1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Best AGG/PRO leader.

Discussion in 'Civ4 - General Discussions' started by Gwynnja, Oct 1, 2013.

?

PRO/AGG leader?

  1. Alexander (AGG/PHI)

    4.4%
  2. Boudica (AGG/CHA)

    2.2%
  3. Genghis Khan (AGG/IMP)

    4.4%
  4. Hammurabi (AGG/ORG)

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  5. Kublai Khan (AGG/CRE)

    8.9%
  6. Montezuma (AGG/SPI)

    11.1%
  7. Ragnar (AGG/FIN)

    6.7%
  8. Shaka (AGG/EXP)

    20.0%
  9. Stalin (AGG/IND)

    4.4%
  10. Tokugawa (AGG/PRO)

    13.3%
  11. Charlemagne (PRO/IMP)

    2.2%
  12. Churchill (PRO/CHA)

    2.2%
  13. Gilgamesh (PRO/CRE)

    8.9%
  14. Mao (PRO/EXP)

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  15. Qin Shi Huang (PRO/IND)

    6.7%
  16. Saladin (PRO/SPI)

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  17. Sitting Bull (PRO/PHI)

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  18. Wang Kon (PRO/FIN)

    4.4%
  1. Fintourist

    Fintourist Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2013
    Messages:
    64
    Yeah, yeah, yeah. It seems that gazing that island city is the best analysis that we can do here. I think my expectations were just set too high. Let's leave it at this then and you can continue enjoying "the doubled production" that SA's give you.

    If somebody else is willing to go deeper and wants to try quantifying the benefits created by SA I'm still honestly interested to discuss the topic.

    Oh f*** it. Here is a bonus for you. Probably I'm just wasting my time here, but whatever ;)

    Let's take your island city:
    - It starts at size 4 with 14/28 in the food box, granary is built
    - Let's assume you are not in HR, because otherwise also the player without SA would have the option to whip continuously and stack whip unhappiness..
    - Lets take the happy cap of 5 (even with this happy cap the growth is fast enough that also the player with SA has to stagnate his growth at times).
    - Food surplus is 6 :food:
    - Natural production is 1 :hammers:

    With SA:
    Spoiler :

    Turn 1: City Size: 4, Food at EOT: 20/28 :food:, Production at EOT: 1/35 :hammers: Axe
    Turn 2: City Size: 4, Food at EOT: 26/28 :food:, Production at EOT: 2/35 :hammers: Axe
    Turn 3: City Size: 2, Food at EOT: 32/24 :food:, Production at EOT: 63/35 :hammers: Axe, 2-pop whip
    Turn 4: City Size: 3, Food at EOT: 26/26 :food:, Production at EOT: 29/35 :hammers: Axe
    Turn 5: City Size: 4, Food at EOT: 19/28 :food:, Production at EOT: 30/35 :hammers: Axe
    Turn 6: City Size: 4, Food at EOT: 25/28 :food:, Production at EOT: 1/35 :hammers: Spear
    Turn 7: City Size: 4, Food at EOT: 25/28 :food:, Production at EOT: 7/60 :hammers: Worker
    Turn 8: City Size: 2, Food at EOT: 31/24 :food:, Production at EOT: 62/35 :hammers: Spear, 2-pop whip
    Turn 9: City Size: 3, Food at EOT: 25/26 :food:, Production at EOT: 58/35 :hammers: Axe
    Turn 10: City Size: 3, Food at EOT: 31/26 :food:, Production at EOT: 24/35 :hammers: Axe
    Turn 11: City Size: 4, Food at EOT: 24/28 :food:, Production at EOT: 1/35 :hammers: Spear
    Turn 12: City Size: 4, Food at EOT: 24/28 :food:, Production at EOT: 14/60 :hammers: Worker
    And on Turn 13 Spear can be double-whipped again..

