BOTM02 Final Spoiler

[jesusin]

Challenger, space victory in 1915 AD.
...
Any thoughts or suggestions for the future?

You don't say how many cottages your empire had. I think that is the key performance indicator for a Space game.

 

[Roland Ehnström]

1913 Space Ship win, 56384 points

Aim: Highest scoring space ship win.

Gameplan: Found first city in the tundra, second in the perfect position for a later capital. Found Hinduism, build Stonehenge in city #1, build Hindu shrine, build new palace in city #2. Expand by force. Get close to the domination limit as early as possible, then go all-out for science and build the space ship.

Reality: Built first city in the tundra, and realised it would have been better to move north from the start since there were a surprising amount of resources there. Didn't found Hindusim. Cancelled plans on Stonehenge. But at least made the palace jump in turn 110. After switching to bureaucracy, we now had a fantastic capital!

By now we were slightly boxed in by the Persians, so we attacked, with an army consisting mainly of cats and dogs. Catapults and Dog Soldiers, that is. . We quickly took their main cities, and our forces continued north and also took Timbuktu from the Malinese. Why? Because that was the location of the Hindu Shrine (ha!), which was already worth 25 GPT (= 50 GPT with Market, Grocer and Bank).

By now we realised that our economy couldn't cope with further expansion, and went into a building/science phase. We attacked Mali again about 1000 years later, with Rifemen before they had Musketmen. We easily took all of their main cities and made them a vassal of our growing empire. Then we took the final Persian city, before attacking Egypt, with Infantry before they had Riflemen. We took almost all of their cities and made them a vassal too. Now we turned west and attacked the Byzantine (was it?), and took a couple of their cities with Tanks before they had Infantry. By now we were very close to the domination limit in the mid 1800's, and could have choosen a Domination win for 75000 points.

I thought a while about that option, but decided to continue with my gameplan (I wanted a space win), made peace and went for the space-ship, which was built in 1913. This dropped the score by 20000 points, which proves that the score system sucks.

 

[jesusin]

By now we were very close to the domination limit in the mid 1800's, and could have choosen a Domination win for 75000 points.

I thought a while about that option, but decided to continue with my gameplan (I wanted a space win), made peace and went for the space-ship, which was built in 1913. This dropped the score by 20000 points, which proves that the score system sucks.

Hi Roland. I don't think your game proves that the score system sucks. You were able to win in 1850AD, you decided not to do it and you won in 1913AD. It was only to be expected that deciding not to win should decrease your score! The aim of the game is to win!

Now, I wholeheartedly agree: the score system sucks.

 

[Niklas]

1913 Space Ship win, 56384 points

Aim: Highest scoring space ship win.

Well, you beat me by 416 points, I had 55968. Quite surprised we were so close though, since I was nowhere near the domination limit.

 

[bcool]

Thanks for the feedback, all useful.

Why the heck would you build the Chicken Itchy?

No good reason really, I had stone and the culture bonus pushed some borders back.

Palace? You must mean forbiden, since you didnt move your capital. Too early and a waste.

I meant the Apostolic palace, I didn't build the foreign palace until I eventually did take out Pacal.

Also, did you really already have a big enough happyness problem to justify settling the silver camp this yearly? Other than providing the happy from silver, it is never going to grow into anything special, and cost quite a bit in maintanance. Yes, you need to eventually settle it for the happy, but you might have waited a few centuries.

Good point, timing is important...

But the bigest problem I see, if you were dreaming of an early trip to space, is your capital...

Yes, I see your point. I guess I haven't thought about a few turns used wisely in the beginning can save you lots of time in the end. I'm scared to start later than the other civilizations, but one turn isn't that big of deal...

In response to the cottage question from jesusin,

I relied on representation from the pyramids for my early science game, and so I didn't build many cottages other than around the flood plains city north of my capital. I eventually captured cottages from other civilizations, and used the build research and wealth options to make up for the lack of cottages in the end.

 

[Capt Buttkick]

@bcool: looks like you placed Spiro on the silver. I went for the silver too, but placed my city one N of where you ended up. With the fish and 2 silvers, and after a while, a few cottages and some coast tiles worked, it more than payed for its contributed maintenance.
I grabbed the whale for the with my second border expansion, which happened quite some time before I bothered to research Optics in this game

 

[Jastrow]

Oops... Forgot about the Apostolic. Yes, I agree that building that one is well worth it, at least to keep it out of AI hands.

