Conquests 01: First Spoiler. End of ancient age.

[smackster]

Is this true?

After playing Predator up to 1395 AD, I played the open file to 400 AD (back to fit of rage re: RNG gods, but I calmed down). Being my first Predaotr level game, I thought some sick individual might have... . Concerning the AA, I popped two settlements at Predator, none in the Open save file from the same GHs. But, if the above statement is true, I could've been building a settler, don't recall.

They may have they changed it in Conquests, they certainly changed the incidence of advanced villages for sure. In / not only was that true, but also you could not get a settler if you already had one in play, not just building one. There is also an algorithm that calculates the number of cities as you don't get a settler if you have too many.

I had a post on this, but who knows where it is now.

Smackster

 

[Darkness]

I believe scientific leaders were disabled for this game because they are unbalanced. Perhaps one of the staff can elaborate.

I'm not on the staff but SGL were disabled for balance reasons, according to Ainwood

Also, you definately can not get a settler from a GH if you're either producing one or have one in the field.

 

[smackster]

I'm not on the staff but SGL were disabled for balance reasons, according to Ainwood

And just to elaborate on that, unbalanced because getting an early SGL can have a dramatic effect on your game, and its pure luck. Imagine getting an SGL with your first tech researched, and rushing the Pyramids before 3000BC.

However without the SGL we have no way of rushing GW's. I think this counter balance has the effect that the player will do more warmongering. First they have to capture most GW's, and if they get a leader are likely to build Armies and because of the over balance of Armies do even more war mongering.

I'll talk more about this in the next spoiler, where I get my first taste of Conquests Armies.

 

[DJMGator13]

Is that directed at me? I did say I was playing predator in my game report, which is admittedly back on page 1 of this thread.

Offa,

Not directed at you. Alot of the posts in the past have not included the class and when you are trying to learn research paths and others peoples playing styles it is helpful to know the class. I think AlanH or even Ainwood have previously asked for the class to be included in the posts.

My random thought on the Predator class, looks to be off base, since Open classes players are getting early AD middle ages also. I guess a better question would be which techs (order) were emphasized and why. The tech tree and AI tech trading knowledge is my weak point.

 

[Doc Holliday]

I'm not on the staff but SGL were disabled for balance reasons, according to Ainwood

Also, you definately can not get a settler from a GH if you're either producing one or have one in the field.

This is true for free settlers but you can still pop a free city while producing or having one on the field.

 

[dojoboy]

I believe scientific leaders were disabled for this game because they are unbalanced. Perhaps one of the staff can elaborate.

Not a staff member, but that is correct. SGL's have been disabled.

 

[dojoboy]

I'll talk more about this in the next spoiler, where I get my first taste of Conquests Armies.

(lengthening message by at least ten characters)

 

[Offa]

Sorry if this is slightly off-topic in hand, but what does influence whether you get a settler from a hut? I know you mustn't have an active settler, or be building one (at least I knew that in PTW and it seemed unlikely to change), and that hut settler are more likely for expansionist Civs at low difficulty levels (zero chance at sid). However, I am a bit less clear about the effect of the number of towns you have. I vaguely think that having fewer towns than the AI maximizes your chances.

 

[HellboundHeathcliff]

It use to be that you needed fewer than the average # cities per civ. I have a feeling they changed the rules for C3C. I seem to remember getting a free city in a random game when i had more cities than anyone else.

As for turning off SGL's... the game is based heavily on the RNG and just about everything in the game depends on luck for one thing or another. I think they should be on and if someone gets a lucky start because of it and pushes the top players down a bit... who cares? Same for goody huts. Random events are part of the game and it's not what you get, but how you use it that matters. (just needed to get that out of my system)

 

[al_thor]

The game (not just this GOTM) sure would be A LOT better if the AI used Armies. I have two 4-Knight Armies (I have the Pentagon) and another Army consisting of 2 Midevil Infantry (one of them is Elite), 1 Elite *Leader Sword, and 1 Crusader. Absolutely devastating. Too bad I can't fit them into my Galleon's (not yet but SOON).
I almost have the Military Acedemy built (however, I MIGHT switch this to a GW). But, once that's done and I start building Cavalry Armies, the fat lady might as well start warming up, because it's gonna be over.

 

[samildanach]

Sorry if this is slightly off-topic in hand, but what does influence whether you get a settler from a hut? I know you mustn't have an active settler, or be building one (at least I knew that in PTW and it seemed unlikely to change), and that hut settler are more likely for expansionist Civs at low difficulty levels (zero chance at sid). However, I am a bit less clear about the effect of the number of towns you have. I vaguely think that having fewer towns than the AI maximizes your chances.

