ALC Game 20 Pre-Game Thread: Playing as Ragnar

[DrJambo]

@PericlesofAthen

AggAI doesn't effect ability to conduct diplomacy; all it does is make the AI build more units. More units and bigger power ratings can lead to more warring.

I'm a bit inexperienced with regards to archipelago maps, but I can understand the point that playing as Ragnar on an island heavy map could be a little biased. Maybe a snaky continents is indeed the best idea/compromise? AggAI civs do build good fleets however, and in one game I remember Hannibal, Willem and Joao all having 4+ full carriers and multitudes of destroyers and battleships. More than I had that's for sure. Both Willem and Joao have proved to be worthy opponents in watery maps. Joao's traits are particularly suited to REXing.

 

[DarkFyre99]

The Viking UU, the Berserker, is tricker to leverage. Amphibious is a promotion I rarely grant to units; in most games I wait until Marines come along with their automatic Amphibious promotion before I take advantage of it. Berserkers seem to offer a much earlier opportunity to use that promotion.

However, Berserkers (like Macemen, the unit on which they're based) appear at the precise moment in the game when city defenses are at their toughest. Walls and a castle give cities big defense bonuses in the medieval era (made worse if my enemy has built Chichen Itza). But the real kicker is that there's absolutely no way to remove those high city defenses from a water unit in that era. That ability doesn't come along until Chemistry and Frigates.

There's always spies, and the incite revolt mission. That takes down the city defenses for a turn, hopefully long enough to take the city.

 

[Munch]

Wy not play a Medium an small map with snaky continetns

Seconded. Regular "Medium & Small" or "Archipelago" with the 'snaky continents' and 'low sea level' settings. I wouldn't hand-pick the leaders for any available purpose; it would be good to specify at least one Financial AI player, or some criteria like that, but sadly not possible.

Also, I have to say I'm strongly against Aggressive AI. A group of AI players, potentially on mostly separate landmasses, teching slowly and spamming early game units when the volume of water makes war more unlikely than in most situations? And with our humble narrator being Financial of all things. This can only result - if played out intelligently, which I'm sure it will be - in an easy win involving smashing backward civs who have built too many units too early on.

Those are just my negative comments anyway . I'm sure it will be interesting to follow whatever happens. I particularly like the idea of sailing around looking for new, weak cities to plunder. I recently played a Big & Small map with random continent sizes and 'islands' (not tiny islands) thrown in (not separate); it turned out to be archipelago-esque, and I found that when an AI player tries to colonise a small landmass with around 4 cities, they are all defended pretty poorly. This would be the perfect application for Berserkers, and then you could always make the colony independent if it's not close to your motherland.

£0.01

 

[Tyrant Roger]

S says he will try for domination or conquest. How do you win a conquest victory without first achieving the conditions for a domination victory? do you just raise one AI city after another?

 

[r_rolo1]

^^Vassalize everyone and you'll win by conquest. Like vassals land only counts 50% for Dom proposes, it is certainly doable to not hit Dom if S man starts vassalizing and colonizing people

 

[RockTheCazbah87]

I'd be a vote in favour of all the enemies being random. If one of the ones you guys want, (Wilem, Joao II, and Hannibal seem to be the most common) get in through random , then they are there. If not, no big, there will be other civs there. The ALC is to showcase the leader for the round, not the enemies. I want to see what he can do as Ragnar on a water based map with aggressive AI on. So many civs can present a unique challenge to you, so let the RNG decide the enemies this round.

Exactly my point. The games about Raggie, not Willem or Joao.

 

[Detektyw]

I think that many of the posters here are right. Building a lot of unit in the early game efficently eats hammers which are best spent on libraries and groceries on a map like this, especially when at least one AI is financial. If I were S, I would just raise the difficulty level by one and turn AggAI off.

As of strategy, there are several wonders that can enhance financial greatly on this map (not like I'm saying anything new):

Moai Statues (National): +1 - Synergy with general sea tile income
The Colossus (World): +1
The Great Lighthouse (World): +2

 

[Mesousa]

Exactly my point. The games about Raggie, not Willem or Joao.

