Ronnie1
Deity
Yes this is true...but the flying camera says there is land close in that direction. Look at the forests in front of the crabs.
SGOTM 13 - Gypsy Kings
- Thread starter AlanH
- Start date
Ronnie1
Deity
Also, I think I just figured out a way to determine IF Louis is in the game. If we let our cities be named with the standard French names, and Louis is in the game, his cities use the same name list. So when I founded city 2, in the test game of course, it was named Rheims instead of Orleans!
adrianj
Deity
Clever
.When we go to settle our next city, does it attempt to name it Paris since at that point it is unused, or does it proceed on to Orleans anyway? But yeah, if it chooses Rheims then something is certainly up.
I wonder... what does the game do if you try to rename a city to something that already exists? Eg, could we attempt to rename a city to Moscow, Amsterdam, Berlin, Madrid, etc? Edit: tested it out - nothing at all happens. The game does allow cities to have the same name, eg, Greek and Egyptian Thebes are a natural example. But, if another Frenchman is in the game we will definitely know about it by the method you suggest.
Ronnie1
Deity
Next test, Isabella starts Oracle T85 in city #2 planted right next to quarried Marble....stupidly it is NOT roaded of course!
mabraham
Deity
Yeah, there were certainly some weird options, like maximum-crabs for fast BW and whipping.
I remembered you saying this, and had it in mind to test when the time came. I ran one just now, waiting for max overflow before whipping the settler. I overflowed onto the WB, and then hammered out a fast worker (which drops to size 1 - maybe worker then WB is better, not sure). I did my usual 3-wonders approach on Grifftavian's old test map and got T96 and T151 with colossus due about T154. I had four side cities up, CoL done and a serious amount of exploring. So this approach may well be a close-to-best compromise for getting a fast second city.
Of course, the new terrain and resources will make for new strategic possibilities, but we have to be fairly sure these are going to beat the above.
mabraham
Deity
Oh you mean "ocean" as in "not-land", rather than "ocean" as in "not-coast"
2SE of capital happens to be a not-coast ocean, which created confusion.
Ronnie1
Deity
Clever
When we go to settle our next city, does it attempt to name it Paris since at that point it is unused, or does it proceed on to Orleans anyway? But yeah, if it chooses Rheims then something is certainly up.
I wonder... what does the game do if you try to rename a city to something that already exists? Eg, could we attempt to rename a city to Moscow, Amsterdam, Berlin, Madrid, etc? Edit: tested it out - nothing at all happens. The game does allow cities to have the same name, eg, Greek and Egyptian Thebes are a natural example. But, if another Frenchman is in the game we will definitely know about it by the method you suggest.
You can rename a city to anything if it has been used, I just tested.
mabraham
Deity
Clever
When we go to settle our next city, does it attempt to name it Paris since at that point it is unused, or does it proceed on to Orleans anyway? But yeah, if it chooses Rheims then something is certainly up.
I wonder... what does the game do if you try to rename a city to something that already exists? Eg, could we attempt to rename a city to Moscow, Amsterdam, Berlin, Madrid, etc? Edit: tested it out - nothing at all happens. The game does allow cities to have the same name, eg, Greek and Egyptian Thebes are a natural example. But, if another Frenchman is in the game we will definitely know about it by the method you suggest.
Yeah. If city 2 doesn't prompt as Paris, we will know that Louis is in the game. Well spotted in advance, though we'd have worked it out at the time, too!
Here's a hidden gain case for settling on turn 1... Louis (if any) would already have settled!mabraham
Deity
Chokos have put up a T8 save that has score 30, culture 16 and power that isn't plotted. Either it's not there for some reason, or it's a fractional value under one of the other idiotic lines.
So that looks like they did SIP and posted the post-border pop save, when they had all the information we do.
Could the reason the other two teams have a power graph be that they've met an AI, and only then is power measured? Anyone with more SGOTM experience than me seen this before?
EDIT: You can turn off various teams from the graphs - Chokos are not on the graphs.
So that looks like they did SIP and posted the post-border pop save, when they had all the information we do.
Could the reason the other two teams have a power graph be that they've met an AI, and only then is power measured? Anyone with more SGOTM experience than me seen this before?
EDIT: You can turn off various teams from the graphs - Chokos are not on the graphs.
adrianj
Deity
I can only guess that Chokos' Power graph isn't showing because it stays a constant 6. Unless they went Mining first I wouldn't expect any changes in their power rating after only 8 turns.
Look at barley demons power graph for SGOTM12 up to 3200BC. Same situation, where their power was presumably constant along the x-axis for those first turns.
Look at barley demons power graph for SGOTM12 up to 3200BC. Same situation, where their power was presumably constant along the x-axis for those first turns.
Ronnie1
Deity
I am actually experimenting with the WB>WB>WB(interrupted)>settler(whipped)>worker(whipped)>WB(finished) approach. This gets us city#2 up quickly, worker #1 productive soonish and the double whipping reduces the need for the 3rd WB. If we put sailing in after Pottery, we can strategically add a LH to the que for 1 turn and whip it the next to boost our coast tiles in either/both cities. I don't think getting the Marble city up as city #3 helps us with our Oracle time at all because of all that goes into getting it up even IF we settle right on top of it.
