earth 18civ tutorial

[JoeHollywood]

oh and I love that you picked a "covered civ"...we only get better by bouncing ideas and techniques off each other...

this isn't a "list" for me, just my ideas on the civs, and whereas I consider myself a very consistant and very good earth map player, I'm by far perfect, so I love rehashing and debating ALL the civs ( well inca and mali aren't too fun, but sometimes ), and seeing what we can all do to improve our games...

the best earth map games are where EVERYONE is good, not just the top 3 or 4...I've had a 10 hour game where there were still 8 players fighting for the top spot...THOSE are the enjoyable games, not just "another" rome stomp...grin

Joe

 

[Betafor]

Hi OCC, glad you could make it

Just for the first time looked back on the earlier posts...

Quick thing i would like to make about england, is that once you are done with building the farm/3 animal pastures, you have a couple turns before you can improve the new cities, because you havea few turns before the settler comes out ( if you research Agriculture->AH first), so by that time hopefully you have bronze working, meaning you can go chop the forest that your 3rd city will be in for a couple extra hammers. What do these extra hammers do? they make BOTH of your cities finish the settler at the same time... and you aren't losing anything, because the forest you are chopping you will settle on that sqare anyway. just a lil tip

Plus i tried out and really like your 2 scientist strat on england... i'm not normally a specialist person...

 

[JoeHollywood]

you do lose something there, and you also don't really gain anything...yes your settler in york finishes one turn faster...but it doesn't get to its destination any faster...if timed right, city 4 settler ends up on the iron hill the same turn both ways...and you've lost 2 roads...or the rock quarry, depending on how you went with research after ag and farming...if you can't do either of those improvements I'd try to mine where the coal pops out later, anything is better than wasting time on a chop that doesn't really do anything one way or the other...

good thinking, but the execution of moving the settlers doesn't pan out...

Joe

 

[I play 4 fun]

K I have another question Joe, about india, since i do tend to be in the middle east most of the time.

Do you think India should do an archer rush against persia before they get horses? What I do in this strategy is get these techs in order hunting/AH (for production)/ archery/then go for Iron working with agriculture in the mix depending how good the war is going.

I ususally build one warrior plus the starting one and then 2 workers when city size is 2, followed by a barracks then archers. The warriors usually patrol the horses so persia doesnt get them.

I've tried this strategy plenty of times and it does work, unfortunatly those people never expect an attack from India cause they think india cant do anything military wise cause of jungle and lack of production. They are more worried about arabia because they get horses and India doesn't.

Just a reminder the india leader is Asoka not Gandhi

 

[JoeHollywood]

I'd have to do some play testing, canadian, I'm not sure if it will work vs a competant persia...it's a pretty big gamble seeing as how if persia gets just one immortal he's going to shred you (+50 or +100% vs archers if I remember right ), even with terrain he's going to slaughter your army in the field...I think you might need to tweak it up, forget the barracks and get a few more warriors early.

Like I said, would have to play it out from both sides and see what I can come up with...damn you best buy I want my pc...

Joe

 

[Betafor]

...How does it not make a difference joe? Yes, your third city appears on time, but your fourth city settler has an extra turn to move. It's a set amount of turns to get the settler, and a set amount of turns to move the settler, add them together and you have the number of turns to build the city... but minus one for a forest chop is still minus one, no matter what terrain is there. I could see an exception for making a road, but i usually have my last settler done before wheel...

OCC, i have a lot of freinds who do this with persia:

Worker/barraks/worker/immortal spam.

You can see why i like rushing with india..

i dont normally play india as you know, but i have learned that waiting for persia to attk is a bad idea, considering persia needs 2 border pops before it can access the horse, and you lose your only advantage. So, i like your strat, expecially using the warriors to make sure he doesnt get horses...

However, I am normally against early rushes becaue early rushes vs a good UU civ all depend on the fact that the person has to be building non units in order to better his eventual conquest(barraks, worker to hook up stuff.

