Don Quijote rules the world - SG for RFC

[blizzrd]

I'm not an Android or a Vulcan... and my logic was that Palos would've flipped to Portugal.

Just look at this page: http://rhye.civfanatics.net/wiki/in..._Fall_of_Civilization_stability_maps#Portugal

Everything in the dark green tiles will flip to Portugal, including cities and units. Except for Cadiz... but Palos I wouldn't think so... or am I mistaken here?

You should have looked at this page for the accurate information on spawns:

http://rhye.civfanatics.net/civ4/rfc-atlas.htm

Your logic was therefore flawed.

Also, about the Americas: Ever heared of the stability penalties for razing that many cities?

Razing Lisboa, Yax Mutal, 2x Aztec cities and 2x Incan cities is within acceptable limits.

 

[nody]

You should have looked at this page for the accurate information on spawns:

http://rhye.civfanatics.net/civ4/rfc-atlas.htm

Your logic was therefore flawed.

So I made a mistake... BIG DEAL. Palos or Cadiz, maybe a little more food in Palos? But common... I'm not all in it for the logic, anyway. Maybe you are, but not all of us are like that.

I guess it brings tensions when Civ-players with different styles work together, since, face it, most of us are control-freaks...

 

[AnotherPacifist]

Tough luck losing the Minaret... I guess the stone trade with justinian wasn't vaiable anymore after my turnset...

Well, we can always claim a little bit of the African soil

It's always best to get DR soon after Mali spawns, because you might be fighting Arabia too for the minaret. Nothing like a little Feudalism/Code of laws/machinery to befriend Mali and get them to be a willing vassal later on.

 

[nody]

Well, with mixed feelings I hereby present to you my second turnset:

(numbers may not match actual turns)

1 - The Madrilene settler claims Morocco with Casablanca. Maybe raze Chartres if we happen to be at war with France or if they collapse.

2 - After realizing we need to be the first to found a city in America we quickly build another one.

3 - All cities set on automated working of tiles. Surprisingly the spy in Santiago stays, otherwise I would have forced a spy there.

4 - We bombard Hamburg for a few turns.

5 - Our caravels shine light on a lot of darkness and we found that Japan has already colonized the Manila-spot in the Phillipines.



6 - Our first spy in Bordeaux steals Civil Service and the second spy steals 560+ gold from the French treasury. They have little more to offer since we are technologically superior...

7 - Hamburg falls.



- Our swordsmen in Hamburg are upgraded to macemen

8 - Our Adventurers raze Tenochtitlan with the loss of one cannon, because Montezuma had hired a very strong longbowman.

9 - Our second settler founds our first American city: Veracruz between the corns and ruins of the fallen Aztec cities.

10 - The healed and barely damaged Adventurers conquer the last Aztec city of Yaqui and keep it. If we found Oaxaca New Spain is complete, but that's not up to me...



- And finally: We raze Qusqu, but beware: The Incans just hired a lot of strong mercenaries and moved them to the south. So be sure all our units there are healed from the plague- and fighting damage.

To do:

- The European units are ready to bombard Berlin and I suggest: Raze it and found a city 2 S of Berlin (it's within Spanish Habsburg tiles). But first conquer Laibach of course!

 

[blizzrd]

So I made a mistake... BIG DEAL. Palos or Cadiz, maybe a little more food in Palos? But common... I'm not all in it for the logic, anyway. Maybe you are, but not all of us are like that.

I guess it brings tensions when Civ-players with different styles work together, since, face it, most of us are control-freaks...

Nobody asked to redo your turn set that resulted in Cadiz instead of Palos. Because it wasn't a big deal. Just a sub-optimal choice. As would keeping Lisboa have been a poor choice.

All I'm saying is that if you make actions without considering the requests/opinions of others, you might find a vote to redo those actions. If actions taken are illogical, my personal position would be to question their worth. Everyone is entitled to their own position, logical or not.

