[BTS] BOTM 294: Sitting Bull, Deity - Final spoiler-game submitted or abandoned

[kcd_swede]

I will try to put this in the standard format soon. For now, you are welcome to report your results in this thread. If you have not completed or submitted your abandoned game, you should stop reading right here until you have done so. Submissions by PM to me are recommended for now.

 

[Mitchum]

I started the game thinking that I would race to Astronomy and dominate by settling the new world before anyone else got there. I was the first to Optics and fully scouted the New World and then life happened and I knew I wouldn't have enough time in real life to do that. So I decided a bit too late to go for a conquest victory... at least too late to be competitive. But I finished anyway with a late date.

I had three early wars with Darius, Lincoln, Ramesses and Hammy before I had decided to go for conquest. These were early wars to slow them down and to capture a few more cities to add to my collection. I could have capped them but didn't because I still had my sights on Domination. Once I shifted from Domination to Conquest, I went back and fully eliminated Darius (1220 AD) and capped Washington (1090 AD), Hammy (1505 AD) and Ramesses (1545 AD).

There was a war with Alex in the 1300s to slow him down because he was getting too big but he had been at war with Darius on and off since the BC era and he had a massive, highly-promoted army. I weakened him but decided to take a CF until I could build a bigger army, hopefully with a tech advantage.

I declared war on Ragnar in 1545 AD (the same turn I capped Ramesses) and had take all of his cities on the mainland (he had a few island cities north of his starting location) and a couple in the New World. At that point, he vassaled to Alex which meant that Alex a) DoW'd me and b) Ragnar wouldn't capitulate to me. So I sent my entire army to the east to take out Alex. I took all of his cities and "He was doing fine on his own" and wouldn't capitulate. I guess an AI can't capitulate if he has vassals himself??? So I sued for peace in 1645 AD and he gave me one of his two cities in the New World. At this point, I had to build a bunch of galleons to a) take out Rangar's island cities and b) take out Alex's city in the New World.

Ragnar broke away from Alex a few turns after our war ended so I would now be able to capitulate him separate from Alex. I built a bunch of galleons starting in 1645 AD and finally capitulated Ragnar (1705 AD) and took out Alex (17010 AD). I late date for sure. I'm sure that if I had focused on Conquest from the start, I could have done it several centuries sooner. All of my "fake" wars to grab a few extra cities could have ended in capitulation rather than a peace treaty and a tech or two. I'm pretty sure something in the 1000 AD range would be possible in the right hands (not mine, of course... ).

 

[kcd_swede]

I started the game thinking that I would race to Astronomy and dominate by settling the new world before anyone else got there. I was the first to Optics and fully scouted the New World and then life happened and I knew I wouldn't have enough time in real life to do that. So I decided a bit too late to go for a conquest victory... at least too late to be competitive. But I finished anyway with a late date.

I had three early wars with Darius, Lincoln, Ramesses and Hammy before I had decided to go for conquest. These were early wars to slow them down and to capture a few more cities to add to my collection. I could have capped them but didn't because I still had my sights on Domination. Once I shifted from Domination to Conquest, I went back and fully eliminated Darius (1220 AD) and capped Washington (1090 AD), Hammy (1505 AD) and Ramesses (1545 AD).

There was a war with Alex in the 1300s to slow him down because he was getting too big but he had been at war with Darius on and off since the BC era and he had a massive, highly-promoted army. I weakened him but decided to take a CF until I could build a bigger army, hopefully with a tech advantage.

I declared war on Ragnar in 1545 AD (the same turn I capped Ramesses) and had take all of his cities on the mainland (he had a few island cities north of his starting location) and a couple in the New World. At that point, he vassaled to Alex which meant that Alex a) DoW'd me and b) Ragnar wouldn't capitulate to me. So I sent my entire army to the east to take out Alex. I took all of his cities and "He was doing fine on his own" and wouldn't capitulate. I guess an AI can't capitulate if he has vassals himself??? So I sued for peace in 1645 AD and he gave me one of his two cities in the New World. At this point, I had to build a bunch of galleons to a) take out Rangar's island cities and b) take out Alex's city in the New World.

