Emperor Cookbook II: Mehmed II

[Gliese 581]

RRRaskolnikov: No you're right about the granary. It used to be you always wanted to complete it 1 turn before growing as you then got a half-full bin (in older civ games). I used to do this in CIV as well for the longest time before I realised that the rules had changed.
But getting granary first will give you the fastest growth in any case bc after you whip the lighthouse you'll be growing at double speed which is worth more than getting +1 food.

 

[pigswill]

Calculations are going to be more complex if the food resource is in the outer ring. My intuition (in the absence of religion) would be monument>gran>LH but I could be wrong on that.

 

[RRRaskolnikov]

But getting granary first will give you the fastest growth in any case bc after you whip the lighthouse you'll be growing at double speed which is worth more than getting +1 food.

You're right, tx for the explanation... the other way you have to wait to grow from 2 to size 3 to benefit from double growth rate...
@Pigswill: yeah, culture first if the food is in the second ring

 

[ChromiumL]

Votin' Time...

Lots of people played the round (or at least part of it) but for various reasons are not submitting or completing their saves. Just to be clear, these people may still vote for other people's saves.

Voting will end on Wednesday and we will start up again then!

Saves:

Cornhog: Post, Save

Monsterzuma: Post, Save

Kraftster: Post, Save

RJM: Post, Save

Pigswill: Post, Save

Bleys: Post (I couldn't find a post summarizing your round--did I miss it somewhere?), Save, Shadow (not submitted for votes)

Abegweit: Post, Save

KingMorgan: Post, Save

Gliese 581: Post, Save Save is at normal game speed (I think?)--so probably best if this save gets mention but not votes (unless we decide to continue the game in normal speed).

Carl Corey: Post, Save

RRRaskolnikov: Post, Save

Winston Hughes: Post, Save

 

[Gliese 581]

ChromiumL: Yes I'm not participating in the voting, it's just a shadow game and normal speed.

 

[IPEX-731BA5DD06]

this is late, but is NOT FOR CONSIDERATION anyway..so

Spoiler :

I just played it out so I'd get a feel for the game...the wonders seem to go faster than I'd have expected.

anyway, I built the settler and axe, gave up on beating Cyrus, and settled at the pig/elephant spot to the NW.

finished writing, hunting, math's, built the pyramids DIDN'T SWITCH TO REP, I've just realized NOW....

Eridine, built the pyramids, chopping AFTER maths, so I thought GE FACTORY. Whipped something for 3 pop, HUGE MISTAKE, think it was a Forge. Tried to build the Hanging gardens, but could see Toku, got Maths at same time, so was behind him, and he built it.

Next Umm Hmm I think Iron working as I saw Cyrus had Alpha, teched too much but got Alpha and iron working for Metal casting. No other worth while trades as all crappy Mono, Poly etc not worth WFYBTA

I then teched up the Lit line, Missed Statue of Zeus, was built the same turn I realized that I'd forgotten to build it. Built the Great Library, building the Parthenon. Lost out on Colossus, started in Ankara, changed to another city, and missed out on it, but panicking about great library.

have only built 5 cities, but all have forges, or are about to build, iron hooked up, ele's, 1 city off shore. I messed about with settler/axe/galley. Was going to settle onto of stone, so could build hanging gardens, when I lost that race, I continued onwards, only to find Cyrus, BEAT ME AGAIN

I then spend another 15 turns coming back, only to find Saladin, in charge of overseas Colonies, and having to open borders with him. Finally settle clam sheep island.

Another city built with Pigs/spice.

Overall a real crappy round, played with some focus and some enter fever. Not enough workers/setters/cities. No religion adopted as I'd prefer Hinduism, which won't spread to us, but X-ianity, Taoism and another useless religion did.

At least this will give me an insight into the better rounds, Saladin, only has Archers, No Ele's hooked up, and is ripe for a sword attack.

Shaka's declared on toku, who's settled a city to the north of Ele/pigs. Able to trade Currency for Calendar, didn't want anything else.

I got 'Wonder fever' AGAIN. Messed up Hanging Gardens bid...over all, I'm not happy chappy with effort. At least I can vote with some insight now.

View attachment 195917

 

[RJM]

Jeez - I find it even more difficult to compare these saves than I did last time round. I've made a preliminary assesment, but I'd like to see some discussion before I cast my vote.

The three factors I've compared so far are sustainable research rate, number of techs already learned and whether GL has been built. What factors are others using? Are there any other wonders that should be considered? How about defensive units? And are civics important?