 

[nody]

The save:

View attachment Isabella AD-1505 Turn 282.CivBeyondSwordSave

BTW, one turn away from Liberalism! I can assure you we are the first!

 

[Science Rules]

I think I'm at fault for Chartres and Satsuma instead of Arguin and Manila. I had the citynamemanager.py file open when I played my set and I think that may have caused it to malfunction.

Nody, good job on the German campaign. I'm sorry for mistakenly stating that Palos would flip to Portugal. I know I'm no where near as good a player as some of the others here, so I usually don't put up a big fuss when my suggestions are rebuked or others chide me for my mistakes. I usually view those as moments to improve my playing. I hope you can see the errors in your suggestion that we keep Lisboa and the inland indigenous cities. Also, I don't think it's a big deal if a set has to be replayed. During the British SG game, I made some foolish decisions and had to replay a set. If anyone is requested to replay a set, that person should not take personal offense.

 

[nody]

If anyone is requested to replay a set, that person should not take personal offense.

As long as it's a democratic decision and so far I think we are working together just fine as a team. That's what this is all about, and also to learn from eachother, of course!

 

[Ororo]

A nice set, nody. I'm glad that you've listened to the majority regarding Cuzco.
Regarding settling: Found La Habana first and then the usual Denver-Chicago-New Orleans.
Now, can somebody please post a picture of the tech situation? I suggest that we discuss what tech to take from Liberalism - it doesn't always have to be a tech with the highest ammount of beakers.

 

[nody]

and then the usual Denver-Chicago-New Orleans.

That's not very usual as Spain, since those cities are all in the red zone:
http://rhye.civfanatics.net/wiki/in...and_Fall_of_Civilization_stability_maps#Spain

I always go for Venezuela and Grenada first.

 

[AnotherPacifist]

You simply have to colonize most of NAm including Denver/Chicago/New Orleans, and then later on California. Florida and Mexico simply isn't enough for domination. Why make it harder when the rules say you can expand outside historical areas?

 

[Ororo]

That's not very usual as Spain, since those cities are all in the red zone:
http://rhye.civfanatics.net/wiki/in...and_Fall_of_Civilization_stability_maps#Spain

I always go for Venezuela and Grenada first.

Denver-Chicago-New Orleans is a usual setup when playing as any colonial civ. Yous should absolutely sacrifice some stability to get these awesome cities...

 

[blizzrd]

A nice set, nody.

I am not in agreement. Some reasons:

Remember that we should adopt Resettlement before colonising the New World.

This didn't happen.

Please use the whip when Olximche and Amsterdam come out of revolt, because these cities will start to starve otherwise (it will take 10 turns for cultural borders to expand due to religion).

I don't think this happened either, Amsterdam is still starving for instance.

The Madrilene settler claims Morocco with Casablanca.

We had already claimed these tiles with our culture from Melilla. Casablanca is a horrible city with no bonus food resources and therefore can't work either the Iron or the Ivory (which had already been hooked up). What a waste of a settler and a drain on our science rate for no benefit. We could have settled random backwaters like this just before getting towards Domination threshold if we needed a little more to get there, but not as one of our first 10 cities. Uggh.

In my opinion, your play is much too focused on the stability maps. These should be a guide only and not what dictates where you found cities and choose to conquer. Just because some desert tiles are in a historical area doesn't mean that we need to found a city there. Each city has to actually be able to contribute something towards our economy for it to be worthwhile.

Maybe raze Chartres if we happen to be at war with France or if they collapse.

For someone who was worried about razing Incan cities, this seems out of character. Razing Chartres would be a complete waste of time.

All cities set on automated working of tiles.

Sigh. There were reasons why certain tiles were being worked. Automated is rarely the best option and I never rely on it, whereas you have defaulted to it.

Hamburg falls.

I would have razed. Berlin is a perfect fit with its BFC not overlapping Amsterdam, but Hamburg is very badly placed.

