Bartleby's HoF Thread

[Bartleby]

I thought I'd make a thread for me to ramble about my games. Before this April, the last time I submitted a game was 2010. I've played intermittently since then, but not really with the focus to make HoF entries.

I'm prompted to make the thread now since I just submitted another game; the other day I said in BlackBetsy's thread I was "quite a way off" from finishing my Huge Emperor Space race, but this weekend was a bank holiday so I played a few sessions.

The setup:

Huge Pangaea, 60% water, normal/temperate/5 bil years old, no barbarians, minimum aggression

I chose Sumeria, vs 12 opponents. All the scientific civs (although I forgot the Babylonians -- maybe I had planned to try for a CB SGL, which would make the Republic Slingshot very unlikely, I honestly don't remember if I tried that in this game [I do know there was no SGL]) plus the extra civs to improve chances of getting access to resources & luxuries. I opted for no-alphabet additional civs: America, China, Japan, Mongols, and Zulu.


Long story short: 1355 AD Launch!


I do plan to review some of the saves from various points of the game, to post specific stuff and hopefully get some critique.

 

[EMan]

A couple of things we have in common:
1. We're both Englishmen living in other countries. (Although my U.S. Citizenship is now pending after being in the U.S. for 50 years!)
2. We've both been on this site and posting HOF entries for a long time. You probably have a Top Ten record for a 14-year absence!

 

[Bartleby]

Thanks Eman. I've been living in Ireland now for nearly 25 years. I haven't got around to trying to get an Irish passport just yet.

Are you working on a Demigod game now?

 

[Bartleby]

This was the start position for the Emperor Spaceship game. I'm lucky enough to have a functioning Windows7 laptop that runs MapFinder, I ran it for a while just looking for starts with a cow and river. I played a couple for a few turns before abandoning them (small island, beaten to philosophy, that kind of thing). I continued with this one.

From Crpviewer I can see that I founded my second town in 2850 BC and in 1000 BC I had 12 towns. Not that impressive. I had settled 3 luxuries, and unkown at the time, Iron. I completed the slingshot in 825 BC and got three or four turns of Anarchy. When the Republic was established I had 16 towns, and presumably having caught up in tech, I had secured Horses.

I don't recall exactly when the middle ages began, I was the third civ to reach that stage, having been beaten (by 2 turns) to Contruction by the Greeks and either America or Japan. My free tech was Theology.
In 10 AD I had 23 towns and was almost out of room to settle any more. At that point I still had a monopoly on Theology, and was presumably researching Education, or maybe Astronomy.
I still had 23 towns until 190 AD, when Kaifeng flipped from China.

I built my first Wonder in 290 AD, Copernicus' Observatory, and nine turns after that, in 380 AD, I declared war on China.
In 450 AD I built Newton's University
In 570 AD I captured the last Chinese city; nearly 20 turns for the first war. In reality the Chinese still had a settler, who declared war on Greece and it was another few turns until the rampaging Greeks finally eliminated the Chinese.

I settled a few gaps and by 590 AD I had 49 cities. That was probably a few turns after reaching the Industrial Age. I traded for Steam Power and Medicine, and got Sanitation for my freebie.

620 AD, declared war on Mongols.
700 AD, got the only leader of the game, created an Army.
760 AD made peace with Mongols for their offshore town and one other town, leaving them with an exclave that would've taken me ages to get to anyway. At that point I had 76 cities. There were no more major wars for Sumeria after this.
780 AD, built Theory of Evolution and took Atomic Theory and Electronics.
900 AD, built Universal Suffrage, and started Sumeria's Golden Age. I had researched Refining in 7 turns (should've been 6 but I lost a turn when Jerxes sneak-attacked; the last turn of research on Refining was done with a single scientist; but I did enjoy war Happiness for a long time.). During the Golden Age I finished out the Industrial Age at 4-turn pace.
1090 AD I built the last of my cities, brining the final city count to 96
1100 AD, entered the Modern Era, traded for the first-level techs (managed to get most of my gold back afterwards) and drew Nuclear Power as my free tech.

I had a 1000 shield prebuild in the hopes of building the Internet, but used it for UN instead. I had back-up prebuilds ready for a few turns later which did build the Internet & SETI.

I rigorously went through all the science farms to increase beakers at the expense of growth, and also micromanaged all the proper cities to maximise science, but Miniaturization was going to be 6 turns. That was the last turn of the Golden Age, and despite rushing a bunch of research labs, it was still 6 turns on the following turn. Once the Internet was built I sold the purchased labs, and all of the visible techs could be had at 5 turns, some even at 90% research.