IMHO, it's a gamble. (This is what i've learned playing non earth games about early rushings where one has a later game advatage, but for this we'll use persia and india)
India rush, persia builds units for defence - lose stalemate not worth the time, stagnated because you built useless units instad of settler/buildings/ect, while you may eventually be able to pull this off once you get iron online, by this time everyone else is way ahead of you, even with your new city
India build, persia builds units for defence - win, he can't easily take you over w/o UU
India rush, persia builds worker/barracks - win, you sucessfully rushed him
India build, persia builds worker/barracks - lose, UU kills you.

if all situations are equally likely, then it's a coin toss. The fun becomes when you can anticipate the movements of your opponent.

Don't you wish you were phycic?

 

[JoeHollywood]

ahh how an assumtion can totally ruin a strat...

gentlemen...one must not assume that persia will settle in place...I know I don't with them...grin...

now, after mulling that over, here is the trick with england as to why it's a null turn for the settler...

for ease I'm going to assume we've done all the first steps...london is in place, york is 3 west...and we'll run both scenarios

turn 1) london finishes settler...york is one away...settler 1 moves 2 squares northwest

turn 2) york finishes settler...settler 1 moves 1 square north...forested tile...settler two moves to one square south of forested tile...

turn 3) settler one settles...settler two goes through the tile and ends up on the square with the iron...

scenario 2...

turn 1) both cities finish settler...settler 1 moves two northwest...settler two moves to same tile...ok wait...I now see I was wrong...

grin

I thought that you would pick up an extra movement through the city and land on the iron on the same turn...you're absolutely right you do pick up one turn all the way around...good job...

is it worth the total of 4 turns wasted with the worker?...I still don't think so, you still get the extra turn, but an extra turn of what?...that turn translates to an actual loss of gold (city maintenence-commerce worked) and only 3 shields if my memory is correct )

so you gain 3 hammers, 1 beaker, and lose 2 gold ( boy it would help having the game to reference this ), I don't think this is worth 2 roads or a quarry that early...personal preference would be to leave things as is, but I do have to give you credit for speeding up that aspect...

Joe

 

[Betafor]

is it worth the total of 4 turns wasted with the worker?

Joe

yay, i'm right for a change...

You are right, first time i thought of it i thought it wasn't worth it, but it's very useful i've found for getting IW much earlier, because you have to search BW... One thing that you aren't considering is the fact that the iron gets pumped earlier, and i do beleive a mine with iron on the hill would be preferable to a quarry in terms of net gain... just my $0.02. Also, this is GREAT if france is AI and hasn't been taken over yet, because often you need to wait for catapults, so you can afford to get things like the wheel and masonry later.

 

[I play 4 fun]

Assuming to your are persia Joe and you do move the persian cap onto the dessert hill, you would lose a turn moving the city even though you are closer to horses. This is one more turn for india to research the required techs to attack persia. You would also then have to move farther to improve your cows, ivory and deer which are the main production elements of the persian capital

In my experiances as persia and I have many, the culture pop isnt to much to worry about cause it has happens just before i get the road done (the way i play persia any way). Granted the hill provides better defence but the goal of the rush with india is to prevent horses and wait till iron shows up (not take the cap with archers). Then it's an easy victory.

 

[JoeHollywood]

you won't get iron working "much" earlier...in fact most likely won't get it earlier at all...the most you can get is exactly 4 beakers...it would be rare to make it even a turn earlier...and you don't have the roads

Joe

 

[I play 4 fun]

Well it isnt so much about getting iron working as it is to get archery but i c your point

 

[JoeHollywood]

the iron working post was for the england strat...but once I get my pc back we'll play test you india, me persia, and see what happens on a few test runs...I think you have to get more agressive...forgo the barracks, pump more warriors and straight rush archery for it to have a chance...even then I get the tech for chariots at the same time you get the tech for archery...since your warriors have to move to my city and mine are already there ( 2 moves to the horse ) I'll have time to get a worker out to compensate for the travel time and will have my first immortal at the time you have your first archer...I think AH and archery are the same, no way to check right now...and in that case persia just wins...at worst stalemates, but I can get the first immortal on your iron and park...

