project was approaching completion in Mecca, so if anything we might just be able to rely on nukes to help hold Stalin off. WW was reaching fever pitch in our own empire, but Malls had been built by now to help keep unhappiness down (together with the 30% on the culture slider). The extra income from our UB would also be useful if we had to rush buy some ICBMS in an emergency.
More bloodletting:
And shelling of cities:
Shaka decided enough was enough, so the proud conqueror humbled himself:
If we accepted it, we might win rightaway. That would be a good thing. Better win now before Stalin joined in. However, I wasn't so sure that Shaka controlled enough land to help us get over the 64% as a vassal, so I decided to check first:
I don't think so. If we capture all the cities that he had, though, we'd certainly win, so it's on with the war
[to be continued in the next post]
Next city to fall was an old contested one:
I was debating with myself (in my head, of course) if we should raze it. It's small and likely be overwhelmed by Russian culture. But I decided to keep it. If we had our way, we would be winning soon anyway and every little bit helps.
Our blitzkrieg arm really lived up to its name:
Minimal resistance so far. Shaka's defenders were totally pwned by our bombers.
Meanwhile, on the western front, our foot soldiers tried to keep up:
I must say they're doing an admirable job, since the cities they were taking were bigger and better defended. Shaka had a small stack of artillery left, though, so I still had to be careful with troop positioning.
The tanks again:
This was when Shaka chose to throw all the artillery he had left and whatever SAM infantry happened to be nearby at us. He was clever enough not to do it to the SEAL-protected groups. He did it to our tanks. We lost about two, but managed to hold on to Bursa. With this last dismal failure, Shaka was officially dead. We didn't even need to be careful anymore. It would be quick beelining to the rest of his cities from then on. Our spies had revealed earlier that he would take 20+ turns to finish researching Industrialism (WW was killing him badly), so there's nothing new he could come up with.
Meanwhile, we continued airlifting reinforcements in. If Stalin still didn't help Shaka, this would be over very soon.
Speaking of which, the Manhattan Project was approaching completion in Mecca, so if anything we might just be able to rely on nukes to help hold Stalin off. WW was reaching fever pitch in our own empire, but Malls had been built by now to help keep unhappiness down (together with the 30% on the culture slider). The extra income from our UB would also be useful if we had to rush buy some ICBMS in an emergency.
More bloodletting:
And shelling of cities:
Shaka decided enough was enough, so the proud conqueror humbled himself:
If we accepted it, we might win rightaway. That would be a good thing. Better win now before Stalin joined in. However, I wasn't so sure that Shaka controlled enough land to help us get over the 64% as a vassal, so I decided to check first:
I don't think so. If we capture all the cities that he had, though, we'd certainly win, so it's on with the war
[to be continued in the next post]
aelf
Ashen One
[continued from previous post]
We finally reached one of Mehmed's two cities:
It was a refreshing change, not getting shot at by SAMs when we bombarded the city from the air.
We captured Shaka's last core city:
See that? The two arms (or wings) have met in the middle of the continent. Hooray for us!
I decided we would have enough land to win after the cities go out of revolt if Shaka capitulated, so I looked him up:
Strangely, he wouldn't agree to it now. However, he did agree to give one of his last two cities. Desperate man. It was good enough an offer, so I accepted it.
I raised the culture slider and waited a few turns for a couple of cities to go out of revolt. And....
World domination!
We had the Manhattan Project kept one turn from completion, but looks like we didn't need it anyway. Stalin was too engrossed in building his spaceship or something. Can anyone offer an explanation as to why Shaka didn't vassalise himself to Stalin? Or why Stalin wouldn't agree to it?
As you can see, Stalin had a higher power rating than us. He had huge stacks sitting around in his cities unused.
The world rankings:
City rankings:
Washington had the top spot once, before heavy WW during the Brennus war pulled it down. Since then, it had never regained its position
Our final score:
It's higher than any games I've played on Warlords so far, but, because of the late finish date, it's still lower than the score we had for the first Emperor Challenge.