I've just been doing a test game with the Inca ( agricultural and expanionist ) on regent level. I've played up to 1550 BC and popped 18 huts.
The results were 9 techs, 3 lots of gold ( one at 50g which I got after currency) , 3 maps and 3 warriors. The goody huts were never empty.
This isn't defintive as it would require some more testing but it appears that at least the Inca never get settlers or cities from goody huts. However, it might be that no agricultural civs get settlers or cities from goody huts.
In this game all the other civs had founded their second city by the time I founded mine. It was on a standard panagaea.

edit: I should add of course that when I popped the huts there were no settlers being built or in the field.

 

[Stile]

This is true for free settlers but you can still pop a free city while producing or having one on the field.

Thanks for the clarification. I thought I was crazy when I popped a city when I had my first built settler in the field. I assumed the rules had changed or perhaps the AI had outbuilt me past some threshold. I guess there is an important distinction between GH settlers and cities. Actually I'm happier with the city than a settler, because I would have been tempted to move the settler and the city turned up with horses several turns later.

 

[Kuningas]

Sorry if this is slightly off-topic in hand, but what does influence whether you get a settler from a hut? I know you mustn't have an active settler, or be building one (at least I knew that in PTW and it seemed unlikely to change), and that hut settler are more likely for expansionist Civs at low difficulty levels (zero chance at sid). However, I am a bit less clear about the effect of the number of towns you have. I vaguely think that having fewer towns than the AI maximizes your chances.

I'm currently working on my HOF Deity attempt and I got 2 settlers from huts I play with Incas traits expansionist and agricultural. Capital city built granary while I popped huts. I confirm, you must not have an active settler or be building one. I hardly got any techs. So the biggest factor must be the number of cities vs AI. AI had 3-5 cities while I had 1 and 2.

 

[samildanach]

I'm currently working on my HOF Deity attempt and I got 2 settlers from huts I play with Incas traits expansionist and agricultural. Capital city built granary while I popped huts. I confirm, you must not have an active settler or be building one. I hardly got any techs. So the biggest factor must be the number of cities vs AI. AI had 3-5 cities while I had 1 and 2.

I replayed with the same conditions but this time at deity. I played up till the same date, this time I popped 22 huts. Of those, 3 gave settlers, 4 gave gold, 6 gave maps, 5 gave warriors and 4 gave techs.
Interestingly, of the three settlers I popped two came in the first eight huts. Also 3 of my 4 techs came in the first eight huts.
It looks like the settlers from GH are dependent on your relative civ size and are independent of level. Techs from GH do appear to be dependent on level - half the huts popped on regent gave a tech even though I had a significant tech lead. But on deity - less than a fifth gave techs and seemed to dry up as soon as I got ahead.

 

[SniperDevil]

im anxious for next spoiler. How long does it usually take for next spoiler to come out?

 

[smackster]

im anxious for next spoiler. How long does it usually take for next spoiler to come out?

Usually on the 10th. Can you wait that long? I fully expect you to be the first to post having done your full writeup, and loaded your pictures in anticipation

 

[SniperDevil]

Usually on the 10th. Can you wait that long? I fully expect you to be the first to post having done your full writeup, and loaded your pictures in anticipation

Ha. Im not that "addicted yet" i havent really learned the ways of recording whats happened and dont know how to take pics and then upload them. Plus i suck( this is my first game ever on regent and my first GOTM). At least im in 4 out of all the nations :/ And the most powerfull nation in the world borders me

 

[smackster]

Ha. Im not that "addicted yet" i havent really learned the ways of recording whats happened and dont know how to take pics and then upload them. Plus i suck( this is my first game ever on regent and my first GOTM). At least im in 4 out of all the nations :/ And the most powerfull nation in the world borders me

Addicted, not yet, but you will be.

For PC's just hit "Print Screen" and then ctrl-v into you favorite graphics program, Paint that comes with windows does a basic job.

Posting games that go wrong is also valuable to a lot of players, so don't be afraid to tell us what went wrong.

Smacktser

 

[DJMGator13]

I've been using Screen Shot Assistant for taking my screen shots and then paint to edit them.

Screen Shot Assistant is nice because it gives you a history of your folders so I can easily switch from GOTM to SGOTM.

 

[Sir Clive]

A enjoyable game but I am not doing very well so far I am afraid despite playing at conwuest level. Over eagerness caused me to settle the capital in a bad position and I haven't really recovered from that

I normally play on Regent or Monarch and struggle a bit , but this time I seem to doing even worse than usual.

I usually play a fairly peaceful game so I started off by planning to get to the Great Library first and sure enough I got there fairly easily.

I then started building a few marketplaces in order to keep the happiness level up. I had 2 iron but I didn't have any horses and was planning to go to war to get them towards the start of the middle ages.

Hopefully thing will improve, but it is still an enjoyable game . I think it is pretty safe to say I will still be qualified to play Conquest level for my 2nd GOTM attempt