Yes, wait for the critique before you play.
(If Chieftess doesn't respond by tonight, I'll see if I can put a bug in her ear.
)
ct3 - Chieftain Training Day (for newbies only)
- Thread starter Chieftess
- Start date
(If Chieftess doesn't respond by tonight, I'll see if I can put a bug in her ear.
)Archer 007
Rebirth
Good point. Never really thought of it that way. Guess it's because I'm normally low on gold (science can be a real pain in the ol' bank account).
I'm also usually a little short on cash at this point in the game. The key is to balance things out. Things that help ensure cash: make sure that you have at least a road on every square that your citizens are working (road = +1 gpt), reduce science spending (hard, but sometimes necessary), trade (but we only know Shaka, right now).
To gain the gold we would need to upgrade our warriors, I would probably have slowed science as much as I could stand, to get the gold necessary. (In addition to micro-managing our citizens.) As soon as we had enough gold to do what needed done, crank the science back up.
Of course, this is moot, now.
To gain the gold we would need to upgrade our warriors, I would probably have slowed science as much as I could stand, to get the gold necessary. (In addition to micro-managing our citizens.) As soon as we had enough gold to do what needed done, crank the science back up.
Of course, this is moot, now.
Archer 007
Rebirth
I always built roads in the squares in which citizens are working. What I really hate is having to slow down science.
Good! The next question is, did the city governor leave the citizens there? As mentioned earlier, they like to put people to work on squares you had no intention of working yet.
I'm with you. I, too, am a builder. I love to lead the world in science, and build all the new things that the new techs give me. But science costs $$, so sometimes has to be cut, at least temporarily. In my play on Regent level, I usually lag the other civs in tech until he late Middle Ages. I don't get left in the dust because I trade, and research techs I don't think the AI will. I frequently come out of a trading session with more gold in my bank than I had going in, and a higher gpt level, too.
BoBtheBUILDER
Bonded and Certified
Here's my frustration with science... it's cheaper to buy than it is to research. Take our current situation... our priority, now, is to eliminate Shaka. Why? Because we don't want word to get out that we're lousy fellas. Do we need any new techs to beat Shaka? No... not really. We do need to upgrade our units (or what we had in the way of units) to ensure swift, efficient victory.
Taking all that into consideration, our focus should be on gold, not science. There doesn't seem to be any one rule that governs the game. I'm a builder by nature, but the game has thrown us a curve so we deal with it the best way possible. Once Shaka is gone and we don't need to gold to upgrade units we can go back to full steam on science. Anything we miss we can catch up with once we make contact with other civs.
That's why I see Map Making as a high priority. If we can get out there and meet all the civs first, we can use our contacts to make up any tech edge we lost fighting Shaka. It's kind of a one time deal though... once contact is made we're not going to be able to make deals.
Just a few thoughts I had. In a game I'm doing on my own (I started playing on warlord) I can buy a tech someone else researched for what I'll take in over 3 or 4 turns in gold. Despite that, I'm still maintaining a tech edge on everyone else.
BoB
Taking all that into consideration, our focus should be on gold, not science. There doesn't seem to be any one rule that governs the game. I'm a builder by nature, but the game has thrown us a curve so we deal with it the best way possible. Once Shaka is gone and we don't need to gold to upgrade units we can go back to full steam on science. Anything we miss we can catch up with once we make contact with other civs.
That's why I see Map Making as a high priority. If we can get out there and meet all the civs first, we can use our contacts to make up any tech edge we lost fighting Shaka. It's kind of a one time deal though... once contact is made we're not going to be able to make deals.
Just a few thoughts I had. In a game I'm doing on my own (I started playing on warlord) I can buy a tech someone else researched for what I'll take in over 3 or 4 turns in gold. Despite that, I'm still maintaining a tech edge on everyone else.
BoB
I don't know why we are so concerned about our reputation. Shaka is annoyed with us at the worst. We did not go into Babylonian territory and then decalre war when we got close to their capital. We were rudely asked to leave, and told Hammurabi where to shove it
This sort of action is only a minor transgression as far as reputation is concerned. We did not violate an ROP agreement, we did not reneg on a GPT agreement, and we did not abandon our allies during a war.
We should be able to easily hold a tech lead on all the other AI civs if we build up our infrastructure properly. We need to get into a better government (Republic), and claim the island for ourselves. (Kill Shaka)
We were in a great position to eliminate Shaka with our massed warriors. Although I was hoping to delay our inevitable Golden Age until it could be useful to us, we could have upgraded our warriors to Immortals, and easily decimated Shaka. That option is still available to us, even with the disbanding of our former troops.
