Delayed bronze working #2: Deity isolated

[ahcos]

It's in the first post, in the spoiler.

I wasn't aware that the english language has no word like the german "Indiz/Indizien", so maybe you don't know that term, but you're clearly confusing evidence, like in the german "Beweis", with "Indizien". He won one map, that's a Indiz that his strategy might work, but no Beweis. I won't continue arguing with you about that as it's a waste of time from my point of view, sorry. You're just as convinced by your point of view as i am from my pov, we won't set anything straight here ever.

Back to topic:

I'd still like to know the answer to a question i brought up earlier in the thread (Page 5):

Given your strategy makes sense on certain settings, how do you know that your approach is superior? Is there _ANY_ way to know that your strategy will be superior, or at least just as good, as the classic BW approach? Given you have random map settings whereever possible.

As delaying BW is the strategy, we'll want to delay it as long as possible, so how do you decide wether or not it's a good strategy?
And more important, how do you alter your strategy if you feel that you have to research BW in order to get metal units for defense? It will change your bulbing path alot, after all. How do you compensate?

 

[Jastrow]

The German "Indiz(en)" translates pretty close to the English word "Indication(s)" is that helps...

 

[ahcos]

Well, i already used "signs" instead of "evidence" to make it clear, so as much as i appreciate your help i doubt it will change anything

 

[Soirana]

Please read the strategy article, which has answers to both of your questions. Will be happy to answer any other questions that you may have.

Have exactly same two.

In particular
why having general lower tech rate is supposed to be better than higher one?
what is supposed Lib target assuming at time of teching it BW and techs BW leads to are unvailable?

 

[Brennus.Quigley]

Personally i believe, assuming player is comfortable on difficulty level he plays on, in general more trades> less trades as it pushes general teching rate which commonly leads to nice winning dates.

From the article:

First, depending on your path, there are lots of other non-Bronze Working technologies that you can trade for (Calendar, Construction, Monarchy, etc...) and possibly broker. Second, less trading with the AIs can sometimes be the better strategy. By trading with them, you are advancing them and, most importantly, guiding them up to the best spots on the tech tree. It can be better to let them meander trying to acquire all of the low level technologies with each other while you shoot up and guard one specific valuable tech path. Getting into a powerful position does not always come from accumulating all the technologies that exist, especially if that means you are helping the AIs do so as well. Instead, the goal for some types of maps is to get technological separation with AIs.

I would add that I believe your "more trades> less trades" approach is oversimplified and can get you into trouble. One should also consider the other costs associated with trading (losing out on wonders, losing out on Free Techs/Free Great People/Founding Religions, earlier AI national wonders, diplomatic penalties, etc."). Selective and judicious trading is good. Reckless trading is not.

One more narrow question - if it is actually about bulbing lib, what is supposed free tech assuming by time lib is aquired BW is not teched yet?

From the article:

Some notes on this strategy: 1) The most powerful technologies that do not require Bronze Working are Military Tradition (Cuirassier rush), Constitution (further your scientific advantage), and Nationalism (Cultural victory). That makes them ideal and efficient technologies to snag with Liberalism while avoiding Bronze Working. 2) Since the Liberalism bulb is not a full bulb, you can use this technique to "lock" your Liberalism advantage in and then trade up the metal tech path to try to open up the tech that you want to get with Liberalism. If you want to Lib a tech that requires Bronze Working, delaying Bronze Working may not be a faster way to get there, but it will make it less likely that you lose the Liberalism race to an AI.

As delaying BW is the strategy, we'll want to delay it as long as possible...

Why would you "delay it as long as possible?" You are specifically delaying it for an alternative bulb opportunity. Once you have utilized that bulb opportunity, there is no reason to continue actively avoiding it.

...so how do you decide wether or not it's a good strategy?

You just have to make an assessment of all the variables that need to be considered (map, neighbors, civ, etc.) and make a strategic decision.

 

[ahcos]

Why would you "delay it as long as possible?" You are specifically delaying it for an alternative bulb opportunity. Once you have utilized that bulb opportunity, there is no reason to continue actively avoiding it.

And more important, how do you alter your strategy if you feel that you have to research BW in order to get metal units for defense?

So, what do you do if you pick the strategy and have to alter it half way through?

