Civ2 in Civ3

[Elear]

Settings: All random except: normal map size, normal rules, Emperor level, restless barbarians

Goal: Civ2 victory conditions are the only valid ones for us: conquest and space race. AI can do any (note normal rules).

Who wants in? Taking 1 person. We'll play and win.

Turn sets: 20 a piece due to small roster

 

[Bucephalus]

I might be up for this, Elear, depending on how quickly you want to play it. I could probably commit to a couple of sets a week, maybe more in the early turns.

 

[TheOverseer714]

I'm interested. Ku-1 is winding down, and I really doubt there will be a Ku-2. I think everyone involved in the SGDeity game has agreed to let that die in peace. Hawk-02 just finished and there needs to be at least 1 more player to get Hawk-03 going. I'm down to 3 active SG's and that may soon be 2. 20 turns per set will be fine probably to the middle ages, and should Conquest be the accepted route, that may be all we need. If it goes to the IA, ten turns will be better then, but we'll decide when that point is reached.

 

[Elear]

I'll count you both in since you replied; I don't expect such a SG to be a very lengthy one.

Roster:

Elear
Bucephalus
Overseer

I agree with Overseer's notion that turnsets should be 10 a piece if we make it to the IA.

I will start this shortly.

 

[Elear]

4000 BC - Found Athens. Pottery from hut. Start on warrior. Worker NE to BG. Start on Writing at minimum.
3750 BC - Athens: Warrior -> Warrior. Start minimum exploration with warrior.
3550 BC - Lux up to prevent riot.
3500 BC - Borders expand. We have wheat, fish, some fresh water, BG, ivory, game, some forest and hills, and a cattle just to the north. Athens: Warrior -> Hoplite.
3450 BC - Carthage warrior comes from east. They want almost everything we have for Masonry; I don't accept. BW + Pottery + 38 gold + 1 gpt seems steep.
3300 BC - Enough commerce to get Sci and Lux down from 20% -> 10% each.
3250 BC - Athens: Hoplite -> Settler.
3150 BC - Discover a wheat cattle.
3100 BC - Discover incense.
3050 BC - Discover Carthaginian borders separated by freshwater lake to the west. Landform vaguely appears to be 70 percent continents, 60 percent archipelago, or 70 percent pangaea. It is too early to tell and I could be off on this guess.

The known world with dotmap:



Of the dots on that map, the red dot (by the wheat), magenta dot (by the ivory), and orange dot (to block Carthaginian expansion) seem most important to me. Orange dot may be impossible to get, seems like it is rather close to where Carthage might be, in which case some of the northern dots need adjustment. The towns along the the west coast aren't that great; they are for the sake of needing fishing towns. The grey dot in the far NE is a vague guess, we may need to build a town there too to block Carthage.

EDIT: If it's not clear where the Carthaginian borders are, you can sort of see them just NE of the southern exploring warrior.

 

[Bucephalus]

Hmm. not a lot of commerce inherant in the surrounding lands, but plenty of food and shields - I think it's more set for a conquest VC than SS.

@Elear: I'm a little confused with your Worker moves: you've roaded to the wheat, which cannot be worked until it falls within another city's boundaries. Meanwhile, Athens is working two unimproved tiles. What's your thinking?

I think your city spacing may be a bit wide, given the start; with that configuration, dozens of tiles would remain unworked until Sanitation. Unless we go for a Space VC, that's more than half of the game. The Red dot in particular would have 5 tundra/forest tiles within it's boundaries. Wouldn't it fare better brought back one NE, where it might work some more powerful tiles?

I'm not keen on the 2 dots to the SE at all. The light blue is sacrificing an awful lot just to be on a river. Yes, they are river tiles, but they are tundra river tiles. I would probably put it one E of that position, leaving room for another city 3 SE of Athens.

I would bring the Yellow dot one tile closer to Athens, too.

The Pink and Magenta would then be fine where they are, but the Light-Green (W of Athens) could come one closer.

All just my opinion, of course - feel free to ignore it.

In terms of immmediate strategy, I'd be in favour of an early war with Carthage. We are going to be competing for land with them, sooner rather than later, and in my experience they usually start the game quite slowly - early could be a good time to catch them.

Should be able to play this in about 24 hrs.

 

[Elear]

As for the worker moves, I really wanted to prepare for the settler to get there ASAP. Usually, I do minimal improvement (except for food bonuses) with my first worker. I use the first worker to get roads where I need them.

I do not know why Athens would be working unimproved tiles? It was up to 3050 BC, then it grew. Perhaps the governor re-assigned them in 3000 BC on my 20th turn?

At a second glance, my spacing in the dot map is loose, yes. So I agree there.

Conquest victory, yep, seems like it's more bent towards that so far.

