ALC Game 19 Pre-Game Thread: Playing as Gilgamesh

[Elandal]

You're missing a case of melee with bonuses, Belisar.
Eg. swordsman with C1 + Shock + 3 turns of fortify (=+15%). This would give the sword +50%.

Axe vs. sword+50% = 5/6 -> ratio 0.833
Vulture vs sword+50% = 6/7.5 -> ratio 0.800
-> axe/vulture ratio 1.04 (same as axe vs. vulture)

In most cases of vs. melee, axe is better. In some cases vulture reaches axe. This all depends on how much bonuses are applied - you just happened to pick the case that is best possible for vulture

I think with base strength of 6 Vulture would need +35% or so against melee to be exactly as good as axe in majority of cases (again fringe cases could lead to vulture being better even).

 

[Thyrwyn]

But the Vulture is much better in two important cases:
1) The Vulture is a much better City Raider than an Axeman;
2) The Vulture defends against Mounted Units (see Chariots) better than an Axeman.

 

[madscientist]

One observation I noticed with BTS 3.13, the AIs tech alot faster than 3.03 with solvers unofficial patch. Something to consider, Gilgamesh's emperor AI tech speed is gonna be different than ISabella II's AI tech speed.

 

[Elandal]

Indeed, Vulture is better oriented towards city raider tasks where axe is better counter. Vulture won't lose much to sword when it comes to city attacks - sword has only the +10% innate city attack bonus compared to Vulture's +25% vs melee.

 

[Scaphism]

Maybe I subconsciously recalled the ALC order but last week I played out a few Gilgamesh starts.

I haven't played a full game as Gilgamesh but just from playing out the start, he has a lot of excellent early game options. Which is great - don't get me wrong. But too many option can be a bit overwhelming. I doubt it will be a problem, your play is pretty strong now and the ALC crowd will keep you in line if you wander too far off the path, but it's something to keep in mind.

Creative is clearly the stronger trait in the early game. There are a lot of projects clamoring for hammers and not spending them on monuments or missionaries is crucial. Pushing your borders out further also helps get your troops closer to the front line before actually declaring war.

Gil can either peacefully REX, or aggressively REX, and it's great to have that flexibility. The trap you want to avoid is building up your cities too much. You can should be able to grab your first and maybe second city sites quickly, but don't stop there. I think the people advocating pushing your economy to the brink are onto the right path with Gil.
You can get close to collapse and definitely dig your way out. Obviously watch out and don't expand far beyond your means, but the safety net is much bigger than you may be used too.
You can whip cheap libraries or more expensive courthouses, and both are great tools for getting your economy humming.

Pottery is a good early priority - I was lucky to pop it from an early hut in 2 of the games I played. I found that copper wasn't nearby in any of the games I played, but a few cottages made getting Iron Working a definite possibility before I founded city 3 in a normal timeframe.

Pray for farmable resources, not fish or animals. Having to research fishing can kind of screw up the early game. You really want to put early hammers into workers - for mining, chopping, farming, roading, and cottaging. Researching Mining->BW isn't that bad, but Fishing->Mining->BW seems much longer. At least you have the Wheel already to hook up resources but it's not usually a problem to grab it after you discover where the hidden resources are.

Ziggurats: I know I was tempted to research and build them ultra-early, just because I could, but I think that was a mistake. A Ziggurat is 9/10ths of a settler.
You don't need to research Myst->Med/Poly->Priesthood early. It's a quick path, particularly if you grab Pottery early and have a few cottages. I think, more importantly, it gives you the flexibility to pursue Iron Working early if you don't have copper. This works even better if you start in/near the jungle. You'll want workers to clear jungle/build cottages and to get your cities up and running.

Honestly I'm not sure what I would do if I started with Stone/Marble nearby. So many hammers and worker turns are already accounted for before you even get started.

I've seen a few topics about Horizontal vs Vertical expansion recently - I think Gilgamesh is the essense of horizontal expansion. If you have farmable resources then your tech needs are basically nil, so value production and food above all else. If you have a great commerce spot nearby that's terrific, and don't ignore it, but you don't need to get a tech lead to have an edge over the AI - Creative plus the Vulture and Ziggurant effectively give you a tech and production edge, coming earlier and costing fewer hammers.
None of that is earthshaking, I just wanted to share so you don't fall into the trap I did and build up my first three cities early without pushing my expansion out.

You are Gilgamesh, King of all you survey! Don't let another civ beat you to whatever you want, or if they do, have your Vultures rip it from their corpses. Or your spies steal it from them without them even realizing what's happened.

 

[Belisar]

You're missing a case of melee with bonuses, Belisar.
Eg. swordsman with C1 + Shock + 3 turns of fortify (=+15%). This would give the sword +50%.

Axe vs. sword+50% = 5/6 -> ratio 0.833
Vulture vs sword+50% = 6/7.5 -> ratio 0.800
-> axe/vulture ratio 1.04 (same as axe vs. vulture)

You can get additional bonuses for an axe as well as a vulture and also for the units they are up against.

