AG8 - Let's try Sid

[Greebley]

Offa, I think we got fairly lucky. There was no civ very close to us, and I think India had better land to the south and so concentrated settling away from us. There was also evidence that the Sumeria/Indian war started before the settling phase ended and probably contributed to the slower growth of both Sumeria and India both.

I suspect chance plays a good part in winning SID. I remember one SID game my initial border expansion showed 3 different civ borders already there. (I was trying AWS so I hadn't explored yet - It was an OCC AWS - with 3 immediate contacts - you can guess the result - the only reason I lasted to about 1750 BC was because I was playing Sumeria).

This is why we had Skyfish check it out first and give a thumbs up first.

 

[TedJackson]

Aggie,

I can't play until tomorrow so if you can play tonight go ahead and grab it. If not, I'll pick up in the morning.

Either way it looks as if we've got a window of opportunity for some carnage


Ted

 

[Aggie]

Ted,

I'm not that much in a hurry. Just take it tomorrow

 

[TedJackson]

OK,

will do


Ted

 

[Aggie]

Remember all: set governors on emphasize production

 

[anarres]

Originally posted by TedJackson
Either way it looks as if we've got a window of opportunity for some carnage


Ted

hehe Ted, that's fighting talk!

 

[TedJackson]

Got it


Ted

 

[TedJackson]

Well,

I'm halfway through turn 2 (110BC) and I've already captured Punjab, Kolhapur, Karachi & Lahore. We still have 40 MW with another 8 currently under construction.

I've paused here to allow a little discussion as to when to stop the war. I have 6 MW that will be in position to assault Bengal in 2 turns and can reckon on 8 MW to assault what I hope is Bombay in 3 turns. At about the same time I should have another 8 MW in place to capture (or raze) Indus. The big question is should we stop there, leaving a small India as a buffer between ourselves and the Byzantines/Sumerians?

Currently we are rated weak (militarily) against both Sumeria & Byzantines and we don't really have the production to take (and hold) many more Indian cities. I didn't expect to make such rapid progress against India and I'm now inclined to try for Peace after dealing with Bengal, Bombay & Indus but want to allow the team the opportunity to discuss the situation.


Ted

 

[Aggie]

Ted, what happened to the iron deal we had with Sumeria? Isn't that deal now interupted and our rep broken?

I'm a bit scared that the cities would flip back to India. Taking the ToA seems vital. I also assume that we are better of to raze and replace.

 

[Nad]

I hope we haven't trashed our rep, that could be fatal at Sid level.

Way to go on the attack Ted! That is awesome progress.

I think the cities flipping back is more or less inevittabel, therefore we need to train lots of settlers immediately to abandon/replace.

I would vote for leaving India with 5-10 cities as a buffer state between us and the greater powers.

 

[anarres]

Wow, Sumeria deal broken?

Well, in terms of the war I think we should take as much of India as we can, providing that the cities we take will be in our new productive core.

I hope we didn't break our deal tho...

 

[Aggie]

I agree with anarres. We have 40 MW's, which seems enough to make ourselves a nice core.

But, if we really broke our rep then I think it's a lost game. Ted, could you clear this issue up?

 

[TedJackson]

Brainfart!

I knew we had a deal with Sumeria. Somewhere along the way, while I was looking at troop deployments, I totally forgot about it

My apologies to all. What shall we do now?


Ted

 

[Skyfish]

OOPS

 

[Nad]

We have no choice...we just carry on as best we can. If we can get close to the AIs in power rating then renegotiating peace and paying for techs with gpt is an option. Alternatively any civ at war with Sumeria will accept credit payments. We'll just have to manipulate as best we can. The difficulty rating has just gone up though

 

[Aggie]

I like the teams point of view on this. I want to suggest to let TedJackson replay his turns as from 150 BC. The reason is that I think we will have no chance to win this with a broken reputation.

We have been discussing this reputation issue from the moment Sumeria demanded the iron. Anarres even stopped playing and asked us what to do. We then decided to give Sumeria the iron and as a consequence delay the war with India with 20 turns. So this declaration of war after 10 turns was not as planned.

Big drawback is that we now know that India isn't ready to go to war now. But we were aware of that when we saw that their military hardly is equal to ours.

I am doing this because I feel that we have a good shot at this if we play this out. Team discussions and focussed play should bring us far But if the team doesn't like this, I want to continue using Nad's suggestions.

 

[Skyfish]

If you could run over India so quick and not even get hit back, it looks to me that the game was already slightly less difficult than normal Sid.
Trades are not as important in Sid than at Deity, if the situation is as good as what Ted says, am sure you can win this game even wiith the broken rep...
But thats only my 2 cents and you should not pay attention to me

 

[Nad]

Well, from a personal opinion I would be dead against replaying the turn. Making mistakes, forgetting things is part of the game, IMHO. Just as a human player can outsmart the AIs with strategic moves, so the human player can be worse than AIs in forgetting to do things. It's the nature of the beast...

Nevertheless that is just a personal opinion and if the team decides to replay then I'll go along with that.

 

[Aggie]

Skyfish, why is trading less important? We surely have to trade for technology, resources and luxuries? I've never played Sid, but I expect we will be more dependent on our rep than in deity, in wehich at one point you may get a tech lead.

 

[Nad]

trading for resources is not a problem, that is pure perturn trades and we can always do that, it is buying techs for credit that we can no longer do. I guess what Skyfish means is that on Sid the AIs tend to be further ahead so there is less scope for 2fers and such, but I agree with Aggie, this makes buying techs even more important since we have to take what few opportunities there are.