The ALC games are supposed to be about highlighting the respective leader's abilities. Sisiutil can do that regardless of whether he handpicks the opposing civs or not, it doesn't change anything for how he plays as Ragnar. No one's interested in a game that's too easy though, and since the deck already gets stacked in Ragnar's favor (map type, possibly selecting AggAi too) it wouldn't hurt at all to make sure at least some of the competition are suited to the circumstances too. The most recent ALC is a great example of how strong contenders make the game more interesting and worthwhile.

 

[Welnic]

It does seem to me that the game would be better without the AggAI, since early wars aren't going to be a big factor.

I would be willing to pick the best of three starts using hazy, unknown criteria.

 

[Winston Hughes]

Were you following the Gigamesh game? I wouldn't categorize that as an easy win!

Yep, I was lurking all the way through, and I'd stand by my comment that it was a fairly easy win.

The AI still has terrible problems getting its priorities right when it comes to pursuing victory, so any game in which you can grab 1/3 of the world by the Industrial era (without becoming terminally backwards in tech) should be a pretty straightforward win imo.

Also, it was a fairly tough map played with a weak leader, and, as you acknowledged, you made a couple of pretty serious mistakes (too much anarchy and not leveraging the Pyramids), which I wouldn't expect you to make again.

So, I don't think you're that far off being ready to take on Immortal, and with an overpowered civ/map combo (such as Vikings/Archipeligo or Rome/Pangea) you would probably find Emperor too easy - at least for an ALC.

As it stands, though, I'd agree that snaky continents would be a good choice - and considerably tougher than archipeligo - but I still don't like the idea of knowing for certain that a particular civ is out there before the game begins.

If you want to guarantee some strong opponents, it might then be worth getting Welnic** (or someone*) to select them and roll the map for you.

Any financial civs would be viable choices, and you could specify that at least one out of Willem, Hannibal and Joao must start on a different continent to you (otherwise it would be too easy to neuter them early on). That way it'll still be something of a surprise, and it won't be so easy to mould your strategy in anticipation of meeting specific leaders.

Btw, are you still planning on going for AggAI. I think it would be a much better option on snaky continents than it would on archipeligo. Though, since you're planning on a military victory, it could turn the late-game into warmongering micromanagement hell - great for us to watch, but not necessarily much fun for you to play.

*Anyone but me - I'm looking forward to this one way too much to spoil the surprises

**edit: hehe, speak of the devil...

 

[Airefuego]

Wy not play a Medium an small map with snaky continetns

I agree... here are some examples of that:


Setting: Medium-and-small
Continents Size: Snaky Continents
Islands Size: Islands
Island Overlap: Island Region Separate

Spoiler :

I like these maps because as you can see there are LOTS of islands, but also a few decent-sized snaky landmasses. So sea power will be vital but there will also be slightly more normal tech-rate and warfare than you get in a pure-archipelago map.

This leads to lots of fun as well - if you start on a smaller landmass it's a race to expand off the island. Or if you start on a bigger one, you probably have neighbours... angry ones... !

(All credit for images and the hard work goes to the excellent thread and map guide by Mortac: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=246788 )

 

[Gooblah]

The above example will work well.
Couple things:
1) I like DarkFrye99's idea. Simply bring a Galleon loaded with Spies, and drop it off onto the coast. Then infiltrate each city when you want to attack, and Incite City Revolt. This will eliminate the defensive bonuses. Then assault from the ships with Berserkers. Bring some Seige units though. Once you capture a city, use the Berserkers as normal Maces and the send Spies and Siege to get rid of defense.
2) Aggressive AI gives the AIs an inherent -1 diplomatic modifier. Thus, Gandhi will be Cautious, not pleased, and Monty will be close to Furious. Now, this is in Vanilla. If this is not the case in BTS (haven't tried AggAI in BTS yet) disregard this statement.

 

[Bhruic]

1) I like DarkFrye99's idea. Simply bring a Galleon loaded with Spies, and drop it off onto the coast. Then infiltrate each city when you want to attack, and Incite City Revolt. This will eliminate the defensive bonuses. Then assault from the ships with Berserkers. Bring some Seige units though. Once you capture a city, use the Berserkers as normal Maces and the send Spies and Siege to get rid of defense.

