Roland Ehnström
Prince
ainwood said:Nice analysis!And to think I chose Maya just 'cause I think they're cool!
COTM 04 Pre-Game Discussion
- Thread starter ainwood
- Start date
Spot on, Roland. Well done
So with such a good starting position, where's the catch?
I'm tempted to follow Xevious' idea and move the worker W. Particularly as there are not many bgs in sight, which might limit any settler factory plans.
So with such a good starting position, where's the catch?
I'm tempted to follow Xevious' idea and move the worker W. Particularly as there are not many bgs in sight, which might limit any settler factory plans.
I don't think there is a need to scout with the worker. We see already two top notch positions for a Maya capital.
So I will not waste the industrous worker turns, but just flip a coin to go N or NE.
NE is better from what we see (it is a 4-6 settler factory already), but it would fit to Ainwood if N is really the better solution.
So I will not waste the industrous worker turns, but just flip a coin to go N or NE.
NE is better from what we see (it is a 4-6 settler factory already), but it would fit to Ainwood if N is really the better solution.
Hobbes
Utilitarian Despot
Nope, the first thing I want to do is irrigate the wheat (settler factory in the capital), I do not want to irragate a bonus tile because I will end up turning it into a mine within a few turns, the irragated grass will just be unworked until I switch goverments.grs said:
Xevious
1 Solvalou left
I can't tell if the start position is BG or not. It looks like there's a dot just left of the settlers foot. The reason I bring it up is that moving the settler N will lose the bottom BG. But then, as nice as the surrounding area looks I'd be willing to bet there are more somewhere N, NE or NW of start. Now that I think about it, I'm likely to move the settler N in any case, so why not move settler N first? If I see the the river turns W or SW, I can then move worker W, otherwise, he can stay in place. <EDIT> On further reflection, if the settler doesn't see any more BG after moving N, we could even move SE on the second turn to make sure we get both of the visible ones. The worker would road the start tile in this case meaning the extra settler move wouldn't cost us anything more than 1 turn of growth/prod. </EDIT>
If worker stays in place, I would road (since I can't irrigate right off), irrigate, move NW, road BG to bump up gold, move SW, and irrigate wheat. This will irrigate the wheat just as capital expands and can use wheat. Then road wheat, move NE and mine BG, then look for another BG. Roading that first BG will be nice because captial will grow just after it's roaded, giving a non river spot for a citizen to work. With luck there will be a BG on the river as well and production will just zip along.
For a 20k game, if you use the capital as the 20k city, the NE spot is probably better, owing to the 4 hills and 2 BG you'd get.
If worker stays in place, I would road (since I can't irrigate right off), irrigate, move NW, road BG to bump up gold, move SW, and irrigate wheat. This will irrigate the wheat just as capital expands and can use wheat. Then road wheat, move NE and mine BG, then look for another BG. Roading that first BG will be nice because captial will grow just after it's roaded, giving a non river spot for a citizen to work. With luck there will be a BG on the river as well and production will just zip along.
For a 20k game, if you use the capital as the 20k city, the NE spot is probably better, owing to the 4 hills and 2 BG you'd get.
Xevious
1 Solvalou left
Hobbes said:
My sentiments exactly (see above).
I hope we do not get the Mayans.
Their traits are great, they have a very special UU, too, but they leaderhead and city names are hopelessly ugly.
Rome, Babylon, Maya, Byzantines (probably not again) have red starting or secondary color.
But how about the Celts?
I would really love to play the Celts.
Their traits are great, they have a very special UU, too, but they leaderhead and city names are hopelessly ugly.
Rome, Babylon, Maya, Byzantines (probably not again) have red starting or secondary color.
But how about the Celts?
I would really love to play the Celts. 
grs
nameless one
@Longasc: what's so ugly about chicken pizza?
SirPleb
Shaken, not stirred.
I'm going to start by moving the worker west to the wheat. As Xevious says, it would be nice to find a river closer to the wheat.
If there is such a river visible after moving the worker then I'll move the settler two steps to be on the river and to have the wheat directly beside the city. The worker will road then irrigate.
If there is no river visible after moving the worker then I'll move the settler NE. Next turn the worker will move NE to the BG. If something really useful becomes visible north of that I might change plans at this point. More likely there's nothing there and I settle the capital same turn on the tile NE of start. Next the worker roads and then irrigates the BG tile, then moves to the wheat and irrigates then roads that. This sequence gets the wheat irrigated just in time for the capital's border expansion and saves one worker turn sometime later when returning to the irrigated BG to mine it.
Moving the settler north is tempting to reveal a little more but NE seems safer. I'd like a forest in the immediate city radius and the NE location assures that as well as assuring a four turn settler factory. The forest will add a bit of production during some food overruns in early turns. One turn of the first seven the citizen can be on the forest, and four turns of the following six one of the two citizens can be on the forest. This will still result in growing to size 3 at 3300BC, same as if the forest hadn't been used but gains 5 shields. NE also has at least one additional forest in its radius which can be chopped sometime for a production boost.
