They were fighting off 4 rifles so the extra cavalry is not a major shock!
SGOTM 14 - Kakumeika
- Thread starter AlanH
- Start date
They were fighting off 4 rifles so the extra cavalry is not a major shock!
bcool
Deity
Man, I feel like taking OSS's save and just finishing the game to see where they are going to finish. They are taking forever 
Man, I feel like taking OSS's save and just finishing the game to see where they are going to finish. They are taking forever
They are making some very unhealthy SGOTM players!!!!
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2007
- Messages
- 7,920
Mitchum said:OK. I have to stop for the moment in my tile counting. Here is where I am so far:
Our current tile count is 394. The total land tiles is 1321. We need 68% or 899 tiles.
If we were to just let our borders expand naturally (with some culture building), settle cities 2 and 4 as shown on the map, and capture Phrygian (barbs), Usngungundlouu (size 12), Nobamba (size 6), Nodwengu (size 5), Nongoma (size 8) Ondini (size 8), Otrar (size 2) Karakorum (size 10), Tabriz (size 2), Tiflis (size 2) and Turfan (size 10) and all of these cities came out of revolt and expanded their borders once, we'd have 710 tiles. That's still 189 tiles short.
I picked these cities to start with because I knew that we could capture them quickly and they could come out of revolt in time. We can capture many more cities but some of the larger ones may still be in revolt, so we'd have to raze them and plant more settlers in their place.
If we control all of the Milanese peninsula tiles (109 by LC's count), we're still 80 tiles short (710 + 109 = 819). The western part of the Zulu peninsula that I hadn't counted already adds another 23 tiles (819+23 = 842). Still 57 tiles short. Settling all of the spoke and a few more cities to caputure tiles here and there, I think we'll still be a tad short.
Gandhi has about 100 tiles in his area and Monte has about 136 tiles. That's 236 or 17% of the total. We should be able to leave them alone and make it easily. I'm not sure where the 1321 - 842 - 100 - 136 = 243 are. That's a lot of missing tiles. I've noticed in games past that the tile count doesn't get updated immediately. Let me quickly count our current tiles to see what I come up with... a quick count gave 305 which is nearly 90 short. Sigh... I must have missed an entire peninsula. I have to run now!!
I'm not sure if this helps. I hope to have more time tonight or tomorrow but we're still living out of boxes after our move and my wife has a LONG list of things I have to get done by Sunday or else...
I still think they can win via domination and still win 1st place. However, given the limited time left (38.6 hours from the time stamp on this post), the fact that conducting a war takes a lot of time, and their economy is tanking their odds aren't looking so good anymore.
Sun Tzu Wu
mabraham
Deity
Mutter... the results graphs have been updated with the final win dates and victory type before OSS have finished. So they now know they have 5 more turns than they were targetting
Htadus
A and L's dad
Man, I feel like taking OSS's save and just finishing the game to see where they are going to finish. They are taking forever
I feel that pain
.Congratulations on the fabulous demonstration of diplomacy and AI control.
Manco Capac
Friday,13 June,I Collapse
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2010
- Messages
- 8,051
Interesting use of immune settler to disbandment.
Never I would have thought of it.
=========================================================
Soon enough, we will see the result. Will OSS finish at their presumed date of 1170 AD, I can't wait to see. ONE hour to go!!!
LowtherCastle
Deity
- Joined
- May 18, 2005
- Messages
- 23,631
Traitor...Man, I feel like taking OSS's save and just finishing the game to see where they are going to finish. They are taking forever
Congrats on diplo. I was following your graphs, expecting you to put in a top showing.
bcool
Deity
Traitor...
Congrats on diplo. I was following your graphs, expecting you to put in a top showing.
no, no the team name means revolutionary not traitor
If you want to be part of a well managed team, you can always come over to us
Manco Capac
Friday,13 June,I Collapse
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2010
- Messages
- 8,051
@bcool
I remember you were asking me to decode random personalities via python console. I was ravished to see the worldbuilded version allowed python console being outside of HoF mod.
But that is quite unfortunate the generation of the game continously change the personality slots. Unless Neil has a prime version of the game at turn 0 outside HoF mod, it is clearly impossible to know who is who.
I remember you were asking me to decode random personalities via python console. I was ravished to see the worldbuilded version allowed python console being outside of HoF mod.
But that is quite unfortunate the generation of the game continously change the personality slots. Unless Neil has a prime version of the game at turn 0 outside HoF mod, it is clearly impossible to know who is who.
Attachments
OK, I understand what you mean now. I will ask AlanH as he generated the actual save.