You just have to make an assessment of all the variables that need to be considered (map, neighbors, civ, etc.) and make a strategic decision.

Yeah, well... we had some sort of discussion on that already, but i'm really interested in why and at which point you decide against BW. For me, it's a tech i usually tech very early, almost all of the time long before i have a complete picture of the whole situation. As your plan is to delay BW for long-term-bulbs, you'll have to have a pretty good idea about how the game will play out and if you actually can go without BW for a pretty long time. After all it's not only BW missing, but also IW ...

If we're only discussing very certain maps here (like the one you've posted), i'd like to withdraw my question, but as far as i'm concerned i'd like to know all the conditions that can make your strategy work and how to indentify them.

 

[Doshin]

Let's focus upon what the bulb path offers, rather than what is gained or lost by avoiding Slavery and chops.

Here are the base costs of the techs you bypass by avoiding BW and bulbing to Lib:

Bronze Working (120 )
Iron Working (200 )
Metal Casting (450 )
Compass (400 )

In an ordinary game, I will self-tech BW. I then generally self-tech Aesthetics and/or Drama to trade for IW and MC (via Alphabet). Diplo penalties are easy to avoid. It is not necessary to trade with everyone. You avoid trade-caps by not trading for stupid techs like Archery or Fishing.

Compass is a very powerful tech for the player to self-research. It pays off handsomely (see Round 3 of my recent Charlemagne game). I have, however, put this in italics, because Compass can be circumvented by avoiding Sailing (not noted, I think, in the original thread). Calendar (350 ) can also be circumvented by avoiding Sailing.

Avoiding BW, then, saves 770 in a race to Lib, which is then adjusted according to difficulty/discounts/number of Civs that know said tech etc. In practice, this actually amounts to a 120 - 200 saving, because it is not difficult to acquire IW and MC via trades.

In isolation, the saving is more substantial. Isolation means islands, which lend themselves to Fishing (40 ) and Sailing (100 ) which, with BW, will require you to self-tech IW, MC, and Compass (1050 ) before the Lib. bulb opens up.

In semi-isolation, tech trading can be more difficult, so there may or may not be a worthwhile saving. However, there is also an increased likelihood that you will need BW to defend yourself.

With a saving of 120 - 200 , I can't ever see why you would avoid BW, even on an arid map. "Diplo penalties" is not a good answer. With a saving of 1050 , the bulb path becomes much more attractive. This has to be balanced by the advantages offered by being able to chop and whip early wonders for culture or commerce (namely, the Mids, GLH, Parthenon, TGL, Sistine, Colossus).

I think this is the essence of what the strategy offers, right?

Advance apologies if I have made a mistake with a tech value or bulb path.

 

[UnforcedError]

^^Doshin, you have to avoid Fishing not Sailing as the GS can bulb that. But otherwise you're right. It can save you the beakers of BW and nothing more in non-isolation. In my games I practically never self-tech IW, seldom go for MC and almost always trade for Compass (I could have strategical reasons to beeline them but on non-water maps I usually don't). Plus: you can trade for BW as well. So at the worst case you saved no beakers but crippled yourself by avoiding one of the most important early production / military techs in the game.

In isolation this may change a bit, especially at the lower levels (Deity AI will have Optics in general before you get Lib). Is isolation a preferred map then to employ this strategy on?

 

[Brennus.Quigley]

And more important, how do you alter your strategy if you feel that you have to research BW in order to get metal units for defense?

The answer is in the question. Ideally, you would only employ this strategy when you do not need/desire early metal-based units. Warriors, Archers, Catapults, Longbowmen, War Elephants, Chariots, Horse Archers, etc. don't require metals or metal techs. Choosing any strategy and then abandoning it halfway towards your goal is necessary sometimes, but certainly not optimal.

Yeah, well... we had some sort of discussion on that already, but i'm really interested in why and at which point you decide against BW. For me, it's a tech i usually tech very early, almost all of the time long before i have a complete picture of the whole situation.

We play differently. Teching Bronze Working is not a default thing that I'm going to do early. I need to see the map and the strategic situation first and then decide that that's the route I want to take. So I have a bit more time to consider the situation than you do. When I first started playing I would play with Brennus on Monarchy level and always beeline Iron Working for a Gallic Warrior rush, but as I got better I learned that being one dimensional like that is self-limiting and will lead to a lower percentage of victories than need be.

