ALC Game 22: Arabs/Saladin

[r_rolo1]

I was the first one to see this map and when I checked WB , my first thought was " Loius has to die fast, or else....." . His capital spot is pretty good and to add S man was slow in land pressuring and diverted to early religion... I think a standart axe rush would have been by far the best option.

 

[Artichoker]

My vote goes for replaying the same map.

As everyone else has been saying, this was a very difficult map to play. The difficulties of this map easily offset any advantage you can gain by prior knowledge of resources.

 

[Bandobras Took]

The Saladin-bashing starts once again, I see.

I didn't see a lot in this game that even attempted to utilize Protective -- archery was deliberately ignored, most people were in favor of immediate offensive war with axes, etc.

I'm inclined to ask how well Montezuma would have done on this map if we had deliberately ignored his Aggressive trait by shooting for Archery and avoiding early offensive action.

 

[Artichoker]

The Saladin-bashing starts once again, I see.

I didn't see a lot in this game that even attempted to utilize Protective -- archery was deliberately ignored, most people were in favor of immediate offensive war with axes, etc.

I'm inclined to ask how well Montezuma would have done on this map if we had deliberately ignored his Aggressive trait by shooting for Archery and avoiding early offensive action.

Utilizing Protective is not just about Archers, but also Longbowmen.

If you can leverage access to Copper, there's a chance that can lead to earlier access to Longbowmen.

For Protective leaders, the cutoff point of strategy from other leaders, in my opinion is not Bronze Working vs. Archery, but Iron Working vs. Writing. With Protective, you have the option of taking Writing instead of Iron Working--even if you lack Copper--which will eventually lead to earlier access of Feudalism.

In this case, the error seems not to be taking Bronze Working, but the other extraneous techs like Polytheism, Agriculture, and Animal Husbandry.

 

[Kev]

I'm wondering if some industrious soul would like to try at least a start on this game while trying to leverage the protective trait. Some people (myself included) suggested sending protective archers into Louis' territory early to cause problems and pillage where possible. I'm wondering if this would have helped or maybe it would have just caused the whole continent to tech super slow compared to the rest of the civs out there.

Out of curiosity, who were the other civs in the game? Wonder if they were techies or warmongers. I guess if anyone answers they can spoiler tag it in case there is another attempt at this same map (which I'm not in favor of).

 

[Bandobras Took]

Utilizing Protective is not just about Archers, but also Longbowmen.

If you can leverage access to Copper, there's a chance that can lead to earlier access to Longbowmen.

I wasn't so much arguing against Bronze Working (Slavery and Chopping are necessary) as I was against ignoring Archery altogether. Protective Archers have been great both as anti-Barbarian units and city Protectors in every Protective game I've played. Protective Longbows are great (as are Protective Gunpowder units), but Protective Archers seem to me rather underestimated.

 

[Sisiutil]

Post your failure. It'll still be entertaining and maybe even educational.

I think I already did that. Seriously, the failure was in the makings from turn 1. You should be able to see it based upon what I've already posted. I'd rather move on than dwell on it, kind of like a relationship that goes sour, you know?

Please define getting your butt handed to you. Did he wipe you out completely, or did he just successfully resist your onslaught (or somewhere in between)?

Well, for starters, remember how I was going to research a few turns of Monarchy and then trade Alphabet to Louis for it? Well, Suleiman beat me to it. They turned into happy tech-trading partners, leaving me in the dust. I kept expanding, building 2 more cities (the southern sheep-silk-fish and the central sheep cities) as well as Workers and a few units, as recommended. The slider kept dropping and because I'd been told to prioritize Workers and Settlers and units over Madrassas, I wasn't able to compensate by running a SE. So by the time I plodded along to Construction, Louis--assisted by the Great Library, which the wonder-monger completed--was well on his way to Machinery. By the time I managed to cobble together a few Swordsmen and Catapults, he'd completed it. I declared war and by the time I marched through all that French cultural territory, he had 4 Crossbowmen waiting for me in Paris. I gave it a shot anyway, but my stack died in a horribly futile forlorn hope. Then Louis began marching towards me and Suleiman joined in. The former barb city fell, then central sheepville, and neither opponent was willing to offer me peace unless I surrendered Medina. So I decided it was time to cash in my chips.

Replay the map. Replay it until you win it, I say. There's a definite advantage to knowing the lay of the land, but not much more than what good scouting would have told you anyway.

