Early game strategy proposal (Informational)

Do you accept the proposal outlined in the 1st post?

  • Yes

    Votes: 12 66.7%
  • No

    Votes: 5 27.8%
  • Abstain

    Votes: 1 5.6%

  • Total voters
    18
  • Poll closed .

Eklektikos

Eponymous
Joined
Apr 24, 2002
Messages
2,635
Location
London, UK
Poll Duration: 48 hours from posting or until quorum is met, whichever is the later

The discussion leading to this poll can be found in this thread.

Proposal:

I would like to propose that we use the following strategy at the start of the new game:
  1. Build a warrior to scout out the terrain
  2. Build a second warrior to garrison the capital
  3. Build a settler
  4. Build a barracks in the capital
  5. Begin building archers, initially to scout out the land and increase the AIs perception of our military strength.
    [/list=1]
 
How do we know if the settler will be done in time? (when the city reaches size 3). It'll need to be timed perfectly.

warrior 1 (on the 2 food 2 shield game) - 4 turns.
8 turns total.

Settler - 10 turns (probably closer to 8 since the city will grow).

16 turns, and we need 20. Build another warrior in between.
 
you just had to wait until now to do that calculation, didn't you? After all the time this proposal was up... :p ;)
 
Ok, CT's right. 3 warriors is better than 2. Problem is that I'm now afraid to tinker with the poll, since it's already shaky enough as it is... what do I do?!? :confused:
 
Let it fly, EK. It's info only but will get a feel for the general acceptance of the populace. The actual build queues from the governor are where the specifics will be needed.
 
I suggest this:
Based on the expected excess food at pop 1 & 2,
And the expected no. of shields at pop 1 & 2,
calculate the total no. of shields we will get once we reach size 3.
Take this number - 30 for the settler to get number of extra shields we have before building settler (assuming we want a settler as soon as we reach size 3).
This is slightly complicated by the worker improving our land.

If someone gives me the numbers, I can do a quick estimate to find out how many extra shields we have.
Based on this, we can decide what to produce before our settler.
 
Now that I see all the great land available Eklektikos, I would change my plan to warrior/warrior/warrior/settler/barracks/settler just to take advantage of the new game herds and the spice. Then go military.
 
I like Aj's proposal better, but will the food be enough for bavaria to grow enough to build 2 settlers in queue?
 
I think it's a mistake to put in another settler. It delays an early strike by 30 shields plus the production loss of 2 population. If we are serious about taking charge early we need to concentrate on military objectives.
 
Putting a second settler into the queue before building our archer strike force just gives the Aztecs longer to build themselves up to a point where a 6 archer strike force is no longer powerful enough. The effectiveness of this kind of attack is very much dependant on very early execution - even more so against a formidable foe like the Aztecs. Remember that with Emperor level AI production, their Jag Warriors cost less than half as much as our archers, and so a delay in our attack is very much in their interests, rather than ours. If we make our second city a settler factory then we can still expand with considerable speed, and remember that by attacking early we should be able to capture (as opposed to auto-razing) at least one of their cities, thus still adding to our production base.
 
they may churn out jag warriors at half the speed of archers, but remember they are only warriors (ok + 1 movement) but that still means they have a disadvantage against archers, and if we had a spearmen for defence of the stack (or 2) we should be ok. all we would have to wathc out for is that extra movement, we wouldnt want them sneaking up on our cities able to attack before we saw them coming.
 
So shouldnt the queue be:
warrior-warrior-settler-spearman-archer-archer-archer-archer-settler?-archer-archer-...
 
@Almightyjosh: You didn't happen to notice that it's got informational stamped all over it already? :rolleyes:
 
should we have this poll closed due to further discussion-need and due to the fact AJ put up a queue now?
 
Top Bottom