In an ordinary game, I will self-tech BW. I then generally self-tech Aesthetics and/or Drama to trade for IW and MC (via Alphabet). Diplo penalties are easy to avoid. It is not necessary to trade with everyone. You avoid trade-caps by not trading for stupid techs like Archery or Fishing.

I believe you are describing a popular Deity level strategy here. Chopping and whipping early and then teching up the Aesthetics line to trade it away. Both fine on some maps, I'm sure.

(And even though I disagree with some of your comments below, I appreciate the cordial manner in which you made them...)

Compass is a very powerful tech for the player to self-research. It pays off handsomely… Avoiding BW, then, saves 770 in a race to Lib, which is then adjusted according to difficulty/discounts/number of Civs that know said tech etc.

If you are trying to maximize trade routes and Harbors are a priority then go for it. That would not sync with a delayed Bronze Working strategy. But there are great buildings and civics all over the tech tree, many of which do not require Bronze Working. Rushing to harbors will result in you having them sooner, but will probably result in you having universities, markets, Bureaucracy, etc. later.

In practice, this actually amounts to a 120 - 200 saving, because it is not difficult to acquire IW and MC via trades.

If you are in a trading situation, there are lots of things you can trade for. You can trade for other techs instead of BW, IW, and MC. On the highest levels with the AI teching up a storm, I usually don't find I've gathered all the knowledge of the world and can ONLY trade for the metals path. If the ONLY trades available are metal trades, then I agree that that is something to consider and weigh into the equation. I've even had an AI come to gift me BW, and situations like that certainly need to be considered. I do not advocate just thoughtlessly avoiding Bronze Working. One should consider all the opportunities that are available and make a calculated strategic decision.

In isolation, the saving is more substantial. Isolation means islands, which lend themselves to Fishing (40 ) and Sailing (100 ) which, with BW, will require you to self-tech IW, MC, and Compass (1050 ) before the Lib. bulb opens up… With a saving of 1050 , the bulb path becomes much more attractive.

Add in the cost of Bronze Working, for a total of 1170 .

In semi-isolation, tech trading can be more difficult, so there may or may not be a worthwhile saving. However, there is also an increased likelihood that you will need BW to defend yourself.

Because? In semi-isolation you may still be able to go with a non-metal based army.

With a saving of 120 - 200 , I can't ever see why you would avoid BW, even on an arid map. "Diplo penalties" is not a good answer.

It seems that you are cherry-picking out one factor ("diplo penaties"), isolating it, and then ridiculing it. What about the following statement, in its entirety, do you actually disagree with:

I would add that I believe your "more trades> less trades" approach is oversimplified and can get you into trouble. One should also consider the other costs associated with trading (losing out on wonders, losing out on Free Techs/Free Great People/Founding Religions, earlier AI national wonders, diplomatic penalties, etc."). Selective and judicious trading is good. Reckless trading is not.

So at the worst case you saved no beakers but crippled yourself by avoiding one of the most important early production / military techs in the game.

In the worst case scenario you describe above someone will have attempted to use a delayed Bronze Working approach on a map that syncs with early Bronze Working. No way do I advocate that.

In isolation this may change a bit, especially at the lower levels (Deity AI will have Optics in general before you get Lib). Is isolation a preferred map then to employ this strategy on?

Isolation limits peoples' trading concerns, but I myself would not limit the strategy to isolated starts.

 

[UnforcedError]

So what are the criteria for opting to go for the delay strategy? I understand that you make a decision based on gut feel, but it would be good for the stategy article itself to define some more exact prerequisites (at least in a rough form) or define the phenomena that would speak against a delay strategy. (Terrain features present / absent, specific neighbours present / absent, capital tile yields present / absent...) How do you decide whether to go for BW or not?

 

[Brennus.Quigley]

So what are the criteria for opting to go for the delay strategy? I understand that you make a decision based on gut feel…

When did I say to make the decision based on a "gut feel"? I advocate making it based on the map and strategic situation. Seems to me like your use of "gut feel" here is just another unnecessary slight. Comments like that got old a long time ago.

