ALC Game 16: Persia/Cyrus

[Whitefire]

Sorry for derailing your thread further Sis, but people won't let up.

The question of "ethics" that continues to arise strikes me as off the mark.

I tried to avoid this, but apparently y'all keep getting offended, and make personally attacks in the process. What amuses me the most is that Sis has been the most reasonable one in this thread, since (I'm assuming) that he understood from the start his actions could be construed as cheating. I consider any use of the World Builder as cheating. You are gaining access to information (the most valuable resource in Civ) that you shouldn't normally receive. Even if you limit it to the availability of neighbors (i.e. not isolated) and horses, that is still, by my definition, cheating. I will continue to consider such actions as cheating - although I will not voice that any longer since I now understand the intent of these threads - and y'all need to lay off before I really decide to tear you a new one about social responsibility and group think .

 

[scooter]

Sorry for derailing your thread further Sis, but people won't let up.

I tried to avoid this, but apparently y'all keep getting offended, and make personally attacks in the process. What amuses me the most is that Sis has been the most reasonable one in this thread, since (I'm assuming) that he understood from the start his actions could be construed as cheating. I consider any use of the World Builder as cheating. You are gaining access to information (the most valuable resource in Civ) that you shouldn't normally receive. Even if you limit it to the availability of neighbors (i.e. not isolated) and horses, that is still, by my definition, cheating. I will continue to consider such actions as cheating - although I will not voice that any longer since I now understand the intent of these threads - and y'all need to lay off before I really decide to tear you a new one about social responsibility and group think .

I agree, let's just put this thing to rest and agree to disagree, so sit back and enjoy the show.

 

[Sisiutil]

Round 1: 4000 BC to 3970 BC

A round consisting of a single turn! Is that a first for the ALCs?

At any rate, as I mentioned, I decided to do just a wee bit of exploring, post the results, and then decide upon where to start. I'm growing rather fond of doing this lately. In a couple of my recent off-line games, the RNG placed a gold mine in what would have been the capital's third ring. Well, I'm sure we all know how powerful a gold mine for the capital can be, so I moved to claim it.

Not that I was lucky enough to find gold this time around, but I did reveal some more tiles that will give us food for thought. There's a pun in there that's fully intended.

First off, the Scout. I moved him to that grassland hill to the northwest:

This is what he revealed:

So, a Calendar-enabled happy resource and a goody hut. The silk would require a second city or the starting position's 4th border pop to claim it. Is that a reasonable possibility by the time Calendar comes along?

I decided to have the Settler reveal all the tiles in the starting position's fat cross, so I moved move him 1 E:

And then 1 SW onto the hill:

So here's what that revealed:

A very good AH food source, not to mention another river, some hills and forests, and another tribal village. We can also now tell that I'm in the southern hemisphere, as indicated by that tundra to the south. We also now know that if I'd settled 1 NW as I'd initially suggested, I would have missed out on the piggies.

I decided that if I didn't move the Scout again, we'd spend 5 pages debating that, so I took it upon myself to go to the next turn and move him. I didn't pop the hut; I can do that on the next turn, and remember that you have to have at least 1 city founded before a hut will pop for a technology. Instead, I decided to move him 1W and then 1SW to reveal more of what could be in the capital's fat cross:

Interesting! Another Animal Husbandry resource, and notice how both of them are on grassland for maximum food output. Of course, I can't claim them both with the same city, but this bodes well for a 2nd or 3rd city location. A plains hill too, for production. There's also yet another river to the southwest.

I have not moved the Settler on this turn. One of you requested a look at the blue circles, indicating the AI's city site suggestions, so here they are:

The one near the sheep and corn is understandable, but it forsakes fresh water, so I'm inclined away from it. The interesting one is that circle by the coast. Many posters on this board insist that these circles are based purely on the visible tiles and not on any hidden ones, but that's an awfully curious place for a city unless there's seafood over there. Mind you, Cyrus doesn't start with Fishing, so I'm not inclined to pursue a coastal start either.