Tragedy struck in the closing stages of the game. With Xerxes succumbing under a dogpile instigated by Greece I feared losing my War Happiness, which was what was allowing me to do 100% Science spending. I re-negotiated peace with the Byzantines and included an alliance againt Persia -- I thought then that when Perisia was eliminated I would get War Happiness from Theodora, but that was not the case, and i had to do the a few turns at 10% luxury rate. With 100% Science I could've had The Laser in 4 turns and I'd have been able to Launch one turn sooner. I managed to get back to 100% spending for Robotics, when Theodora formed an alliance against me with the Ottomans; I dogpiled everyone onto the Ottomans which freed up wines for trade (I only ever had six luxuries up until then). Despite losing that turn, I'm still quite pleased with the 1355 launch.

 

[BlackBetsy]

Wow, great finish. I am kind of comparing your game to my Regent Diplomacy game that I finished @970 AD. Very similar path.

You got the AI to research 1 or 2 Modern Age techs for you? Maybe Synthetic Fibers and Satellites? The 36 turn Modern Age is pretty strong.

 

[BlackBetsy]

Also @Bartleby I really want to know about that #1 Standard Chieftain domination game you submitted. To get a #1 domination on Chieftain after all these years, that is really something.

 

[Bartleby]

Thanks BlackBetsy. I'll give some details of the Domination game in a while, when I get back to my Civ computer.

Other than the first-level techs I researched all of the Modern techs myself; I think the AI research capacity was lacking because I had most of their available gpt, and also the previous front-runner the Greeks ended up in Fascism because of their war with Persia.

Actually when the Persians sneak-attacked me I got alliances with Greece and America, in case Persia might do the same otherwise (Greece because they were giving me so much gpt and America because we shared a long border that wasn't strongly defended at the time). That led to several AI-AI alliances that gradually petered out until it was just me and Alex fighting against Xerxes. I cancelled the alliance after the 20 turns but the hostilities continued.
Then when Rocketry came around, Alex had no Aluminium and he demanded it from me; I declined and instead of declaring on me he went apehorsehocky against Persia, who did have Aluminium but couldn't see it. Alex then re-started the World War that led to the end of Persia and Alex going Fascist.

 

[Bartleby]

Just thinking about what I know I did wrong in the Spaceship game.

First, I was going to abandon any game that didn't have an SGL once the slilngshot was done. I always make that plan, but often carry on regardless. The Pyramids would've made so much difference to the growth of science farms. I was pleased with the way the late Golden Age worked, but I could've probably held up the Newton's University build until later, and triggered it that way. Or even skipped Newton and triggered it with ToE.

I also didn't build nearly enough cities. When I was looking to try to increase beakers for Miniaturization, there were so many empty tiles and spaces that I could've ICS'd. ICS looks ugly and I sometimes worry a little bit about rank corruption in marginal cities, but I'm sure that ICS would be beneficial (and the Pyramids are important for that).

The other main I'm thinking of now is that I really should've taken out a third AI to secure more luxuries. I had 3 settled luxuries and I took one each from China and Mongolia. I traded with Japan for gems, but the Zulu had wines and gems and we shared a short border. I wouldn't realistically have been able to conquer the eighth luxury in time, but seven would've been enough for 0% lux.

 

[EMan]

Are you working on a Demigod game now?

Since you ask: It would seem logical that I would be working a Demigod Milker but I'm cruising along in a small Sid Conquest in between climbing mountains, here in Colorado, for the summer. I know it would take me a few years to finish any higher level of Huge Map Milker, so I'm just "resting" up a while.

Good to hear you're using MapFinder (Thank You Author Moonsinger!) for a good starting position and getting an SGL for The Pyramids....That's a must for me in my milk games. (Along with a dedicated Windows XP "Gaming Computer" for finding good Map starts). However, don't know if getting that early SGL is possible at Demigod or above levels. (Anybody know the answer to that one? )

 

[Bartleby]

Standard Chieftain Domination

The Setup:

Standard Pangaea, 80% water, normal/temperate/5 billion years old, sedentary barbarians, min. aggression

Civ: Inca

Opponents: China, England, France, Rome
(I'm not sure anymore what the rationale behind China was; the others all had Alphabet so I could possibly trade for it. I wanted no Scientific civs to minimise the already slim chance of meeting a Spearman. There were no REL civs so I could have a chance of a CB SGL)

The Plan:
Build a load of Chasqui Scouts, pop an early settler/town & get lots of techs from huts, capture three out of four AI capitals, build settlers & the Temple of Artemis, use very wide spacing to grab as much territory as possible when the borders expand



I played a proof-of-concept game from a random start, which I won in 310 BC. In that game I had no SGL, but I waited for quite a bit before deciding to hand-build ToA, which completed in 490 BC. The Dom Limit was passed 9 turns after that, so I still needed some towns.[dom limit was ~780]
In that test game I revolted in 1600 BC and drew a very unlucky 8 turns of Anarchy, which made me wonder whether staying in Despotism might be better, but a couple of later tries with Despotism showed otherwise.

