ALC Game #10: India/Asoka

[Dr Elmer Jiggle]

General - is medic III so great?

It's pretty nice to have one. I used one in my first several Warlords games, stopped for a while, and now might start again. My recommendation is that everyone should try it once. Maybe you'll like it, maybe not.

The value of Medic III is that your units heal as fast in enemy territory as they would normally heal with a Medic I in your own. That's some fast healing!

You can often get away with no wasted turns for healing. Bring the injured units along with you when you attack the next city. On the turn when you attack, keep them out of the battle. That gives them one turn of rest to heal. Often that's enough. If you throw in an occasional one turn pause, you'll always have fully healed troops.

 

[Dr Elmer Jiggle]

you should know now what you are going to do when the settler in Uppsala starts sailing north.

Yesterday I read that there's an undocumented change in the patch where you can no longer see what units are inside a transport ship. That means don't wait until you actually see a settler in a galley. As soon as you see a galley, you assume there's a settler inside, and you take appropriate action.

 

[Eggolas]

I will echo VoU's post in its entirety.

In past games, I've noted that you run very light on workers. While its true that you capture many, your infrastructure loses out on many years worth of growth. In the past, it hasn't mattered as much for a variety of reasons, mostly due to the AI farming everything in sight. In this game, with an improved AI that focuses on growth and building cottages, you are getting your head handed to you.

I'll also add a comment to VoU's on not keeping cities. There really wasn't a good reason to raze and rebuild. Perhaps in 150 to 200 turns the advantage will change, but you needed the boost and turn advantage now, not in the far future.

 

[johnny_rico]

My guess on the wonder builder is Roosevelt.

 

[Sisiutil]

Okay, I hear everyone on the critiques. I think I ran much of the last round based on previous games; frankly, this is one of the few games I've played where happiness has become such a non-issue so early, but I'm playing as though it is. Hence the small city sizes and unimproved floodplains, all instinctive attempts to keep my cities under their happiness limits. I think my brain is having a hard time believing how high those limits are this early in the game.

Same for the forges--in previous games (Alexander comes to mind in particular) you guys have beaten me up for not having enough of them. Again, I'm building them reactively, forgetting that two of the most essential buildings they would help complete (lighthouses and courthouses) are cheap for me anyway and can be built without their help.

So I'll do my best in the next round to implement patagonia's and VoU's advice in particular, and then we'll see where we stand.

Hey, even if I lose, provided we learn something, it's worthwhile.

 

[Jet]

quickies:
- agree with no forges/library, yes penninsula, yes lighthouses/courthouses, not sure about more workers, and I wouldn't let up on units and missionaries. One city units one city missionaries might be reasonable.
- give a banana to R and trade one to T for 4 GPT - you can always renegotiate
- you can build heroic epic now, do it - but where?

 

[Sisiutil]

quickies:
- agree with no forges/library, yes penninsula, yes lighthouses/courthouses, not sure about more workers, and I wouldn't let up on units and missionaries. One city units one city missionaries might be reasonable.
- give a banana to R and trade one to T for 4 GPT - you can always renegotiate
- you can build heroic epic now, do it - but where?

Good idea with the bananas, though my dye deal with Toku can be renegotiated in 4 turns anyway.

Good question on HE--I was thinking that I should get that built ASAP. I think I'd prefer a coastal city so it can also produce naval units. Either Madras or Bangalore seem like good candidates. I'm tempted to put it in Madras to add to its cultural output and GP points as well.

 

[babypacman]

Okay, I hear everyone on the critiques. I think I ran much of the last round based on previous games; frankly, this is one of the few games I've played where happiness has become such a non-issue so early, but I'm playing as though it is. Hence the small city sizes and unimproved floodplains, all instinctive attempts to keep my cities under their happiness limits. I think my brain is having a hard time believing how high those limits are this early in the game.

I'm having a hard time wrapping my arms around the logic in those statements. I deal with happiness caps by improving floodplains and resources so that I can run as many high-production low food tiles as possible at the happiness cap (or high commerce low food tiles, or run more specialists at the cap). If I bust through the happiness cap I crack the whip.

 

[patagonia]

So I'll do my best in the next round to implement patagonia's and VoU's advice in particular, and then we'll see where we stand.

Hey, even if I lose, provided we learn something, it's worthwhile.

This game's still very much there for the taking, especially if Toku and Ragnar stay off your back for the next 300 years or so. One of the "advantages" of the AI changes is that fewer troops tend to be built, which should help you some in this situation, but I would be inclined to "play nice" with any requests you get for the time being, as long as they don't seem too unreasonable.