The one thing that I was always hesitant to do when I played my first couple of games was to rush build units with population points. This sort of action goes against my personal values. But I thought to myself, "What the heck. Let's try something new" I was amazed at how quickly I could put a sizeable force into the field.
I played most of my first games as a pure builder. I would only go to war when I had to, and then only for as long as necessary. I discovered that i could compete quite easily at lower levels, but at higher levels I had to make war to slow down the progress of the AI and to grab resources. I soon found that I began to prefer warmongering to building
I guess what I am saying is that the purpose of a training game is to try different strategies that you would not normally not employ. You may be surprised to see how your gameplay will change.
This sort of action is only a minor transgression as far as reputation is concerned. We did not violate an ROP agreement, we did not reneg on a GPT agreement, and we did not abandon our allies during a war.
We should be able to easily hold a tech lead on all the other AI civs if we build up our infrastructure properly. We need to get into a better government (Republic), and claim the island for ourselves. (Kill Shaka)
We were in a great position to eliminate Shaka with our massed warriors. Although I was hoping to delay our inevitable Golden Age until it could be useful to us, we could have upgraded our warriors to Immortals, and easily decimated Shaka. That option is still available to us, even with the disbanding of our former troops.
The one thing that I was always hesitant to do when I played my first couple of games was to rush build units with population points. This sort of action goes against my personal values. But I thought to myself, "What the heck. Let's try something new
" I was amazed at how quickly I could put a sizeable force into the field.I played most of my first games as a pure builder. I would only go to war when I had to, and then only for as long as necessary. I discovered that i could compete quite easily at lower levels, but at higher levels I had to make war to slow down the progress of the AI and to grab resources. I soon found that I began to prefer warmongering to building
I guess what I am saying is that the purpose of a training game is to try different strategies that you would not normally not employ. You may be surprised to see how your gameplay will change.
@BoBtheBUILDER: You've got the picture about right. 
@Barker:
The purpose of a Training Day Game is to
@Barker:
Wrong!
The purpose of a Training Day Game is to
- Teach players how to play Succession Games
- Teach the basic fundamentals of how to play at the specified level.
[/list=1]
In that respect, warmongering is specifically not taught in Training Day games. Instead, what we try to teach is how things work. I have seen TD games where the players have been explicitly instructed to not build any Wonders! The reason: Wonders are a "crutch". They can cover up otherwise flawed play. Players can start to depend on getting Wonder "X" and can't survive if they lose out on the race for it.
The same for warmongering. Anyone can throw together a sh*tload of Immortals and go kick the AI ass. But what if you're not Persia? What if you're, say, France? Or England? Far better to know how the game works, so you can play any Civ, and still win.
That is *one* of the reasons Chieftess and I were both concerned by the sudden war against Babylon. Yes, they needed taken out, and yes, you did an excellent job. But now, because you had an implicit RoP rape, if we don't take out Shaka before contact is made with other civs, our reputation is shot.
And the fact that Shaka is annoyed with us has nothing to do with reputation. You can have everyone gracious to you, and they still won't give you a gpt deal to save their skins if your rep is bad.
BTW, if anyone wants real-time civ discussions, join us at the #civfanatics chat. Just click the Chat Room link at the bottom of this page. 
Originally posted by Padma
Yes, wait for the critique before you play.
(If Chieftess doesn't respond by tonight, I'll see if I can put a bug in her ear.
Huh? Bug? Where? OH, ok, there! I'll put the webpage down and critique the save.
I lose track of time when developing software/webpages. Turn 1-1250 BC-Warriors sent to disband to help Spearman and Immortal production.
*makes note to self - conserve the number of smoky-moves icons*
x3 :aargh3:x4 NEVER disband a unit that can be upgraded. In this case, warriors can be upgraded to Immortals. That's why the barracks were built. Barracks not only get vet units, but allow for upgrades. Very bad move.
Turn 2-1225 BC-Movement to disband contiunes.
Again,. (see above)
Turn 3-1200 BC-Spearman complete in Persepolis. Three warriors disband to help Spearman production in Babylon.
How much disbanding are you doing? Are you disbanding even when the unit will be complete the next turn? Very big waste of shields.
Turn 4-1175 BC-Arbela founded. Production set to Immortals. Warriors disbanded in Pasargadae to help Immortals production.
Next to the Zulu capital. Not Good. Our culture is nearly zilch. You have our border towns set on Immortals (all towns even). The time spent disbanding our warriors just cost us some temples in the border towns. Why? The warriors could have been upgraded, and the border towns (Susa, Pasagardae) could be been building a temple. What ever happened to our expansion plan? Look at this screenshot:
The pink W's are the wasted tiles that will never be used. The blue dot (and dotted lines) are a better site (even though it over laps a city).