So, that's it, guys. Another great game
You can post some of your own analyses about the trade route strategy we pursued (at least until late game) before I post mine.
We finally reached one of Mehmed's two cities:
It was a refreshing change, not getting shot at by SAMs when we bombarded the city from the air.
We captured Shaka's last core city:
See that? The two arms (or wings) have met in the middle of the continent. Hooray for us!
I decided we would have enough land to win after the cities go out of revolt if Shaka capitulated, so I looked him up:
Strangely, he wouldn't agree to it now. However, he did agree to give one of his last two cities. Desperate man. It was good enough an offer, so I accepted it.
I raised the culture slider and waited a few turns for a couple of cities to go out of revolt. And....
World domination! We had the Manhattan Project kept one turn from completion, but looks like we didn't need it anyway. Stalin was too engrossed in building his spaceship or something. Can anyone offer an explanation as to why Shaka didn't vassalise himself to Stalin? Or why Stalin wouldn't agree to it?
As you can see, Stalin had a higher power rating than us. He had huge stacks sitting around in his cities unused.
The world rankings:
City rankings:
Washington had the top spot once, before heavy WW during the Brennus war pulled it down. Since then, it had never regained its position
Our final score:
It's higher than any games I've played on Warlords so far, but, because of the late finish date, it's still lower than the score we had for the first Emperor Challenge.
So, that's it, guys. Another great game
You can post some of your own analyses about the trade route strategy we pursued (at least until late game) before I post mine.
aelf
Ashen One
Rashkaar said:Thanks aelf for wasting 4 days of continuous reading at work (I am the boss so noone can complain
Now that's awesome. I wish I could say the same
Anyway, yes, playing on Emperor with the new patch would be interesting. I suspect we won't win the first time. But after winning by domination on a continental Ice Age map with a leader that has late UU and UB, I think we could give the new patch a decent shot.
patagonia
Emperor
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2006
- Messages
- 1,025
Great finish! It's good to see the American UU and UB - which are generally rubbished for coming too late to matter - play a major role in the push to victory here.
I think the trade route strategy was definitely viable and helped you to keep pace reasonably well in the early/mid game before aggressive expansion took care of things effectively. With the bureaucracy bonus, the trade routes in Washington alone were probably worth an extra 3 cities in terms of total commerce output in the early middle ages.
The one drawback with the approach is that it depends on getting two early wonders which the AI places a reasonably high priority on, but that stage of the game is over sufficiently early to change tack and use a different strategy if you fail to get one or both of them (using the gold to finance deficit research or aggressive expansion in the meantime).
Looking forward to the next EMC.
I think the trade route strategy was definitely viable and helped you to keep pace reasonably well in the early/mid game before aggressive expansion took care of things effectively. With the bureaucracy bonus, the trade routes in Washington alone were probably worth an extra 3 cities in terms of total commerce output in the early middle ages.
The one drawback with the approach is that it depends on getting two early wonders which the AI places a reasonably high priority on, but that stage of the game is over sufficiently early to change tack and use a different strategy if you fail to get one or both of them (using the gold to finance deficit research or aggressive expansion in the meantime).
Looking forward to the next EMC.
I think Aelf deserves a hearty internet golf clap for the great work and effort you've put into this thread and all the others.
So..
*golf clap*
Great job aelf, looking forward to the next one (if you have the energy!)
So..
*golf clap*
Great job aelf, looking forward to the next one (if you have the energy!)
Congratulations! An impressive victory and, most importantly, another great read.
Sisiutil
All Leader Challenger
An awesome finish, aelf. I particularly enjoyed how you divided your forces not only into two stacks, but into different specialties based upon the units' abilities. And as others have said, it was good to see those two late unique elements coming into play for the win.