    Total production during the 12 turns:
    2 axes, 1 spear and 39 :hammers: in unfinished builds. That's a total of 144 :hammers:
     
  2. Fintourist

    Fintourist Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2013
    Messages:
    64
    Without SA:
    Spoiler :

    Turn 1: City Size: 4, Food at EOT: 20/28 :food:, Production at EOT: 1/35 :hammers: Axe
    Turn 2: City Size: 4, Food at EOT: 26/28 :food:, Production at EOT: 2/35 :hammers: Axe
    Turn 3: City Size: 2, Food at EOT: 32/24 :food:, Production at EOT: 63/35 :hammers: Axe, 2-pop whip
    Turn 4: City Size: 3, Food at EOT: 26/26 :food:, Production at EOT: 29/35 :hammers: Axe
    Turn 5: City Size: 4, Food at EOT: 19/28 :food:, Production at EOT: 30/35 :hammers: Axe
    Turn 6: City Size: 4, Food at EOT: 25/28 :food:, Production at EOT: 1/35 :hammers: Spear
    Turn 7: City Size: 4, Food at EOT: 25/28 :food:, Production at EOT: 7/60 :hammers: Worker
    Turn 8: City Size: 4, Food at EOT: 25/28 :food:, Production at EOT: 14/60 :hammers: Worker
    Turn 9: City Size: 4, Food at EOT: 25/28 :food:, Production at EOT: 21/60 :hammers: Worker
    Turn 10: City Size: 4, Food at EOT: 25/28 :food:, Production at EOT: 28/60 :hammers: Worker
    Turn 11: City Size: 4, Food at EOT: 25/28 :food:, Production at EOT: 35/60 :hammers: Worker
    Turn 12: City Size: 4, Food at EOT: 25/28 :food:, Production at EOT: 42/60 :hammers: Worker
    And on Turn 13 Spear can be double-whipped..

    Total production during the 12 turns:
    1 axe and 73 :hammers: in unfinished builds. That's a total of 108 :hammers: Player without SA has produced 8 :commerce: more and has 1 :food: more in the box than the player in the previous example. If we use rough simplification (I can't remember the results of the best study I've seen) and say that 1 commerce = 0.5 hammers and 1 hammer = 1.5 food we end up with 113.5 adjusted :hammers:


    Result:
    Spoiler :

    - Player with SA wins by 30.5 adjusted :hammers: Or by 27 %
    - Note that 27 % is not 100 %, (or not even close) which would imply that SA had doubled the production.
    - Note also that this is an extreme example. Unless settler/workers/more axes would be needed very badly, the player without SA would not stagnate his growth, but overflow instead into infra that increases the happy cap allowing him to do next a 3-pop whip and improve his conversion rate. (The 1:1 food-to-hammers conversion that happens when the player is building a worker is the reason, why the player with SA earns in this case those extra hammers.)
    - Also the player with SA needs to increase his happy cap in this example as he also needs to spend time stagnating (every 5 turns)
    - I think this ~30 hammer gain every 12 turns is pretty much the maximum that SA player can gain compared to non-SA player and it also requires non-SA player to play suboptimally (either due to his own incompetence or due to external circumstances)
    - In the example that I posted previously (I haven't calculated it) the hammer gain from SA in the similiar time frame will probably be between 0 and 10.


    How should one need to proceed if one would like to compare SA to Terrace:
    Spoiler :

    Steps would include:
    1. Evaluate how much hammers SA saves/generate in an average city and during what time frame
    2. Evaluate how much hammers/food having Terrace creates in an average city and during what time frame
    3. Estimate the appropriate discount rate for hammers (the best study I've seen so far ended up with 3.5 - 4 % per turn interest rate for beakers, with the exception of early turns, where it's even higher ~6-8 %)
    4. Calculate the present value of those hammers
    5. Compare

    In the essence I (as many others) do believe that the discount rate in Civ 4 is pretty far away from 1 (meaning that early hammers are much more valuable than late hammers), which is the main reason why I claim that terrace > SA


    Damn, if you do not bother to think about this I hope that at least somebody will.
     