You're inevitably going to fall behind technologically so after picking up Currency and Civil Service, it may be worth looking to trade-bait such as Philosophy if they haven't gone there yet to help keep you in the game (even if Ragnar's the only one willing to swap goodies). A mid-game tech deficit is no biggie though, provided you can stay competitive on the battlefield. You've got a lot of good land at your disposal and with a fairly committed cottage-spam, even the new AI won't be able to keep pace by the Industrial/Modern era.

Militarily, I'd focus on cats and spears, since cats are an excellent all-purpose weapon and both of your major rivals have horses, which the AI seems to have a real fetish for.

 

[Sisiutil]

I'm having a hard time wrapping my arms around the logic in those statements. I deal with happiness caps by improving floodplains and resources so that I can run as many high-production low food tiles as possible at the happiness cap (or high commerce low food tiles, or run more specialists at the cap). If I bust through the happiness cap I crack the whip.

I hear ya, but the sad truth is that I suck at micromanagement and I hate doing it and math when I'm just trying to relax and play a game. So while I use the whip extensively, I suck at using it optimally--especially if I'm trying to do anything other than whip 1 pop for overflow when a build has 1 turn left, which is ineffectual if you've hit the happiness cap in a city. So I often find myself having to either insert a more expensive (and unneeded) build before the one I really want, or letting the city run with a useless citizen for several turns--in which case I again often miss my optimal whip window, because I suck at math and micromanagement. Vicious cycle.

As the game goes on I find my economy really requires that I work cottages (as well as production tiles) more than whipping--so if I lack ways to lift the happiness cap, I prefer to rely on slowing growth or stagnation. I often put cottages on a mix of flood plains and grasslands so that if I want to slow or stagnate a city's growth I have flexible tile assignments to do so without impacting my economy too negatively.

Maybe it's not optimal, but it works for me. Usually. So it's the way I've been playing, instinctively and habitually, but in this case it is not taking into account the early, high happiness bars I have in my cities, which I'm not taking advantage of because I'm just not used to it. In fact it's surprising the hell out of me. Point taken, though, I'll do that in the next round.

 

[Sisiutil]

Militarily, I'd focus on cats and spears, since cats are an excellent all-purpose weapon and both of your major rivals have horses, which the AI seems to have a real fetish for.

I'll do that, but don't forget War Elephants also get a bonus versus mounted, and I have a monopoly on those suckers.

 

[patagonia]

I'll do that, but don't forget War Elephants also get a bonus versus mounted, and I have a monopoly on those suckers.

I did forget about the heffalumps. They're definitely a better option than spears.

Bearing that in mind, Ragnar will give you HBR and all his gold for CoL. Probably worth doing since in Warlords, HBR lets you build stables, which means heffalumps with 5XP off the production line

 

[Melon Head]

You aversion to going near/over health and happiness limits is, I think, rather common around here, and I think that people are too afraid of doing so.

To be honest, I don't think there's ever a categorical reason to work a grasslands over a flood plains. Certainly there are situations where that is preferabe (at happy cap, working a cottaged grassland is better than a farmed flood plains), but in general the flood plains is better. What's the difference between the two? A flood plains always has +1 , and often +1 . So, I suppose that there are situations where you think you don't want the food. (you're at the happy limit and don't want to go over, so you slow growth) But lets look at those in specific; turns out there's actually no advantage to working a cottaged grassland over a cottaged flood plains.

The real danger in going over the happiness cap is not that you have an unhappy citizen. Those days ended with Civ 3 (where a single extra unhappy citizen destroyed all the productivity). Rather, it is the opportunity cost of working a more productive tile/using a specialist instead of gathering food. This is why you might stop working a farmed flood plains to work a grassland cottage, or gold, or iron, or whatever. But when you are working a cottaged flood plains, you are getting the same benefits for no disadvantage. And being pushed over the happiness limit simply does not hurt you.

Indeed, having an extra unhappy citizen is better than being at the happy cap with only 1 food to go before you grow, or somewhere in that last pop. Why? If you ever increase your happy limit, you instantly have an extra citizen available for work. If you ever need a building or unit asap, you have 30 hammers just waiting for use. It's like having a pre-chopped forest available all the time, and the only downside is that you're working a food tile rather than another tile. Choosing between flood plains and grasslands, that's not an issue.

Another advantage to working the cottaged flood plains rather than the cottaged grasslands is that the cottage will grow significantly faster if you're working it constantly, rather than switching between a farmed flood plains and a cottaged grassland when you're at the happy cap.

Going above the unhealthiness cap is even less worrisome. Basically, you lose one food for every extra you have. This basically means for each extra unhealthiness point you have, it's as if you've turned a flood plains into a grassland. That's why I tend to disagree when people worry about the health implications of growing on flood plains. It doesn't matter because the flood plains make enough food to counter-act the food lost to . This means that above the health cap, each new flood plains within your city limits gives 2.5 food, rather than 3 normally, or 2 for a grassland. Again, flood plains are simply better than grasslands. That's not to say it's not a good idea to split flood plains between two cities; that's a good idea so more can be worked earlier, but don't do so because you're worried about issues.