Much better idea - use Caravels. They can enter all borders, and can drop off spies (which also can enter all borders). And spies can't be caught on ships in 3.13 (there's an interesting question... If you have a spy on a ship that's in a city, does it get the "stationary" bonus while it's idling on the ship?). Anyway, the advantage here is that you can have the spy in place before you declare war, allowing you to drop the defenses and then attack immediately.

2) Aggressive AI gives the AIs an inherent -1 diplomatic modifier. Thus, Gandhi will be Cautious, not pleased, and Monty will be close to Furious. Now, this is in Vanilla. If this is not the case in BTS (haven't tried AggAI in BTS yet) disregard this statement.

The modifier was -2, and it was removed in BTS.

Bh

 

[ori]

disregard this statement.

its -2 in Vanilla and Warlords and they commented this out in the code for BtS - so its incorrect in both directions

I'd vote for not preselecting opponents and using some sort of snaking continents just for my 0.02€

Edit: gah Bhruic types faster

 

[Plodder]

I support Winston Hughes' ideas in post #90, just above.

I'm sure Welnic will do a good job of choosing, using "hazy, unknown criteria."

I might learn something by trying to formulate clear criteria. What makes a good map? It depends on context. What would make a good map for ALC 20- Ragnar?

1. S should not share a continent with only one AI (axe rush too easy).

2. S should not be isolated (unable to contact another civ until Optics).

3. The globe cannot be circumnavigated until Optics. (at least probably not).

4. At most one AI is isolated.

5. At least one of Willem, Hannibal, Joao is in the opposite hemisphere.

All the above can be accomplished by a continents or hemispheres map. We are suggesting Archipelago or Medium and Small because ...? We want more water? We want naval action? Is there a specific description of what we want a map to be like?

 

[Airefuego]

We're suggesting Archipelago or Medium and Small because it lets us leverage Ragnar's traits, UB and UU to the maximum.

A lot of the rest of the discussion is trying to solve the conundrum that the AI is not too good at warring on archipelago maps, yet we want water, war, and a challenge!

 

[Airefuego]

PS actually I like island maps where you can circumnavigate without optics... discovering all your opponents early makes diplomacy very interesting! Especially when some are too far away for us to attack yet...

 

[oldsaxon]

You could always have each AI civ start with a Worker / Workboat. Or give each AI an extra tech (e.g. Fishing, or Sailing if they had Fishing already). If we're having someone vet the save beforehand, there's a lot more flexibility in how we balance the game.

On the other hand, we wouldn't want to go overboard - these ALCs are meant to be relatively 'pure,' after all. One Worker each, though, could be a decent compromise.

 

[ori]

with all this discussion moving towards even more customization of the game, how about:
shuffle, random sea level, random climate, random size
seriously: I'd be in favor of leaving as much unknown as possible

 

[PericlesOfAthen]

Do you know this for a fact or is it just your experience? I haven't noticed that my difficulty setting or aggai/default has had any impact on which random leaders I face.

Ahhh . . . errr . . . ummm . . . .

Well it was based on my experience; not on reading the code. Playing on Emperor I noticed I have run into a lot more Mansa, Joao, Orange, Ragnar, instead of say Saladin, Sitting Bull, Louis XIV, etc. But I haven't played a lot of Emperor level games so maybe I am mistaken.

I have played a lot of aggressive AI games though and I think it does impact AI leader selection. You will get more aggressive civs like Stalin, Churchill, Tokugawa, Monty, etc. Sometimes you don't even have one good teching civ. I also noticed in some games that when I first meet some civs in default they would be cautious but with aggressive they are annoyed . . . I've tried searching the forums to find some threads that back up my claims but I didn't find anything in the last twenty minutes. I searched for comments by Blake but couldn't come up with anything he said about Aggressive AI's effect on diplomacy. I don't believe the AI's have a bias against the human but I think there is some overall negative modifier. I may be mistaken and perhaps it is a result from having more aggressive civs but I don't think so. Anyone know more about this? Kmad?