Sid Strategies

[Spoonwood]

what you describe, in your latter and refined version, is what Spoonwood (i think still under his old nickname) posted here quite a while ago.

i understand well how it works. i also understand that it was obviously already in use in HoF-games, and by the rules righteously so. i did play around with it a little myself.

but i also agree, that it nullifies the essence of the game. so i deliberately forgo this option, even if it arises "by itself", and i definitely do not especially look out for it.

t_x

No, I didn't use such to put free money into the economy. Or at least I would only try to take as much as they had.

 

[templar_x]

Sorry if it seemed that I insinuated you would use such a technique in your games. I simply do not know.

What I felt that I remembered was that you described it already quite a while ago. I did not look it up, but it was a detailed information on how you could make those "double trades" by cutting trade roads, so that only one trade survives until the IBT.

t_x

 

[jarred!]

I think this strategy is what's being referenced:

So during my war turns, each turn roughly partitions into steps.

1. I wake all my units.

2. I disconnect any resources I have hooked up... at least if I think the AIs have any to spare. I then see if the AIs have any deals for resources... but not with an AIs I have any deals for luxuries going on to make sure I won't end up putting free money into the economy from nowhere.

3. I disconnect my capital. At this point once or twice, I've opened the F4 screen and talked to the AI to see if any AIs have a resource or luxury available which says "0". This way I know I could theoretically "obtain" a resource or luxury from them later, if I gifted them an appropriate city.

4. I reconnect my capital.

5. I pick up gold, maps, and techs tied into luxury/resource deals for gpt with the AI.

6. I disconnect my capital.

7. I connect my capital again, and acquire luxuries/resources (fortunately on this map, I've had before iron and saltpeter native... unfortunately neither Leo's or the Pyramids got built on my home island) via gpt.

8. I re-capture any cities that have flipped. Note that I do all luxuries/resource deals first to keep the cost of luxuries/resources down as much as I can.

9. I take care of any units that have landed in my territory or near enough my territory that my cavalries can retreat to safety if needed. I've started NOT leaving artillery type units in captured cities (unless I've just captured it on the turn I put the artillery type unit in the city) to avoid losing them if they flip. This means first shelling them out with cannons so far, and hopefully artillery proper soon enough. I also fish for leaders here. Before I generally had placed any elite stars into an army, but after some consideration, I've started, generally, putting cavalry which haven't attacked into an army, so they have 4 unit movement, and thus can go attack a city immediately.

10. I capture cities and clear out any needed AI units around those cities. I move workers along placing done rails as desired co-ordinating this with capturing cities. In other words, I basically attack and move workers in places near where I will attack before having them do any work elsewhere.

11. I take settlers and plant them in gaps in my newly captured lands to expand my borders.

12. Other worker and settler action, along with fortifying my newly captured cities and my newly planted cities. I've never seen a city flip immediately on the inter-turn after capturing it (though the next inter-turn I feel sure I've seen sometime). So, if a city has barracks (or if I owned Sun Tzu's and had it on the same continent as my captured cities), I think this means so long as I have the new cities on the rail network, I can fortify any wounded units in the captured city, and it will heal the next turn, so long as it doesn't get attacked. I haven't done this with armies, or all that much really, but in principle, this might also help quell a little more resistance.

13. I cycle through my cities making sure they do what I want them to do (I'm by no means thorough in this regard).

I also make sure to re-adjust the luxury slider, even if my weariness hasn't jumped, as the disconnecting/reconnecting of imported luxuries needs corrected, I think, once you have the new luxuries in place for happiness purposes. In other words, say I have 10% luxuries going and I only want 10% luxuries again next turn. Well, I first bump it to 20%, then push it back to 10%, which changes the citizens faces to what the now imported luxuries tell them we have.

I never built any roads around any tile immediately adjacent to the capital, except in one spot. In other words, if I didn't have any roads whatsoever, and I had a one movement unit in my capital, there exist 8 possible spots my unit could move to and finish its turn. The other spot (a regular, not a bonus, grassland square) has a road built and cut a few times every turn.

Before I had railroads, I kept three warriors and 6 industrious workers on that spot, or 4 industrious workers on that spot and two working on some project very close by (in the current archipelago game, the one with screenshots of my capital and 8 trades I played on pangea and I've abandoned it). On most turns I would pillage with a warrior, re-connect, make "trades", pillage again, and then send out gpt for luxuries. 2 would mine, as I didn't know what else to do with them, while still having them in range of the capital... it took me a few games to figure out this, as I've played a few Sid games with just 2 pillage/roading parties instead of 3. During the start of a war, before railroads (in other games also) I have used the first pillage and road build to get techs/money/get the AI to declare on me. The 2nd pillage and road build to get free military alliances. The 3rd pillage and road build to obtain luxuries/resources. I have built mines and forests in the other squares which haven't had roads. I repeat I just didn't build roads in the other 8 squares, though I know I didn't figure out I should just forget about building roads directly adjacent to my capital, except for one spot the first time I started using this sort of trick. It almost felt instinctively to build a road anywhere before leaving it.

I've also pillaged out extra sources of iron/saltpeter so I can make deals for them when desired, and execute disconnect-reconnect for horseman-knight or horseman-cavalry upgrades (which I haven't done a lot of since my war with Greece).

If you want to see more details, this game, and a conquest game coming in the update with China on a Sid large map might help you along, and you can test it to work out deals also.

No, you don't have to sell any harbors if you disconnect the roads around your capital. If you kept roads around your capital, you could pillage at your borders instead, so long as you don't have any trade routes via a harbor. I would advise using your capital. I have the AIs set at "least aggressive". On top of this, if they don't feel at least "polite" to me, I'll generally try and gift them 100 gold (which I promptly buy back in trading) to try and improve their attitude towards me. The gpt going to them, also probably helps to keep them at peace with you. Wait... that's just to keep a sneak attack. You also have to make sure NOT to export any luxuries/resources to the AI. This wouldn't necessarily cause war, but would cause a reputation hit, and consequently make a sneak attack more likely, I think.

When I want a war, I basically make sure I can "purchase" some resource/luxury from the target AI, and that I can also re-negotiate a peace treaty. Then I open up the diplomacy screen and click on "Active" at the bottom of the screen. I re-negotiate the peace treaty with gpt going to the AI for a luxury/resource and anything else like workers (if any available) and lump sums from the AI. Now, I also do NOT export any luxuries or resources to the AI. They import luxuries or resources to me tied to the peace treaty for gpt. Then, I pillage the trade route to my capital. This results in the AI declaring on me (I don't think I did this in the Iroquois game all that much, and only figured it out in my China large game or my abandoned huge game with China, which I've mentioned in my HoF write-up thread). I try to do this on my first pillage with a resource if say I have a disconnect/reconnect for horses-knights upgrade thing going on.

Now, what if the target AI has no extra resources/luxuries available? I then try to figure out which resource luxury I have the least number of/have in some corrupt area far away from my productive core. I park one unit, as weak as I have basically (in this game, I've used javelin throwers and rifles mostly for this) one square adjacent (on a road, of course) to any of those cities. Next, I open up the diplomacy screen. I then gift those cities with the resource/luxuries to the target AI. Then, I open up the diplomacy again, and I double check to see that the target AI now has an extra resource/luxury available for sale. If not, I'd check the F2 screen to see where I still have an extra resource/luxury.

Then, if later in the game especially, I'd make sure I can pay gpt for that resource/luxury before doing any actual deals (use tax collectors/adjust tax slider temporarily as needed). Once I feel sure of this, I'll re-negotiate the peace treaty with the AI, again, with a resource/luxury coming from them with only gpt going to the target AI (you could theoretically use techs/lump sums you have also, but why would you give an AI techs/lump sums before going to war?). Then, I'll cut the trade route. Since the exporter of a luxury/resource comes as responsible for continuing the trade deal, and the resource/luxury deal comes as tied to the peace treaty, the AI declares on me.

Then I re-connect the road, and acquire gpt with my lump sums of gold if any available with any AIs with a luxury/resource available. With least aggressive AI the rate goes 18 gold for 1 gpt. I'll then sign military alliances (on turns when starting a war, if I want a military alliance), as many as possible tied to resource/luxury deals, and re-acquire all those lump sums by sending the AI gpt for resource/luxuries, along with techs or workers or maps if available. Then I'll cancel all of those deals by cutting the trade route... but the hard goods (workers/gold/maps/techs) stay with me. The deal where I leeched gpt from the AI stays in tact, since I sent them a lump sum for gpt (no resources/luxuries involved). I then reacquired the lump sum giving me both.

Then I cut the trade route once more. I re-connect and pay gpt for the luxuries. Note that I first disconnect the trade route before doing any lump sum for gpt deals, because I do NOT want to put any more money into the world economy than already exists there (which the HoF rulebook says does not work for Conquests, but even so, I'm not so sure about this... and I might not want to hurt every AIs economy as much as I could, which might result if I did this, because I want the AIs to do research for me).

I just take whatever already exists in the world's economy/workers/maps/techs and put them into my hands. Note that I haven't given the AI anything really, as all deals get cancelled immediately (except for the final one involving luxuries/resources for gpt only). I also haven't given the AI more gpt than I can afford, since all of that gpt I could have payed had I wanted to for some reason.

What I've described (as indicated by others also) comes as legal under HoF rules according to this clause

I didn't come up with this. I first learned of the basic idea, and didn't understand it actually when reading a Sid succession game, where Ignas suggested something like this (Microbe seems to have noticed the basic thing long before this). Lord Emsworth explained many of the details of what you can do with this here. The only thing possibly new with me (I'm not so sure Lord Emsworth didn't hint this at me either) comes as to use the capital instead of your borderlands. After a few games of playing both ways, I definitely feel the capital easier to use on a pangea map, and it basically comes as the only option on an archipelago map (I haven't tried selling/buying harbors on and off, and it seems even more expensive).

That all said, it *can* fail (though I doubt often), or at least disappoint you. When starting a war, as I learned in my abandoned pangea Huge game with China you have to make sure you can re-negotiate the peace treaty (which you can ensure by NOT getting into any wars with the target AI before attacking them). Also, I'll mention that in this game I wanted to attack the Hittites first. They had extra incense and I think gems for a while. I didn't trade for them, as I had planned to attack them once I had built up my military, so I wanted to make sure I could get them from someone else. The turn I wanted to start a war with them (though not the previous turn), they had no luxuries or resources to trade for, as I recall. Fortunately, I investigated one of their border cities, saw they had 7 luxuries going for them, and found some way to get them the 8th which I had, and started the war. So, I managed.

 

[LordofDread]

I think this strategy is what's being referenced:

It is based on that, and some additions from Lord Emsworth in this thread. The only thing I haven't seen anywhere else is that you buy their resource (much) overpriced in order to make the game think the AI has much more gpt than it actually will have. Hence my two posts - however the first one is obsolete after edit from second post. Since there seems to be virtually no limit in the gpt you can get with this, I consider this special case a serious exploit. Spoonwood's strategy seems limited to the actual income a specific AI has, at least from what I've seen.

The only "fun" application of buying overpriced could be in a balance of power game, where you directly funnel the overpriced gpt from a hard opponent to a weak AI you wanna help (at zero cost). Other than that, a game loses much of its flair and challenge if you can set your gpt to whatever you want it to be.

As a side note, there might be some cases where an AI gets into a "small" negative gpt-economy by itself, just by playing normally. On higher diff and fast tech rate, this doesnt matter much though.

EDIT: Just for clarification why I say "set your gpt to whatever you want it to be". In my second post, where I buy Lux from the Americans for 1000gpt. There is nothing that would keep me from offering them 5000 gpt for their Silks again in some turns. When buying the 5000 gpt back with cash (Step 2), they would offer me only 4000 gpt to buy my cash, since they have 1000 negative gpt from last "trade". Of course I need around 90'000 gold at hand for this, but you get that in no time this way, especially if you do this also with other civs every round. Provided I did no other trades inbetween, this would boost my 6700 gpt to 10'700 gpt. And so on and on...

 

[LordofDread]

that on top of that, you could actually force the AI into a "Negative GPT-Economy"

I can now confirm this. Forcing AI into a negative gpt-economy seems to work the same as for human players. At the very least, AI buildings get destroyed (presumably 1 per turn).

Investigating Incan cities, I "traded" with them since many turns now:

They gathered 226 culture, are rebuilding temple and have 0 buildings in the capital. Another example:

Here they built a temple before I did, but mine surpassed their culture very fast.
Last example from the Hitties (traded with them since some turns now):

 

[justanick]

It is the same for units as Bamspeedy has shown in Beyond Sid.

Beyond Sid

PTW 1.27-Default rules, except for difficulty level AI cost factor is 1 This means they can build temples for 6 shields, Pyramids for 40 shields, towns need 2 food to grow (growth every turn), 3 shields for a settler, etc. Free Units at start of game for AI: 3 settlers 6 workers 18...

forums.civfanatics.com

 

[WeirdoJoker]

Does such a strategy work at lower levels as well (e.g., Monarch)? I'm not even clear how to do that...

 

[justanick]

Extracting more money than AI can give can work at any difficulty setting.

 

[WeirdoJoker]

Extracting more money than AI can give can work at any difficulty setting.

I thought as much. How to get the AI to do it, though? Wouldn't that fall into the category of "they would never accept such a deal"?

 

[LordofDread]

Does such a strategy work at lower levels as well (e.g., Monarch)? I'm not even clear how to do that...

It does. The basic strategy is described throughout in this thread. It's worth the time reading it from the beginning, with many helpful pointers. First you need to have at least one AI that has a resource to sell and that has an intact trade route with you. Second you prepare your capital (or in other cases also described here your harbor city) quite different than you normally would. Easiest thing is to set up a road free ring around your capital at some point, with the exception of one tile, connecting your capital to the rest of your empire (and ideally to the world). On this tile you have enough workers to road it two or three times a turn (and also some military units to pillage).

Here is my current example. The pillage spot is located in the blue circle, and every other tile directly adjacent to the capital has no roads.

Then apply the strategy discussed in the thread. Even without buying overpriced, you can make a nice amount of cash this way, getting free techs and free money. This alone does not guarantee an AI getting into negative gpt.

If you want to push it to the limits however, as I am currently trying with 700'000 gpt getting to 1 Million gpt, there is no way around buying overpriced. However, I still see this "buying overpriced" as exploit-ish...

 

[WeirdoJoker]

It does. The basic strategy is described throughout in this thread. It's worth the time reading it from the beginning, with many helpful pointers. First you need to have at least one AI that has a resource to sell and that has an intact trade route with you. Second you prepare your capital (or in other cases also described here your harbor city) quite different than you normally would. Easiest thing is to set up a road free ring around your capital at some point, with the exception of one tile, connecting your capital to the rest of your empire (and ideally to the world). On this tile you have enough workers to road it two or three times a turn (and also some military units to pillage).

Here is my current example. The pillage spot is located in the blue circle, and every other tile directly adjacent to the capital has no roads.

View attachment 664508

Then apply the strategy discussed in the thread. Even without buying overpriced, you can make a nice amount of cash this way, getting free techs and free money. This alone does not guarantee an AI getting into negative gpt.

If you want to push it to the limits however, as I am currently trying with 700'000 gpt getting to 1 Million gpt, there is no way around buying overpriced. However, I still see this one as exploit-ish...

