Buce01: The Slavemaster

[Phaedo]

Oops

 

[Phaedo]

Okay, I kow I have been out of the loop for a while and I am just getting back into it but I've looked at the save and have a couple of thoughts and questions.

First about the placing of Apollonia: I didn't have a chance to look closely at the save before I posted so I claim the fault as my own but It is closer to the cap than Pergamon with only 2 cities between where Pergamon has 3. Pergamon gets more than 50% of its SHIELDS without a court. Babylon would only have to lose 1 tile to get us 3 CxxC cities in the same area and that seems possible with their war with the Iros. I'm fine with the placement but lets be clear about the reason. It wasn't because we would lose the gold to corruption, it was because we felt we needed 3 (as opposed to 2) cities in the area quickly. We will get control of the area eventually so the reasoning should be that the income from the 3 cities (or unit support) is more important than a stronger long-term town. We are sprawling enough that it's not going to make much difference but if we are building courts in Marathon (not sure it needs one at this point) we shouldn't look at Apollonia as a corrupt town (as it is the same 10 tiles from the capital with 2 cities in between). Granted Apollonia is younger and thus subject to more corruption but should still be less than Pergamon.

My second comment is about the blockade. Along the Eastern coast we have 5 MIs and 5 Knights. Couldn't these deal with any landings that came? The more Zulu units we kill, the better peace deal we will get. The 2-move knights could easily cover the Northern peninsula while the MIs could cover the roaded SE coast. In addition, we have a stack of 13 MIs doing nothing. If we aren't planning on marching them into Hittite or Iro territory in the next turn or so I think they would be used better as escorts for the units moving through our territory or for coastal defence.

Bringing me to my third comment about the workers. There are a couple of workers fortified to prevent landings (why not some MIs from the stack if that is what we are doing) while single slaves are roading coastal tiles (much more effective defence than a blockade in my opinion). There a number of slaves roading a hill on the Northern Peninsula as well. Is this the priority tile? There are also 10 slaves watering a plains square along the Iro border that we won't need for ages (there are already 2 roaded and irrigated tiles in the city's radius). Ideally, we want to limit the improvement of border squares unless they are going to be used effectively. As long as we have a road to each Civ we can trade and if there is only 1 road, it's far easier to control access to our land. I would consider pillaging that particular square myself. Make Punk boy spend the turns crossing unimproved land until we are absolutely going to use the tile (this is in the context of having unroaded coastal tiles and our Western lands needing improvement). Finally, there are slaves working the hill next to Apollonia. This isn't a big deal in my opinion although neither do I think it is the priority tile. But wasn't the choice to settle the gold because it was assumed that the city would be too corrupt to benefit from it? Gold suffers less than shields when it comes to corruption and waste. Why would we work the hill?

I hope this hasn't come off as too harsh. It's been a long day and I'm a bit chippy so please don't take any offence, but I'm not quite sure about the reasoning behind the set up. I know I have been out of the loop for a while so if I am missing something, please enlighten me.

 

[Bucephalus]

I'm sorry, Miles, but I'm finding it imposible to be as tactful as Phaedo has been; this set is riddled with the kind of fundamental errors that I wouldn't expect to see from a Monarch level player, much less someone who claims to be comfortable with DG.

I hardly know where to start.

Epheseus has only four corrupted gold out of 24, yet it is building a Courthouse; it will do no more than cover it's maintainance costs.

Ditto Pharsalos, and Eritrea which badly needs an Aquaduct.

Arterium is building a regular LB.

We are running 100% Science, yet Athens is building a Bank while you cry out for more Knights.

And fortified workers lining the coast? What's that about?
Aside from being a cardinal sin - workers should be working - they do not prevent landings; they can be taken directly from boats.

As Phaedo pointed out, you have a stack of MI's that could be doing that job; not that it's necessary when you have 5 Knights in the region - what are you expecting them to drop? Pikes and LB's would be my guess.

If Iroquois Knights had you worried (and they are a problem - I'm amazed that Shaka hasn't allied them against us), you only had to pause and ask for advice.

The answer is quite simple, and it certainly doesn't require making peace with Shaka, particularly while we have an alliance with Mursilis.

IMO, what is required is to give gpt to Hiawatha (we may be short on military but we have money to burn) for another alliance, and a ROP to speed his Knights on their way.