…but it would be good for the stategy article itself to define some more exact prerequisites (at least in a rough form) or define the phenomena that would speak against a delay strategy. (Terrain features present / absent, specific neighbours present / absent, capital tile yields present / absent...) How do you decide whether to go for BW or not?

The article already talks about forests, food, the possibility of non-metal armies, game settings, etc… I agree that it could go into greater detail about those and all of the specific variables that should be considered and so that's a fine suggestion. When I have some extra time, perhaps I'll do that. Thanks for your suggestion.

 

[Bandobras Took]

I wasn't aware that the english language has no word like the german "Indiz/Indizien", so maybe you don't know that term, but you're clearly confusing evidence, like in the german "Beweis", with "Indizien". He won one map, that's a Indiz that his strategy might work, but no Beweis. I won't continue arguing with you about that as it's a waste of time from my point of view, sorry. You're just as convinced by your point of view as i am from my pov, we won't set anything straight here ever.

Slight side note: Actually, that is a language barrier problem: "Indication" and "Evidence" can be used fairly interchangeably in English. My point is simply that playing and winning this map is always going to be a stronger indication of what strategies work on this map than not playing and not winning this map.

 

[UnforcedError]

What I was advocating was basically the need for the information necessary for any player reading your article to identify the situations where your tactics might be valid. Where they could say. "hey, this is exactly one of those rare maps Brennus.Quigley was talking about so I will try his tactic now". Since you did not define the exact parameters necessary to induce you to delay BW, I'm assuming you're making the decision on the fly without making any calculations (this I would call basing a decision on "gut feel", which isn't necessary wrong). However, a strategy should be reproducible in the right circumstances. As it is obvious that this tactic would not work on the majority of maps it would be necessary to clarify its prerequisites.

 

[Doshin]

If you are trying to maximize trade routes and Harbors are a priority then go for it. That would not sync with a delayed Bronze Working strategy. But there are great buildings and civics all over the tech tree, many of which do not require Bronze Working. Rushing to harbors will result in you having them sooner, but will probably result in you having universities, markets, Bureaucracy, etc. later.

I believe that I am describing three situations as they relate to the Lib. bulb:

1. Avoid BW, MC, IW, Compass. Save 1170
   
2. Avoid Fishing, Sailing, and Calendar, in addition to delaying BW. Save an additional 490 (1660 total). Only possible for civs that do not start with Fishing. You have not advocated this tech path, I am simply positing it as a more extreme variant of your strategy.
   
3. Tech BW, at a cost of 120 . Trade or part trade for IW and MC via Aesthetics and Alphabet. Self-tech Compass at 400 . Trade or part trade this for Civil Service, CoL, or Paper.

I think that, with the exception of isolated or semi-isolated starts, #3 is always going to be preferable. #2 is, I think, too extreme a bulb path to work (isolated starts being on islands and all). #1 may be a good option in isolation, but you would need to ask a Lonely Hearts veteran for his or her opinion.

Compass, on Pangaea, should be teched as trade bait (not for Harbors). In isolation or on an Archipelago map, it should be teched for Harbors and quicker access to Optics/Astronomy. Continents fall somewhere in between.

Because? In semi-isolation you may still be able to go with a non-metal based army.

Sure, but, as a rule, you leave yourself much more exposed. You shut off the counter unit to melee units (= Axes/Maces) and the counter to Chariots, Horse Archers, and Elephants (= Spearmen). I am not denying that you can still stop an AI SoD with hill LBs, Elephants, Catapults, or a good UU.. But, if you are playing in semi-isolation on an arid map, and see that Montezuma is your neighbor, you would be a fool not to tech BW as preparation for the inevitable declaration.

edit: just to be clear, BW is not always necessary in semi-isolation (in my original post I referred to the "increased likelihood" that BW would need to be researched by the player.)

It seems that you are cherry-picking out one factor ("diplo penaties"), isolating it, and then ridiculing it. What about the following statement, in its entirety, do you actually disagree with:

Originally Posted by Brennus.Quigley
I would add that I believe your "more trades> less trades" approach is oversimplified and can get you into trouble. One should also consider the other costs associated with trading (losing out on wonders, losing out on Free Techs/Free Great People/Founding Religions, earlier AI national wonders, diplomatic penalties, etc."). Selective and judicious trading is good. Reckless trading is not.