Turn 5-1150 BC-Nothing.
Turn 6-1125 BC-Nothing.
Be a bit more descriptive. Did you do any micromanagement? Diplomacy checks?
Turn 7-1100 BC-Persepolis finishs Spearman, changes production to Immortals.
The early game is expansion, and we've just about missed that chance. There's land to the north that has to be settled (and worked). Had we not disbanded our warriors, we would not need to spend time building Immortals. We just wasted maybe 20 turns or more. A few extra cities could have been built. Our workers (that's another story) could have been preparing for the new cities.
Turn 8-1075 BC-Babylon completes Spearman, changes production to Granary.
It's going to take 28 more turns to build a granary. That's a bit too long. Build some workers to clear the jungle.
Turn 9-1050 BC-Pasargadae produces Immortals, moved toward Zulu terroity,
Why? Keep them in cities for now. If you leave them in the jungle, they can die of disease (wasting shields and a unit).
Turn 10-1025 BC-Susa completes Worker, changes production to Immortals.
It's a border town. Border towns should build culture to make their borders expand (Especially when next to another civ). No culture = culture flip.
------
Save critique:
Military: We just disbanded our warriors!
This is a bad move in any game in most cases. Also, a lack of an army = an incentive for another civ to attack and invade us, leaving us with few troops to retake our cities.
Rule #1: NEVER disband units that upgrade to an UU (Unique Unit).
Rule #2: Only disband when the unit becomes obsolete (i.e., swordsman in the industrial era).
Rule #3: If you are to disband, do so in a city where a unit or improvement will be completed in 2 or more turns. That way, you don't waste shields.
We have an Immortal in the jungle. -smoke- They can die of disease here.
Infrastructure & City Growth: Our road system is more than sufficient for our population. Our workers should be clearing jungle, or building roads to new city sites. Our lack of culture severely limits our growth, especially for cities along a river.
Pasagardae: There's a worked tile that's not on roads! It's on the forest, but putting it on the roaded-mined hills yeilds the same food and production, and gives us 1 extra gpt.
All other cities are 'okay'. (We could be doing better, but we really shot ourselves in the foot by disbanding our entire army).
Workers: They're everywhere, and only 1 per tile. -smoke- Workers should work in pairs (especially for an Industrial civ. Stack 4 or so workers on a jungle tile to cut it faster, not just one. Also, there's a worker by Arbela irragating grasslands. We're in despotism. In despotism, irragated grasslands (without wheat, game, cattle..) have no effect. It's a waste (It's ok if you're close to monarchy). There's furs next to Arbela that the 2 nearby workers should be working on. Babylon has a worker in the hills. There's enough tiles there now. Pasagardae has a road over the gems, good, but the worker isn't clearing that jungle. A bit -smoke-. Clear the jungle where the gems are, and you can have food, plus more gold. What's the worker by Susa doing? I didn't see it in the write up.
My suggestion. Had we not disbanded our warriors, we could have taken those workers, and moved them north of Persepolis to build roads to new city sites. Now, we need to focus a bit more on production. Our cities are also spread out a bit (a bit more corruption - hurts production big time in antiquity).
Diplomacy: Where's the diplomacy checks? A quick check of the Zulus revealed that we could have gotten Horseback Riding for the Alphabet and 6 gold.
Culture: Where's our culture? Again, I think disbanding our early military crippled us here. We had our military (and gold) all set. Our border cities could have been producing settlers, and culture (temples), and workers in between.
Technology: Could be adjusted to 70% (8turns, 1gpt after that micromanaging). It's a toss-up there. We're scientific, so Literature should be a consideration, too. (cheaper libraries). We'll need the culture. After (if) we do take the Zulus, we should think about settling our continent and building culture first. If any other civs land on our continent, and have higher culture, our cities might flip.
Overall: Not a good turn. -hammer- We lost our military, and now we have to rethink our strategy. Instead of upgrading and taking out the Zulus, we have to manage both expansion, and Immortal production with low population cities. Not 1 city is size 4 or higher. Only Persepolis is size 3, and we're trying to build Immortals with size 1 and 2 cities! We could restart this turn, but this is a succession game, and we have to learn to deal with crippling mistakes.
*makes note to self - conserve the number of smoky-moves icons*
x3 :aargh3:x4 NEVER disband a unit that can be upgraded. In this case, warriors can be upgraded to Immortals. That's why the barracks were built. Barracks not only get vet units, but allow for upgrades. Very bad move.Turn 2-1225 BC-Movement to disband contiunes.