I sometimes replay a map in my off-line games, but very rarely; the pre-knowledge is just too much of an advantage ("Oh, right, there's a goody hut over there that will give me Masonry if I pop it on turn 12, and horses will appear here, copper here...). Furthermore, the exploration of the unknown is a big part of the fun of Civ for me.

What I prefer to do when I lose a game, and what I'm going to do this time, is play another game with the same settings--especially the same leader. But I resolve not to repeat my previous mistakes and to better exploit that leader's unique advantages.

I was the first one to see this map and when I checked WB , my first thought was " Loius has to die fast, or else....." . His capital spot is pretty good and to add S man was slow in land pressuring and diverted to early religion... I think a standart axe rush would have been by far the best option.

Yes, I certainly see that now, and the early religion was indeed a non-starter, so I won't be trying that again. I'm thinking of better exploiting Protective next time by teching first through Hunting and Archery. If I wind up with a dangerous neighbour like I did this time, I'm thinking of flooding him/her with Protective Archers who will pillage and harass them until I can field better units to kill them off completely.

 

[pigswill]

For what its worth I'm playing a shadow. Got up to 1290ad so far. Didn't found an early religion. Louis and Sulemain remain the monster civs in my game. Other continent had the early religious wars so I managed to build pyramids in 475bc. Got up to 7 cities. Did a fairly standard caste/pacifism/rep SE lightbulb thing and got lib/nat about 800ad. Got Taj. I've currently got a small tech lead. Swopped to HR after lib/nat to improve relations with LouSuly and trade some techs.
Other continent may be vulnerable to invasion but my game remains a long way from won (though hopefully I'm fairly safe from LouSuly)

 

[patagonia]

<snip>

So by the time I plodded along to Construction, Louis--assisted by the Great Library, which the wonder-monger completed--was well on his way to Machinery. By the time I managed to cobble together a few Swordsmen and Catapults, he'd completed it. I declared war and by the time I marched through all that French cultural territory, he had 4 Crossbowmen waiting for me in Paris. I gave it a shot anyway, but my stack died in a horribly futile forlorn hope.

It sounds like the problem was sticking doggedly to an outdated plan and starting a war you never had a realistic chance of winning. If you'd reined it in at that point, space and cultural were almost certainly still viable victory conditions.

True, they're not the warmongering romp that the ALCs have been of late (the peanut gallery does love a domination/conquest win), but you'd have got decent mileage out of Saladin's traits and UB in the process. Spiritual-abuse gets more powerful as the game goes on and with protective CG3 drill 1 infantry in your cities, no AI would have been able to take them.

Do you have a save from before you declared war? If so, I'd be interested in playing it out.

 

[madscientist]

Sis, too bad.

A few comments

1) Losing happens, even in posted games. No shame, and I think you should post what happened. Take it from me, I have posted my share of failed games (hell more than my share).
2) Not every leader is built for war! Saladin is built for several religions, a culture victory, and patience. I understand the ALC is made to showcase the UU, but in this case adopting Louis religion and HR and kissing up to him while playing a peaceful game may have been the best path.
3) Consider the difficulty level and how it applies to future ALCs. You did well with Isabella 2, struggled with Gilgamesh, Exceled with Ragnar (a financial leader), and exceled with Shaka (after dumbing down the AI with the agressive setting on a Pangea map). Saladin was a failure although he is one of the more difficult leaders to play. SO my point is, you may want to keep teh ALCs at emperor longer than the Saladin game.

Great Series, keep up the good work I know it's alot of work to post these games!!

Thanks!

 

[Nares]

The Saladin-bashing starts once again, I see.

Actually, I found him to be quite powerful.

Saladin has been shown to dominate in other map settings.

 

[Jet]

If I wind up with a dangerous neighbour like I did this time, I'm thinking of flooding him/her with Protective Archers who will pillage and harass them until I can field better units to kill them off completely.

Aren't they all dangerous? Which leaders would you consider the dangerous ones?

 

[Peachrocks]

Yeah to be honest I was wondering how Sisutil would win this with Louis getting metal casting so soon with oracle thus getting cheap forges AND marble... it seemed an impossibility to win when he outteched you, outproduced you and out everything you. It's what I do from time to time with my beloved Incans , but Louis is another favourite leader of mine.

I can understand why you didn't want to post this and I won't be pressuring you to do so . Of course if you have a change of heart, all the better . I can guess at what happened, its happened to me a few times, particularly when I play a different leader.

Protective is a bad trait because it is very hard to leverage in an attempt to actually win the game unless you Oracle for Longbows or do some sort of Metal casting to lightbulb machinery crossbow thing. Later on with gunpowder yes it is slightly more helpful but even then, you simply can't wait that long against AIs that get ridiculous advantages.