LowtherCastle
Deity
- Joined
- May 18, 2005
- Messages
- 23,631
I can think of at least two good reasons why Gyathaar and others like you have created resource-rich starts for SGs.Don't expect the works next time
Taking land from the AI did make it a bit easier for you, but trust me, you should prefer it that way.
This is one of the hardest Emperor game I have ever played, for most victory conditions (Culture and Space are the exceptions). The 'Cuteness' WOTM was harder, but that was at quick speed. You should try to single play it if you don't believe me. I was worried when I submitted it that some teams would lose, though it looks now like some might not finish.
1) It tilts the game a bit in favor of the human, increasing the likelihood that all teams will post a victory.
2) The more resources, the more variables. The more variables the more variety of gameplay. In this game, OSS and PD went for different strategies and settled quite differently based on their strategies. This isn't likely to occur on an out-of-the-box start.
FYI - SGOTM 15 sign-up is underway! bcool, Tachywaxon, and I have singed up so far.
I glad to see almost everyone is back! Hopefully Frogdude can join us again.
I am very happy to see that WastinTime has accepted my invitation to join Kakumeika! Welcome to the team!
I am very happy to see that WastinTime has accepted my invitation to join Kakumeika! Welcome to the team!
Manco Capac
Friday,13 June,I Collapse
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2010
- Messages
- 8,051
I am very happy to see that WastinTime has accepted my invitation to join Kakumeika! Welcome to the team!
You got some influence, don't you?
Looks like he's less busy now...
mabraham
Deity
I glad to see almost everyone is back! Hopefully Frogdude can join us again.
I am very happy to see that WastinTime has accepted my invitation to join Kakumeika! Welcome to the team!
Indeed! Welcome aboard.
bcool
Deity
Yes welcome back everyone and welcome to WastinTime! I'm looking forward to another great game. I might have a little less time in first 6 weeks of this game, but I should be able to carry on as team captain.
I appreciate everyone's reflection on the team process last time that we did via PM.
A few ideas came out of that.
Implementing a 3 part planning process with a grand strategy plan first.
To facilitate the group consensus style of play we had in the last game and to make it easier for active player and the team to be involved I suggest a 3 part planning process for turns starting with the grand strategy.
The grand strategy is the strategy that we currently are pursuing to win the game. It was suggested that we keep the grand strategy on the first page. I'm happy to reserve a space and do that, however I think it is should also be copied and posted again before each turn set by the active player so that it is fresh in that player's mind and we don't miss some opportunity to change the plan for the better.
So I suggest the active player copy, review, and suggest changes to the grand strategy before they plan the goals and details of their turn set. The grand strategy would include the victory condition and the stages or phases of the game we need to achieve that victory condition.
For example the Ducks grand strategy in the last game was something like (*just for example purposes--not sure this is exactly right*)
-Goal Fastest Conquest
-expand and set up bulb of mathematics and chop out key city improvements
-build the Oracle and get Code of Laws
-settle and grow 6-8 cities
-generate enough great scientists to bulb to astronomy
-switch to war effort and kill everything including the wizard
An individual turn set would probably only happen in one of the phases that I laid out in the example above, but it is important for us to review the grand strategy before we make the specific plans for our turn sets.
Our grand strategy will obviously develop as we learn more about the game through exploration, testing and discussion and could completely change depending on how things develop.
Once the grand strategy is reviewed by the active player and the current turn is put into that context, the active player can develop a more specific plan for their turn set but still goal orientated rather than planned out with micro.
The player can post a goal oriented Pre-Play-Plan (PPP)
The goal oriented PPP would include:
The purpose of posting a goal oriented PPP first is to save the active player some work. The other players would be asked to suggest changes to the goal oriented PPP before the micro details (turn by turn city builds, tile use, worker movements, whips, chops, war movements) are planned out.
Once the specific goals are agreed upon, then the active player can develop a micro plan which includes the micro details the team thinks this is necessary. (Or the active player can request help with an aspect of the micro from someone else on the team)
Once the micro PPP is produce (same as the goal oriented PPP just with micro details), another round of feedback can start if necessary.
Of course in the course of working out the specific goals, or the micro new opportunities might arise, so it might not be a linear process.
Address ways to reduce few members dominating the discussion/game plan
I hope the suggested new approach to our planning will make it easier for everyone to contribute to the discussion. Also it might avoid the problem of wasting time ( ) developing micro plans that don't align with the grand strategy or team agreed upon goals.
Also, I believe I was guilty of providing poorly thought out micro feedback and giving too detailed suggestions for someone else before they got a chance to develop their own plan.
So I will and I hope others will wait to provide micro feedback on the another person's turn until after they have put up a plan and the team has agreed on the goal oriented PPP and grand strategy. (or unless they ask for it first)
Reduce poorly thought out posts
With a lot of active members on our team, the thread can get a bit overwhelming.