Based on what I see, I think there are two possible sites for the capital, both of which can be founded on this the second turn. One is the initial start on the riverside plains tile, which as you can see is the 3rd suggested blue circle site. The other is 1W of that spot (1NW of the Settler's current position) on the grassland riverside tile. This city would still claim both the corn and the pigs, and it trades one coastal tile for a plains hill. If there is seafood on the east coast, this city site would leave room for a half-decent coastal city over there. If there's a hidden resource in those three eastern coastal tiles, the 3rd border pop will claim it.

The downside is that this site is on what would have been a 3F grassland tile with irrigation, trading it for the 2F 1H plains tile where I started. A loss for either a specialist economy or a cottage economy. It also runs the risk of a resource appearing smack dab in the city itself, which connects it immediately, but sacrifices most of the production benefit I'd gain from horses, iron, or copper should it appear there. We also don't yet know what would be in this site's 3 SW tiles. If we want to know that before we settle, we'll have to wait one more turn to found the capital, since I'd have to move the Settler 1 NW and then 1 SW to reveal all those tiles.

Of course, some of you might have other ideas on where the capital should go, and/or other pros and cons on the two sites I've indicated that I've overlooked. I look forward to hearing them.

 

[TRJS]

I agree with you on the 1NW site as it will boost the capitals prodction. This boost will be very handy for early war, which I understand is your intention.

 

[tazpn314]

1 vote for the river grassland 1 NW of current settler position. We have at least 3 hills for mining hammers. We do probably have a hidden resource nearby based on the lack of cross resources but I agree we probably have seafood based on the circle and we can still get a decent coastal on that.

 

[Whitefire]

Oh man, you suck big time for this second post Sis.

Settling in place not so hot because of the blue circles. There is a very good chance that you will set your capital on a Bronze/Iron/Coal/etc. resource. While my gut syays to settle on this turn, other things suggest not to. Settling 1NW-1N would definitely help the SE that you are shooting for. However, settling 2W Isn't a bad idea since the circles would indicate at least one food resource.

Anything that requires more than 1 turn delay is a questionable risk, IMO. Although others will likely have opinions.

 

[scooter]

Wow this is a tough decision, I just can't imagine settling one tile off the coast for a capital... I generally try to never settle one tile off the coast unless something bizarre happens, but I don't know on this one...

 

[Hold The Onion]

I'm voting for the starting location. I'm not opposed to the others, I'm just going on record as chosing the starting spot.

 

[gallego]

[It also runs the risk of a resource appearing smack dab in the city itself, which connects it immediately, but sacrifices most of the production benefit I'd gain from horses, iron, or copper should it appear there.

Can't that happen regardless, even on the starting square? I've had it happen to me several times recently.

 

[scooter]

Can't that happen regardless, even on the starting square? I've had it happen to me several times recently.

Edit: I was wrong, ignore this post

 

[Welnic]

The blue circles are based on resources that you can see, regardless of whether they are hidden or not. At the moment you can't see iron, copper, or horses, so those don't affect the blue circles. But the blue circle at the start was affected by the pigs even before you could see them. As you discover new terrain the circles will not move, but discovering techs that let you see new resources will move circles around.

 

[ratrangerm]

I'll add my name to the list of people who say Sisiutil should play the map.

I freely admit to regenerating maps if I don't like the starting location or restarting a game very early if I don't have something that's important to whatever strategy I'm trying to implement.

While it's true there is the "challenge" part to consider, I don't think it hurts to know if it's an isolated start or not, plus we do want to highlight the UU and such. I know Sisiutil played a couple of ALCs in which he didn't do enough to highlight certain traits of a civ and, although he won, he was disappointed he didn't get to demonstrate the trait.

Only thing I would object to Sisiutil knowing about in advance is who his rivals are... and that's after I suggested to him maybe playing against a set group of other AI opponents, and he was against it because he wanted to be surprised.