  3. plastiqe

    plastiqe Grinch

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Messages:
    597
    Location:
    Canada, eh
    -50% :mad: duration from whipping ≠ +100% production

    You're still stuck inside your little Incan bubble of thinking. Remember, Forge is a building that gives +25% production. Sacrificial Altar does not give +25% production. They work really well together tho. : ) In your example the extra hammers specifically came from:

    Turn 8: City Size: 2, Food at EOT: 31/24 :food:, Production at EOT: 62/35 :hammers: Spear, 2-pop whip

    Nice formatting btw. So in your own analysis you admit that the city with a SA has a production advantage of 30 :hammers: compared to a single regular whip cycle. You even say "~30 hammer gain every 12 turns" implying that you could repeat the cycle. Question 1. After 50 turns is the advantage still only 30:hammers:? Question 2. How long do you typically stay in Slavery?

    A1: Lets continue the example using Slavery to hurry production every time the whip anger fades:
    SA: whip on Turn 13, again on Turn 18, Turn 23, Turn 28, 33, 38, 43, 48.
    No SA: whip on Turn 13, 23, 33, 43.

    Hey! A Sacrificial Altar allows you to whip twice as often. Isn't that awesome, twice as many whips! : P

    A2: Rhetorical, you don't need to answer this one.



    Here is a snowball analogy for you: Terrace is a snowball, Sacrificial Altar is an avalanche. If you like, try to respond to mintegar's simple statement with logic as opposed to magic beakers from the sky (or I will mock you for a second time).
     
  4. Fintourist

    Fintourist Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2013
    Messages:
    64
    :thanx: Finally! But we are still interested in this, right:

    -50% :mad: duration from whipping --> WHAT

    Mmm.. I would say that the difference comes from the fact that the player without SA is forced to stagnate longer and convert more food to hammers with 1:1 ratio while building a worker. If he had a larger happy cap, he could keep growing and convert that food 5 turns later with better ratio into hammers e.g. with a 3-pop whip. Having SA would still be beneficial, but the difference becomes significantly smaller.

    Yes, that's exactly what in the case of "low happy cap 1-tile island city producing mainly axes/spears" would happen

    No, of course not! That advantage cumulates exactly with the same logic as the benefits from Terrace cumulate! Now for the further discussion it's necessary that the concept of time value of money is crystal clear for you. Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_value_of_money
    The principle is simple of course. The hammers that SA wins you during the turns 91-100 are more valuable than the hammers that it gets you during the turns 101-110.

    Depends! :crazyeye: For the sake of the the calculations (coming below) let's assume that we stay in Slavery practically forever, say, until about T250 or T300.

    Yeah, I'll try to express my logic.. The logic is that if the 1-time benefit is big enough it will overweigh smaller/later repeating benefits.

    Let's start with the key assumptions:

    - When you have SA in place, it will save you 10 :hammers: per turn every ten turns. I think this is on the high side, but we would need to iterate this through more examples. It's clear that every one of your cities is not like that 1-tile island where the benefits are big, but every one of your cities is hopefully not struggling for food either (and thus destroying all the benefits of SA). So yeah, I'm using 10 :hammers: per 10 turns as the approximation. One could argue that the benefits grow in absolute terms with time as more production multiples and maybe Kremlin come in, so also I let the benefits grow over the time in my calculations
    - We are considering how much later SA benefit kicks in compared to Terrace benefit. Obviously in early cities SA comes significantly later while with in later cities it could be even be your 2nd build. I did a small exercise where I weighted the value of early cities higher than later cities and I'm now using the assumption that SA is built on average 25 turns after the granary/terrace is built. That 25 turns assumption already requires quite an aggressive CoL beeline. Maybe also oracling it. Note that this is not the same thing as when the benefits of the building (terrace or SA) kick in.
    - I'm using the interest/discount rate of 3.5 %. If you are interested in this subject I can search you the study/discussion, but do not make me do it unless you are honestly interested!
    - Note that we are also assuming that one wants to always build a courthouse and SA comes basically at 0 extra cost. In reality, if you are Aztecs you are possibly building a courthouse even in your capital, or building it earlier than otherwise and this obviously has an extra cost. Here for the sake of simplicity we however assume that this cost does not exist.