 

[Elandal]

Yes, Belisar. Exactly what I meant. My example certainly was a bad one - I just wanted to show one where axe again is better against melee. I believe that will be the case always when the net modifier is zero or positive in the opponent of axe/vulture. Meaning: Axe is better against melee than vulture, in many or most cases in my rough guess but I haven't bothered to consider all possible cases.

 

[Gooblah]

Okay, ALL.

It appears the consensus is a espionage-intensive game coupled with early conquest to max out the benefits of Gilgamesh's UU and UB.
Next, Map seems to be the next issue.
I haven't been tracking the BTS maps, but hasn't Sisutil been using Fractal?
If so, it should be kept that way. Thus, we might see what could happen to an isolated Sumer. Also, random landmasses are very interesting.
As for Options:
No Tech Brokering
Assuming this means no tech trading, I suggest this is turned off.
Tech trading is a huge part of the Civ experience, and turning it off doesn't really teach much, since techs are a vital part of diplomacy. Even though tech trading may make the game 'easier', it still is somewhat essential. Plus, new players checkin' out the ALCs may not learn as much.
Aggressive AI
I guess this would work. The Monarch and above AI is pretty aggressive already, so not to much of a difference. I tried it today and found out all the AIs have one less starting diplomacy (Gandhi is Cautious, Isabella is Annoyed).

I think i've hit on the major points of this area of gameplay. Let me know if I missed anything and feel free to comment!

 

[Scarredroman]

Gilgamesh is not going to play with axes in this ALC. Not being as vulnerable to chariots is a big plus over axes and being as strong as swords lessons the need for iron as the resource or the tech as a priority.

There's another thread claiming you can found 6 cities in 24 turns. Now Gilgamesh is a ruler I think you could try to do that with because his Ziggurat comes along so early. I'd like to see Sisiutil try.

 

[LiberiGlacialis]

Gilgamesh is not going to play with axes in this ALC. Not being as vulnerable to chariots is a big plus over axes and being as strong as swords lessons the need for iron as the resource or the tech as a priority.

There's another thread claiming you can found 6 cities in 24 turns. Now Gilgamesh is a ruler I think you could try to do that with because his Ziggurat comes along so early. I'd like to see Sisiutil try.

That sounds like a Joao stunt. Or is that up and running cities?

 

[KMadCandy]

As for Options:
No Tech Brokering
Assuming this means no tech trading, I suggest this is turned off.
Tech trading is a huge part of the Civ experience, and turning it off doesn't really teach much, since techs are a vital part of diplomacy. Even though tech trading may make the game 'easier', it still is somewhat essential. Plus, new players checkin' out the ALCs may not learn as much.

no tech trading means nobody can trade techs at all (stealing is still an option). no tech brokering means that you can trade only techs that you researched yourself, not those you got in trade. you can "safely" trade/sell techs to the AI knowing they can't hand it around to everybody else. the AI is programmed to consider this factor and they won't take trades at times that they consider the "i can trade this" benefit better than "i can get this from somebody else's beakers".

i haven't tried either but i assume that makes a big difference.

one "is this a bug or a feature" mystery is that you can trade techs that you stole from another player and never researched yourself. if this game has a heavy emphasis on spies to leverage zigs, that probably would have a bigger impact than in a "normal" game.

i'm curious to watch this game option in action, but like you i'm hesitant about the showcase being an ALC. i'm sure there's more than one SG that used the option. following traditional SGs isn't usually as fun as taking part in the ALCs, but i love that part of the intent of ALCs is to learn, and that we can contribute/ask questions without feeling like an intruder in a team's thread.

 

[Andvare]

Okay, ALL.

No Tech Brokering
Assuming this means no tech trading, I suggest this is turned off.

It just means that you, or the AI, can't trade techs that wasn't researched. Meaning that if anyone traded for, say, iron working, they can't trade it. No third party tech trading.
It makes it easier to keep a tech monopoly, and, in my limited experience, is more of a hamper for the AI than the player.

Edit: Curses! Beaten to the quote by a giggling permanoob!

 

[Validator]

The question of whether axemen or vultures are better against melee is complicated. As Elandal pointed out other bonuses that are applicable to a particular battle will change the odds that the two units would face.

Consider three cases where the axe/vulture is defending against a sword:

Case 1: No promos and no defensive bonus
Axe: 6 vs. 7.5 (5 + 50%)
Vulture: 6 vs. 7.5 (6 + 25%)
The two perform equally.

Case 2: Sword has Combat1 and Shock promos; no promos or defensive bonus for the defender
Axe: 6.6 vs. 6.25 (5 + 25%)
Vulture: 6.6 vs. 6 (6 + 0%)
The axe has better odds.

Case 3: No promos; 50% defensive bonus
Axe: 6 vs 10 (5 + 100%)
Vulture: 6 vs 10.5 (6 + 75%)
The vulture has better odds.

Which one performs better will depend on the particular battle, but generally speaking there shouldn't be much difference in their performance against melee. Of course the vulture will definitely do better against all non-melee.