Keeping the other three Civs fighting is entirely in our interests while we complete our infastructure, and it keeps them short on offensive units for when we make our next incursions.

I think your entire strategy during this set was fundamentally flawed.

 

[CivActuary]

... workers should be working - they do not prevent landings; they can be taken directly from boats.

Slightly off the main topic, but I always thought workers actually could prevent landings. Thought I remember reading that somewhere.

 

[Bucephalus]

Slightly off the main topic, but I always thought workers actually could prevent landings. Thought I remember reading that somewhere.

I think that used to be the case, but I'm sure it's not now; of course I'm willing to be corrected if I'm wrong, but even so, that is not an efficient use of workers or a sound and necessary strategy.

 

[Bucephalus]

One thing to remember for later: A unit can capture a worker directly from a dromon, even if it isn't amphibious.

This was taken from SGOTM12.

 

[CivActuary]

I think that used to be the case, but I'm sure it's not now; of course I'm willing to be corrected if I'm wrong, but even so, that is not an efficient use of workers or a sound and necessary strategy.

Possibly. I've been looking through the site and found a reference to a worker block on an island, but it's a couple years old and you are probably right about it being different now. Maybe I'll set up some sort of test for it later on if I get some playing time tonight.

Edit: Just saw your post - I stand corrected, and don't need to test it now!

Anyway, I would let the Zulu units land and then kill them. Our forces up there should be sufficient to deal with the landings, and the more AI units we get rid of, the better.

 

[Bucephalus]

Do you (team) have any thoughts on what I suggested regarding Hiawatha?

 

[Bucephalus]

Just to clarify the issue:

Spoiler :

 

[CivActuary]

Do you (team) have any thoughts on what I suggested regarding Hiawatha?

Definitely buy him back into an alliance. I was rather surprised he got out of the first one so quick - even when I stupidly gave him saltpeter as part of it.

However, this would mean curtailing research of Metallurgy, since if I read the turnlog correctly we are 100% sci and running a deficit. How many turns are left for that? I am assuming we could still research at a decent clip even after giving some gpt to Hiawatha in a deal.

I'm not so sure about the ROP though. He's going to use it to send his knights off to conquer Babylon - Wouldn't we rather do that (the conquering, I mean)?

 

[Bucephalus]

Definitely buy him back into an alliance. I was rather surprised he got out of the first one so quick - even when I stupidly gave him saltpeter as part of it.

However, this would mean curtailing research of Metallurgy, since if I read the turnlog correctly we are 100% sci and running a deficit. How many turns are left for that? I am assuming we could still research at a decent clip even after giving some gpt to Hiawatha in a deal.

Shaka has it already, so it's not a monopoly; it's a question of priority IMO - what's one turn more or less when set against the advantages of Hiawatha and Shaka fighting again.

I'm not so sure about the ROP though. He's going to use it to send his knights off to conquer Babylon - Wouldn't we rather do that (the conquering, I mean)?

I'm guessing he'll send fewer when he has an enemy closer to home; but it really doesn't matter who we take the Babylon lands from - Babylon or Iroquois. One thing that Miles got right is the need to take out Hiawatha sometime soon.

 

[Phaedo]

Getting Punk Boy into War with Zulu would suit us beautifully (this was your suggestion yes?). It is not overly expensive.

Just to play devil's advocate (purely for discussion purposes), we could get Hiawatha to join our campaign against the Zulu for free if we went against the Babs with him. I realize there is no immediate need for this but there is land to be claimed and as we can claim it, Punky should direct more attention toward the Zulu as we settle the Bab land that opens up. We could easily take the Bab city in our midst (that would allow us to reasonably block Iro troop movement through our territory). We are looking for peace between Babs and Iros so we may be able to hasten it with an intervention. We are not really in the strategic position to do this but we could bein a turn or two.

At the end of the day, Iro and Babs are done. Murray is our next target and if we can time it such that we do the clean war switch from Zulu to Hittite we will get everything Zulu has (and more than he can afford if he is still at war with someone). The main concern is to get Murray to commit his troops to the Zulu war (which we have done) before we stab him in the back (which we haven't). However, if Iro troops are in our territory and allied with Murray, it's the same as going at Murray head on as the Iro knights will give Murray time to target us.

The question is how we get Iro out of the Bab war (with as much advantage to ourselves as we can get) and into a Zulu war (to get the troops moving that direction), while setting up for the big Brutus move where we ally with Zulu against Murray? Please correct me if I'm on the wrong track.

If I am on the right track, we want to sell everything we learn from the new continent to the Civ we are about to declare on and bankrupt them. If we keep our continent at war, make peace on our terms and keep trading with the beta continent, we will easily be dominant quickly.

If I haven't missed anything in the above analysis, we are well on our way to domination. The missing key is workers. I think now is the time to develop a strategy for farming Bab/Iro slaves. I think the best way to do this is to reduce the Babs to the most food-rich land and leave them some open land to settle (this is why we have to get the Iros out), stay at war and cull their setlers as they appear. I think working out this farming technique will be quite important in the Buce02 game.

Well, there it is. The sub comes in and tells the team how to play. Give me sh** guys

 

[Elephantium]

Why are we so eager to prolong the Zulu war? Personally, I'd rather make peace and avoid any WW. Plus, peacetime reduces any distractions from infrastructure building.

 

[Bucephalus]

Why are we so eager to prolong the Zulu war? Personally, I'd rather make peace and avoid any WW. Plus, peacetime reduces any distractions from infrastructure building.

OK, that's a fair question; let's see if you can answer it for yourself.

First, some facts:

On DG, the AI is allowed 3 free units for every city;

Zulu have 27 cities;

On DG, the AI has a production bonus of 30%; in the time that it takes us to build a bank, they will build a bank and a Knight.

Hittites and Iroquois provide a buffer zone between ourselves and Zulu.

We haven't lost any units or cities, and we have no units in enemy territory, so WW is not an issue.

Given those facts, ask yourself these questions:

When Zulu build their cheap Knights, what will they do with them, a) If they are fighting Hiawatha and Mursilis, or b) If they are at peace?

Given that we can't rebuild our military and improve our infastructure at the same time, what is the best strategy to ensure homeland security while we build our banks/uni's/aquaducts?

 

[Bucephalus]

Well, there it is. The sub comes in and tells the team how to play. Give me sh** guys

Phaedo, I haven't ignored this post; I just think we need to get us all singing from the same hymn sheet first - I'd like us to address the 'why's' before we address the 'how's'.

 

[Elephantium]

OK, that's a fair question; let's see if you can answer it for yourself.

First, some facts:

<snip>

When you put it in those terms, my question actually seems kind of silly

Given that we can't rebuild our military and improve our infastructure at the same time, what is the best strategy to ensure homeland security while we build our banks/uni's/aquaducts?

"Let's you and him fight while we build some banks"

 

[Phaedo]

Not a silly question at all. It does seem that for DG and up it is important to keep our main threats and next victims at war. It does seem to be one of the ways that this level really diverges from Emperor. Although WW isn't a concern now, it is something to be very aware of. I think the best way to keep it under control is good military tactics. Losing cities is the big killer and usually unnecessary. Recently I have been struck with how easy it is to control how the AI enters your territory by destroying the roads on the tiles just outside our borders. Ad the open city lure and you can pretty much fight them when and where you like defensively. The invasion stuff requires good prep, using movement wisely and making sure your forces are well-defended at the end of turn (which usually just takes some careful movement counting).

 

[Bucephalus]

When you put it in those terms, my question actually seems kind of silly

Absolutely not - it's those kind of questions that ensures that we get it right; it's about making a team greater than the sum of it's parts.

"Let's you and him fight while we build some banks"

Bingo!

 

[Bucephalus]

Not a silly question at all. It does seem that for DG and up it is important to keep our main threats and next victims at war. It does seem to be one of the ways that this level really diverges from Emperor. Although WW isn't a concern now, it is something to be very aware of. I think the best way to keep it under control is good military tactics. Losing cities is the big killer and usually unnecessary. Recently I have been struck with how easy it is to control how the AI enters your territory by destroying the roads on the tiles just outside our borders. Ad the open city lure and you can pretty much fight them when and where you like defensively. The invasion stuff requires good prep, using movement wisely and making sure your forces are well-defended at the end of turn (which usually just takes some careful movement counting).

Trust an English-teacher to find the right word.

At higher levels the AI is like a dog; if you don't control it, it ends up biting you.

 

[Phaedo]

Now if only I could learn how to spell