Again,
. (see above)Turn 3-1200 BC-Spearman complete in Persepolis. Three warriors disband to help Spearman production in Babylon.
How much disbanding are you doing? Are you disbanding even when the unit will be complete the next turn? Very big waste of shields.
Turn 4-1175 BC-Arbela founded. Production set to Immortals. Warriors disbanded in Pasargadae to help Immortals production.
Next to the Zulu capital. Not Good.
Our culture is nearly zilch. You have our border towns set on Immortals (all towns even). The time spent disbanding our warriors just cost us some temples in the border towns. Why? The warriors could have been upgraded, and the border towns (Susa, Pasagardae) could be been building a temple. What ever happened to our expansion plan? Look at this screenshot:
The pink W's are the wasted tiles that will never be used. The blue dot (and dotted lines) are a better site (even though it over laps a city).
Turn 5-1150 BC-Nothing.
Turn 6-1125 BC-Nothing.
Be a bit more descriptive. Did you do any micromanagement? Diplomacy checks?
Turn 7-1100 BC-Persepolis finishs Spearman, changes production to Immortals.
The early game is expansion, and we've just about missed that chance. There's land to the north that has to be settled (and worked). Had we not disbanded our warriors, we would not need to spend time building Immortals. We just wasted maybe 20 turns or more. A few extra cities could have been built. Our workers (that's another story) could have been preparing for the new cities.
Turn 8-1075 BC-Babylon completes Spearman, changes production to Granary.
It's going to take 28 more turns to build a granary. That's a bit too long. Build some workers to clear the jungle.
Turn 9-1050 BC-Pasargadae produces Immortals, moved toward Zulu terroity,
Why? Keep them in cities for now. If you leave them in the jungle, they can die of disease (wasting shields and a unit).
Turn 10-1025 BC-Susa completes Worker, changes production to Immortals.
It's a border town. Border towns should build culture to make their borders expand (Especially when next to another civ). No culture = culture flip.------
Save critique:
Military: We just disbanded our warriors!
This is a bad move in any game in most cases. Also, a lack of an army = an incentive for another civ to attack and invade us, leaving us with few troops to retake our cities.Rule #1: NEVER disband units that upgrade to an UU (Unique Unit).
Rule #2: Only disband when the unit becomes obsolete (i.e., swordsman in the industrial era).
Rule #3: If you are to disband, do so in a city where a unit or improvement will be completed in 2 or more turns. That way, you don't waste shields.
We have an Immortal in the jungle. -smoke- They can die of disease here.
Infrastructure & City Growth: Our road system is more than sufficient for our population. Our workers should be clearing jungle, or building roads to new city sites. Our lack of culture severely limits our growth, especially for cities along a river.
Pasagardae: There's a worked tile that's not on roads!
It's on the forest, but putting it on the roaded-mined hills yeilds the same food and production, and gives us 1 extra gpt.All other cities are 'okay'. (We could be doing better, but we really shot ourselves in the foot by disbanding our entire army).
Workers: They're everywhere, and only 1 per tile. -smoke- Workers should work in pairs (especially for an Industrial civ. Stack 4 or so workers on a jungle tile to cut it faster, not just one. Also, there's a worker by Arbela irragating grasslands. We're in despotism. In despotism, irragated grasslands (without wheat, game, cattle..) have no effect. It's a waste (It's ok if you're close to monarchy). There's furs next to Arbela that the 2 nearby workers should be working on. Babylon has a worker in the hills. There's enough tiles there now. Pasagardae has a road over the gems, good, but the worker isn't clearing that jungle. A bit -smoke-. Clear the jungle where the gems are, and you can have food, plus more gold. What's the worker by Susa doing? I didn't see it in the write up.
My suggestion. Had we not disbanded our warriors, we could have taken those workers, and moved them north of Persepolis to build roads to new city sites. Now, we need to focus a bit more on production. Our cities are also spread out a bit (a bit more corruption - hurts production big time in antiquity).
Diplomacy: Where's the diplomacy checks? A quick check of the Zulus revealed that we could have gotten Horseback Riding for the Alphabet and 6 gold.
Culture: Where's our culture? Again, I think disbanding our early military crippled us here. We had our military (and gold) all set. Our border cities could have been producing settlers, and culture (temples), and workers in between.