I used MapFinder to generate Cow-River starts, originally looking for ridiculously low limits (<625 I think) but that drew a blank and I think I ended up looking for <750 DL

The revised strategy was to hand-build ToA, sadly I can't remember what were the criteria I used to switching the capital from settlers to ToA, or maybe I just started to prebuild it after I stopped making Chasquis. I probably did build a couple of Chasquis, a settler, more Chasquis then prebuild. I don't think I built a Granary.
For the Chasqui rush you need a good few; I would usually try to capture the first AI capital with one or two, ideally it would be undefended, but later ones I'd try to stack 5 or 6; it's not unlikely for four Chasquis to fail to kill one warrior; once he's elite, forget about it. Also if you don't capture it on the first turn they'll have pop-rushed another warrior, or even a spearman -- that's game over.
Research wise I went for CB - Mysticism - Poly while popping towards Writing then switching to Philosphy. If a leader showed up he'd have been used to build the pyramids (spoiler -- a leader never showed up)

I played a game with ~720 DL, popped a town in 3500 BC, captured Paris undefended in 3250 BC, captured Rome in 2670 BC, captured Beijing in 2070 BC, razed Nottingham in 1550 BC and took York for peace in 1425 BC. ToA was built in 1250 BC but then it took another ~20 turns to reach the DL in 730 BC. This made me realise the importance of sending the first settlers farther away and settling closer sites after. And also cash-rushing settlers from the AI capitals as quickly as they grow. In that game I revolted in 1830 BC, for 5 turns.

The 875 BC game had ~740 DL, popped a settler next to the capital & built 2nd city 3850 BC. London captured undefended in 3450 BC. Paris captured 2430 BC. Beijing captured 2390 BC. ToA built 1125 BC, Domination 11 turns later, so I still needed to settle more. There were 39 cities in the end, and five settlers in transit. That game had 7 turns of Anarchy, from revolt in 1790 BC.

I think 875 BC can "easily" be beaten, by getting an SGL for Pyramids, and by having shorter Anarchy. But you still need a reasonably lucky Chasqui rush.

Looking at the dates of my saved games, I played the first test game on 2nd April, and submitted the final game on the 13th. About 40-50 attempts I reckon.

 

[BlackBetsy]

39 cities by 875 BC is impressive. How many were captured vs. built? Just London and Beijing? So you built 35 (39-Beijing, London, Popped Settler & Capital)? 35 built cities is mucho impressive.

 

[Bartleby]

Yeah, I edited to add Paris captured, so I built Capital, popped settler, captured London, Paris, and Beijing, and built 34 more cities and 5 settlers left over.

It's the early-captured AI capitals generating settlers that makes all the difference. I also edited to add the estimated number of attempts.

 

[Spoonwood]

Good to hear you're using MapFinder (Thank You Author Moonsinger!) for a good starting position and getting an SGL for The Pyramids....That's a must for me in my milk games. (Along with a dedicated Windows XP "Gaming Computer" for finding good Map starts). However, don't know if getting that early SGL is possible at Demigod or above levels. (Anybody know the answer to that one? )

Kuningas's Huge Sid 20k game has an early SGL, and he even included a save where he still had it in 2750 BC. So, the game would truly be bugged if an SGL wasn't possible for some map with some opponent setup at all difficulty levels.

Though he did play 80% archipelago, I think, not 60%. But, I don't know if the land amount difference affects AI research that early.

That said, that's at least one less scientific AI for the tech pace. But, that's probably not a big deal. I remember Drazek writing that he felt the tech pace for his first Sid game too slow to maximize score.

But, I think there's a bigger question, and I remember posing this to killercane a while back. The forced despotic golden age with The Maya, well I don't know. Military production at a good time does start to become more important, I think, at Demigod when the AIs. Getting to the domination limit quickly might come as more likely without a Pyramids SGL, and having a golden age in Republic for military production. I don't think it matters as much how things look in 1000 BC or 10 AD. The Pyramids approach likely results in a higher score at either time I feel rather certain! But, which has the higher score at 1000 AD? That might not be The Pyramids approach at Demigod, or Deity, or Sid.