You are conflating frequent trading and reckless trading. If you are playing on Pangaea, you may research a wonder tech and hold onto it until one of your six opponents has also researched this tech. That grants you a 1-10 turn head-start on building a particular wonder. This AI will not trade the technology until that wonder has been built (provided that the AI is building said wonder). So you may trade at your (relative) leisure and still receive the Parthenon/TGL/Sistine Chapel (etc.) in good time.

This delay also gives you a head-start when it comes to teching further along a monopoly tech path. This increases the likelihood that you will be the first civ to build any associated wonders (if they're worth building), receive any great people, and acquire more trade bait.

The easiest example to illustrate this with is the Aesthetics route. The following is a hypothetical, but typical scenario. Research Aesthetics. Delay trading until Pacal or Hatchet also self-tech Aesthetics (let's say that takes five turns). Wait a turn or two, then trade Aesthetics to Ragnar for Alphabet. The following turn, trade Alphabet to Izzy for IW. In the mean time, you have reached Literature. You have a seven turn head start on TGL and researching Music. Get to Music first. Receive the free Great Person. Trade Music to Ragnar for MC. Trade MC and/or Music with Izzy for CoLs. Sell any unnecessary tech for gold (wait until a wonder is built, and soak up another AI's fail gold). Tech with friends, neighbors, and weaklings. Deliberately avoid teching with a military threat, medium-term target, or free-wheeling trader (Mansa, Willem).

On a Continents map, the above is tweaked but still applicable. In semi-isolation, it's much harder for the player to maintain a tech advantage via multiple trades. This is where your bulb path starts to become more attractive.

 

[vranasm]

#1 may be a good option in isolation, but you would need to ask a Lonely Hearts veteran for his or her opinion.

I read couple of times from rolo (or was it vicawoo?) advocating streamlining gameplay to achieve optics asap to start the catch up and influence diplomacy

but honestly the jury is (imo) on this one still out... I saw succesful games where people concentrate on CS, slow expansion and strong cottage economy.

Isolation is really totally different beast and a lot of the time you will lose just because.

 

[Brennus.Quigley]

I believe that I am describing three situations as they relate to the Lib. bulb:
1. Avoid BW, MC, IW, Compass. Save 1170
2. Avoid Fishing, Sailing, and Calendar, in addition to delaying BW. Save an additional 490 (1660 total). Only possible for civs that do not start with Fishing. You have not advocated this tech path, I am simply positing it as a more extreme variant of your strategy.
3. Tech BW, at a cost of 120 . Trade or part trade for IW and MC via Aesthetics and Alphabet. Self-tech Compass at 400 . Trade or part trade this for Civil Service, CoL, or Paper.
I think that, with the exception of isolated or semi-isolated starts, #3 is always going to be preferable. #2 is, I think, too extreme a bulb path to work (isolated starts being on islands and all). #1 may be a good option in isolation, but you would need to ask a Lonely Hearts veteran for his or her opinion.

Well, I'm glad that you think #1 and #2 can be applicable to isolated and semi-isolated starts.

The article has always mentioned #2 and the two victories I posted for this map utilized #2. Of course, if there is a lot of seafood to work or you start with fishing, #2 is out. The #3 that you posted is too pre-scripted for my taste (tech these specific things and then trade them for these other specific things). I do not share your belief that such an approach is "always going to be preferable" on non-isolated starts, but I do recognize it as a popular approach that is out there that certainly syncs with some maps.

Sure, but, as a rule, you leave yourself much more exposed. You shut off the counter unit to melee units (= Axes/Maces) and the counter to Chariots, Horse Archers, and Elephants (= Spearmen). I am not denying that you can still stop an AI SoD with hill LBs, Elephants, Catapults, or a good UU.. But, if you are playing in semi-isolation on an arid map, and see that Montezuma is your neighbor, you would be a fool not to tech BW as preparation for the inevitable declaration.

Yes, having Montezuma as a neighbor is a good reason to invest in (i.e. gamble on) axemen. But having Sitting Bull as your neighbor is a good reason not to invest in (i.e. gamble on) axemen. The specifics of who your neighbor(s) are and how that affects your ideal army composition is something in which the article can still go into greater detail.

You are conflating frequent trading and reckless trading.