Technology: Could be adjusted to 70% (8turns, 1gpt after that micromanaging). It's a toss-up there. We're scientific, so Literature should be a consideration, too. (cheaper libraries). We'll need the culture. After (if) we do take the Zulus, we should think about settling our continent and building culture first. If any other civs land on our continent, and have higher culture, our cities might flip.
Overall: Not a good turn. -hammer- We lost our military, and now we have to rethink our strategy. Instead of upgrading and taking out the Zulus, we have to manage both expansion, and Immortal production with low population cities. Not 1 city is size 4 or higher. Only Persepolis is size 3, and we're trying to build Immortals with size 1 and 2 cities!
We could restart this turn, but this is a succession game, and we have to learn to deal with crippling mistakes. Why would warmongering not be taught in a succession game? The most important strategies IMHO have to deal with troop selection, the effective use of artillery, analysis of terrain advantages, and troop deployment. These are the areas that I have been trying to improve in my most recent games.
Perhaps I should be playing in a training game that is on a higher difficulty level. I thank you for the opportunity to play in your training game. I will admit that I am not a "newbie" in the purest sense of the word. ( I am currently playing Monarch games)
Perhaps I will join you guys in the chat room sometime
Barker: Yeah, if you are playing Monarch, you are not a "newbie"! 
stwils
Emperor
I have the game and hope to start playing when I get back home later this afternoon.
Think I need to study what to do now.
stwils :enlighten
Think I need to study what to do now.
stwils :enlighten
Good luck!
This is where the elites and near-elites excel. Coming back from a disadvantaged posistion. (Just pretend we lost all of our warriors in a war.
). Anyway, to see an ultimate comeback-game (Ice Island on deity level!) see one of Aeson's posts (or threads).Archer 007
Rebirth
To set the record stright, the Immortal was ordered to go the grassland tile just north of the Zulu. I post this not to look as stupid. Anyway, sorry about the mistakes.
If any of us are worried about looking foolish, we shouldn't be playing Succession Games, where our mistake are out there for the world to see!
Besides, if you didn't make mistakes, why would you be in a Training Day Game? Chieftess and I pulled some boners of our own in our early SGs. (At least I did, and I think I remember reading where she did some, too....) There are reasons why we were some of the initial group of "trainees", in the initial Training Day Games.
Besides, if you didn't make mistakes, why would you be in a Training Day Game?
Chieftess and I pulled some boners of our own in our early SGs. (At least I did, and I think I remember reading where she did some, too....) There are reasons why we were some of the initial group of "trainees", in the initial Training Day Games. BoBtheBUILDER
Bonded and Certified
Archer,
I wouldn't worry about it too much... we're all here to learn. I think that's what I'm starting to like about succession games too, you have to deal with the hand another player in the group deals you. We may play completely differently, but when I am in an SG with you I have to take my ten turns based not on my play but the play of others before me.
So take in the lessons learned and watch the critiques of your fellow players in their turns so you can make yours better! That's what I'm looking forward to. 
BoB
I wouldn't worry about it too much... we're all here to learn. I think that's what I'm starting to like about succession games too, you have to deal with the hand another player in the group deals you. We may play completely differently, but when I am in an SG with you I have to take my ten turns based not on my play but the play of others before me.
So take in the lessons learned and watch the critiques of your fellow players in their turns so you can make yours better!
That's what I'm looking forward to. BoB
Bob, that's it exactly. The Training Day games were first started to generate a larger group of consistent, team-oriented SG players. That way, if you joined a game with them, you could feel pretty confident about their ability, and their willingness to work together as a team The "Realms Beyond" group are a prime example. (Sirian, Arathorn, Zed-F, and a bunch of others.) Many of their games here are named "RBDX-xxx". If you look at them, you will see people tuning their personal styles for the greater good of the game.
In one game I played, one player loved the fact that he followed LKendter in the rotation. He knew that "General Lee" would leave him with military forces strong and in position for maximum benefit. (Fortunately, the timing was such that wars were always about "due" at that point. ) But the important thing is communication between players. Always make sure the other players know why you do something, especially if it's not obvious. As the game progresses, you understand each other, and can come to a consensus about what to do in various situations.
Hmm, I think I'm starting to ramble, so I'll cut this off here.
In one game I played, one player loved the fact that he followed LKendter in the rotation. He knew that "General Lee" would leave him with military forces strong and in position for maximum benefit. (Fortunately, the timing was such that wars were always about "due" at that point.
) But the important thing is communication between players. Always make sure the other players know why you do something, especially if it's not obvious. As the game progresses, you understand each other, and can come to a consensus about what to do in various situations.Hmm, I think I'm starting to ramble, so I'll cut this off here.
Similar threads