The whole SE tundra thing I based off of two criteria: river tiles (yes, tundra rivers aren't as good), and then trying not to infringe on core cities. I see your point about adding a third city in that region, then shuffling the dots, but regardless, I disagree that the whole region has an "awful lot" to sacrifise in the first place.

Light green dot could come one closer; it depends on the terrain there in the end. Looks to be just forest.

As for your notion about Carthage, I do see early war as the way to go, but I disagree that they are easy. Remember the Numidian Mercenaries, they are terribly annoying.

Sorry for my poor dot map though. I drew it up quickly and I've been out of Civ a little while. You made some good suggestions.

 

[Bucephalus]

As for the worker moves, I really wanted to prepare for the settler to get there ASAP. Usually, I do minimal improvement (except for food bonuses) with my first worker. I use the first worker to get roads where I need them..

No criticism intended; I've never played with you before, so I'm trying to get a handle on how you are thinking. What I mean about unimproved tiles is, because you roaded to the wheat, Athens has one fully improved tile but three working citizens (one of whom is working a part-improved tile, granted). It is usual to have a tile improved and ready for each turn of growth.

I didn't intend to imply that Carthage would be an 'easy' target, just that they can be vulnerable early-game because of slow growth.

I'll try to put a Dot-map together this A.M.

Edit: This would be my settling preferences for the immediate core, red being first priority - immediate access to beef and 3 BG's.

 

[Bucephalus]

Just to confirm that I'l be able to play this tonight (about 5 - 6 hrs), so if you have any thoughts........ we could especially do with reaching agreement on the first two city sites.

What about you, Overseer?

Edit: I've also had a thought regarding medium term strategy. We have Ivory to the East, and if we are going with 'Conquest' VC, I suggest looking to get a pre-build going for the SoZ. Tech path adjusted to get Maths, obviously.

 

[Elear]

I understand what you mean now about improvements; I suppose it's just a matter of preference. It doesn't matter now though, so we can just fill in the "gaps" as we go.

I like your dot map, even if it takes the fish lake spot away; you made a fair point in how you re-adjusted.

I'd like to see this order of dots:

1) Yellow
2) Red
3) White
4) Navy
5) Purple
6) Green
7) Blue

Reasons:

1) Good shields, decent food, road already built towards it.
2) Cattle + some shields long term.
3) Fairly good city site & ivory.
4) This site will become productive and appears to be the next best.
5) This site will become productive and appears to be the next best.
6) Wheat but half the radius is tundra.
7) Has nothing more appealing than any of the other sites, so this one is last.

This order should change if it's more efficient to make cities in a different order depending on how roads, etc. are made.

edit: I'm also fine with utilizing the SoZ.

 

[Bucephalus]

I understand what you mean now about improvements; I suppose it's just a matter of preference. It doesn't matter now though, so we can just fill in the "gaps" as we go.

I like your dot map, even if it takes the fish lake spot away; you made a fair point in how you re-adjusted.

I'd like to see this order of dots:

1) Yellow
2) Red
3) White
4) Navy
5) Purple
6) Green
7) Blue

Reasons:

1) Good shields, decent food, road already built towards it.
2) Cattle + some shields long term.
3) Fairly good city site & ivory.
4) This site will become productive and appears to be the next best.
5) This site will become productive and appears to be the next best.
6) Wheat but half the radius is tundra.
7) Has nothing more appealing than any of the other sites, so this one is last.

This order should change if it's more efficient to make cities in a different order depending on how roads, etc. are made.

edit: I'm also fine with utilizing the SoZ.

Pretty much agree here, with one difference: Yellow dot will not have access to the Wheat until Green dot is also settled, or until it has an expansion. The Red dot has immediate access to growth (cow) and 3 BG's. Once improved - and with a granary - it would make a half decent Settler pump.

 

[TheOverseer714]

Buce's red dot looks good. His green dot moved 1 tile south saves an Aqueduct. Yellow moved 1 SE gets the same benefit. I think purple, blue, and white dots are fine.
I'd build Red, then green, then yellow, then blue. Blue will probably be a good armory city, red for workers or settlers, green armory/SoZ(fish, wheat, 1 hill, 3 forested tundra could mean growth + shields, perfect for a wonder). Just my opinions. However, I think each of us is veteran enough to make good decisions, but it is nice to know the why behind site choices. Early war against Carthage might be good, before they get strong. Conquest it is.

 

[Bucephalus]

Buce's red dot looks good. His green dot moved 1 tile south saves an Aqueduct. Yellow moved 1 SE gets the same benefit.