Building a wonder for the culture bonus is highly inefficient. A temple or library is a much better bargain, stone or no stone.

About the capital and the responce about cottages... They are linked closely... Just to give some numbers, in order to get an early spaceship launch (say ~1850)you need to be pumping out, at the end of the game, about 1700 beakers per turn. Consider a capital on the norther plains hill. It has....

4 FP
4 grassland
4 plains
7 hills (4 with grass)
1 lake
AND.... 2 pigs and 2 wines.

Pigs (with pastures) add 4 food, win (with winery) 1f, 3C.

So, working 2 pigs squares (one a hill), and the 4 FP, gives you 11 spare food (after paying the two for the guy working it. Add 2 from the city square, and you are at 13 extra food. Including the 4 grass and 4 plains (and thus the two wines), you get to 11 spare food. You can also work the lake if you want.... That is population 14, with 11 food left...The 3 remaining (non pig) grass land hills cost one food each, so now pop 17, 8 food left. This pays for 4 more citizen which can be shifted from plains hills for production, to specialist, as desired.

Now, lets cottage all the flatland, and count up commerce (I will not include free speech for as will be clear later):


each FP: town =4, +1 river, + 1 printpress = 6
The 5 non resources plains and grassland: 5 each (+3 are on rivers).

Total from cottages = 24+25+3=52.
The two wines (with river) = 8
River hills = 4
Castle = 8
Total = 72 commerce.

Now, lets run bearaucracy.... 72+1.5= 108.

Now, when not in production mode, you can have 4 scientist for another 24 beakers, and lets say 3 settled supper scientist (a very modest number) for another 27. (under representation)... 51*1.5 for bearacracy = 75.

Total: 183

Library = +25%
Uni = +25%
Academy = +50%
Observatory +25%
Labs = +25%
Oxford = +100%
total bonus: +250%.

183 *(1+2.5)= 640.

So, you see that this capital (which still mind you has nice production capacities) could in the end game, all by itself, be producing almost 40% of the research you need for a really fast launch. It might even get to be quite a bit more. You are philosophical, and can run a few scientist all the time. Add the great library, and 6 or 7 settled great scientist is not unlikely, which would get you to 860 beakers, or more than half of your total empires need!!

Compare that to your capital, and to farming the flatland (except the floodplains)... You have only two cottages, and two wines.. Only one pig (and two less floodplains) means you can only support about 2 specialist. Total commerce is about 40 (including castle and the specialist under rep.)... It is not worth running bearacracy on this capital...

You will build a lib, uni, lab, and observ, and lets assume also an academy... This gives you 100... 140 if you decide to invest in oxford (unlikely to be worth it).... So each turn of the norther capital is producing something like 5 to 7 turns worth of research from this one.... You need about 6 cities equal to your capital to match the northern one!!! Thats an very high price to pay to start one turn earlier.

 

[Jimmy Thunder]

I planted my capital on the same spot as bcool.

At the start of the game you can't see the 2nd pigs from that plains hill. So it's not an obvious choice to move further north to find the better spot. Especially since after one turn you have already found a good capital site on a 2hammer tile with floodplains/pigs/wine/hills and river grassland that is much better than the deer/fish starting spot.

It isn't a bad spot for a capital, but as Jastrow said, a few squares north and it would have been much better.

 

[Roland Ehnström]

Hi Roland. I don't think your game proves that the score system sucks. You were able to win in 1850AD, you decided not to do it and you won in 1913AD. It was only to be expected that deciding not to win should decrease your score! The aim of the game is to win!

Yes, I knew full well that my decition would lead to a lower score, I know perfectly well how Civ4 calculates the score. It's just that it would have been much easier for me to win by domination in 1850 than by space in, say, 1900, and none the less it would have given a much higher score. That's just wrong.

Or look at it this way: If I would have been able to pull of a space race win already in 1850, I'm sure you agree that it would have been a rather good result, while a domination win in the same year would have been an average result. Why then, does both give the exact same number of points? If a "good" result gives the same number of points as an "average" result, points-wise, the points system doesn't make sense.

The obvious solution would be to weigh the score depending on the victory condition, like we did in Civ3 GOTMs if my memory is correct.

 

[Roland Ehnström]

Well, you beat me by 416 points, I had 55968. Quite surprised we were so close though, since I was nowhere near the domination limit.

It's because your space ship arrived in 1868 while mine arrived in 1913. If my ship would have arrived in 1868, I would have had 70000+ points. I also had a pretty low population, considering the amount of land I held.

 

[Niklas]

Yeah, I guess you're right. I've never bothered to learn the ins and outs of the score systems since it seems so flawed anyway. I strongly second the notion of "Jason scoring" for CIV. How difficult could it be? famous last words

 

[Jastrow]

I planted my capital on the same spot as bcool...

But where you playing for space? From your spoiler, I have the impression you played diplo from the start. For space, a strong research capital is almost essential for a quick time. While you cannot see the pig from the top of the first hill, here is what you know (with a bit of fog gazing)...

Going to the hill 2 further north, you give up:

3 Tundra, 4 plain, 1 grassland, 1 grass hill, and 1 plain hill (no visible resources, no river tiles except for one of the tundra).

You get:
2 river grasslands, 2 FP, 1 grass hill, and 5 unknown tiles, which are unlikely to be tundra given the geography.

The grass hills cancel, and the 4 other tiles you get are VASTLY supperior to the 4 plains and the grassland you give up (with cottages, they prduce 24 gc, feed themselves and give you two food... the 4 plains plus grassland you gave up, to feed themselves need farms, and would produce only 6 gc and 4 hammers....) so, even if the 5 unknown tiles (for which you are trading 3 tundra and a plains hill) were all mountains, you would still have improoved your capital! Given the extremly likelyhood that at least some of those tiles will be grassland or better, moving further north seems 100% clear to me, if you have an aspirations for space.

 

[Jimmy Thunder]

Given the extremly likelyhood that at least some of those tiles will be grassland or better, moving further north seems 100% clear to me, if you have an aspirations for space.

Good arguments. You are definitely right and now have me thinking why I didn't move north!

I think I just said, "this is pretty good spot for a capital" after one move and was happy to settle there. But if I had looked at the available tiles properly I may have seen that the extra move north was well worth missing a turn.

It worked out well for me though pursuing a diplo game. The other pig tile and flood plains were perfect for my GP farm.

 

[jesusin]

But where you playing for space? From your spoiler, I have the impression you played diplo from the start. For space, a strong research capital is almost essential for a quick time. While you cannot see the pig from the top of the first hill, here is what you know (with a bit of fog gazing)...

Going to the hill 2 further north, you give up:

3 Tundra, 4 plain, 1 grassland, 1 grass hill, and 1 plain hill (no visible resources, no river tiles except for one of the tundra).

You get:
2 river grasslands, 2 FP, 1 grass hill, and 5 unknown tiles, which are unlikely to be tundra given the geography.

The grass hills cancel, and the 4 other tiles you get are VASTLY supperior to the 4 plains and the grassland you give up (with cottages, they prduce 24 gc, feed themselves and give you two food... the 4 plains plus grassland you gave up, to feed themselves need farms, and would produce only 6 gc and 4 hammers....) so, even if the 5 unknown tiles (for which you are trading 3 tundra and a plains hill) were all mountains, you would still have improoved your capital! Given the extremly likelyhood that at least some of those tiles will be grassland or better, moving further north seems 100% clear to me, if you have an aspirations for space.

Just to insist on your point, I think that someone going for a military VC should consider moving further N too. The tiles are better and you end up more centered in the map and closer to your enemies.

 

[Thrallia]

I founded where JT and bcool founded as well. I never got to touch the northern floodplains or pigs though...Darius decided to expand toward me(when he expanded away from the player in nearly every other game I've seen ) Hatty decided to expand away from me though, partly because I founded next to the eastern gold and pigs.

When I last posted at 500AD, I had successfully pulled off a Feudalism slingshot(weird, considering I rarely do a slingshot at all, I was surprised I managed to get Feudalism with one), and I had built Stonehenge, so around 800BC, I had access to Longbows with 8 exp right out of the training room. I declared war on Egypt, but struggled with the new and improved AI militarily. I took three Egyptian cities, but soon lost them after a failed assault on Hierconopolis, home of the Colossus.

Rather than getting peace, I rebuilt my army(yay for Cahokia's 2 turn LB production, with a settled GG I got 10 exp LB every 2 turns...) and retook Thebes, Memphis, Hatty's marble city, and then pushed toward both Hierconopolis and Elephantine. About this time, I realized that the world had somehow become Hindu. At 500AD, there were about 4 different state religions. By 1000AD, Mansa was Buddhist and everyone else was Hindu except me(I had no religion) and, surprise...half my cities were Hindu. I quickly converted and revolted to Theocracy, giving me 12 exp longbows in Cahokia I also took time to try to build the AP. Unfortunately, when I was 5 turns from finishing it, Darius popped a GE and rushed it around 1100AD. Charlemagne was elected as Pope, and after a few turns, up comes a resolution to end all intrafaith fighting. Of course, I didn't like this at all. I felt I was a matter of turns from vassalizing Hatty, and I was two turns away from capturing Pi-Ramesses(after having captured both Hierconopolis and Elephantine). I picked defy resolution, assuming it would be passed. I was immediately stripped of full member status, and became a mere voting member. I also was given huge unhappiness penalties in all my cities. I took Pi-Ramesses and then got peace from Hatty in 1200AD when I realized that she had been gifted both Feudalism and Guilds! That kept me from taking her last large city and vassalizing her. The next turn, she vassalized to Mansa. I'm so glad I peaced her, or I would have been stuck at war with Mansa, the most advanced of the AI.

Unfortunately, things didn't last much longer. I was 4th to Liberalism(Pacal came out of nowhere and beat Darius to it by 2 turns, who beat Mansa by 3 turns) And while I was researching Astronomy for trading(only Pacal had it), Charlemagne spread Hinduism to a single Malinese city and then asked for a diplo victory vote. I voted for Darius, but it didn't matter. Charlemagne had 40% of the vote, and the two next highest voters both voted for him as well.

So I lost a Religious Victory to Charlemagne in 1370AD.

 

[da_Vinci]

So I lost a Religious Victory to Charlemagne in 1370AD.

It seems clear with this and all the cultural victories, that the AI pursues more ways to win in BTS than in V/W. Which gives us humans a lot more to worry about, increasing the challenge (and the fun! )

dV

 

[Harbourboy]

I hate vassals. I was going along really nicely for a domination target, but every time I got an AI down on its knees, it would become a vassal to the top dog, who would then come down on me like an avenging storm. The final blow came when Charlemagne had 3 vassals and they all declared on me at once. I find this to be so unfair. Why would someone who likes you instantly go to war with you just because they've vassalised your current target? I find this to be impossible to combat, other than to take over the world pre-vassalisation.

As it was impossible to fight the whole world at once, I had to batten down the hatches and eke out a survival until Hatsepshut conquered the world with culture.

Bah!

EDIT: Reading through the spoilers, I see that Cultural Loss was a popular option in this game! I'm so cool!

 

[Niklas]

The next turn, she vassalized to Mansa. I'm so glad I peaced her, or I would have been stuck at war with Mansa, the most advanced of the AI.

Why would someone who likes you instantly go to war with you just because they've vassalised your current target?

I feel I must be missing something here. Is this how it works? My memory may be hazy, and BtS may be different, but I seem to recall otherwise. Also the mechanic you describe would be horribly broken, that's certainly not how it should work, so I can't help but wonder if you've missed something.

For instance in WOTM14 I was fighting Stalin and signed in Napoleon, and a bunch of turns later when Stalin became Napoleon's vassal I found myself automatically at peace with both - very frustrating since I was gearing up for a push on Stalin's capitol, but no where near as frustrating as a war with Napoleon would have been.

And in this game I declared on Hatty, had Hammurabi declare on me in response (DP), and signed in Mansa against both of them. A number of turns later I first vassalized Hatty, which forced Mansa into peace with her, and then Mansa did the same with Hammurabi, which forced me into peace with him. Being forced into war with my best buddy Mansa at either of those occurences would have been rather ridiculous - who would ever ask for capitulation then?

 

[Harbourboy]

I feel I must be missing something here. Is this how it works?

In my version of the game, yes, ALWAYS. I hate it. I always turn Vassal off in HoF because I am so sick of this feature. It makes domination impossible for me at this level. I have to put up with 10 turns of "Refuses to Talk" before I can even start negotiating my way of out of it. So frustrating.

 

[ChrisFromLux]

Ahem, are you really sure?

Because I'm with Niklas here ... the vassal automaticaly adopts his new master's relationships ... meaning, if you're at peace with the master, you should automatically be at peace with your enemy, once he becomes vassalized!?!

That's how it works in my games