shyuhe said:
Oh and I almost lost the game because I almost clicked on the wrong box for this
For about 3 minutes straight I have been laughing at this comment and will probably keep laughing for quit some time!
I guess you're referring to the "do not chop" signs I ignored some thousand turns ago..? You haven't forgotten me then
How could I forget you, mysty?
IIRC I chopped first and removed the signs after so I removed outdated signs as well
To be honest, that may actually be worse... if it were the other way around, you could have just claimed that you were hiding the clutter and then forgot about it... what you're saying here is that you blatantly chose to do something else. As you say, in a competing game, not a big deal.
In a regular SG, I'd hope that you would at least check with the other players first.
I disagree here, I saw you do that and I don't like it much, call it "information overload". I mean if you see what's in this city once its fine...
Clear communication trumps abrieviations that others might not understand.
Clear AND concise communication trumps that, but better to be wordy and clear than concise and not clear.
3 drafts per turn for 10 turns is 30 drafts, which is nothing when spread across 24 cities. That's what I mean; we have the resources for extensive drafting (without crippling ourselves). We have plenty of
-resources, far too much infra and still the culture slider if need be so we definitely won't run into problems there... We have a runaway AI and you can't expect taking him down to be a walk in the park.
Regardless, we have to stick to the rules. Taking down a run-away AI might suit your victory condition, say, if it's conquest. It might not suit another player's, say, if it's cultural.
So, what you think is right but goes against the spirit of the rules should be disallowed for that reason: that we each have our own competing goals and the rules were put in place to ensure a level of equity across goals, whereby doing something excessive wouldn't harm another player significantly.
I wouldn't mind seeing a clearer ruling from shyuhe on the subject, but I would think that 1 draft per City per turnset, as long as doing so doesn't bring a City into unhappiness, is a reasonable upper limit.
... a friendly AI with tons more tech and in the driver's seat for culture victory. Not sure, but I *think* we ought to do something here...
That's your victory condition talking. For some victory conditions, there's no reason to panic for a long time--no reason to panic at all, really.
As long as we aim to raze one Legendary-to-be City that doesn't contain one of the Wonders that we are not allowed to raze, we can put off a war declaration for a good number of turnsets and still be able to win with any victory condition.
Going all-out-war is not fair to some players, though, which is the crucial difference.
There are several methods to ensure safety for our cities, firstly by intelligence. Position spies in his land to locate SODs, if we get there fly some airship recon missions, etc. The AI isn't great in taking chances and opportunities, no stack no attack holds pretty often. If we strike in, say, 3 places (opis, west, east) we spread his defences and further lower the risk of counterattack. But that needn't be discussed until later so I left this out in my last post.
Okay, but this comment ignores the point that not every player will gain by going to war and some players will be harmed by it.
Unless we manage to capitulate Hammurabi, then a diplo or AP player will actually not want to attack Hammurabi.
Considering that culture doubles after 1000 years and that there are already plenty culture buildings
Here, again, having Espionage Buildings could have helped us, as we could have sabotaged a couple of his long-ago-built buildings, particularly his Hindu Temples and Hindu Monasteries, plus possibly some Cathedrals in a key Legendary-to-be City, delaying his win for an extremely long time. We can still aim to build the Espionage Buildings and do exactly that... completely avoiding war for the players that don't want to upset Hammurabi.
and more importantly, considering the way culture works, the only thing we should really care about is popping borders, and building yet another monastery doesn't help much short-term.
See, there aren't that many non-Wonder Cultural buildings to build once Monasteries become obsolete. When you're competing against an established Cultural City, those Monasteries do have a HUGE relative impact. So, you want to hit the 500 Cultural mark?
What have you got... +1 from Religion, +3 from a Theatre, +1 each from Temples... we can't even build Castles anymore... what else are you going to build? Monasteries!
Agreed, we have tons of obsolete units, THEY can be put into such cities, it usually doesn't take that much to avoid revolts. About building rifles or cavs, we might want to go into war with infantry, but the quickest way to get it is by a combination of drafting and upgrading. After AL we keep the slider at zero until we have the cash. That gives us max. inf in min. time. But yes, that is up to the player.
Again: great plan for the conquest player. For others... probably not so much.
Hehe shyuhe, that makes you the third player to violate rules and trade for gold
Clearly, we either need to loosen that rule or else we need to be clearer when we talk about it... we keep TALKING about "no tech trading," which just reinforces the wrong ideas in our heads, i.e. that "other kinds of trading could be okay."
BTW I thought we couldn't remove any builds, no matter whether there are hammers in them yet.
That is my understanding, too, which means that shyuhe just TROLLOLOLOLOLed the next player by putting Factories everywhere.
@Dhoomstriker: I'm curious though, how is stealing a lot faster than teching here? We have twice the beaker output than we would get with espionage...
Well, duh, we didn't really beeline Democracy and Espionage Buildings and we seem to have picked up Economics, obsoleting Castles. So, of course our current Espionage Rate will be sucky.
However, stealing techs comes in at a tiny fraction of the cost of researching them. Add to that the fact that we have lots of players that could be potential theft targets, such as Vassals with small Espionage outputs but the ability to research quickly.
Sure, even with some Espionage Buildings, you MIGHT have more base Flask output. But that's not how you compare Espionage... because Espionage lets you steal a tech at a fraction of its Commerce cost in Flasks.
Also, with AIs having the esp. buildings a lot longer than us, missions are riskier and they have plenty more on us as well, making missions more expensive...
What was it you said? We have 24 Cities? How can they feasibly compete with that? Espionage is great when you have a large empire, since it is something that scales in your favour the larger your empire gets, and even moreso when the world mostly shares the same State Religion as each other.
So, looks like habitus gets the military buildup set and I get the fun-but-endless-set
Only if he falls for your victory-condition-oriented arguments and/or if he is the conquest player.
edit: We have plenty of outdated units standing by in rotterdam, either to be upgraded or to be used as MP in border cities.
Just make sure that when moving a stack out of a border City that we check the City's Culture bar by hovering the mouse over top of it, to ensure that we aren't entering or increasing the Revolt Percentage zone.
Oh and I've garrisoned our border cities to prevent culture flips. For now... If Hammy keeps on cranking up the culture, we may need more troops to prevent flips (or have to invade him).
:suicide:
