Well the shadow's certainly of far less value now. After all, now that I've realised that the 1060 AD save is actually a re-run which (i) uses cuirs (ii) settles different cities and (iii) relies on tile sharing much more than the original (which I was really enjoying following), I've nothing to compare it to any more to help me learn! FWIW, I blame @Doshin's finish date.
Some people don't like oppositions and thus are tough nuts to crack.
Usually, I am at the other side of the spectrum (if I'm not in my occasional temper tantrum) where I welcome criticisms and other points of view. Just like a good scientists motto: one is not the one-above-all and free yourself to close-mindedness and embrace other opinions (unless it's hysteria).
Now I know, that to get Tachys attention you need write a message to ZZZ!
Tachy, I might sound old with my "no strategy value" thingy, but here is a situation:
Someone starts "a walthrough I got asked for many many times!". He somehow forgets to mention he is actually replaying this map, furthermore it appears he is editing it in WB and when pointed out, ask moderators to delete the thread and starts a new one.
In the new thread (wordbuilded again and without notice again) he advocates "grow to happy cap, before getting out a settler" approach. On this particualr map this is plain wrong and when ZZZ disagrees with him (in his lovely trolling manner) he asks moders to delete ZZZ's posts!
And then Doshin posts a game with so obvious early helper cities and better results.
Leeching techs better. In war, you and the AI got a war value. Each war success increases your value. Other factors like soldier count (powers) enters in the formula and that is where war success favors the human player. With AggAI, if you endanger an AI city (just one is sufficient) with a sole unit, their war value is diminished to a third that it was.
Thus, if you got x value and the AI x value too AND you endanger their city, thus you got a remainder of 2x/3, which can be extorted in form of gold, techs or whatever you want.
No, it doesn't affect war success at all. It affect the war true value by diminishing its cost to a third of what it was originally...leading to favoring an easy ceasefire. For diminishing the cost, you need to endanger an AI city with whatever attacking unit.
But there is a hidden danger: if the AI endangers more of your cities than theirs being jeopardized by you, you got the 1/3 war value, meaning you need to take out his units to retrieve a normal value.
One thing I don't understand about you guys: why are you so invested in those improductive discussions thread. What does it really bring? I have read plenty of those and how I get better at the game: Naaaaaadaaaa!
Depends who defends its point. Some knows what they are talking about becayse they know how to leverage a long term gain to make it stronger. But I know short term gains are usually king simply because of the snowballing effect.