Ok, yeah, I'm going to have to review the entire thread when I have time. Thanks for the pointers, though. (And how the f*** did you get to be a gpt almost-millionaire?? I was shocked when I once had only five figures - somewhere around 30K - at Regent or Monarch.)

 

[LordofDread]

Ok, yeah, I'm going to have to review the entire thread when I have time. Thanks for the pointers, though. (And how the f*** did you get to be a gpt almost-millionaire?? I was shocked when I once had only five figures - somewhere around 30K - at Regent or Monarch.)

Only with buying the resource from the AI for much more than it wants to have. So if they want 50 gpt for iron, you dont settle for this (as HoF players would), but offer them as much you can afford. Then I applied the other necessary trades, including letting them buy your cash, pillaging, and then buy back your cash again and their resource. And pillage again. Road up again. And same thing for the next Civ. Almost every round. Works much faster if you have more than one AI to "buy" resources from.

Still I would not recommend buying overpriced for normal gameplay. You can not buy overpriced and still get many advantages, while keeping some key elements of the game. I'm just testing the limits, if and when the game would crash

EDIT: I'm providing the save below if anyone's interested. Active trades ongoing with Egypt, Inca, Hitties, Netherlands and Vikings. Always keep buying one specific resource from everyone before going to the interturn.

 

[Spoonwood]

Extracting more money than AI can give can work at any difficulty setting.

Yea. Basically, what you've been doing can correctly get called an Emsworth agreement, and he was playing his game on Chieftain. Except, the scheme you have setup there I think simpler than Lord Emsworth's.

Also, this is banned for XOTM competitions, since trade route pillaging is banned.

Also, it goes against the HoF rules:

"Giving the AI more gpt that you can afford or accepting more gpt than the AI can afford.​

This is disallowed as it results in putting 'free' money into the international economy. While fixed for C3C, it is banned for all versions for the sake of consistency."

Except, it's not fixed for C3C.

 

[justanick]

I'm just testing the limits, if and when the game would crash

That or some other bug may occur if the amount of ongoing trades becomes too high. But i am only speculating here.

 

[Spoonwood]

That or some other bug may occur if the amount of ongoing trades becomes too high. But i am only speculating here.

One does not get rich off of speculating, but off of pillaging.

 

[LordofDread]

Yea. Basically, what you've been doing can correctly get called an Emsworth agreement, and he was playing his game on Chieftain. Except, the scheme you have setup there I think simpler than Lord Emsworth's.

I'm really thankful for your link to Lord Emsworth's thread, and for quoting the HoF rules. I was somewhat confused, since some claimed "my" refined strategy as HoF compatible. Having read Lord Emsworth's thread I have to agree in calling it a Emsworth agreement. "My" refined strategy does not need an MA, however, which is a real benefit. I did also not see any cashback trades, but those ideas I got from your thread here iirc. So all the relevant elements were already available.

Giving the AI more gpt that you can afford or accepting more gpt than the AI can afford.

Which means one has to be very careful in doing trade route pillaging and doing cashback trades.

Example:

AI got 200 base gpt to offer for trades. It also has horses and iron, and are willing to giving those to you for lets say no less than 50 gpt each. Which means I can do a cashback trade for 300 gpt ~ 6500 gold, depending on difficulty. However, after I pillage the road the first time then, they will actually already have 100 gpt negative income? So I wonder if this is still rule conform, or if I have to settle for max 200 gpt instead.

 

[Spoonwood]

Which means I can do a cashback trade for 300 gpt ~ 6500 gold, depending on difficulty.

Depending on aggression level or aggression difficulty I suppose. At minimum aggression, it's 18 gold for 1 gpt. That exchange rate is not possible in your save above, so I know you don't have the setting as "least aggressive" or whatever it gets called. As far as I know, Sid level exchange rate is the same as Chieftain exchange rate if the aggression level of the AIs is the same. AI attitude can also affect the exchange rate, but I think it's constant for "least aggressive".