I am honestly more interested in trying to figure out WHEN the AI might build the Oracle.
In my last test, Isabella started it T85 without Marble hooked. In that test, I gave every AI marble either in their BFC or in the 3rd ring to ensure it was prioritized at least a little bit. But we are totally guessing about who is in the game. It is an educated guess, but a guess non the less. Different AI will obviously behave differently, and the same AI behave differently every time the RNG is accessed.
bcool
Deity
I might have time tonight to try an early oracle in the 2nd city, but instead of a forge, build an earlier 3rd settler for the stone and whip settler OF build the pyramids. I think that probably will be better than a GE built pyramids since we have stone. But testing hopefully will tell.
It might still be better to build the forge first since my plan would be to whip many times in the capital for the pyramids. The forge might allow efficient 2 pop settlers for a max overflow into pyramids with stone.
Of course other possibilities for the oracle tech open up if we don't go for the GE Pyramids as well.
I played with whipping down to 1 pop on the worker, but wasn't that impressed with the results. Maybe I wasn't doing it that well.
Last night, I tried to get a 3rd city on the Marble and have city #2 3E build the Oracle. I couldn't do better than our earlier results. T100 Oracle with a 3rd city (maybe better depending on how close we are to AI dates, but no where close to a forge)
We might be able to do better if we build the Oracle in the capital and settle the 2nd city on the Marble, but I don't think we have to. And getting the 2nd city 3E to share food resources and getting it up faster will provide more benefits than the Marble site as the 2nd city I think.
It might still be better to build the forge first since my plan would be to whip many times in the capital for the pyramids. The forge might allow efficient 2 pop settlers for a max overflow into pyramids with stone.
Of course other possibilities for the oracle tech open up if we don't go for the GE Pyramids as well.
I played with whipping down to 1 pop on the worker, but wasn't that impressed with the results. Maybe I wasn't doing it that well.
Last night, I tried to get a 3rd city on the Marble and have city #2 3E build the Oracle. I couldn't do better than our earlier results. T100 Oracle with a 3rd city (maybe better depending on how close we are to AI dates, but no where close to a forge)
We might be able to do better if we build the Oracle in the capital and settle the 2nd city on the Marble, but I don't think we have to. And getting the 2nd city 3E to share food resources and getting it up faster will provide more benefits than the Marble site as the 2nd city I think.
Grifftavian
Emperor
Yes, I noticed this in the recent Mirror Map xOTM where we played as Greece. I moved the Settler, and founded on turn 1, and the name came up as Sparta instead of Athens. So if City #2 does not come up with the default name of Paris, then Louis XIV is one of the AI opponents.Clever
When we go to settle our next city, does it attempt to name it Paris since at that point it is unused, or does it proceed on to Orleans anyway? But yeah, if it chooses Rheims then something is certainly up.
I wonder... what does the game do if you try to rename a city to something that already exists? Eg, could we attempt to rename a city to Moscow, Amsterdam, Berlin, Madrid, etc? Edit: tested it out - nothing at all happens. The game does allow cities to have the same name, eg, Greek and Egyptian Thebes are a natural example. But, if another Frenchman is in the game we will definitely know about it by the method you suggest.
Grifftavian
Emperor
City #2 on the Marble would mean we would have to research Sailing before starting on the path to Priesthood. Haven't most of the fastest Oracle builds put off Sailing until after Priesthood?
bcool
Deity
I suspect we could get similar times since the turns spent on sailing would be recovered by doubling the hammers into the Oracle, however the capital would be in worse shape since it would have to whip out a galley perhaps instead of a granary.
Grifftavian
Emperor
Worth testing to find out! I'll give it a try later this afternoon. I tried Sailing before Polytheism>Priesthood, City #2 3E building Oracle, and City #3 on Marble, but only managed ~T113 Oracle (1200 BC).
City #2 on Marble could be given/might need the SW Clams from the Capitol's BFC.
Ronnie1
Deity
Looking at the completion of the 1st 2 WB's....start WB#1 now. I think the best method is to grow to size 2 now while working the corn. Once at size 2, work max hammers which is GF + FPH, once 1st WB is complete, work clam net + FPH through completion of WB#2.
Grifftavian
Emperor
I tried founding City #2 on the Marble, and having it build The Oracle. Got it on T105, could maybe shave a couple of turns off that with better micromanagement. Biggest downside was the Settler had to sleep for 5 or 6 turns waiting on a Galley to be built. 
Someone else may want to give this approach a try.
Edited Autolog...
Someone else may want to give this approach a try. Edited Autolog...
Spoiler :
/5 
Grifftavian
Emperor
Agree. This is the way I started my latest test game, and is essentially mab's Option A from his earlier post. I got the third WB completed before Capitol grew to size 4.
mabraham
Deity
Sure. I will publish a PPP for the rest of my turn set later today, planning to play on Friday (or earlier if there's widespread agreement). Since the only thing to do is the tile MM, that should be pretty easy. The Option A seems right to the end of the second workboat, whether the next build is a workboat or a settler.