    Ok, let's set the timeline so that Turn 0 is the turn when Terrace is built in an average city. In my example of EXP in the best/worst trait thread earlier granary saved 40+ food, which in the early game translated into ~90 hammers through a 3-pop whip (e.g. settler). Terrace is working with the similar logic, it allows you to build an earlier granary (skip monument), but it's not producing this benefit in every city. I'm assuming that you get the 90-hammer benefit in every 2nd city (the rest getting 0 hammer saving). In truth 90 hammers in every 2nd city is probably too much, but on the other hand 0 hammer benefit in every other city is too little as well. Anyways I estimate here a 45 :hammers: benefit that kicks in approximately 10 turns after the terrace is build. The extra value of terrace consequently is 45/((1+0.035)^10) = 32 :hammers: on Turn 0.

    With SA the benefits are calculated as follows. 10 hammers come in 30 turns after the terrace is built (whip cycle during the turns 25-34), 10 hammers come in 40 turns, 10 hammers come in 50 turns.. So the formula is:

    Present value of SA benefits = 10/((1+0.035)^30) + 10/((1+0.035)^40) + 10/((1+0.035)^50) + ...

    Illustrated in the following table:



    Leading to the result that the present value of SA's benefits (reduced whip unhappy cooldown) is (at the time point, where terrace is built) worth 13.5 :hammers:

    So the end result of these calculations is that terrace wins the comparison 32 :hammers: - 13.5 :hammers: :p

    I can honestly say that I did try to do the assumptions as fairly as possible. The result will change significantly, when you alter e.g. the discount rate, estimated benefits of Terrace or SA, the timing difference between them etc. We can argue about every assumption for the next 50 years, but we won't ever find an exact answer. There are simply too many changing variables in the game of civ4 (which is the great thing) that things like this can not be quantified exactly. However, the magnitude of value difference between Terrace and SA in these calculation is quite big, so even if I had been biased, one needs to tweak the assumptions quite much before one gets a result where SA comes ahead.
     
  5. plastiqe

    plastiqe Grinch

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Messages:
    597
    Location:
    Canada, eh

    Truly, you have a dizzying intellect.



    If you are working a 4:hammers: grassland workshop, and you have a Forge (+25%) Factory (+25%) and Power (+50%) you have a lot of :yuck:. You also have +100% production. If you mouse over your cities production, you'll see that those initial 4:hammers: are actually worth 8:hammers:.
    4:hammers: + 100% = 8:hammers:
    You have doubled your production.
    A Forge gives +25% production. A Sacrificial Altar does not give +25% production.
    This example is kiddie stuff.

    I was confused by your opening statement because all along you've incorrectly maintained that I think SA = double produciton.

    You said:
    "...can continue enjoying "the doubled production" "
    "...which would imply that SA had doubled the production"
    "...anywhere near the double production with SA"
    "...No! SA is not getting you double production!"

    I've said:
    "...SA allows twice as much whipping"
    "...the number of whip anger turns from using hurry production in Slavery is what changes with a SA"
    "...Sacrificial Altar gives -50% :mad: duration from whipping"
    (taken directly from the game)
    "...it means you_can_whip_again_sooner"
    "...<SO THEY CAN WHIP AGAIN!>"
    "...grasp on -50% duration from whipping"
    "...Sacrificial Altar provide more whips than a regular courthouse"
    "...I was literally whipping twice as often, that's the "how many" "
    "...-50% :mad: duration from whipping &#8800; +100% production"


    Twice as many whips (me) &#8800; double production (you).

    I made reference to you making things up, double production was one of those things. Maybe there was a post of mine somewhere that confused you, but you'll have to point that out yourself. What I think happened is:

    Your response to this post made no sense to me. But I can see maybe the inception of the double production idea. mintegar is correct because he is talking about effectively double the production from whipping. I knew exactly what he meant. You seem to have 1incorrectly interpreted what mintegar said and 2applied it to me. Not that I didn't try to correct you multiple times in pretty much every post I made on page 2. But lets look at the quote he is responding to:

    mintegar says in his post that you don't do two 1 pop whips just because you have Sacrificial Altar, that's stupid. Both the SA city and the city without SA do a 2 pop whip with overflow because SA is not The Kremlin.
    4:hammers: per turn city
    T1 4:hammers: in Axeman 1
    T2 68/35:hammers: hurry production whip Axeman 1
    T3 37:hammers: into Axeman 2
    The reason SA is better than a normal Courthouse is because the SA city now has 5 :mad: and the city without SA has 10 :mad:.