I'm not sure, but your example does seem like 100 gpt negative income for the AI.

What I do:

Figure out how much gpt my empire can get for the gold in our bank with no luxuries or resources traded. Then make that deal for their gpt for my empire's gold. Then use gpt to purchase a luxury/resource + gold + whatever other hard goods I want. Then pillage. The gpt then flows to my empire's treasury, but only as much gpt as the AIs had without any gpt our empire had paid them.

As an example I would consider typical from a succession game a while back:

"1. Disconnect.

2. Reconnect.


3. Sumeria sends us 26 gpt for 468 gold.


4. 40 gpt to Sumeria for Ivory and 549 gold.


5. Babylon has 46 gpt, but we can't afford all that with just one more disconnect. Oh well. 40 gpt from Babylon for 720 gold.


6. 107 gpt to Babylon for Wines, 785 gold, and Monarchy.


7. Spices and 27 gold from Russia for 11 gpt.


8. Disconnect-reconnect.


9. 9 gpt to Russia for Spices.


10. 8 gpt to Babylon for Wines.


11. 18 gpt to Sumeria for Ivory and Silks."

Now I think there could still get a question asked like "but what if that AI (Sumeria) doesn't have 26 gpt in 18 turns? They still have to pay that gold and it could come from nowhere since they went broke in that time!" And I would answer, that such can happen. And it likely has happened before. But, that also comes as a potential nonsensical situation any time technology or other hard goods gets sold for gold per turn. And there may well exist quite a few HoF and GOTM and COTM saves where that did happen. But, that also suggests it's not something that will get retroactively banned and entries get deleted. It also comes as intended that players sell technology for gpt.

Additionally, AIs trade gpt for technology with each other consistently. There does exist a possibility that AIs often enough create gpt from nowhere also.

But, the human player can control things such that they don't setup deals such that they take anymore gpt than the AIs have on that particular turn.

 

[LordofDread]

Depending on aggression level or aggression difficulty I suppose. At minimum aggression, it's 18 gold for 1 gpt. That exchange rate is not possible in your save above, so I know you don't have the setting as "least aggressive" or whatever it gets called. As far as I know, Sid level exchange rate is the same as Chieftain exchange rate if the aggression level of the AIs is the same. AI attitude can also affect the exchange rate, but I think it's constant for "least aggressive".

That is correct. I do have medium aggression level iirc. And it's probably not the actual difficulty level that makes the difference, so I did remember it wrong. I thought I had it from the war academy:

Managing the World: The Machiavellian Doctrine - CivFanatics

Chapter I: Introduction This is a style of play that I think some historically and politically minded players may find more rewarding than purely playing for points or winning the game as early as possible. The strategy should be applicable to all difficulty levels. The Man Niccolo Machiavelli...

www.civfanatics.com

Covered in the section where dexters explains the Banker model. Strangely enough in my games the interest rates are always negative (from my perspective). He calculated interest rate as positive to roughly +0.6% to +1% which means an AI would pay 5 gpt for 101 99 gold. So it's the different aggression level, or maybe it wasn't for Conquests.
In my current game, the "best" I got was 49000 gpt for 999'999 gold (although I did not make it precisely). The "worst" below 48'000 gpt. One can't offer more than 999'999 gold in a trade.

Then make that deal for their gpt for my empire's gold. Then use gpt to purchase a luxury/resource + gold + whatever other hard goods I want. Then pillage. The gpt then flows to my empire's treasury, but only as much gpt as the AIs had without any gpt our empire had paid them.

Safe strategy! Making deal gpt vs gold first avoids making mistakes.

There does exist a possibility that AIs often enough create gpt from nowhere also.

I did think about that too. One can't expect a player to anticipate when an AI runs out of gpt income from other civs. So if they're offering 300 gpt, and you suspect that money comes from other AI trades that soon would run out, you should still be able to accept. They have the same behaviour among each other anyway.