After deciding the factors that seem important there is still the question of relative weighting. How do I compare a save with a higher research rate to one with a lower rate, but more techs learned? Does the GL have a value above its impact on research?

RJM

 

[pigswill]

@RJM. There have been two 'flavours' this round: the Colossus games and the Glib games. I think everyone got Glight. Colossus clearly gives more commerce/turn while Glib will boost GS production for light-bulbing. One factor to consider is how soon astronomy will be needed, with astronomy you don't have to worry about maintaining coastal trade routes but it nerfs Colossus. Glib doesn't obselete until Scimeth which generally can be delayed for a while. Imho Colossus is the more powerful wonder while it lasts so you have to decide how soon you need astronomy.

 

[Cornhog]

I don't think it's an either/or. I haven't checked all the saves but I doubt I'm the only one to get both the Colossus and the Great Library. Well, technically I didn't. I'm five turns — or one whip — away from the GL. Still..

I was going to base my choice mainly on expansion plus the development of the individual cities and the Colossus. Seems like good criteria to me

 

[RJM]

@RJM. There have been two 'flavours' this round: the Colossus games and the Glib games. I think everyone got Glight. Colossus clearly gives more commerce/turn while Glib will boost GS production for light-bulbing. One factor to consider is how soon astronomy will be needed, with astronomy you don't have to worry about maintaining coastal trade routes but it nerfs Colossus. Glib doesn't obselete until Scimeth which generally can be delayed for a while. Imho Colossus is the more powerful wonder while it lasts so you have to decide how soon you need astronomy.

Let me make sure I understand. Both GL and Colossus give a direct benefit. In the case of the GL, this is 2 scientists while in the case of Colossus, this gives one additional commerce for each water tile. Both of these benefits convert into extra research - either directly or via the tax slider. In addition, each of these wonders gives additional GP points - 2 in the case of the Colossus and 8 in the case of the GL. These should eventualy allow you to lightbulb a tech, but don't translate directly into the research rates. Their ability to give a GP depends to some extent on where they are built. The value of a GP point varies over time, but I have seen a suggestion that in the early game, 5 is a reasonable value. This would suggest awarding a "bonus" to the research rate of 10 for building the Colossus and 40 for the GL.

In addition, there is the issue of the obsoleting technology. Perhaps some amount should be subtracted and possibly a greater subtraction in the case of the Colossus because the obsoleting technology is earlier.

RJM

 

[IPEX-731BA5DD06]

Well, from a quick look at the reports only, I'll base it on tech rate/city development.

meaning, what techs have been researched/traded for, how big are the cities, bigger the better, and how many they have.

Wonders, Great Light house and Colossus are HUGE, Great Library for G Scientist production, and Great Engineer pool as well.

Tech board position, Can we attack 1 or 3 civ's next round decisively, what techs do we want, how many Gross tech's have been traded for.

city specialization, has it started, are we still expanding or looking at war. What's the production potential, DO THEY HAVE FORGES.

I know, organized religion=forge, but happy bonus as well as GE points.

 

[RRRaskolnikov]

@RJM: I don't think evaluating the wonders in terms of beakers is relevant...
Perhaps trying to see if the wonder will help you to achieve your plan (fastest liberalism for Glib for instance) while not complety halting you rex and military build up is the way to go. Hard to really quantify it IMO...

Cheers

 

[RJM]

@RJM: I don't think evaluating the wonders in terms of beakers is relevant...
Perhaps trying to see if the wonder will help you to achieve your plan (fastest liberalism for Glib for instance) while not complety halting you rex and military build up is the way to go. Hard to really quantify it IMO...

Cheers

You may be right, but for me, comparing different saves means using some common metric. The justification in my mind for evaluating wonders in terms of is that most of the wonders we have been talking about either have a pretty direct effect on commerce (GLH, Colossus) or on (GL, pyramids). (Fortunately we aren't talking about the ironworks yet.) A good tech lead usualy translates to an easier win.

You're certainly right that its hard to quantify, but we have to do it all the time in civ. If we choose to work a grassland forest rather than a riverside grassland tile, we are saying that we value the hammer more highly than the commerce.

The problem (as you point out) is how to make the comparison between and production or military strength. But we do have to make just such a comparison when we vote.

RJM

 

[RRRaskolnikov]

@RJM: if you want to make a good comparaison of techs, I suggest that you look at beakers produced at the save more than the bpt. bpt should be only the second metric as people relying on bulbs for instance will have lower gnp than the cottage spammers for instance, but that doesn't mean they will have less techs. If both saves have roughly the same set of techs researched, then take bpt in account (to judge the eco).