Cannot agree here, Overseer. Although I see the obvious benefits of saving on 'ducts, moving Yellow from it's proposed position would ruin it's huge potential. IMO. Where I propose, it has access to Wheat, Fish, hills, mountains and lots of grassland; moving it 1SE loses the Wheat and the fish + 3 grasslands, and gains 5 tundra tiles.

However, it's an issue that I'm unlikely to face in the next twenty turns if we agree that Red dot is to be Settled first, so we can mull it over further if need be.

 

[Bucephalus]

Mental note to self: Barbs are on

Enter;

1) Nada.

2) Settler completes in Athens; Settler and rHoplite to Red dot; with Barbs 'on' decide to build couple of quick Warriors in Athens while it grows again, by which time our Worker will have mined a BG for the new citizen to work.

Our 2 Warriors continue to explore. The Northern one (hitherto known as Worker01) is pushing due North, looking for contacts. The terrain is ugly. The Western one (Warrior02) is skirting 'Carthage'. Coastal start, as expected. No food bonus' to be seen but typically they've irrigated two BG's.

3/4) Nada.

5) 'Sparta' is founded on Red dot. Citizen on the Cow, build Warrior>Worker.

6) Warrior completes in Athens, and is sent 'fog-busting' in the near NE.

7) Nada.

8) Worker completes mine (Athens), moves to mine BG.

9) The land to the North is narrowing, coast almost visible on both sides. Still really ugly.

10) Warrior03 encounters GH. I've previously left them, not wanting to risk our explorers, but this one is close enough to dispatch a Hoplite from Sparta. Athens completes Warrior, begins Granary. Sparta completes Warrior, begins Worker.

11) There are Silks near to Carthage' territory.

12) Nada.

13) A useful piece of luck! Our Hoplite gets a Settler from the GH. I'm going to pause awhile to consult the Dotmap, but at first glance it looks perfect where it is. On reflection, I'm torn between leaving it and moving 1S. I decide to settle on the spot, capturing the Incense. One day, this will be a wonderful FP city.

14) Nada.

15) Warrior01 is two-thirds of the way up the map (definitely not pelago), and has still met no-one. The land is still ugly.

16) Ha! I spoke too soon as a green border is spotted.

17) It's Japan. They are up Wheel, WC, CB. Down Alphabet. They will give CB and WC for Alphabet. They want Alphabet and 40g for Wheel (a monopoly only they start with). There's tradin' afoot!

Give Alphabet + 40g for Wheel.
Call Carthage. Give Wheel, 4gpt, 98g for Masonry.
Call Japan. Give Masonry for WC, CB, 50g.
There are no Horses visible anywhere on the map.

18) Nada.

19) Nada.

20) Warrior02 is booted to the other side of Carthage. Although they have Horses nearby, they are perched on the edge of the Tundra, so I don't think they will outgrow us.

Edit: I'm having trouble attaching the save. I'll post with screenies in the morning.

 

[Bucephalus]

Here's the save,

 

[Bucephalus]

And some screenies:

Looking at the save this AM, I see that I made an error. When Athens built it's Settler, I neglected to notice that Science needed to be raised to 20% to continue the minimum run on Writing, so I've cost us a few turns in research.

Sorry, guys.

 

[Elear]

Good job on the trading set. Also I agree 100% with your decision with the GH settler.

As for the whole situation with moving the dots down for fresh water, although normally I would agree, Overseer, in this case it seems more prudent to choose the most productive city sites rather than leaning towards fresh water. I love fresh water too but it's not extremely necessary in this situation.

 

[TheOverseer714]

I'm still fighting that, I think Buce's spot loses the fish, has 2 unimprovable coastal tiles, and needs a cultural expansion to grab the game tundra tile. I'm working up a visual aid to make my point. Mine grabs the game, accesses the wheat, has the fish, no coastal tiles and all 3 tundra tiles are forested, which gets an extra shield when worked. A mined tundra only has one shield, forested tundra gets 2. My choice also gets the fresh water. If you can find any holes in my placement, I challenge you to point them out. With no further adieu, here the picture is:

 

[Bucephalus]

Overseer, I think you misunderstand. My bone of contention was with moving Yellow 1SE - I think you'll find that I didn't mention Green at all.

Now you cause me to look at it, where you are proposing for Green is indeed an improved spot; however, it then goes CxxC with Yellow, which I still think outweighs other considerations. IMO, Yellow has the potential to be our best city, while Green is always going to be second best wherever we put it.

 

[TheOverseer714]

I doubt that it will crowd yellow, since it will not need those shared tiles, the wheat, game and fish were never going to be available to your yellow anyway, and will feed green so well that it can become a power city in it's own right. Even if yellow gets the wheat, which green would need settled to allow anyway, green will still be fine. I have the save and will look things over in close detail, maybe I'll see something I didn't see before.