Cheap Walls and castle for trade route/espionage is okay, but you get castles at engineering, also too late, and the trade route bonus obseletes barely an era later...

To be effective the first war has to take place without protective contributing anything helpful as you shouldn't be the one under attack, perhaps a few archers to leave in the city that is captured, but if you take a capital most of the time you have done significant damage to your enemy anyway.

Every other trait though can be helpful in the early or middle parts of the game no matter what, whether you go war or peace. The help Protective offers early on (which is probably the most important part of the game) against an AI on this level is extremely minimal, oh except against barbs, but even then there's nothing more annoying then barbs who pillage all over the place while your archer can only do his hair or something in the city nearby unless you attack first but this only uses a very small bonus protective offers, the free first strike.

I think its reasonable for Sisutil not to have to leverage this trait until later in the game. It wouldn't have made a difference if a few archers were built here and there, an attack had to happen for which protective archers aren't going to help a great deal, Louis and Suleiman made a nice couple and run off with the game, so using protective wasn't going to help in the least.

What ALC's with Protective leaders should show is how to deal with a handicap such as Protective early on (because having Protective means you can't have another 'better' trait), rather than trying to take advantage of the minimal almost non existant benefits it offers to the human player against AIs early on in the game.

Unless Sisutil wants to pull of a metal casting to machinery lightbulb and spam crossbows, its probably better and trying to take advantage of the other qualities of the leader (whoever it might be), in Saladins case the Madrassa and either build the Pyramids or hope someone nearby builds the Pyramids and demand a permanent loan. Then later when it comes around to it, civic abuse with spirtual, Camel archers and better musketmen and rifles. I hope you have more success next time

 

[Sisiutil]

It sounds like the problem was sticking doggedly to an outdated plan and starting a war you never had a realistic chance of winning. If you'd reined it in at that point, space and cultural were almost certainly still viable victory conditions.

True, they're not the warmongering romp that the ALCs have been of late (the peanut gallery does love a domination/conquest win), but you'd have got decent mileage out of Saladin's traits and UB in the process. Spiritual-abuse gets more powerful as the game goes on and with protective CG3 drill 1 infantry in your cities, no AI would have been able to take them.

Do you have a save from before you declared war? If so, I'd be interested in playing it out.

You're probably right, and I'll keep that in mind in the next game.

If you want to play it out, just play from the last posted saved game. Like I said, I'm anxious to move on and give Saladin another chance to prove his worth.

 

[Scaphism]

I guess this belongs in the pre-game or early game posts, but I don't think Saladin has a "magic moment" in the tech tree where he goes into overdrive. There's no particular tech to aim for, but Madrassas + Spiritual give a lot of flexibility.

Another lesson I recently re-learned was the importance of scouting. You can get a terrific starting spot but the higher I push the difficulty level, the less I find I get to dictate the terms of the game. You have to find out what the other civs are up to and who are the top dogs. If your closest neighbor is top dog...you just have to work that much harder.

 

[Bandobras Took]

Actually, I found him to be quite powerful.

Saladin has been shown to dominate in other map settings.

Me, too. I was replying to:

So You got beat playing as Saladin on Emperor. Can't imagine that's ever happened before . Now, winning with Saladin on Emperor...that would be a rare event.

 

[Olodune]

Another lesson I recently re-learned was the importance of scouting.

Sisiutil typically scouts very well, and I don't think this game was an exception.

I looked back over the early posts and (imho) it was early worker turn assignments that slowed the game down a bit.

 

[whakamole]

Sorry about the loss, S - I know from playing Civ, myself, for nearly 20 years that once in a while "a little reign must fall" (if you'll forgive the pun!)

I'm glad to see you'll be replaying Saladin, as I'd like to learn more about how to utilize his BtS traits, UU and UB in my own games. He certainly is a weak leader in the early game, due to his mismatched starting techs.

I'd caution against your absolute resolve to discard founding an opening religion in the next game. I think absolutes like this are what restricts creativity in the game, and if you find yourself in the right situation to found a religion and use it to your advantage, I think you should be open to it.

However, I know that these ALC games are really designed to help you (and all of us) with learning more about how to play with each leader and his/her specific traits. In this game, you had plenty of advice to consider in terms of pursuing the best ways to exploit a "Protective" trait... and yet I didn't see you consider or comment on them. To me, it always seemed a question of axe rush vs REX - two very standard and very common openings in many of your other games.