Don't get me wrong, I think precise evaluation of the saves is really interesting... but I don't think wonders make such big differences. If you think the GLib is worth 40 beakers, what would you think of 5 caste scientists in pacifism? Would you had 160 beakers or more to the bpt (those 5 guys are worth 30 gpp, a little less than 4 times the Glib gpp production)? It's hard to evaluate really...

Cheers

 

[RJM]

@RJM: if you want to make a good comparaison of techs, I suggest that you look at beakers produced at the save more than the bpt. bpt should be only the second metric as people relying on bulbs for instance will have lower gnp than the cottage spammers for instance, but that doesn't mean they will have less techs. If both saves have roughly the same set of techs researched, then take bpt in account (to judge the eco).

Don't get me wrong, I think precise evaluation of the saves is really interesting... but I don't think wonders make such big differences. If you think the GLib is worth 40 beakers, what would you think of 5 caste scientists in pacifism? Would you had 160 beakers or more to the bpt (those 5 guys are worth 30 gpp, a little less than 4 times the Glib gpp production)? It's hard to evaluate really...

Cheers

You are right - the that has already been invested in techs is very important. In the current set of saves for example, I believe a save that has already discovered paper rates higher than one in which paper is still being researched. But what about archery? I'm inclined not to worry about a save where it has not yet been discovered. At this stage it's not a vital tech and it can probably be picked up cheaply in a swap with the AI.

Is the comparison of techs more important than bpt? Well, IMO, that depends on circumstances. As you say, if techs are roughly equal, bpt becomes important. If the tech rates are roughly equal, techs discovered becomes more important. But if the save with the most techs has the lowest bpt (fortunately not true in this case) you need to make a judgement. In my first attempted evaluation, I've (rather arbitarily) awarded a small bonus for every additional tech discovered.

BTW, assigning a value to the GP points is intended to help compare the use of lightbulbs with the cottage spammers.

The question about 5 caste scientists compared with the GL is very interesting. In principle, I'd value the the 15 GP points from the scientists at 75 bpt (or 150 under pacifism - remembering that the 8 GP points from the GL also doubles under pacifism, so the GL is a little more than half the 5 caste scientists). The problem with our 5 caste scientists is that they are less secure than the GL. I might want to switch to slavery and pop rush something. So I probably should apply some discount to the GP points from the caste scientists. But how much?

RJM

 

[RRRaskolnikov]

@RJM: good point on techs like archery...these are strategic choices...

But I laughed a lot when you said that caste scientists are "less secured" than the Glib! You can run scientists with caste after COL, in every games, this is a fact. Building the Glib is not secured in every games... fortunaly here we have marble... but still I think I missed the "sure" part of the story!

Cheers

edit: I still think your estimation of the gpp value should not be made with mathematical arguments, you should try to look how it fits the plan to win the game (that's probably the way I will do it)... again I could be wrong

 

[RJM]

I can see why you would laugh - I guess I expressed it badly. For those who couldn't penetrate my obscurity, I meant to compare a save where the GL has been built to a save where there are 5 caste scientists but the GL has been lost.

RJM

 

[RRRaskolnikov]

Ah! sorry then! (don't take offense anyways, I all the time...usually of me being so dumb)

 

[Winston Hughes]

The three factors I've compared so far are sustainable research rate, number of techs already learned and whether GL has been built. What factors are others using?

I've yet to examine the current crop, but here's what I look for when judging the strength of a save:

My first concern is the future potential of the empire.

At this stage, with victory still some way off, the two key factors are (i) the number/quality/size/development of cities, and (ii) the opportunities for further expansion, growth, and development. Tech is important, but not pre-eminently so.

My second concern is the state of rival civs.

Here, the relative tech position is crucial - a large, but hopelessly backward rival is preferable to a medium-sized one with a big tech lead. Depending on the geographical and diplomatic conditions, relative military strength can also be a key issue.

Usually, a few saves are clearly ahead of the pack. After that, it's a matter of weighing up the various details. Since these details cannot be reduced to a standard measure of value, the final decision is often intuitive rather than consciously reasoned.

 

[Abegweit]

@Winston.

Well, I sure don't trust your ability to evaluate a save. I mean, you called your own crappy. when it's clearly one of the best. Nice expansion. Superb teching. As I recall, you have the best tech rate of all. What's not to like?