    ***************************************************​


    So that's a very lengthy investigative response as to why you were saying :thanx:. If I'm wrong, then why did you keep bringing up double production? Why did you say :thanx:?

    Now this is probably not the response you're looking for but I'm in no mood to delve into a serious post when the basic disagreement isn't understood by one party. I don't even know if you'll understand the incorrect interpretation I'm trying to correct. Incidentally, correcting your incorrect interpretations in this thread could be a full time job. : P

    Here is another time you make a similar mistake when you say "It's not about the amount of whips. It's the amount of food turned into hammers and their conversion rate." WTF? The whip is turning population (food) into hammers.

    From Vocum Sineratio: The Whip.

    You may as well be saying "It's not about the amount of food turned into hammers. It's the amount of food turned into hammers and their conversion rate." You're just putting the Kremlin where it doesn't go again.

    My advice is to re-read the entire thread and make sure you know what you think you know.

    And by the way, -50% :mad: duration from whipping > +2:culture:. Sacrificial Altar costs less than a regular Courthouse too.
     
  6. qazq2

    qazq2 Warmonger

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2012
    Messages:
    121
    I voted Charlie because he has great synergy with the great wall of espionage game. Genghis was another close contender. PRO in my opinion is better than AGG but that is open to debate. I also like Charlies UB (his UU is kind of pointless though, and the Sac Altar is IMHO the best UB in game). If I was being strict however I would say the best AGG/PRO leader is Tokugawa.
     
  7. Fintourist

    Fintourist Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2013
    Messages:
    64
    To Plastiqe:

    This is just absurd! :nope:

    You just skipped the whole content (comparison analysis of SA and terrace) and prefered to spend 1000 words where you explain how I have incorrectly interpreted the way you think about SA. (The thing is that you have not provided any kind of method how to compare the benefits of terrace and SA yourself, so I honestly have no idea)

    Or was this your thoughtful and constructive response to my analysis?

    My advice to you is that next time when you start arguing about something, you should try to back up your opinion with at least some kind of analysis. The only thing that you have done, has been repeating over and over again the same things that civilopedia says about Sacrificial Altar (was it so that SA reduces whip unhappiness cooldown or did it bring extra trade routes or what?) and just shouting your opinion without any kind of reasoning. Like this:


    This was actually a very useful and relevant reminder:

    For the miniscule chance that you actually would be interested in (or even understand) the analysis that I posted in my previous post. This is how the discount can be taken into account:

    The present value of Courthouse discount at the turn when the granary/terrace is built = (120-90) :hammers:/((1+0.035)^25) = 12.7 :hammers:

    Consequently the comparison becomes a lot tighter:

    Terrace 32 :hammers: - SA 26.2 :hammers:

    Of course, there are many other variables that would require more analysis (e.g. the opportunity cost of beelining CoL), but it most definitely does not look like we are getting there...
     
  8. plastiqe

    plastiqe Grinch

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Messages:
    597
    Location:
    Canada, eh


    I didn't skip the whole content of your post. I used my superior Civ IV game knowledge (from actually having played the game with the Aztecs) to "remind" you that the result you arrived at from the whole content of your post was totally wrong. Nice chart lol.

    Would you have gone back and corrected your mistake on your own if I hadn't?

    Such as when I post images of a city created in the worldbuilder so you can see my proof with the SA + fish whipping city? I like how you sum up my entire contribution to this thread as me knowing facts about the game. Anyways, I haven't been shouting. This is shouting:

    IF YOU KNEW WHAT THE CIVILOPEDIA SAYS ABOUT SA I WOULDN'T HAVE TO DO THAT!!!!!1!