I think the new planning process might avoid some unnecessary posts just because it will hopefully be more efficient. In addition though I think we need to ask ourselves if our post is helping the team achieve its goals before we post.
We also want to avoid posting ideas without testing them out to make sure they are possible and useful before the team spends a significant amount of time debating them.
This requirement possibly does hurt us however, because sometimes good ideas come out of brainstorming. Maybe we just need to be clear if an idea is tested or not, so the team knows not to get sidetracked until the poster or someone else has time to flesh the idea out?
We also might want to revisit our team goals as well. But I'll leave that for another time.
I appreciate everyone's reflection on the team process last time that we did via PM.
A few ideas came out of that.
- Implement a 3 phase planning process with a grand strategy plan first.
- Address ways to reduce few members dominating the discussion/game plan\
- Reduce poorly thought out posts
Implementing a 3 part planning process with a grand strategy plan first.
To facilitate the group consensus style of play we had in the last game and to make it easier for active player and the team to be involved I suggest a 3 part planning process for turns starting with the grand strategy.
The grand strategy is the strategy that we currently are pursuing to win the game. It was suggested that we keep the grand strategy on the first page. I'm happy to reserve a space and do that, however I think it is should also be copied and posted again before each turn set by the active player so that it is fresh in that player's mind and we don't miss some opportunity to change the plan for the better.
So I suggest the active player copy, review, and suggest changes to the grand strategy before they plan the goals and details of their turn set. The grand strategy would include the victory condition and the stages or phases of the game we need to achieve that victory condition.
For example the Ducks grand strategy in the last game was something like (*just for example purposes--not sure this is exactly right*)
-Goal Fastest Conquest
-expand and set up bulb of mathematics and chop out key city improvements
-build the Oracle and get Code of Laws
-settle and grow 6-8 cities
-generate enough great scientists to bulb to astronomy
-switch to war effort and kill everything including the wizard
An individual turn set would probably only happen in one of the phases that I laid out in the example above, but it is important for us to review the grand strategy before we make the specific plans for our turn sets.
Our grand strategy will obviously develop as we learn more about the game through exploration, testing and discussion and could completely change depending on how things develop.
Once the grand strategy is reviewed by the active player and the current turn is put into that context, the active player can develop a more specific plan for their turn set but still goal orientated rather than planned out with micro.
The player can post a goal oriented Pre-Play-Plan (PPP)
The goal oriented PPP would include:
- research (& research trades)
- city builds (not tile use)
- worker goals (not turn by turn movements)
- diplo actions (including resource trades, war declarations, begs, etc)
- civic changes planned
- espionage
- general war plans if applicable, i.e. take this city first or form stack here
- stopping points
- contingency plans
The purpose of posting a goal oriented PPP first is to save the active player some work. The other players would be asked to suggest changes to the goal oriented PPP before the micro details (turn by turn city builds, tile use, worker movements, whips, chops, war movements) are planned out.
Once the specific goals are agreed upon, then the active player can develop a micro plan which includes the micro details the team thinks this is necessary. (Or the active player can request help with an aspect of the micro from someone else on the team)
Once the micro PPP is produce (same as the goal oriented PPP just with micro details), another round of feedback can start if necessary.
Of course in the course of working out the specific goals, or the micro new opportunities might arise, so it might not be a linear process.
Address ways to reduce few members dominating the discussion/game plan
I hope the suggested new approach to our planning will make it easier for everyone to contribute to the discussion. Also it might avoid the problem of wasting time (
) developing micro plans that don't align with the grand strategy or team agreed upon goals. Also, I believe I was guilty of providing poorly thought out micro feedback and giving too detailed suggestions for someone else before they got a chance to develop their own plan.
So I will and I hope others will wait to provide micro feedback on the another person's turn until after they have put up a plan and the team has agreed on the goal oriented PPP and grand strategy. (or unless they ask for it first)
Reduce poorly thought out posts
With a lot of active members on our team, the thread can get a bit overwhelming.
I think the new planning process might avoid some unnecessary posts just because it will hopefully be more efficient. In addition though I think we need to ask ourselves if our post is helping the team achieve its goals before we post.
We also want to avoid posting ideas without testing them out to make sure they are possible and useful before the team spends a significant amount of time debating them.
This requirement possibly does hurt us however, because sometimes good ideas come out of brainstorming. Maybe we just need to be clear if an idea is tested or not, so the team knows not to get sidetracked until the poster or someone else has time to flesh the idea out?
We also might want to revisit our team goals as well. But I'll leave that for another time.
LowtherCastle
Deity
- Joined
- May 18, 2005
- Messages
- 23,631
