Morocco's Kasbah

I play one level below the top most of the time (Immortal, I think it is called). I just tried out Morocco for the first time, and I found the Kasbah to be pretty impressive. Yes, I got Petra. I nearly beelined for it, and I am sure as you probably are that this made all the difference. But with the start bias, this has to be a common occurrence for Morocco. I also got the desert religion, which pretty well carried my religious numbers throughout the game. So I had desert tiles producing 2 food, 2 hammers, 1 gold, 1 faith starting in renaissance. The flood plains (hydro) and hills were even more. I had several Berber horseback dudes go the distance to tanks. They were nearly unkillable on all those Kasbahs.

I have had games with Denmark and Inca go well with Petra, but this was never even a fight, even with aggressive neighbors Harald Bluetooth and Attila. Is this experience shared by others?

It's really Petra that's OP . IMHO the tile benefit should really be restricted to "plain" desert, and/or be a commerce bonus rather than food plus production. Turning half your capital tiles into salt mines? yes please

Problem is that on deity it's really hit and miss, it can go as early as t55 which makes it impossible for the human to get, and a failed beeline puts you on a suboptimal path for a quick NC. I've nabbed it with my free liberty GP, and I've ragequit many times when the start screamed Petra but junge-starting Ghandi with a single desert tile screamed harder...

Thank you for the reply. I played another game with the same strategy. Again I was able to get Petra and again I was able to cruise with three cities to a science victory ahead of opponents with a much higher score. Lots of Kasbahs, but this time no major attacks once I got past an early one by Pocatello.

I think I should try again while not trying to get Petra, but that feels stupid as the desert start bias is part of the game. Perhaps I should spam starts until I do not get a desert start. Would that even work or is it always desert?

EDIT: I acknowledge that I have been getting lucky that I have not had to attack anyone who was too far ahead. But I did pay off Pocatello and Maria to attack Nebuchadnezzar in the atomic era to take him down a notch, which was probably the difference between a win and a loss. Is there some other weakness in this strategy that I am not seeing?

I don't find them OP at all.

Petra is what is OP here, not the Kesbahs.

It is just a very nice improvement in some cases. But I also had games where I hardly built it, because on the tiles that I could built it, I really need more foods (so farms was the choice) or production (so mines was the choice). And building Kesbahs on flat dessert without Petra is nothing better than just building a Fort the way I see it. You will never work these tiles anyway.

Maybe the question is if the Kasbah is the best improvement to take advantage of Petra. You get a half-mine, half-farm tile that gets a gold also, or two in a golden age. Considering that you need some farms and some mines anyway, is this not just all upside?

Finnagain said:

Maybe the question is if the Kasbah is the best improvement to take advantage of Petra. You get a half-mine, half-farm tile that gets a gold also, or two in a golden age. Considering that you need some farms and some mines anyway, is this not just all upside?

Click to expand...

And I would prefer (pure production + pure food tiles) over ("half-mine", "half-farm" tile) - because you may micromanage better.

Imho Kasbah is worth only on plain desert; on hills mine will be better (unless you really lack food or may benefit from additional defense).

Nobody honors trading posts on flat plain tiles (again, with some exceptions).

its at best an average to mediocre UI.while morrocco does have a desert start bias not all of their cities will have desert tiles.

I am far more inclined to build a farm on desert hills with a river.especially late game when the food far outweighs the gold.

it really just makes flat desert tiles not totally useless.

Phukit said:

its at best an average to mediocre UI.while morrocco does have a desert start bias not all of their cities will have desert tiles.

I am far more inclined to build a farm on desert hills with a river.especially late game when the food far outweighs the gold.

it really just makes flat desert tiles not totally useless.

Click to expand...

So what would a Kasbah tile produce later in the game?

Are there any techs that improve output?

The output doesn't improve, you get 1 food 1 production and 1 gold from the start and that's it. It seems like the idea is to add them to a Petra city, otherwise I don't see them useful on anything other than dry hills (but even then, once you get chemistry you may want to switch to mines). You can build some for the fort bonus but other than that, the Kabash is pretty useless without Petra.

Phukit said:

it really just makes flat desert tiles not totally useless.

Click to expand...

