The benefits of avoiding bronze working

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well, to find a delay-BW friendly map, we will need to find a map which has 1) low amounts of forests (+ few hills fore mining production) 2) low food (where slavery is inefficient) and 3) no near neighbours/peaceful neighbours, because you will only have archery to rely on for defense.
Of course, even if maps are found (which they will), the problem is, where is the line drawn between BW advantageous early and BW disadvantageous early? There will be a 'shaded' area were both options are viable, but general clear distinctions will be needed to show when this strategy is better/worse than early/early-ish BW. And lastly, specifically found delay-BW maps will probably need to be played with the traditional BW just to compare differences, to nail down whether this is a viable strategy. I reckon it is, but my opinion holds pretty much 0 value considering I play at a very low level (noble-prince).

Surely the best way forward is what Penopat said, play maps, varying difficulty, compare the different methods, collect data, slowly grind out general rules of when to avoid BW. At the moment arguments are being thrown around achieving nothing.

Brennus.Quigley at least deserves credit for thinking whether such a play was possible on a minority of maps. If this strategy proves viable, then it's viable, if it's not, it's not. It's just that, really, the only way to build data to prove that this is viable by playing maps. Seriously. Do it. Someone fire off Mapfinder now.
 
Two good reasons to aviod Bronze Working are:

1) The initial city site has more than a 3 Fpt surplus with Ancient Era improvments. The city will not quickly recover from whipping, though it may be marginally useful for whipping critical infrastructure. Maybe the threshold should be +2 Fpt; not sure about this, but noone will ever say that +3 Fpt is good whipping city, so +3 Fpt seems to be a good threshold.

I agree that low food makes slavery inefficient, since it lengthens the time that it takes to replace the dead citizens, even beyond the imposed 10-turn unhappiness penalty.

But I would also suggest that there may be many other situations in which slavery would not be efficient:

1. HIGH YIELDING CITIZENS. From resource tiles, financial cottages, or specialists in representation (i.e. Pyramids). I.E. These citizens are more productive living and working than being whipped away.
2. EARLY VERTICAL GROWTH OPPORTUNITY. Are not some maps designed to head towards Monarchy and Hereditary Rule instead of Bronze Working and Slavery? An initial high health cap (expansive leader, health resources) without too much settling pressure should present an opportunity for this.
3. CASTE SYSTEM GP/BULB STRATEGY. An ability to utilize whatever food surplus one has towards a viable caste system gp/bulb strategy.

2) Low Forests - it will be harder to determine a number of forests for which BW is not worth researching to chop them. I would say that six forests in the capital's BFC is marginal. Some might say that four forests is enough to make researching BW profitable. However, I would stick with six for now, until it is proven than four or five is a better threshold.

Again, I agree that low forest maps can diminish chopping opportunities. But is it not also true that non-obtrusive forests (i.e. forests that are not on tiles that one wants to improve and work immediately) should also contribute towards a higher health cap and thus an opportunity for early vertical growth. So I guess what I am suggesting here is that a delayed Bronze Working map need not be one that has 1) low food and 2) low forests. Could it not also be one whereby non-obtrusive forests and food surplus offer us an opportunity for early vertical growth?

There will be a 'shaded' area were both options are viable, but general clear distinctions will be needed to show when this strategy is better/worse than early/early-ish BW. And lastly, specifically found delay-BW maps will probably need to be played with the traditional BW just to compare differences, to nail down whether this is a viable strategy. I reckon it is, but my opinion holds pretty much 0 value considering I play at a very low level (noble-prince).

Thanks for your thoughts. Even at Noble-Prince, your participation is very welcome here. I would also be interested in how dynamics may be different at that play level, instead of Immortal/Deity. A slower teching AI should result in less trading opportunities and therefore more ambitious bulb strategies may be required to get to a desired tech sooner. One simply cannot rely on high-value complimentary trades being as available as they may be on higher levels.

no near neighbours/peaceful neighbours, because you will only have archery to rely on for defense.

Fortunately, there should be a variety of options. Warriors, Archers, Chariots, Horse Archers, Catapults, Longbows, and War Elephants do not require Bronze Working.
 
Just out of Fairness and to make Brennus happy: Screenshot from Deity-game with no cheating / no reloading / no whatever showing a GE from the Pyramids that were built without chopping while expanding to 4 cities being able to bulb Feudalism!



Notice: Of course I didn't bulb Feudalism.
 