Going above the happy limit can be particularly nice for whipping; according to the old whipping advocates, each is worth 3 . While I think it's a little less than that, particularly since you can't always whip every 10 turns, and there are other issues to consider...it's still an interesting point. For instance, lets compare working a farmed plains to a farmed grasslands at the happy limit. You might think the farmed plains is better. It slows growth down, and gives you an extra hammer per turn. On the other hand, the farmed grassland gives you +1 per turn. So lets say that it will take you, 20 turns to grow at a +1 surplus. You grow, have an extra pop, and whip for 30 hammers. Then you have 10 turns of unhappiness, where one of your old citizens is not working. At the end of that time, you're back to where you started happiness-wise, and got the same 30 hammers you would have gotten working the farmed plains tile. So, if it'll take you less than 20 turns to grow at +1 , then it might be worth getting the food. If you can get more than +1 food for each production sacrificed (working a plains as opposed to a flood plains), there might be more advantage to the food. This isn't always the case, sure, as there might be commerce in the plains square, or you could use a specialist, but it's food for thought. Whipping more than 1 pop also improves efficiency (as it tends to do), and being over the happiness limit means you're larger, and can therefore whip more pop. Remember you can only whip half your current pop, and that calculation doesn't care whether it's happy or unhappy.

Anyways, that's mostly mumbling. Basically I think people worry a bit more about the caps than they should, and you ought to be willing to go over them if you have a decent reason to, or if avoiding going over isn't worth it.

 

[VoiceOfUnreason]

I hear ya, but the sad truth is that I suck at micromanagement and I hate doing it and math when I'm just trying to relax and play a game. if I lack ways to lift the happiness cap, I prefer to rely on slowing growth or stagnation. I often put cottages on a mix of flood plains and grasslands so that if I want to slow or stagnate a city's growth I have flexible tile assignments to do so without impacting my economy too negatively

OK - you need to get over this. Fundamental rule: Always work your best tiles.

Trading food for commerce, or food for hammers, is sometimes a legitimate play. Trading food for less food is just broken.

If there's an exception to this (and I don't think that there is), it comes from the fact that improving grasslands is faster than improving floodplains. But that sort of micromanagement you can safely ignore.

 

[drkodos]

Always work your best tiles.

This is axiomatic and much better advice than to never enter a land war in Asia.

 

[Vikciukas]

The post from Melon Head is very insightfull. I have cought myself in being affraid to grow over happiness level despite sometimes it is good to. Anyway, this subject might even qualify for having its own thread and I wanted to open one for some time, but I am simply too lazy to form thesis on a game

Maybe some other, more dedicated players could open such discussion. For now, I think we can say for sure that sometimes it is beneficial to grow over happiness cap. Good job for bringing this up, Melon Head

 

[carl corey]

I hope you don't mind this, Sisiutil, but for all those that are having problems with happiness/health caps we're currently having a challenge game in which the goal is to have the 5 largest possible cities by 1200AD: Super Size Me!. Feel free to stop by.

Back to your regular game now.

 

[UncleJJ]

I hear ya, but the sad truth is that I suck at micromanagement and I hate doing it and math when I'm just trying to relax and play a game. So while I use the whip extensively, I suck at using it optimally--especially if I'm trying to do anything other than whip 1 pop for overflow when a build has 1 turn left, which is ineffectual if you've hit the happiness cap in a city. So I often find myself having to either insert a more expensive (and unneeded) build before the one I really want, or letting the city run with a useless citizen for several turns--in which case I again often miss my optimal whip window, because I suck at math and micromanagement. Vicious cycle.

I sympathise with you You should play these games as you want to play them in a way that you find enjoyable. But you need to understand (and I suspect you do) that many people who read your threads and especially those that download your savegames will have very different playstyles and will be critical. I think perhaps for your next ALC you should tell your readers that you will be paying more attention to military and diplomacy and less to micromanagement if that is your intention.

If I were to characterise your playstyle and ability, (please forgive my presumption, but I do it for rhetorical purposes ) I'd say that currently your military ability is well able to deal with Monarch difficulty, your awareness of global strategy and diplomatic ability is capable of dealing with Emperor level but your managament of economic matters and especially food, growth and slavery is only fit for Prince level It is obvious that micro-managing cities has little interest for you and that is why you undervalue that aspect of the game ... but hey that is your right. But it is that which is stopping you from playing the game at a higher level and holding you back. Of course you should play at the level that suits your playstyle since the main purpose of this game is entertainment. I enjoy your games (been a fan since ALC 6) and still learn many things but I don't expect to learn much from your economic management

Maybe it's not optimal, but it works for me. Usually. So it's the way I've been playing, instinctively and habitually, but in this case it is not taking into account the early, high happiness bars I have in my cities, which I'm not taking advantage of because I'm just not used to it. In fact it's surprising the hell out of me. Point taken, though, I'll do that in the next round.