Not really. Although there might be an association between the two (i.e. they often times happen together), I do see a qualitative difference. If someone can "frequently make wise trades," then that's fine and I would not argue against it.

If you are playing on Pangaea, you may research a wonder tech and hold onto it until one of your six opponents has also researched this tech. That grants you a 1-10 turn head-start on building a particular wonder. This AI will not trade the technology until that wonder has been built (provided that the AI is building said wonder). So you may trade at your (relative) leisure and still receive the Parthenon/TGL/Sistine Chapel (etc.) in good time.

This delay also gives you a head-start when it comes to teching further along a monopoly tech path. This increases the likelihood that you will be the first civ to build any associated wonders (if they're worth building), receive any great people, and acquire more trade bait.

The easiest example to illustrate this with is the Aesthetics route…

Great. Both trading and the popular Aesthetics trade bait approach are not in conflict with delaying Bronze Working. What I've been saying all along is that there are lots of non-metal techs that can be traded for and possibly brokered.

 

[Brennus.Quigley]

I read couple of times from rolo (or was it vicawoo?) advocating streamlining gameplay to achieve optics asap to start the catch up and influence diplomacy

but honestly the jury is (imo) on this one still out... I saw succesful games where people concentrate on CS, slow expansion and strong cottage economy.

Isolation is really totally different beast and a lot of the time you will lose just because.

Welcome back to the thread...

Yes, I think the two approaches to isolation are 1) take advantage of the peaceful situation for as long as possible; and 2) get out in the world in order to make contact as soon as possible. Delaying Bronze Working syncs with the former, not the latter.

 

[UnforcedError]

but honestly the jury is (imo) on this one still out... I saw succesful games where people concentrate on CS, slow expansion and strong cottage economy.

It is a sound strategy if you have good land but wouldn't you then rather focus on wonders that can help you tech (Mids, Colossus, TGL)? And if you planned for an early Lib in isolation wouldn't you want to lib something that helps your situation? Maybe Astro? (Yep, I know it's hard to achieve on the higher levels. Have Mansa, Willem and Freddy tech hand in hand on some other continent and they might beat you to Lib even if you have all those wonders and great land.) If you focus on scientist bulbs why not bulb towards Astro? Or, if you decide early that you want to win culture why not focus on religions and why waste your GP points on GSs instead of farming GAs? (I'm definitely not a culture expert but getting all those scientists towards the Lib bulb delays a cultural victory by at least 100 - 200 turns which can be the difference between winning or losing.)

 

[vranasm]

It is a sound strategy if you have good land but wouldn't you then rather focus on wonders that can help you tech (Mids, Colossus, TGL)? And if you planned for an early Lib in isolation wouldn't you want to lib something that helps your situation? Maybe Astro? (Yep, I know it's hard to achieve on the higher levels. Have Mansa, Willem and Freddy tech hand in hand on some other continent and they might beat you to Lib even if you have all those wonders and great land.) If you focus on scientist bulbs why not bulb towards Astro? Or, if you decide early that you want to win culture why not focus on religions and why waste your GP points on GSs instead of farming GAs? (I'm definitely not a culture expert but getting all those scientists towards the Lib bulb delays a cultural victory by at least 100 - 200 turns which can be the difference between winning or losing.)

imo culture victory is one of toughest in a sense... you have absolutely zero influence over AI's usually and rely purely on luck, except you go for "domination culture victory".

as per the first part of message... imo if you're isolated you're even worse out in control over wonders... i remember me playing the Wang Kon LHC game which streamed AZ too and was actually very hillarious to see him getting 700 BC GLH which I lost 1500 BC...

imo in isolation I try to go for space usually... domination/conquest is tough due to MM for me. I lost some good games not being involved in other continents though .

 

[shakabrade]

Culture game is pretty much like any other game until 1AD. Then you focus your empire on GP production and multipliers. You usually bulb all the way to Lib and take Nationalism. All the diplo has to be done to that point and it is pretty possible. You can't always bribe people in wars but you can make them stop trading and other sneaky stuff. Culture is beyond sword in full sense of those words.

Isolation game calls for early as possible Astro. Letting AIs do something somewhere is dangerous and completely luck dependant. If you win culture without means of razing other people's culture cities or capital for spaceship, you should do that before 1800AD. Everything else is pure luck.