    Don't bother trying to play theorycrafting with me anymore. I'm getting sick of your BS. I won't engage when you just start out with an assertion that Sacrificial Altar is worth 1:hammers: per turn, backed up by your own opinion which I obviously do not agree with.

    Remains unanswered from the time before:

    Why did you say :thanx: ?
     
  9. Fintourist

    Fintourist Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2013
    Messages:
    64
    What a lame conversation this has been. I'm totally amazed by your clearly superior civ skills that free you from the need of justifying any of your arguments with something resembling logic. My wasting of time ends here.
     
  10. plastiqe

    plastiqe Grinch

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Messages:
    597
    Location:
    Canada, eh
    "...Oh boy, I really regret entering this pointless discussion."
    "...But yeah, one last try:"
    "...I won't spend anymore time trying to educate you."
    "...My wasting of time ends here."


    There you go again, I'll believe it when I see it. Maybe now you'll have time to go play a game with an AGG/PRO leader like Montezuma. Or better yet, choose Montezuma as an opponent and take out all your frustrations with me on him with your beloved Inca.

    Off Topic Edit: If history is any lesson Fintourist is destined to go on to big things in the Civ series. The last time I disagreed with someone for so many posts in a row on this site was when I argued with Trip (Jon Shafer) over unreleased Civ IV back in 2004. I think the highlight is when he says Civ should be a RTS like Starcraft.
    http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=101355
     
  11. Gregonar

    Gregonar Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2009
    Messages:
    74
    Why don't you guys duke it out in a 1v1?

    That said, I think that for MP games, Kublai has the greatest synergy of all the PRO/AGG leaders. Ragnar is close just because he is FIN but his starting techs are awful. Monty/Shaka/Boudi are good in theory but are a bit too predictable; two of them have great uniques, though I personally hate Jags. The Chinese leaders can be fun but hard to play reliably. Gilgamesh is good because of Sumeria (and CRE) but not because of him being PRO.

    Also, in MP games, which are on QUICK speed, I almost always find myself having more food and citizens than I can comfortably whip--and yes, a lot of MP games are just endless whip cycles until the Renaissance--even then, the only reason you're not whipping regularly anymore is because you have too many cities, the game speed is on BLAZING! and is lagging; you have 50+ units in the field in 4 different stacks and are trying to double-move them onto good terrain and maybe to make an unexpected stack attack here and there. You're also trying to keep your rally points up to date with the battle lines and a number of other little things before the timer counts down to 0:00.

    I snooped in a few games to see what most good players have built by medieval---a lot of the time, it's just a monument, or nothing if they're creative. If you're against an AGG leader, you HAVE to build barracks at some point to try to even the field (shock axes with spears are invincible early in the game). Granaries are often skipped until maybe elephants/catapults because it's hard to find ways to whip that extra pop except to maybe build courthouse/library/forge later. Being CHM helps a lot with managing the happy cap, with needing to get to monarchy before construction, and stacking your cities full of archers.

    That said, my fav. war time leader right now is Brennus. CHM/SPI is a killer combo.
     
  12. Gregonar

    Gregonar Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2009
    Messages:
    74
    Oh Starcraft...that's like comparing crack with red wine, or a car crash with a boring train ride, or one night stands with failed marriages....wait, where was I going?
     
  13. plastiqe

    plastiqe Grinch

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Messages:
    597
    Location:
    Canada, eh
    ...or like creating a Civ game where units can only occupy 1 tile at a time. If only Firaxis had been warned to read his posts from back then. It's on my list of things to do when I invent time travel.
     
  14. Antilogic

    Antilogic --

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2006
    Messages:
    15,602
    Yeah, this. I was expecting a poll with only one option!



    Rest of thread looks pretty long and complicated. May comment on it later.
     