No, they are still totally useless. Unless the city is really huge, you are going to want to work a specialist slot instead. And it won't be huge because too much desert.

Petra + flat desert == too weak to work
Kasbah + flat desert == too weak to work

Petra + Kasbah + flat desert == okay tile to work

claudiupb said:

The output doesn't improve, you get 1 food 1 production and 1 gold from the start and that's it. It seems like the idea is to add them to a Petra city, otherwise I don't see them useful on anything other than dry hills (but even then, once you get chemistry you may want to switch to mines). You can build some for the fort bonus but other than that, the Kabash is pretty useless without Petra.

Click to expand...

This sums it up. Kasbah is good for dry desert hills. As Morocco, with the start bias, you should have a few. It is a very weak UA.

Thanks very much for the input, people.

I don't think Petra is overpowered because to use it you need a good dessert start and if you start in a large dessert you're still growing slower compared to everyone else especially if you get beat to a pantheon you need. Petra is more of a necessity for a dessert player than an OP wonder imo.

Desert cities can be very strong, the flood plains are like grassland and if you get a decent amount of hills you can plant really good cities. Then there's Desert Folklore...

With the right combination of flood plains and desert hills, Petra can be a very op wonder. There is no growth problem because the flood plains can be worked for 4 food, and hills will either give 3 food 3 hammers or 1 food 4 hammers, and that is pretty strong. Then you have the free caravan and that can mean another food route and extra food. In total Petra can yield a lot of benefits.

With Petra, adding a kabash to flat desert tiles, makes them yield 2 food 2 hammers and 1 gold, and that is pretty op, it's like being surrounded by irrigated hills.

Well, the Kasbah has its good uses. I've taken pictures of it before but it looks really nice when you place the improvements on the map all over desert tiles. The tiles are really useful with petra and desert folklore because you get food, production and faith. However, the odds of having all of that at once could be rare in higher difficulties.

Kasbah + Petra + Desert Pantheon is tremendously powerful

Its a good improvement on any normal (yield 2 terrain) because of the gold. (the 1/2 farm +1/2 mine +1/2 trade post) effect.
so desert hills, floodplains, petra desert.

But its not a super amazing improvement, flat desert is still pretty lousy.

when you have Petra the desert hill tiles are rediculous: a self-feeding, post chemistry mine that also produces 1 gold or 2 gold during a golden age.

Without Petra, I find that they help me compensate for "food crazy improvement habits." I usually prioritize my worker actions as well as my tile allocations similar to Marbozir (see his LPs) where other than luxury improvements and food resources, wet farms are always the top priority. Consequently, my cities grow crazy fast helping me catch up to deity AI in tech, but the lack of (or better, the delay of) hammer-heavy tiles and gold tiles leave the city with long production times and a treasury that can't rush too many units. build-ques become more of a wish-list and carpets are approaching my borders.

With the Kasbah, particularly on flood plains, you're probably going to build them because, "Hey, I picked Ahmed and am sacrificing Inginuity and Solidarity for this" and you'll choose to work the tile because, "Hey, it's something unique and interesting to the civ." so flood plains tiles lose 1 food (but are still growth positive) but give a little to the city's production and civilization's economy. Maybe it adds a turn to city growth, but that's something that I (and most of us tradition players) probably over-emphasize anyway.

Another thing to consider: If a city is using 2 tile allocations for 1.) a farmed flood plain and 2.) a desert hill mine, than the two tiles would yield 4 food (from the farm after CS) and 4 hammers (from the mine after chemistry). TOTAL = 4F, 4P
If the same two tiles both had Kasbahs, the FP would produce 3F/1H/1C and the hill would produce 1F/3H/1C. TOTAL - 4F/4P/2C.
The food and hammer output is identical but you're also making 2C/turn, or 4C/turn during a golden age.

I tried a game tonight as Morocco. I ended up rage quitting.

I spent the first 70 turns fighting off barbs.

Religion-wise, desert folklore got taken, salt and copper one got taken (I had a ton of salt and was in the desert). And then by turn 80 Petra was taken, Hanging Gardens, Temple of Artimis and the one for marble and stone (I had three stone in my second city).

I figured what's the point?

Turn 80 petra is kind of late, you should've have beelined it while using caravans to leech science from AI. Sorry about the loss of DF.