Ragnar broke away from Alex a few turns after our war ended so I would now be able to capitulate him separate from Alex. I built a bunch of galleons starting in 1645 AD and finally capitulated Ragnar (1705 AD) and took out Alex (17010 AD). I late date for sure. I'm sure that if I had focused on Conquest from the start, I could have done it several centuries sooner. All of my "fake" wars to grab a few extra cities could have ended in capitulation rather than a peace treaty and a tech or two. I'm pretty sure something in the 1000 AD range would be possible in the right hands (not mine, of course... ).

Well done! And thank you for the write-up which will help me some day when one of our other staff make a game so I can play. (lookin at you @DynamicSpirit ) lol.

 

[MirrorGuard]

In 75 AD I declared war on Alex when his troops were marching through my territory. He signed ceasefire with Ramesses and focused on me. He bravely attacked my cities only to see my super longbow+elephants+dogsoldiers waiting for him. Meanwhile I assaulted Corinth(with the Pyramids) and Pharsalos with horsearchers. The deficit(about -40/turn during the war and -15-ish after) forced me to prioritize courthouses and gave me an unexpected advantange. My ep points greatly exceeded Alex's so his cities and soldiers soon became visible to me. At this time I had the option to finish Alex off first. But Lincoln's growing city count drew my attention. I had scouted his land before and I knew there was no room for further expansion. Did he somehow reached a new landmass? In the previous Boudica game, AIs' capitulation threshold became so hard to reach after their overseas expansion despite my overwhelming army. So I decided to take care of Lincoln first and signed peace treaty with Alex in 200AD. Alex became busy again during the peace treaty. I thought he must be plotting against someone else.
I was wrong. As soon as the peace treaty expired, Alex declared war on me while my forces were attacking American cities. Alex took back Corinth but lost his big stack when he tried to take another.

Spoiler super(longbow)man :

As my forces were divided into 2 directions, on the eastern front I didn't have enough melee units. So I had to call for ceasefire several times before I managed to capitulate Alex in 1040AD. Darius was destroyed in 1070AD. On the western front it was much easier. I subdued Lincoln(400-640), Ramesses(940-1010). Hammurabi(1040-1060), Ragnar(1120~1170). I got Conquest victory in 1180AD.

Spoiler Kill/Loss stats :

 

[Mitchum]

@MirrorGuard Alex was pumping out a crazy number of units in my game. Interestingly, he was in a war with Darius of and on for many years and never made much progress. Yet, when I attacked him he still had a massive stack of units. It feels like the AI doesn't fully commit to wars against each other but when the human player shows up, the gloves come off! haha

How did your game end?

 

[MirrorGuard]

It feels like the AI doesn't fully commit to wars against each other but when the human player shows up, the gloves come off!

Was it just a stalemate? Great general is a good indicator of how bloody a war is. Did they have many great generals?

 

[Mitchum]

Was it just a stalemate? Great general is a good indicator of how bloody a war is. Did they have many great generals?

I didn’t pay attention to that.

 

[MirrorGuard]

It feels like the AI doesn't fully commit to wars against each other but when the human player shows up, the gloves come off! haha

I played another game today. Shaka Churchill and I were at war with Alex. They both had a big stack of units(I only sent a spy to see what's going on) next to Athens while Alex only had 3 half-hp units in. They both moved back and forth for a few turns and it seemed they had little interest in claiming Athens. I was curious so I loaded the save a few turns back and sent 5 knights to see if I could steal Athens. This time as you can predict, they hesitated no more. Their "random walk" immediately stopped when my knights were 2 tiles away from Athens. I guess this "random walk" is routine for warfare among AIs until human player's military units(as a friend or a foe) are near.

 

[LowtherCastle]

@MirrorGuard
That is interesting.