 

[KMadCandy]

Nope, that's part of why when in doubt the starting spot is usually the safest route, because it's guaranteed to never be the spot where a resource pops, and it's also guaranteed to have a certain number of resources in the fat cross (I don't know the number), so when you see little to no resources in your capitals fat cross, that often means you've got an early strategic resource like iron, copper, or horses.

not true. as sure as isabella's a fanatic and monty's a psycho, i've started directly on top of metals, and i've had opponents start directly on top of horses. not often, but it's happened. if you are "guaranteed to have a certain number of resources", i'm quite certain that the number varies by difficulty level, and that it has some odd method of considering flood plains as resources, since if you have a lot of them, you don't get as many resource-flag type resources.

note: i do swap back and forth between playing vanilla and warlords, both have current patches. if your information is correct, it may be something that they changed in warlords but never did change in vanilla? because i can't tell you which version i've seen it happen in, but i promise you i've seen it happen, more than once, in the last two months.

i had a case last week were i settled exactly where i started. i did have resources in my BFC, four seafood i think it was. the funny thing was, i got one strategic resource nearby much later, oil. but it wasn't quite in the fat cross, it was one tile too far north to be in the city radius, up in the former jungle . didn't matter, it was well within my culture by the time i had SciM, but i found it amusing. "hey, i settled exactly where you started me, i feel kind of ripped off!"

anyway...

because in my experience settling where you start is no guarantee that you won't settle on top of something, and for other reasons, i'm in favor of starting 1NW from where we are, on the grassland. swapping a lighthouse-less coastal tile for the plains hill is a GREAT deal. and not blocking those three east coast tiles for a potential future fishing village if we want one could turn out to be a reallllllllllly good idea, depending on what's there. if we settle on the initial site, the nearest coastal site over there we could settle is where the hut is, by the tundra. sure, we could get any seafood resources in our culture boundaries, but i'd rather have a city to get the commerce and stuff, eventually. as far as the potential downside of moving away from a resource we'd otherwise get, as you pointed out..."If there's a hidden resource in those three eastern coastal tiles, the 3rd border pop will claim it." so that's taken care of. if it's a tile we want to work, we can settle a city over there. we have it covered

to me, the production you'll get from the plains hill vs. the useless coast tile with no harbor/lighthouse is a no-brainer, this is your capital after all. and i'm quite obsessive about not blocking future city sites. i wasn't always that way...i've made some rather bad decisions in my day, and now i do my best to avoid those kinds of mistakes. i've also learned to use similar strategic settling to purposefully block off potential sites from my neighbors, but that's another story .

fog-gazing tells me there's plains by the river, not tundra, and the tundra over east looks like it starts further south than the city radius would be if we settle the grassland. i don't know the actual rules about whether we'd see a peak from where the settler or scout is now, if there is a peak in those black tiles where the city would go. if you're nervous about that, you might want to wait the turn and go take a look at the tiles that would be in the radius. but i'd probably go ahead and settle this turn. i'm not very patient by nature .

 

[ratrangerm]

And look at that... I post a remark and discover Sisiutil is already moving forward.

Seriously, I think moving the Settler 1NW and then 1SW to see what else is revealed would be good. Then if everything looks good, settle on the square currently 1NW of where the Settler is now.

I'd say settle on the hill the Settler is on now, but I'm betting a strategic resource is on that hill.

 

[oyzar]

i think the blue reasources indicates a hidden reasource and even if the blue circle isnt affected by that you starting only near corn and pigs seem highly unlikely, maybe there is horses or copper in bfc? . Sersiouly i see no reason whatsoever to waste early turns on wobbling around... Its basically just wasting turns when the comp is actually quite decent at placing your starting settler(cept it doesnt like starting on marble/stone on plains hills for some reason instead start beside them so you have to move on them...). It gives the AI one more turn to hook up copper... That said i would still settle NW as it allow for a coastal city to claim the sea reasource that is likely out there.