 

[BlackBetsy]

Of the 39 settlers you generated, how many would you say you whipped? That's just an insane number of settlers. I'm going to have to load your map.

 

[Spoonwood]

Of the 39 settlers you generated, how many would you say you whipped? That's just an insane number of settlers. I'm going to have to load your map.

He revolted. I didn't understand why at first, but I think to irrigate for food to have population for settlers. Then again, maybe he did whip settlers, I don't know.

 

[Bartleby]

Yes, I didn't pop-rush any settlers, and the reason the despotism games were so poor was that there wasn't enough food for growth, or enough cash for rushing settlers.

 

[BlackBetsy]

I am still trying to wrap my head around certain aspects of your game, because I am thinking how I could even come close to them:

That game had 7 turns of Anarchy, from revolt in 1790 BC

Did you pop Monarchy or Republic from a hut?

875 BC means it was a 85 turn game! Dom limit of 740 divided by 21 tiles in a fat cross = 35 cities, which means that you were really close to optimal spacing if not at optimal spacing (mountains, coast, etc. prevent optimal spacing). Yes, you can get "free" tiles outside cities from optimal spacing but not counting those.

From a production standpoint, you only had 77 turns because of the anarchy. And everything being produced in the last 3 turns, before the settlers could walk to new city locations, was also useless. So you produced 39 setters (30 shields each, 1170 shields) in 74 turns, or 15.8 shields per turn. Having a 2d city @3850 BC is extremely helpful. You are 1 city down because you are hand building the ToA.

The pyramid of cities is interesting. As an ag civ, if you only produced settlers, had at least one +1 food bonus in each city (meaning you are +4 food with one citizen), no granary (I didn't see where Pyramids were built) and started them @ size 1, you can produce a settler in I believe 10 turns. Assuming setting aside 1 early city for ToA:

2 cities - 2 settlers - 10 turns = 4 cities after 10 turns.
4 cities (1 working on ToA) - 3 settlers - 10 turns = 7 cities after 20 turns
7 cities (1 working on ToA) - 6 settlers - 10 turns = 13 cities after 30 turns
13 cities (1 working on ToA) - 12 settlers - 10 turns = 25 cities after 40 turns.
25 cities (1 working on ToA) - 24 settlers - 10 turns = 49 cities after 50 turns.

That optimal rate excludes building anything else AND requires unimproved food bonuses AND requires 3 shields per turn (1 in city center, 2 from worked tiles, uncorrupted). It also doesn't include walk time for the settlers (and the early settlers have to walk far in a domination game - usually 10-12 tiles). If you say an average of 4 turns to walk, taking into account that existing cities don't require a walk, it looks more like 49 cities in 70 turns. Now you did 39 in 75 turns, but at least cities grew from a food perspective during the anarchy, meaning they didn't have to wait for population growth to spit out a settler. I'd image the turn after anarchy ended you spit out a bunch of settlers.

If there is an optimal rate of settler / city production, you were very, very close to being at it.

 

[Bartleby]

I got Republic as the free tech from philosophy.
I think the Anarchy was probably 6 turns actually; I'm not 100% sure how to count it, I looked at it with Crpviewer and counted the turns when culture didn't increase. The spacing is somewhat wider than OCP which aims not to waste tiles, I'm specifically leaving a gaps to autofill, so it's like CxxxxxC in one direction and CxxxxC in the other. You can also see in Crpviewer that when the borders all expanded I gained more than 300 tiles, going from 347 to 655 tiles in 1025 BC.

As for the mathematical analysis, I'm afraid I'm not mathematically inclined myself so I can't comment on it. All I did was build settlers lol.

 

[BlackBetsy]

All I did was build settlers lol.

Indeed you did! At an impressive rate! It makes me think about playing at Warlord and Chieftain level where the first 3/4 citizens are born content. That means you can continually build settlers with no happiness issues, which stops @ Regent. That suggests there should be a drop off @ Regent in terms of domination dates, and ..... surprisingly there isn't.

These things - Tiny dominations at Sid level - are completely beyond my comprehension, especially with the free units given to Sid AI.

 

[Bartleby]

Yeah, the approach that I took might still work on Warlord, but the Chasqui rush becomes more difficult at Regent where the AI is more likely to get a 2nd town before you reach them; it could still be done, but it might not be quicker that using Gallics with the Celts, which seems to be the most widely-used strategy for levels above Chieftain.