I'm not decided on initial research nor build yet. Depends on difficulty level and barbarian setting.
If there is such a river visible after moving the worker then I'll move the settler two steps to be on the river and to have the wheat directly beside the city. The worker will road then irrigate.
If there is no river visible after moving the worker then I'll move the settler NE. Next turn the worker will move NE to the BG. If something really useful becomes visible north of that I might change plans at this point. More likely there's nothing there and I settle the capital same turn on the tile NE of start. Next the worker roads and then irrigates the BG tile, then moves to the wheat and irrigates then roads that. This sequence gets the wheat irrigated just in time for the capital's border expansion and saves one worker turn sometime later when returning to the irrigated BG to mine it.
Moving the settler north is tempting to reveal a little more but NE seems safer. I'd like a forest in the immediate city radius and the NE location assures that as well as assuring a four turn settler factory. The forest will add a bit of production during some food overruns in early turns. One turn of the first seven the citizen can be on the forest, and four turns of the following six one of the two citizens can be on the forest. This will still result in growing to size 3 at 3300BC, same as if the forest hadn't been used but gains 5 shields. NE also has at least one additional forest in its radius which can be chopped sometime for a production boost.
I'm not decided on initial research nor build yet. Depends on difficulty level and barbarian setting.
SirPleb
Shaken, not stirred.
I've changed my mind about one detail
Assuming the worker move west doesn't reveal a river closer to the wheat, my worker will road the wheat first, then move NE to the BG, road and then irrigate, then move back to the wheat and irrigate. This sequence gets the wheat irrigated one turn after borders expand. The food shortfall from that can be covered by using the forest for one turn less. This sequence trades one shield for the worker being one turn faster. The lost shield can quickly be gained back by having the worker mine the roaded BG after irrigating the wheat, and from then on he remains one turn ahead of the other sequence, a clear improvement.
Assuming the worker move west doesn't reveal a river closer to the wheat, my worker will road the wheat first, then move NE to the BG, road and then irrigate, then move back to the wheat and irrigate. This sequence gets the wheat irrigated one turn after borders expand. The food shortfall from that can be covered by using the forest for one turn less. This sequence trades one shield for the worker being one turn faster. The lost shield can quickly be gained back by having the worker mine the roaded BG after irrigating the wheat, and from then on he remains one turn ahead of the other sequence, a clear improvement.
Impressed, I guess. I generally consider myself a good speller, despite never managing to do better than third in my elementary school spelling bee, yet I always have trouble with the Aztec and Inca city names. Don't really know why I bothered to ask, though.
Well, Aztecs, Mayans, Incans... they piss me off, especially because I have to deactivate culturally linked starting positions.
I had them too often in my games, and I just prefer to play with and against Romans and Greeks, I am more interested in them historically.
Let's hope for next month COTM.
I had them too often in my games, and I just prefer to play with and against Romans and Greeks, I am more interested in them historically.
Let's hope for next month COTM.
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2001
- Messages
- 30,080
OK - a bit more info:
As I said at the start, this game is on a large map. Can't remember the exact settings, but I think its 5 billion years old, cool and wet.
The level is Monarch, so that with a good starting location (
) should mean that the Conquest-class players can do all-right.
Given the large land mass and the enslave ability of the Javelin Thrower, its pretty easy to barb-farm for workers for quite a while. So, this forms the basis of the difficulty scaling. For the Predator players, I've made changes to the attack odds against barbs. I'm actually still toying with it - playing with the attack bonus as per the difficulty level, and also with giving barb warriors higher defense (not much point in giving them higher attack, cause they don't use it
)
The base level of barbs is 'restless'.
As I said at the start, this game is on a large map. Can't remember the exact settings, but I think its 5 billion years old, cool and wet.
The level is Monarch, so that with a good starting location (
) should mean that the Conquest-class players can do all-right.Given the large land mass and the enslave ability of the Javelin Thrower, its pretty easy to barb-farm for workers for quite a while. So, this forms the basis of the difficulty scaling. For the Predator players, I've made changes to the attack odds against barbs. I'm actually still toying with it - playing with the attack bonus as per the difficulty level, and also with giving barb warriors higher defense (not much point in giving them higher attack, cause they don't use it
)The base level of barbs is 'restless'.
I will have trouble with this, choosing between lots of settlers or throw in the odd JT at the same cost. But I suppose they are needed in a game like this.
Settler NE and worker start irrigating, a no-brainer for me. If there are any other food resources a second city can have it.
Settler NE and worker start irrigating, a no-brainer for me. If there are any other food resources a second city can have it.
Xevious
1 Solvalou left
gozpel said:
Just remember you can't irrigate until after you settle. You can build a road in two turns, so you could build a road and be one turn behind on irrigating, or you would have to wait the worker one turn.