Personally, I see the protective trait about playing a "passive" game. And by that I don't mean avoiding conflict. Actually, I like the idea of encouraging it. But I feel the true strength of protective trait means you don't have to worry about angering your neighbors over borders, religion, choosing trade partners or refusing tribute. Protective allows you to take hits in diplomacy in order to encourage distention and ultimately war against you, then your enemies consume their resources to a war effort that will have a difficult time against promoted archers/longbows behind cheap walls.

Imagine if Louis had DoW against you earlier in the game because you went Islamic. He wouldn't have had as much time or so many hammers to throw to wonders... he would have been busy building axemen/spearmen which would have suicided against your fortress cities, leaving you to pursue your own wonder building, diplomacy with Sully, and building up your own army to take down his weakened cities. Victory through passivity.

Anyway, what's done is now done, and I'm looking forward to the next game. Please don't forget the "learning experience" we all want to have, and maintain the focus on what can be done to play each game "differently" depending on the leader traits. As always, you rock for creating & maintaining this community!

 

[Quotey]

Protective is CG1 (then perhaps 2 and 3).. It's not a "Get out of war free" card.

 

[Bandobras Took]

At the risk of derailing the thread:

Protective is a bad trait because it is very hard to leverage in an attempt to actually win the game unless you Oracle for Longbows or do some sort of Metal casting to lightbulb machinery crossbow thing.

Oh, no not again . . .

Repeat after me: protective is not strictly an offensive trait. You don't have to attack your neighbors early on in every single game of Civ.

Cheap Walls

Is for an artificially inflated power graph that makes the AI attack you later than they normally would. This is more true on levels where the AI outstrips you early on, not less.

and castle for trade route/espionage is okay, but you get castles at engineering, also too late

It's only late if you ignore it. Archery is similarly late at Gunpowder.

and the trade route bonus obseletes barely an era later...

Provided you play the exact same way and choose the exact same techs every single game.

perhaps a few archers to leave in the city that is captured

As the difficulty level goes up, the likelihood of being attacked also goes up -- both from counterattacks in recently conquered cities and an AI that simply feels like taking you out with a tech lead. In either of those cases, Protective easily helps -- if you've actually adapted your strategy to utilize the trait.

but even then there's nothing more annoying then barbs who pillage all over the place while your archer can only do his hair or something in the city nearby unless you attack first but this only uses a very small bonus protective offers, the free first strike.

On the contrary, fortified Archers on strategic resources do well against Barbarians and in my experience act as a magnet. It isn't too hard to get Drill III Archers once the Barbarians really kick in.

I think its reasonable for Sisutil not to have to leverage this trait until later in the game. It wouldn't have made a difference if a few archers were built here and there

Yes, but you were supposed to be talking about leveraging the trait. "A few archers" built "here and there" isn't leveraging Protective any more than "a few cottages" built "here and there" leverages financial.

an attack had to happen for which protective archers aren't going to help a great deal, Louis and Suleiman made a nice couple and run off with the game, so using protective wasn't going to help in the least

If that is accurate (which is a debate in and of itself), no trait would have helped -- Aggressive isn't going to do you any more good when your opponent has Crossbows vs. your Swordsman.

But if Louis and Suleiman were running away with tech, then all one has to do is utilize cheap walls and castles by beelining Engineering, focus the espionage against strictly one of them, and steal your way into tech parity, relying on Protective units to keep them off your back.

What ALC's with Protective leaders should show is how to deal with a handicap such as Protective early on (because having Protective means you can't have another 'better' trait), rather than trying to take advantage of the minimal almost non existant benefits it offers to the human player against AIs early on in the game.

Actually, the ALCs should show that playing with different leaders means adopting a different strategy rather than mindlessly attacking people because they happen to be on the same continent as you regardless of your traits. It should also show adapting your research to the map and the situation rather than following the exact same tech path in every game regardless of the circumstances.

If you play a Protective leader the same way you attempt to play a non-protective leader, of course the trait is worthless. Calling Saladin handicapped simply because you refuse to even attempt to use the Protective trait indicates that the handicap probably isn't with Saladin.

1) Writing off Archery based on theory rather than experience is not leveraging the Protective trait;
2) Not using the cheap buildings is not leveraging the Protective trait;
3) Not heading for the technologies which improve Protective abilities is not leveraging the Protective trait, and;
4) Attempting to play the game as if Protective were Aggressive is not leveraging the Protective trait.

Saladin is not weak. The UB plays a good part in this, but failing to use Protective is not a weakness of a Civ: it's the weakness of a player.