  15. rfcfanatic

    rfcfanatic Mercantilist

    Joined:
    May 20, 2012
    Messages:
    728
    Location:
    In isolation
    I voted for Kublai Khan, because I think CRE trait is very powerful and because he's basically the only AGG leader with whom I have won on Emperor :) (well, tbh, I've also won with Shaka, but that victory wasn't technologically so convincing one). The third reason is that most of the AGG AI unit-spammers suck at tech and economy, but KK doesn't - he's both an unit-spammer and formidable techer. Hammurabi is another AGG AI techmonger, but he ain't unit-spammer.

    Why I think CRE is so powerful are cheap libraries and absence of the need of sacrificing worker techs for Mysticism. I never do well with non-CRE leaders who don't have Mysticism among their starting techs.
     
  16. Iranon

    Iranon Deity Whipping Boy

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2007
    Messages:
    3,214
    Location:
    Germany
    Qin.

    PRO actually helps a solid Unique that we'd like to build in numbers.
    A solid economy trait, and the one that makes beelining said Unique quite doable.
    Good starting techs.

    *

    Next in line would be Monty, something as small as starting techs may be decisive here. I do rate the Sacrificial Altar as Unique Building #1.

    *

    The comparison between Sacrificial Altar and Terrace isn't very helpful because it requires too many assumptions and abstractions.

    Sacrificial Altar is hard to put a value on, it's not about necessarily about "how many hammers" but "where" and "when". Water and Flood Plains cities will find it much easier to build infrastructure if you want that. Chain whipping after reaching a key tech or in case of an unplanned war is far less costly.
    If we need production before growing into our caps, going food heavy and whipping copiously beats regular production, because we're actually getting more citizenturns in addition to a favourable food-to-hammer exchange rate.

    In a city with other production options that's grown into something approaching stability, the Sacrificial Altar doesn't add much. If we assign a reasonable fixed hammer value to whatever else we're doing (specialist turns, commerce), the most efficient setup is usually "grow into unhappiness at 1 food surplus, whip 2 , regrow to steady cap size the turn anger wears off." SA adds nothing at all during the long regrow phase.
     
  17. plastiqe

    plastiqe Grinch

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Messages:
    597
    Location:
    Canada, eh
    @ Iranon

    It's nice to have a post in this thread that I can relate to. : )

    If you were comparing in a vacuum with one single game or maybe generalizing on one type of setting you could then quantify which choice gives a better advantage. For example take a game with a big empire at 1000 AD and you see if Financial or Organized would have been more helpful. But every game of Civ is different so I think trying to quantify all advantages/disadvantages over the entire game is impossible.

    When you compare the ways a Terrace is better than a regular Granary, and then the ways a Sacrificial Altar is better than a regular Courthouse SA is the clear winner.

    Example, many times you can settle with resources in the first ring so you don't need a monument and could build a Granary (or Terrace) first build. There are so many ways to generate culture. There is only one way to get -50% :mad: from whipping.
     
  18. Fintourist

    Fintourist Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2013
    Messages:
    64
    Just for the record I agree with all of this, except the comment that doing the comparison is not helpful. It's damn difficult for sure, but performing the analysis does help you to understand how big benefits you are really getting from your UB and it helps your thinking when making decisions such as "how much it is reasonable to sacrifice in order to get CoL faster when playing Aztecs?". And if the comparison is done with enough detail and reasonable assumptions it would have given at least a some kind of justified answer to this regrettable terrace vs. SA discussion.

    Having a rough estimation on how much an UB is helping you (saving hammers per turn or whatever), is also very useful e.g. in a multiplayer leader/civ snake pick (unrestricted pairings, leader and civ not chosen at the same time). The basic rule is that getting good traits is significantly more valuable than the effect of UBs and UUs (starting techs also often outweigh the differences between the UBs and UUs of civs), but depending on your position in the pick it might be wise to select civ first e.g. if you think that it will secure you a valuable synergy such as EXP terraces or ORG SA's/Ziggurats etc. (there's also some anti-synergy due to reduced absolute value of discount).
     
  19. ZeekLTK

    ZeekLTK Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2002
    Messages:
    259
    I, for one, enjoyed the (short lived) parody thread.
     
  20. plastiqe

    plastiqe Grinch

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Messages:
    597
    Location:
    Canada, eh
    Me too
     

Share This Page