I just wanted to show one where axe again is better against melee. I believe that will be the case always when the net modifier is zero or positive in the opponent of axe/vulture.

That's what I originally thought, but when you look at the actual numbers the vulture does better whenever either attacker or defender has a much higher modifier than the unit they're fighting. Regarding the last case I detailed above it seems clear that as the defensive bonus increases the vulture would gain a greater advantage over the axe. What's not intuitive is that if the sword has a much greater bonus the vulture would still do better. Consider these cases where a sword is attacking a city defended by a vulture/axe with no defensive modifiers available:

Case 4: CR1 Sword
Axe: 6 vs 6 (5 + 20%)
Vulture 6 vs 5.714(6 - 5% or 6/1.05)

Case 5: CR2 Sword
Axe: 6 vs 4.762(5 - 5% or 5/1.05)
Vulture 6 vs 4.615(6 - 30% or 6/1.3)

Case 6: CR3 Sword
Axe: 6 vs 3.704(5 - 35% or 5/1.35)
Vulture 6 vs 3.75(6 - 60% or 6/1.60)

Case 7: Combat1, Shock, CR3 Sword
Axe: 6.6 vs 3.125(5 - 60% or 5/1.6)
Vulture 6.6 vs 3.243(6 - 85% or 6/1.85)

As the sword gets better the vulture does better relative to the axe. Not what I expected.

 

[Elandal]

B]No Tech Brokering[/B] doesn't strictly limit trading to techs not researched. It disallows trading of techs you have received in trade (be that fair or unfair, asking nicely or demanding, taking in peace or giving something more material in return).
What you can thus trade with NTB turned on:
- Techs researched self
- Techs stolen via espionage
- Techs found from huts
- Techs received by Oracle or Liberalism
- Techs received by lightbulbing
- any other means that do not acquire the tech from another player (AI) via trade screen

 

[Elandal]

@Validator
Not what I expected either. I guess I'll have to work out how the combat really works - probably I'll find some neat curve that has some disjoint at zero.

 

[Morgawr]

It makes it easier to keep a tech monopoly, and, in my limited experience, is more of a hamper for the AI than the player.

No Tech Brokering is actually a hamper to the human player, especially those that trade techs heavily, because:

- When you discover a tech and trade it for new techs, you cannot then broker away those new techs to another AI to leap ahead in the tech tree. Basically, you cannot exploit situations in which two AI's are not trading their techs with each other by doing the buy/sell for them and getting ahead. Note that this happens way too common with the default trading option because most AI's have tons of excuses not to trade (attitude, WFYABTA, % known etc.) and a heavy-trading human is essentially like Mansa and takes unfair advantage of this.

- You cannot sell techs to the AI that the AI has partially researched and make easy money. The AI won't accept techs they have started researching because once they buy the tech they cannot trade it away. Same goes for the human player too of course, it forces you to think strategically about buying/trading for techs that you already started researching.

- You cannot always count on acquiring a tech through trading (even when it's well-spread) because it is common that your main rival who hates you will have discovered it first and traded it to his friends, but the friends cannot trade it to you so you have to research it yourself or wait for others to research it.

Finally, regardless of whether people think it's an advantage or disadvantage to the human player, no tech brokering leads to much more diversified tech inventories across players, which in my opinion makes the game more competitive.

 

[Thyrwyn]

I, personally, prefer to play with No Tech Brokering on. I find that trading opportunities or the techs I need are much rarer. Finding markets for your monopoly tech is as easy as ever - the pickings are much, much slimmer.

Diplomacy becomes a much bigger factor: you were hoping to trade for Code of Laws? Turns out Izzy is the only rival that actually researched it, and she happens to follow another faith. . .

The popular strategy of trading for filler techs is a little riskier.

This actually leads into Gilgamesh and an Espionage-heavy game quite well: with this option, the earlier you can find out what your friends are researching (so you know what you can trade for later) is very important.

 

[VoiceOfUnreason]

Case 7: Combat1, Shock, CR3 Sword
Axe: 6.6 vs 3.125(5 - 60% or 5/1.6)
Vulture 6.6 vs 3.243(6 - 85% or 6/1.85)

As the sword gets better the vulture does better relative to the axe. Not what I expected.

Better, yes. But at that part of the curve I don't think it matters very much. Even if the difference caught a jump point, at that scale the jump is going to be small.

 

[Belisar]

Here is a quick graph to illustrate additional bonuses.

Spoiler :

Purple is vulture, blue axe.
x is the defense bonus of the sword, negative means bonus for the axe/vulture.
Y is the ratio axe or vulture versus sword.
At x=0 both perform equal, for high defense bonuses (more than 75%) the vulture is better,
if the axe/vulture gets a bonus (negative x) the vulture profits more.
In the middle range (0-75% bonus for the sword) the axe performs better.

 

[Bursk]

Finally, regardless of whether people think it's an advantage or disadvantage to the human player, no tech brokering leads to much more diversified tech inventories across players, which in my opinion makes the game more competitive.

Yes, that's it! It also makes each game different from the last. Hurrah!