 

[Morgrad]

1NW is the way to go, for a couple reasons:

1. Why be greedy? Pigs + Corn and some hills = early unit crankage and some specialists when you can get 'em. Asking for more than that for your first city is one thing, gambling for more than that (losing turns) is just greedy. (Enter Michael Douglas in "Wall Street"......)

2. My completely-unfounded-in-code experience tells me there's seafood near the coastal blue circle, so it leaves room for that city.

3. Even if to the NW the only city worth founding is SugarSheep (which is not a joke about rednecks), with a shared corn tile with the capital, 4 peaks and a desert - it could still make a reasonable cottage-money city that will be able to run at least 8 cottages, a health and a happy, and probably a merchant or two - that one sub-optimal city could pay for your entire civics upkeep for the entire game if you end up running a SE. Of course, if the desert turns out to have oil, then it becomes lubricated sweet sheep, and that's gotta be a joke.... and is that the beginnings of a river I see tucked above those peaks? Sweet, wet, lubricated sheep probably means jail-time for someone........

Don't look a gift horse in the mouth, even if it's a previously verified horse.

For the record, I think the 3-map, outsider picks one concept is nothing short of a fantastic idea for the ALCs. I wouldn't do it in an offline game, but for the ALCs, it's fantastic - not only am I glad you're not re-rolling this map, I hope you continue to do it for the remaining ALCs.

 

[kniteowl]

Darn if it weren't for that peek 2S of the Sheep I'd would of risked settling an Inland no fresh water Capital. I Wouldn't worry about the health from fresh water much because it can be replaced by my UB.

But since the Peek is there, The coastal tile is > then the Peek.

Therefore settling 1 NW of the settler's current position seem to be the best option. I Wouldn't waste my time exploring there, unless you REALLY want to be safe.

If you decide to be safe and move the settler NW, SW, You might as well move the scout 2SW on the 3rd turn and explore further, we could potentially find a better capital site, just in case.

It's up to the RNG Gods whether you settle on top of a Strategic resource, Just make your decisions based on what you can SEE

What's worse?
Settling on a resource?
OR Settling in a Sub-average Capital location?

What would happen if you settled at your initial starting location because you were conservative and figured that there was a resource in the NW of the Settler's current location just to find out there's nothing there? I say just ignore something that too unpredictable and just settle on the best possible location of the best possible information available.

The possible outcomes are

A-There's NO Strategic Resource on the Capital site and we're gained better tiles by moving

B-There's IS a Strategic Resource on a Capital Site but we're gained better tiles by moving.

C-We didn't move and didn't settle on the strategic resource at the cost of weaker tiles.

D-We didn't move and there's NO Strategic Resource on our Predicted location at the cost of weaker tiles.

There's also E Where we settle at our initial location and end up on a Strategic resource, which is the MOST unlikely that I Excluded.

From the Choices A to D, I Prefer A but B for me would be a close Second. I'm not sure how much you'd value those hammers from a worked strategic resource but I think those Hills you've gained by moving should be able to cover the lost hammers. That's my 2 cents.

 

[Bhruic]

The only serious options at this point seem to be N or NW. And I can't see that N offers any real benefit compared to NW, other than using a Plain square instead of Grassland. It doesn't seem worth it to try and guess where resources might appear, it's all a crapshoot at this point. So NW seems like the best option.

Bh

 

[TheArchduke]

In my opinion, go NW with your settler and settle. 2 Food Ressources, possible space for a seafood city to the east and if that isn´t the case, maximal fogbusting against barbs.

 

[Killroyan]

Woohoo, score one for the pigs. I was right about that. But I expected them to be on the left. I say go 1 NW and settle. Going right and maybe getting only 1 sea food resource will hurt you a lot more since you will be loosing valuable turns. You can always check it later.

What I don't like is the fact that tundra already starts down there. This means the emphasis on the scouting has to be up. But the first move should be 1SW and 1SE to get a better view of the surroundings.