Joe...

and arabia is no threat...even unopposed from persia they still have egypt and greece to deal with

 

[I play 4 fun]

K let's say the archer rush doesnt work against a compotent persia.

What should india do, cause the way i see it is your screwed until iron working, and persia will most likely attack before you get that.

 

[Locki]

Reading about this Persia vs. India discussion just reminded me that you never addressed a strat for both Greece and Japan Joe (which I'm still hoping you'll write a whole shpeal about). It seems to me as Greece your first moves involve attacking persia since your UU is good against the Persian one. Of course your worried about Rome attacking as well but lets be honest. Rome has bigger fish to fry. So the strat with Indian archer rush vs. Persia may work by virtue of Greece joining in the fray and creating a second battle front. At least thats how I play my Greece.

Locki

 

[Icewise]

OMG just played a game where i was Persia and guess who i lost a war with...

Arabia!



I still can't believe it.

I never seen this done before so let me tell you what happened.

Basically instead of settling at the spot Arabian guy settled right next to me in that excellent spot to the west of Perian starting position, where he gets, farm, Copper, Sheep, Marble or stone all in the radious. I quickly panicked and tried to get him with Warrior Rush, didn't work too well, he had a stronghold in the forrests so his route to Copper was secured and the city was also secured.


So he had Axemen while i had Archers, i coudn't hook up horses.

In the end after a lot of fighting, i lost i did however make a few mistakes but i have to say i was very surprised with this strategy.

he was however taken out later by Russia, this war was a bit too costly for him and dragged on for too long.

 

[Ruiz79]

What would you think is a good amount of cities on the japanese islands?

 

[JoeHollywood]

ok all, tommorrow I'll do greece and japan since the interest is definately there...and I'll actually do so in such a way that delves deep into a couple game theory issues, rather than just overglorified "if/then" statements.

grin...for now...I SLEEP!

Joe

 

[I play 4 fun]

Joe I just played an very long Earth Game last nite and the most interesting thing was that Persia died in the first 5 turns!

Tarkus was persia and another good player was india. Tarkus moved his cap onto the desert hill (like your strat) and i assume started working the oasis tile because of food and money. I then assume india immediately moved his warrior towards persia, he then attacked and razed a defenceless city.

Now Persia can get the warrior out in time, just have switch tiles, but doing that is like the china vs. mongol situation i think. mongols can hold back the attack but it cost them time, like not getting a worker, building military and lack growing. (same problems mongols have) granted persia has better tiles then the mongols. Now when the culture expands Perisa will be able to work the deer tile (2 food and 2 production)

I would like to know your thoughts on the situation, and I think that Tarkus is a competent player.

Locki on your strat as greece, Rome is a major problem for greece since all rome has to do is park a couple of Prae's on the hill leading in, good idea though

 

[JoeHollywood]

tarkus is an incredible "middle game" player...he neglects his defenses too much early though...almost plays multis the way a person should play a single player...

love the guy to death, but can't count the number of times I've taken all of england and had to fight a total of 4 warriors.

I wouldn't be surprised if he went worker first as always...but also there had to be favorable placement with the indian warrior...

you can't just build the warrior and park it in the city early though...you need to work it towards india so that he's dettered from attacking or at worst you can deflect his course and fight him in the field...

where as the defender has the advantage most times in percentages...

initiative of the attack has the advantage in the war...

fight them on their land not yours...

5 turns is pretty fast though...he should have been cranking warriros and had a warrior vs warrior war early, then the worker.

Joe

 

[JoeHollywood]

also the immortal comes a lot earlier than the keshik...and is a lot more dominant in it's time

joe