The trade route strategy was fun and profitable, but I wonder if it would be as viable with the patch, simply because it looks like Civil Service will be much harder to acquire early on, postponing bureaucracy for a while. I'm about to start researching CS from scratch in my current ALC game, and I don't think I've done that since I was a noob playing on settler level!
It looks to me like Firaxis wanted to intentionally skewer any form of a CS slingshot.
The trade route strategy was fun and profitable, but I wonder if it would be as viable with the patch, simply because it looks like Civil Service will be much harder to acquire early on, postponing bureaucracy for a while. I'm about to start researching CS from scratch in my current ALC game, and I don't think I've done that since I was a noob playing on settler level!
It looks to me like Firaxis wanted to intentionally skewer any form of a CS slingshot.
carl corey
Deity
The Great Wall now only gives one Great Engineer Point after the patch, so going for a GW -> Pyramids strategy is pretty much out.
Spectacular finish aelf 
You combined a D-Day (ships and marines) on the western front with a Blitzkrieg (tanks and bombers) on the eastern front, a brilliant military strategy that tore poor old Shaka's impis to bits. He looks so desolate in 1945 when he offers capitulation.
I'd like to see a savegame of the final situation if you still have it. I am curious as to what Shaka's cities look like after conquest and particularly what Stalin has at that time in terms of units.
Concerning the trade route strategy, I am undecided. It certainly did give you more commerce at times but was it worth the trouble? In the mid game it meant that you have to worry about keeping good relations with a couple of civs for open borders and then worry about them running Mercantilism. In my shadow game (drafting rifles ) I found that irritating.
Roosevelt is Industrious so I guess he has to build wonders to make good use of the trait. The question is though, is the trade route strategy as strong as other wonder based strategies? I think the other options could be easier to manage and blend into an overall game plan. But it was fun finding out and led in the end to a spectacular finish and a good score.
You combined a D-Day (ships and marines) on the western front with a Blitzkrieg (tanks and bombers) on the eastern front, a brilliant military strategy that tore poor old Shaka's impis to bits. He looks so desolate in 1945 when he offers capitulation. I'd like to see a savegame of the final situation if you still have it. I am curious as to what Shaka's cities look like after conquest and particularly what Stalin has at that time in terms of units.
Concerning the trade route strategy, I am undecided. It certainly did give you more commerce at times but was it worth the trouble? In the mid game it meant that you have to worry about keeping good relations with a couple of civs for open borders and then worry about them running Mercantilism. In my shadow game (drafting rifles
) I found that irritating. Roosevelt is Industrious so I guess he has to build wonders to make good use of the trait. The question is though, is the trade route strategy as strong as other wonder based strategies? I think the other options could be easier to manage and blend into an overall game plan. But it was fun finding out and led in the end to a spectacular finish and a good score.
UncleJJ said:Concerning the trade route strategy, I am undecided. It certainly did give you more commerce at times but was it worth the trouble? In the mid game it meant that you have to worry about keeping good relations with a couple of civs for open borders and then worry about them running Mercantilism. In my shadow game (drafting rifles
Roosevelt is Industrious so I guess he has to build wonders to make good use of the trait. The question is though, is the trade route strategy as strong as other wonder based strategies? I think the other options could be easier to manage and blend into an overall game plan.
All good points; but I think the trade strategy would be more effective in circumstances other than those found in this game.
In particular, an empire with lots of coastal cities (especially on an islands or, perhaps, fractal map) would make better use of the GL; in fact, anytime you find yourself in a starting place with lots of sea and little useful land the trade thing might prove the difference between keeping up in tech and getting left behind.
A little counterintuitively, it might even be worth pursuing in some more isolated continental starts (eg, stuck on a small continent with only one AI civ), where you're going to beeline for astronomy asap anyway, and where the distance to other civs will provide a decent boost to your trade revenue.
Lastly, imo, there's a natural synergy between trade and diplomacy which lends itself to the pursuit of a diplomatic victory (which, of course, wasn't on the menu in this game).