Thanks for your thoughts. Even at Noble-Prince, your participation is very welcome here. I would also be interested in how dynamics may be different at that play level, instead of Immortal/Deity. A slower teching AI should result in less trading opportunities and therefore more ambitious bulb strategies may be required to get to a desired tech sooner. One simply cannot rely on high-value complimentary trades being as available as they may be on higher levels.
It's a lot more different on lower levels. On Noble/Prince, the logistics in terms of tech is very different, because you're pretty much always the tech leader. You can counterbalance this by building the Oracle just early enough and researching 99% of Lib, then going very deep into one part of the tree. You can also try to bulb deep into a part of the tree. However, you'll have research practically everything yourself. The AI may get the odd tech where you may have ignored a part of the tree, but it's very hard to any tech at all via trade because all leaders (except Mansa Musa) require a certain % of other civs to know it also. So, you have to do everything yourself techwise.
Fortunately, there should be a variety of options. Warriors, Archers, Chariots, Horse Archers, Catapults, Longbows, and War Elephants do not require Bronze Working.
Warriors are strictly early-game military police/fog-busters only, they get destroyed very easily. Archers + Chariots could hold their own, considering even if you get rushes e.g. Defensively promoted, fortified archers slaughter un-promoted Chariots and Archers. However, the main weakness is Swords, which can force you to go HBR early, because Horse Archers are the only 6 :strength: unit you can get without BW/IW. I guess in theory you can survive rushes, but really, the only proof if online MP games, and generally that's not the time to experiment.
In general, Archers + Chariots should counter Chariots/Axes rushes, expect generally you don't want to be researching Archery, but if you don't have horses, then BW is pretty much has to be researched just for copper. Civ does not to be played on a map-by-map basis.
If low food, low forests, and have horses regardless of neighbours (except the most aggressive of ones, where BW could be researched as a pre-caution), then this strategy could, theoretically, be very useful. Of course this (probably) isn't useful if say, high food, or high forests, but that's not the point. Brennus (to my understanding) is trying to fill a small niche where BW is not worth reserching due to a multiple of factors, because food and forests are not guaranteed in a map.
 
@dankok8:

Thanks for expressing your opinion that virtually every map will benefit from Bronze Working in the first 10 technologies researched. You have provided no proof that your opinions are backed up by facts. Several players have tried to play games that proved a point similar to yours and failed. Why should we accept your opinions as fact without any proof?

There are no simple formulas for success in Civ IV Beyond the Sword. That includes the strategy of fitting Bronze Working in the first ten technologies. It simply isn't going to work for 100% of all maps, especially at Deity level. One needs to play to the strengths of the map; if there are none, then skipping Bronze Working may help.

What does one do after following your strategy to discover there is no accessible Copper or Iron? Would you suggest whipping Archers for defense? Now what could have been researched/bulbed instead of Bronzing Working and Iron Working that would really help?

Sun Tzu Wu

You can significantly delay Bronze Working (it's almost always researched in the first 3-4 techs) but beyond the first 10? I really can't see it. Playing without metal when you're not isolated is asking to be killed. In that China game Brennus.Quigley posted delaying it far is doable but I remember his island still had lots of forest north of the capital. But yea small isolated island (virtually no barbs) and little potential for chop/whip. No arguments there. But I really thank such a start is rarer than 6% let alone 30% LOL

Games with no Copper AND Iron are exceedingly rare. If fact the only time I had that problem in Bts was with Ramesses on Earth18. Not on any RNG map ever...

Funny enough Egypt on the Earth Map also has no forests either (Sahara LOL) but with low Happy Cap and extreme growth and virtually no production surrounded with Flood Plains whipping was awesome. War Chariots FTW...

You mention +3fpt as the threshold for whipping and it seems reasonable. 6 forests though I disagree with. I think with anywhere over 3 forests BW pays off even if there is no metal. Anyways my inclination is that chopping threshold is set too high.
 
Games with no Copper AND Iron are exceedingly rare.

Your evidence, other than anecdotal? Are you talking about the entire map? What is a reasonable settling distance for claiming copper? Iron?
 
Your evidence, other than anecdotal? Are you talking about the entire map? What is a reasonable settling distance for claiming copper? Iron?

Whether its possible to claim copper or iron on Deity, is highly map dependent and how crowded it is, based on number of AIs and sea level used. Lower difficulty levels are significantly easier due to the AI starting with a single Settler as compared with two Settlers on Deity.

I also disagree that one will be killed without access to metals early in the game. I have won several Cultural Victories with nothing more than Warriors and good diplomatic relations. Those games were with high peaceweight opponents, but good relations with war mongers is also possible; just not as easy.

Sun Tzu Wu
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom