ALC Game #8 Pre-Game Show: Playing as Alexander

In the next ALC game, I'll be playing as Alexander the Great, leader of Greece. This thread is to discuss, before the game, how to best exploit that particular leader's characteristics, which is the main feature and purpose of the ALC series.

(A couple of minor notes: I have not purchased Warlords, so the ALCs are still based upon vanilla Civ IV. Also, I need a bit of a break between games, so I won't be starting the game thread on this one until this weekend at the earliest. On the plus side, that gives us plenty of time to talk here.)

The fact sheet:

• Traits: Aggressive and Philosophical
• Starting Techs: Fishing and Hunting
• Unique Unit: Phalanx (Replaces Spearman; Strength: 5, Movement: 1, Cost: 35, Unique Abilities: +25% hill defense, doesn't receive defensive bonuses, requires copper or iron)

I get the impression that Alexander is somewhat more popular than some of the other ALC leaders I've utilized so far. Certainly, Helmling made wonderful use of that civ in his outstanding Philosopher Kings Series, which I highly recommend reading if you have not done so already.

And yet, though I'm a classical history fan, I have yet to play a game as Alexander. Maybe it's the odd trait combination, which seem to pull in two different directions. Maybe it's the unique unit, which replaces and barely improves upon a secondary (and sometimes unnecessary) unit, the Spearman. Maybe it's just that every time I encounter the AI Alexander, he's a jerk, declaring war even earlier than Montezuma, the second he sniffs the slightest advantage. I dunno. But this is why I started the ALC games, to find out how to make the most out of a leader I've dismissed and avoided in the past.

So let's talk traits first.

We really highlighted the Philosophical trait in the previous ALC, which featured Frederick of Germany, who shares that trait with Alex, and my first time around with a specialist economy. Thanks to the boost to Great Person generation, the Philosophical trait has terrific synergy with a specialist economy as opposed to a cottage-based one. So we could try a SE again and refine it further.

However, the SE--correct me if I'm wrong here--really relies upon building the Pyramids for early Representation and its +3 research points per specialist. In the Frederick game, we successfully tried a Metal Casting/Pyramids gambit that had the Pyramids built by a Great Engineer rather than stone and hammers by 1000 BC. Eggman pointed out in the post-mortem for the Frederick ALC that Alexander is probably the weakest of all the Philosophical leaders for attempting this gambit, because his starting techs are not on the tech path for it.

So this begs several questions:

1. Do we attempt to go the SE route anyway?
2. If so, do we try for the MC/P gambit, knowing we have an uphill battle?
3. Or do we try to build the Pyramids "honestly"--meaning we're looking to hook up stone ASAP, the presence of which is not guaranteed?
4. Do you HAVE to have the Pyramids for a SE? It seems to me that the economy would be severely weakened without having the Representation research bonus as early as possible.

I suspect that the answers to these questions may largely depend upon the start, which is probably why DrElmerJiggle suggested I take the unusual step of posting it in the pre-game thread. I'd rather stick to the tried-and-true format of posting it in the game thread, but I'll consent to the group's wishes. Another factor in our decision-making may be any luck (or lack thereof) popping techs from goody huts.

At worst, we could make an attempt to build the Pyramids via the MC/P gambit. If we get the Oracle and Metal Casting but miss out on the Pyramids, we will still wind up with a Great Engineer (actually, two of them) that we can use for another wonder such as the Great Library. And if the specialist economy is not going to take shape, it's early enough to punt and go the cottage route.

It would be really terrific to pull off the SE, because it lends itself to warmongering; this would have very good synergy with Alexander's other trait, Aggressive. Cheap barracks and automatic Combat I: ya gotta love it for game-long conquest. I don't think I warred enough in the Frederick game; part of the idea of the SE, I gather, is to be at war pretty much constantly, unlike the war-build cycle of a cottage economy. We could certainly try to correct that in this game. I haven't notched a Conquest win in the ALCs yet, so we could give that a go with Alex, especially with an always-warring SE to back him up.

The one issue I have with that idea is Alex's UU, the Phalanx. In some ways this is a very good, if not great, early unit. You have its required tech to start with, so all you need is one of its required resources, copper or iron, which are high priorities anyway. The Phalanx has a strength of 5, equal to Axemen, though those units get an anti-melee bonus, so it's still not a level playing field. But against an opponent with mounted units, the Phalanx is deadly, and can probably do a decent job versus Archers as well. The Phalanx, as a Melee unit, can get City Raider promotions, correct?

However, the Phalanx has some strange characteristics. Unlike Spearmen, the Phalanx receives no defensive terrain bonuses--except on hills??? Weird. Also, the Phalanx is really just a Spearman with one enhancement (+1 strength) and one diminshment (no defensive terrain bonus, as noted). I don't exactly base a campaign around Spearmen, and I'm not sure how you can, though I am more than willing to be enlightened. In fact, if I'm not facing any mounted units, I sometimes don't build any Spearmen at all, and I could see the Phalanx getting minimal use if my early opponents lack horses.

Now for Alexander's starting techs. As I noted above, they don't lend themselves to the Metal Casting/Pyramids gambit. That doesn't mean they suck. Hunting gives us Alex's UU as soon as we have one of the early game metals hooked up. If we have a campable resource nearby early on, so much the better. We also get a Scout and can build these right out of the starting gate, allowing us to thoroughly explore the surrounding terrain and maybe get to a couple more goody huts before our neighbours. Scouts also make decent early fog-busters once their exploring days are done.

Fishing could benefit us if we have a lake within our start, as the extra commerce can be put towards research. We should also be looking for coastline and coastal cities. I have yet to build the Great Lighthouse in a game, and this might be worth a try if the map allows for several decent coastal cities. Then again, if we wind up running a specialist economy with Mercantilism, its effects would be mostly lost.

So a lot of what I may do in an Alexander game seems to depend very much on the start, perhaps more so than any other leader. The one thing I can guarantee is that with the Aggressive trait--which we haven't seen in an ALC since the first (Montezuma) game, we'll be seeing a lot of warmongering (which, granted, every ALC seems to feature). I like trying something new in each game, so whether we go with cottages or specialists, why not shoot for a conquest win for the first time?

First impressions ...

Sisiutil said:

Unique Unit: Phalanx (Replaces Spearman; Strength: 5, Movement: 1, Cost: 35, Unique Abilities: +25% hill defense, doesn't receive defensive bonuses, requires copper or iron)

Click to expand...

The phalanx does receive defensive bonuses, just like a regular spearman. I think you copied from the wrong column or something.

I mostly agree with you that it's kind of an average but not great unique unit, though it's worth noting that the free Combat I makes its real strength 5.5 instead of the listed 5. With a barracks you can give them Shock to cancel out the axeman bonus. Then you basically have an axeman that's invulnerable to mounted units. I'm not saying you should build these instead of axemen, but I think this elevates them from a niche unit to a fairly useful component of your force.

However, the SE--correct me if I'm wrong here--really relies upon building the Pyramids for early Representation and its +3 research points per specialist.

Click to expand...

Everything I've read, and I really mean everything, says this is true. In a game where almost every "rule" seems to be controversial, this is one that isn't.

It's not that surprising when you think about it. In a true/pure specialist economy, all of your science is coming from specialists. A scientist without Representation gives you 3 beakers and artists give 1. This means that the best case scenario, if all of your specialists are scientists, is that not building The Pyramids cuts your science output in half. If you have any other specialists, it's even worse (since they go from 3 beakers to 0).

Conclusion: unless the specialist economy with Representation is twice as good as the cottage economy (it isn't), then without Representation, the cottage economy will be better.

1. Do we attempt to go the SE route anyway?
2. If so, do we try for the MC/P gambit, knowing we have an uphill battle?
3. Or do we try to build the Pyramids "honestly"--meaning we're looking to hook up stone ASAP, the presence of which is not guaranteed?
4. Do you HAVE to have the Pyramids for a SE? It seems to me that the economy would be severely weakened without having the Representation research bonus as early as possible.

Click to expand...

1. I think it's a good option to consider. The specialist economy excels with Philosophical leaders and war mongering. Guess what? You're Philosophical and Aggressive.
2. I would argue no. First, it would be more interesting to try it from a different direction. Second, there's no point in trying a deliberately bad strategy.
3. That would be my vote, and yes, I think stone is a necessity. If stone can't be found nearby, then I think you fall back to Plan B.
4. Asked and answered.

At worst, we could make an attempt to build the Pyramids via the MC/P gambit. If we get the Oracle and Metal Casting but miss out on the Pyramids, we will still wind up with a Great Engineer (actually, two of them)

Click to expand...

I'd have to think about this more than I want to right now, but I'm not sure you would get two. The second engineer comes because the engineer points from The Pyramids help that city catch up to The Oracle to outrace it for the second great person. If it's just engineer specialist (from the forge) vs. The Oracle, I suspect that The Oracle will have enough of a head start to give you a prophet as your second great person.

The first time I heard of "the specialist economy" was from a poster who said he always played Alexander. I'm not sure if he elaborated on his style, but in one post I think he said something like "I can achieve a decent research rate, and I never build a single cottage." I can't find it now; if anyone can, I'd be obliged.

You could look at phalanx as an axeman with 100%vs mounted rather than 50%vs melee. Given that most AI defend with archers that ain't an issue. Where it might become an issue is defending against barb axes, though I suppose you could knock up a few phalanxes (or is it phalanges?) first to get XP vs warriors and archers and produce shock axes a bit later.

As I posted at the end of ALC#7 going for pyramids via oracle/ metalworking/ GE gives you flexibility and you ain't committed to building the pyramids until the GE pops which means no hammers lost if someone beats you to it. If you get pyramids maybe look at monotheism for theology slingshot with oracle GP. If you researched masonry last you ain't committed to pyramid route until the last moment; if you lost pyramids at last minute you could stop masonry, switch to CoL and get CS slingshot from GP, use GE for Glib and get a headstart on cottage economy/bureaucracy+GLib superscience capital.
Doubt I'll be playing a shadow, its more fun (and less hassle) posting.

Try to build the pyramids honestly. After building your first settler, dedicate the capitol to the pyramids. Occasionally whip other stuff and send the overload to the pyramids.

If you want a challenge, how about adding some sort of fun variant? Since you want to be at war more often, how about playing a game where after declaring war for the first time, you need to be at war with someone EVERY turn? The same turn that you sign a peace treaty with one foe, you must declare war on another. I think it could be a neat variant, especially since with a specialist economy (if that's what you are going with) has some advantages with warmongering.

Dr Elmer Jiggle said:

The phalanx does receive defensive bonuses, just like a regular spearman. I think you copied from the wrong column or something.

Click to expand...

The CFC Civ IV Info Centre is incorrect, then. In which case the Phalanx gets a +25% bonus defending on hills in addition to the regular +25% defense bonus.

Personally, I think you should move the difficulty up to Monarch since you have won the last several ALCs without any serious problems. It is important that it actually be a challenge.

Well, given that Sisiutil is the pilot, I'd suggest a stone thrower's gambit.

1. Hook up stone
2. Gift stone to neighbor
3. Capture pyramids with combat I melee units

Hunting plus fishing. Sheesh, what a combo. Roll an inland start and you've got no worker techs. Blarg.

As usual, with Hunting I'm looking scout first unless circumstances scream otherwise. Gotta find the rocks, or a bunch of techs to slingshot metal casting. Fun fun fun.

Sisiutil said:

The CFC Civ IV Info Centre is incorrect, then

Click to expand...

Yep. Looks that way. I checked various sources before posting the correction, including the irrefutable authority -- the XML unit definitions. They seem to have the same mistake for the quechua too.

As far as I can tell, all melee units get defensive bonuses. Animals and most of the mounted, siege, helicopter, and armored units do not.

VoiceOfUnreason said:

1. Hook up stone
2. Gift stone to neighbor
3. Capture pyramids with combat I melee units

Click to expand...

How in-character.

Sisiutil said:

And yet, though I'm a classical history fan, I have yet to play a game as Alexander. Maybe it's the odd trait combination, which seem to pull in two different directions. Maybe it's the unique unit, which replaces and barely improves upon a secondary (and sometimes unnecessary) unit, the Spearman.

Click to expand...

I love how the leader you'd most associate with Bronze Working lacks the ability to research it as his first tech. Fishing really adds insult to injury, start inland and you delay Bronze even more being forced to research alternate food sources.

Sisiutil said:

So this begs several questions:

1. Do we attempt to go the SE route anyway?
2. If so, do we try for the MC/P gambit, knowing we have an uphill battle?
3. Or do we try to build the Pyramids "honestly"--meaning we're looking to hook up stone ASAP, the presence of which is not guaranteed?
4. Do you HAVE to have the Pyramids for a SE? It seems to me that the economy would be severely weakened without having the Representation research bonus as early as possible.

I suspect that the answers to these questions may largely depend upon the start, which is probably why DrElmerJiggle suggested I take the unusual step of posting it in the pre-game thread.

Click to expand...

I agree that you're almost entirely dependent on looking at the opening map for planning strategy. As enamored as I am with experimenting on MC/P openings I can't recommend it with Alexander without having a handy commerce tile (gold/silver/gems). Trying to parlay a single lake tile won't really cut it.

Starting near the shore might still prompt an shot at early Metal Casting no matter what else you have going on. Use the GE on Colossus so that the capital can at least produce some early raw commerce to take advantage of bureaucracy. Have a bias for coastal cities so that you can almost have them pay for themselves working shore tiles before you're forced to make Courthouses. With 0% science slider it shouldn't be too much trouble to cover city maintenance.

Mutineer popped in with a claim that you don't need Pyramids to be successful with SE but as far as I can make out it's still totally unsubstantiated. So I'd agree with DrElmerJiggle you're going to have to have some plan for Pyramids, Stone or not, to do SE again. I'm not sure I understand what he is getting at saying you want SE to be twice as good as CE even with representation. Isn't better, better? Even if you think SE is exactly equal to CE at a certain stage then you sholdn't have any qualms going with SE if you're experimenting.

Well I think a non Pyramids, mixed SE is possible, in the sense of making your Super Science city concentrate on Scientists instead of Cottages.

Essentially you concentrate on the Scientist GPPs as opposed to the actual Flasks as the benefit of the scientists... Since there is little Conflict between a Science and a Cottage economy Early on
(Slavery v. Caste can be resolved as Widespread Scientists with whipped libraries or Concentrated Scientists in the Science City)

Without Representation, a Focus on getting Great Scientists... assuming it Starts with Literature, and is preceeded by 2 Prophets from the Oracle

Make the Science Town one that can switch from production to excess food
once GL is built that's 8->16 GPP...once National Epic is buildt switch to excess food, and get 2 assigned Scientists going 15->45 GPP

So assuming~20 Turns to get National Epic the production of Great Scientists would be

Turn (Total Cost=300, 700, 1200, 1800, 2500)
19 (at 304 )
29 (725 total)
40 (1220 Total)
53 (1805 Total)
69 (2525 Total)

Now that is assuming no Other cities as sources of GP, however if you run one or two other Scientist Farms [two Scientists], they can probably get one or two other Great Scientists in that time. So with 7 Great Scientists, 6 Settled 1 Academy, and the Four Running Scientists in the Super Science City, you will still end up getting ~84 flasks from that city for the specialists (assuming No Monasteries)

This is definitely not enough to support all of your science, but enough for you to lower the Slider a bit... and with Oxford you can effectively have as many scientists in the Super City as you want... so Caste system is never really necessary... early on, you want the specialists spread out, because you porbably can't support more than two anyways... later on you want them concentrated in one city so you can actually get the now expensive GSs

You would not give up a Cottage Economy, but you would be concentrating maximizing the economic(scientific) use of your Philosophical trait

Now if you Get stone/are able to capture the Pyramids.... I'd say go for a full fledged SE... otherwise, Great Library, rather than Pyramids becomes your "Build it" Wonder... not for a 'Specialist economy' but for a Specialist maximization.

One final Thing, by Not going for a pure Specialist Economy, you can do a CS Slingshot with those Prophets. (which makes Capturing the Pyramids even better, because then you can get the Pyramids while doing a CS slingshot)... of course that relies on a compliant Neighbor who gets to the stone before you do. (or is just Wonder Crazy)

Been lurking these for a while, figured I'd throw my $0.02 in as someone who is still getting game nuances at Noble difficulty...regarding going to the SE, I think it might be instructive to attempt the SE with Alexander for two reasons. First, because it appears that a "pure" SE is difficult to set up with this set of leader traits & techs, there's the element of the challenge, plus contributes to the community "knowledge base" of getting an SE up and running.

Second, while there has been much (almost exhaustive) discussion on which is better and not much practical info on how to get one going (Wodan's thread here and ALC #7, plus thread-delving on the which is better discussions), there is even less (if anything) that illustrates "punting" a failed attempt at an SE. While those who regularly run SE's or the "experts" might say it's obvious, the SE novices amongst us might think otherwise or overlook a "better way" to recover.

Since part of the mission of the ALC series seems to be education, perhaps a (unintentionally) failed attempt at an SE would be just as instructive as a difficult to set up SE.

notopt

Eqqman said:

I'm not sure I understand what he is getting at saying you want SE to be twice as good as CE even with representation. Isn't better, better? Even if you think SE is exactly equal to CE at a certain stage then you sholdn't have any qualms going with SE if you're experimenting.

Click to expand...

I noticed when I proofread that, that it wasn't very easy to understand, but I didn't feel like fixing it. I do think I'm right though. After writing this response, I'm not sure this message is going to be any better, but for what it's worth, the point I was trying to make is something like this ...

Let's say that in Representation, a specialist economy produces X beakers.

Since our premise is that a properly managed specialist economy is better than a cottage economy, we assume that the number of beakers generated by a cottage economy is less than X. How much less than X? At this point we don't know, so let's say it's cX beakers for some constant c less than 1. Maybe it's .99X, maybe it's .9X, we'll come back to that later. Other than the happiness bonus allowing your cities to grow larger, Representation doesn't have a huge impact on the cottage economy, so for now we'll just treat the cottage economy the same with or without Representation (beware of the handwaving ).

As I discussed in my earlier post, without Representation, the specialist economy will produce roughly X / 2 beakers. If all of your science came from scientist specialists, it would be exactly X / 2. If you get some commerce from tiles (rivers, Calendar resources, the occasional stray cottage, etc.) then it's a little higher than X / 2 since that commerce isn't affected by Representation. If you have some non-scientist specialists, then it's a little lower than X / 2 since their beakers go from 4 or 3 to 1 or 0. In a real situation, you'll have some non-specialist commerce and some non-scientist specialists, so I think X / 2 is a fairly good ballpark approximation.

So given all this, the question we're faced with is can a specialist economy without Representation compete with a cottage economy? In other words, can X / 2 beakers compete with cX beakers? The only way it can is if c is roughly .5. If c is .5, that means the specialist economy with Representation generates approximately twice as many beakers as an equivalent cottage economy.

I don't think that's realistic, and that's my point. If the specialist economy without Representation can compete with a cottage economy, then a specialist economy with Representation must be twice as good as a cottage economy. It isn't, therefore a specialist economy without Representation isn't a good idea.

Proof by contradiction.

I found the most profound view of the Phalanx unit to be that it is identical in power with the Axeman against Archery based units. DrEJ noted that Shock would effectively cancel out the Axeman's +50%vMelee bonus, but it doesn't. However, the Phalanx is still overall a strong unit, in particular because the AI more strongly favors early Mounted units than most human players would.

The idea of the TO/P slingshot sounds reasonable. Certainly, if The Pyramids are missed, using a GE for TGL and then popping some GSs for Academies in some more commerce heavy cities would be a great aid for the CE.

Nares said:

DrEJ noted that Shock would effectively cancel out the Axeman's +50%vMelee bonus, but it doesn't.

Click to expand...

Why not? I mean, obviously I'm ignoring enemy promotions -- a Shock promoted axeman would still crush a phalanx -- but shouldn't a Shock phalanx vs. a plain, unpromoted axeman (ex. a barbarian) be 5.5 vs. 5? As I understand the combat calculations an attacking phalanx's +50% would be subtracted from the axeman's, so the axeman's multiplier would be 1 + .5 - .5 = 1.

The question that's been on my mind, though, is whether one scientist is worth not working one cottage. And I think any time I ran Philosophical I'd at least setup one super science city, even if I had to run the science slider.

Axemen, and women for that matter.. ( ha ah) yeah, get 50% V's Melee..So a shock, +25% and combat 1,+ 10% (automatic) Phalanx is actually 5.5 V's 6.25

Axe men get automatic 50% v's melee and the 25% for the phalanx cancels out the axemans full 50 %

so it ends up being Phalanx (5.0 base +0.5 combat 1) V's Axeman (5.0 base +(50%-25%) V's melee *auto*) or 5.5 V's 6.25

P.S. I actually came up with these figures in world builder, so I'm not so smart after all....that's the Phalanx attacking on open grass land, for a 30 % combat odds..or 30.1 or something...

Dr Elmer Jiggle said:

As I understand the combat calculations an attacking phalanx's +50% would be subtracted from the axeman's, so the axeman's multiplier would be 1 + .5 - .5 = 1.

Click to expand...

If the Phalanx's +50% was subtracted from the axeman's strength, then it wouldn't also be added to the phalanx's strength and vice versa.... So a Phalanx with shock would be equal to an axeman with nothing.... either 5 vs. 5 or 5.5 vs. 5.5. This is not taking into consideration the +10% bonus for aggresive leaders. So a phalanx would be slightly better than a non-aggresive axeman. Of course, as Alexander, using axemen would still be superior than using Phalanxes since you don't need that promotion to compete with other axemen. In other words.... if there are no horses around, don't use Phalanxes.

Tennyson said:

The question that's been on my mind, though, is whether one scientist is worth not working one cottage. And I think any time I ran Philosophical I'd at least setup one super science city, even if I had to run the science slider.

Click to expand...

Gah here's somebody else trying to get everybody going on numbers again!

The very brief answer is that in the literal sense, a scientist is better than an actual cottage. You get 3 beakers from the specialist but only one from the cottage. You'll get 2 from the hamlet and then 3 from the village, where you finally have a tie. After this simple comparison is when we starting sharpening torches and lighting pitchforks.

The specialists start better since you're earning a good, fixed number of beakers right away. The cottages finish better since you have 5 from the fully developed town + Printing Press. Add a river and you have 6. Add Financial and you have 7. But I wouldn't go any further with this analysis since you'll have to start making fictional empires to convince yourself that one way of playing is better. If you create a scenario showing when specialists are always superior, somebody else will make their own numbers to show how cottages are so much better and vice-versa. Like everything else in this game it comes down to how you enjoy playing the game the most- how do you prefer to develop cities, what are your favorite civics, what is your prefered victory type and so forth.