In this game aelf has demonstrated that even in a situation where the trade approach may not be the most obvious option, it can still help to compensate for the AI bonuses. I know from experience (on vanilla) that in circumstances more favourable to trade it can be much more powerful (GL and Colossus with coastal cities squeezed into every gap is my usual approach), but the ToA/GL/Bureaucracy combo could give it a real boost. Now, if I could just scrape together the cash to buy Warlords...
aelf
Ashen One
Well, as I see it, the trade route strategy (with its wonders) has a few merits:
-> Extra commerce where it matters most - the capital (assuming you run Bureaucracy for a significant length of time)
-> Generally extra commerce until the wonders obsolete, mainly in the capital and in the form of extra trade routes in coastal cities.
-> Controlling the pace of expansion due to the need to maintain trading partner(s) on your continent until the discovery of Astronomy. This helped us keep up in tech and win both the Liberalism race and the circumnavigation bonus because we didn't need to pay killer upkeep.
-> The extra commerce we got from trade routes also helped us maintain relative tech parity, despite being on the less fortunate continent.
And, as the game has shown, this strategy does not mean you have to follow a peaceful path. You just need to maintain some trading partners until late game, when all the wonders have expired. This just means selecting your foes (and friends). Feel free to destroy your foes. You also don't need to pursue a diplomatic victory as you can go for a domination push in late game, since the trade routes wouldn't really matter anymore by then.
On the other hand, this strategy has a few problems: the need to build quite a few early wonders, including the expensive ToA, and (as UncleJJ has pointed out) the AIs running Mercantilism in mid-game. Also, this would not work well if you somehow have no trading partners for much of the game, making this strategy actually quite undesirable for isolated starts.
It's up to you to judge whether this strategy is worth your while in a particular game.
-> Extra commerce where it matters most - the capital (assuming you run Bureaucracy for a significant length of time)
-> Generally extra commerce until the wonders obsolete, mainly in the capital and in the form of extra trade routes in coastal cities.
-> Controlling the pace of expansion due to the need to maintain trading partner(s) on your continent until the discovery of Astronomy. This helped us keep up in tech and win both the Liberalism race and the circumnavigation bonus because we didn't need to pay killer upkeep.
-> The extra commerce we got from trade routes also helped us maintain relative tech parity, despite being on the less fortunate continent.
And, as the game has shown, this strategy does not mean you have to follow a peaceful path. You just need to maintain some trading partners until late game, when all the wonders have expired. This just means selecting your foes (and friends). Feel free to destroy your foes. You also don't need to pursue a diplomatic victory as you can go for a domination push in late game, since the trade routes wouldn't really matter anymore by then.
On the other hand, this strategy has a few problems: the need to build quite a few early wonders, including the expensive ToA, and (as UncleJJ has pointed out) the AIs running Mercantilism in mid-game. Also, this would not work well if you somehow have no trading partners for much of the game, making this strategy actually quite undesirable for isolated starts.
It's up to you to judge whether this strategy is worth your while in a particular game.
aelf
Ashen One
Oh, by the way, here's the last pre-victory autosave.
Tyrant Roger
Warlord
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2006
- Messages
- 203
I just finished my first game with the patch and the impact on AI development and teching was impressive. I was behind in tech until the modern age and in prior games would have caught up by the Middle Ages.
Firaxis has also made it harder to pursue a variety of slings and wonder strategies that have been touted in the past.
The key problem with this game, however, remains the AI's miserable abilities at war. If the AI could become as good at war as it now is at development, this would make Civ4 an absolute stunner of a single player game.
Firaxis has also made it harder to pursue a variety of slings and wonder strategies that have been touted in the past.
The key problem with this game, however, remains the AI's miserable abilities at war. If the AI could become as good at war as it now is at development, this would make Civ4 an absolute stunner of a single player game.