Hmmm... I'm not convinced by this. You already had a religion and ivory and then acquired a gold resource by culture, a lucky silver popped on a hill, then you traded for Calender (375 AD) and Monarchy (640 AD for wine and HR). I would expect the happiness cap shoot up from circa 6 to 12, it always happens around this time. It is always a period of rapid pop growth in my games, and I anticipate the expansion, although to be fair you only just picked up Monarchy this turn.

Keep playing the way that makes the game fun for you Sisiutil and thanks for entertaining us.

 

[Thomas G.]

Well it will be an exciting next turnset. If left in peace for the buildup, you will soon be golden. Go max growth, work farm where you can and get those size 10 cities. No whipping for next 30 turns. Unless attacked, and pray you don't, not because you will lose, but because it will kill your game development-wise. At least compared to other continent.

Next turnset will be easy enough, just stay on the good side of your friendly neighbourhood warmongers, and let your people multiply in peace.


P.S a perfectly played game would be terribly boring no wouldn't it. How would we learn from that?

 

[UncleJJ]

You aversion to going near/over health and happiness limits is, I think, rather common around here, and I think that people are too afraid of doing so.

Correct, much of the fear of unhappiness comes from later in the game when war weariness (big battles with lots of units attacked and killed) and motherland unhappiness impact and can be difficult to deal with (see aelf's current game). At this stage of the game (small battles) and in core cities unhappiness is very easy to deal with, especially using HR and cheap units like archers and chariots. I often shuffle units between cities to meet temporary happiness needs.

To be honest, I don't think there's ever a categorical reason to work a grasslands over a flood plains. Certainly there are situations where that is preferabe (at happy cap, working a cottaged grassland is better than a farmed flood plains), but in general the flood plains is better. What's the difference between the two? A flood plains always has +1 , and often +1 . So, I suppose that there are situations where you think you don't want the food. (you're at the happy limit and don't want to go over, so you slow growth) But lets look at those in specific; turns out there's actually no advantage to working a cottaged grassland over a cottaged flood plains.

I agree with much of this and most of what has not been quoted. You clearly have a good appreciation of the game.

Personally, I like to farm at least some floodplains to provide a food surplus and then run the cottages on plains. In the current game in Dehli I would farm the remaining 2 floodplains and then support cottages on the 4 plains, working those whenever possible but whipping them away if needed. I would always work the pig, the 2 floodplain farms and 2 floodplain cottages for a food surplus of 12 from these 5 tiles and the city tile. That "food engine" drives the growth of the city and allows a variety of other tiles to be worked in conjunction with effectively converting food to hammers with slavery.

The other tiles in Delhi can be considered the working medium that the "food engine" uses. The grassland cottage and 3 coastal tiles (with lighthouse) provide a food neutral high commerce return. The ivory and grassland cottages give a good mix of hammers and commerce (once cottages are worked up) for a small food loss.

The plains hill and priest specialists are food sinks providing useful outputs for a high food cost, they can be thought of as the brakes on growth and consequently are worked when the city is at or near its happiness cap and should never be worked when it wants to grow fast. They are normally the victims of slavery allowing other tiles to help the city recover faster.

The unimproved forest squares are the least useful and should be the last to be worked if at all, although occasionally the grassland forest can help with growth.

Going above the happy limit can be particularly nice for whipping; according to the old whipping advocates, each is worth 3 .

As an old whipping advocate, I can say that such conversation ratios are possible in Warlords (and don't depend on the whipping bug still in Vanilla) but it depends on whether we are talking about base hammers or output hammers (with multipliers). At a city size of 5 slavery can convert food to base hammers at a ratio of 2 (15 food for 30 hammers). If OR is running (+25%) and a forge (+25%) present then the output ratio is 1 food to 3 hammers. A larger city size 10 can convert food to base hammers at a ratio of 1:1.5 using slavery, and again if it was the capital running Bureaucracy with the other 2 mutilpliers, the output ratio could be 1 to 3 . With larger multipliers such as factory, power and even Ironworks higher ratios are possible, at least theoretically.

OK - you need to get over this. Fundamental rule: Always work your best tiles.

Trading food for commerce, or food for hammers, is sometimes a legitimate play. Trading food for less food is just broken.

If there's an exception to this (and I don't think that there is), it comes from the fact that improving grasslands is faster than improving floodplains. But that sort of micromanagement you can safely ignore.

Earlier, you were a little harsh in your criticism of Sisiutil in my opinion, but I agree with all you've said here. Work your best tiles and food is generally more important than the other resources. I'd say that all tiles giving 3 or more food (including unimproved floodplains) should always be worked at this stage of the game.