The European units are ready to bombard Berlin and I suggest: Raze it and found a city 2 S of Berlin (it's within Spanish Habsburg tiles). But first conquer Laibach of course!

But you have kept Hamburg and propose to raze Berlin!

 

[AnotherPacifist]

Nody you really seem to like many, many cities bunched up together. I agree with blizzrd that Casablanca is terrible. That settler should have gone to New Orleans.
Since keeping the Low Countries was a must, you should have freed up more space for Amsterdam by razing Hamburg.

I think you would really like Civ 5 where overlapping cities won't matter as much because you can work tiles far away from the city. But beware of happiness!

 

[Ichabod]

I'll post comments on the save tomorrow.

Who's the next player? Jusos, Ororo?

 

[nody]

Blizzrd
Me

Quote:
Originally Posted by blizzrd
Remember that we should adopt Resettlement before colonising the New World.

This didn't happen.

I chose not to because I didn't know what you all want with the other civics. I usually change to bureaucracy and theocracy and maybe serfdom.

Quote:
Originally Posted by blizzrd
Please use the whip when Olximche and Amsterdam come out of revolt, because these cities will start to starve otherwise (it will take 10 turns for cultural borders to expand due to religion).

I don't think this happened either, Amsterdam is still starving for instance.

Okay, I didn't read all my 'instructions'. I'm not used to slavery anymore since I lately only choose serfdom or caste system in early games.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nody
1 - The Madrilene settler claims Morocco with Casablanca.

We had already claimed these tiles with our culture from Melilla. Casablanca is a horrible city with no bonus food resources and therefore can't work either the Iron or the Ivory (which had already been hooked up). What a waste of a settler and a drain on our science rate for no benefit. We could have settled random backwaters like this just before getting towards Domination threshold if we needed a little more to get there, but not as one of our first 10 cities. Uggh.

I have let Casablanca work the sheep to the north. Melilla is big enough.

 

[Ichabod]

Edit: Sorry, double post.

 

[blizzrd]

I chose not to because I didn't know what you all want with the other civics. I usually change to bureaucracy and theocracy and maybe serfdom.

Good gracious me. If you don't know, please ask. Founding cities in the New World without Resettlement is just poor play. Not knowing what to do with civics is cause to at least ask the question before you start the turn set, wouldn't you think?

Okay, I didn't read all my 'instructions'.

There were no instructions, I posted a request (starting with a "please"). You clearly ignored my post. Hardly team play on your part, wouldn't you say? And I thought you were trying to be a team player according to your earlier post.

I'm not used to slavery anymore since I lately only choose serfdom or caste system in early games.

Lordy lordy. I begin to think that you should just watch from the sidelines then, if you aren't able to comprehend how the slavery mechanic works.

I have let Casablanca work the sheep to the north. Melilla is big enough.

And now Melilla is starving as a result. Terrible play.

My point was that Ororo's assessment (and I think others also) of your turn set as "very good" was a long way off the mark.

Whilst I don't think that any of your poor decisions (as outlined in my earlier post) are bad enough that they will prevent us from winning this SG, there really were a number of very bad judgement calls in that turn set that have sigicantly reduced our chances.

 

[AnotherPacifist]

Well, blizzrd, you might be a little tough on nody here...you can still easily win according to your SG rules, but maybe delayed by about 5 to 10 turns.

Great rule of thumb: if a city is starving (because of lack of food or plague) and you're in slavery, think about whipping. That's one reason I never switch away from slavery until I have at least biology, even after I know democracy. Free citizens and slaves--they all die from the plague.

 

[blizzrd]

Well, blizzrd, you might be a little tough on nody here...you can still easily win according to your SG rules, but maybe delayed by about 5 to 10 turns.

That's actually what I was trying to say. I still think we can win (otherwise I would have asked for a redo), but it has been made harder by some of the recent decisions. Our tech rate will be permanently slower because of Casablanca for instance.