G-Minor 23

[Thrallia]

I used my worthless great people(merchants, artists) for Golden Ages when building the actual space ship parts, to speed up the production of them.

I didn't need beakers from representation by then, didn't need culture ever, or extra gold per turn...I run 100% science the entire time no matter what. This is actually the first time I've ever used Great People for Golden Ages at all, and I found them to be most helpful, if I didn't need their settled bonuses, at speeding up production of spaceship parts by 2-3 turns at the end.

Prophets weren't as big a loss as I expected them to be, since they give 2 hammers, when Engineers only give 3 hammers. I was kinda surprised by that. But I greatly prefer Scientists to anything else, until the end game...once I use Liberalism for Fusion, I change from running scientists to running Engineers.

Am I wrong in that reasoning? I don't generally play OCC, nor do I generally settle my Great People. I usually use scientists to lightbulb important techs for trading, and to create Academies. I must admit to being very bad at utilizing the power of Great People in most of my games...I don't usually get more than 3-6 Great People, and rarely very early.

 

[Airny]

We already had a settler spacerace, right?
Can't look for it atm, because HoF is down.

This was about running around with your scout and settler at start to get maximum huts.
Why do you repeat settings with so many possibilities still open?

 

[WastinTime]

As far as the effectiveness of Pacifism when you are already philosophical...yes, it only increases your rate by another 50%...but that still gives you an increase of about 35% more Great People.

Isn't it more like only 10-20% more GP? I haven't done the math in a long time. What's your reasoning?

EDIT: At normal speed, it's 16,500 points for 20 GP. If you're getting 50% more points, you have 8,250 extra points that will get you 2 more GP, which is 22. #21 costs you 3300, and #22 costs 3600. That's only 10% more.

 

[Thrallia]

I didn't do the math, I just figured it'd be about 33% more since it gives you 3x the normal rate, as opposed to 2x the normal rate.

 

[ParadigmShifter]

1765AD for my first attempt. I was Liz on a highlands (more production!) map vs. Mansa. Easy was a bit of an understatement! I only fought barbarians (until I built the great wall in 1310AD or something - mainly for engineer points).

I could have won conquest in 140AD when Mansa offered to become my vassal even though I had never attacked him, lol.

Got civil service from Oracle (should have delayed the build a bit I think seeing how slow Mansa was to tech), and FUSION from Liberalism (saving me 4 turns!).

I could have been quicker I think had I taken a later tech from Oracle, and I forgot to delay building of the Taj Mahal until I was building something really big or lots of SS parts simultaneously.

The HOF site is saying no submissions yet for this gauntlet though so I can't see how well I am doing.

EDIT: I also lost no units in this game. Even my scout beat a barb warrior! He was sadly missed when I viciously deleted him when there were no huts left.

EDIT2: Duh, just realised I was running Organised Religion for most of the game without a state religion. Oops. That would have made things a bit quicker.

 

[Thrallia]

My scout beat a barb sword, gaining 9 exp points lol. I was very shocked by that.

I used the Oracle to grab Computers, so you could have definitely pushed it back a bit lol

 

[ParadigmShifter]

I realise that now It was my first ever settler game, and first on a duel size map, first highlands map too.

If I have another attempt (I probably will, it only took 3 hours and wasn't exactly taxing on the brain), I might try a spiritual civ so I can change civics more often. I just went slavery->caste system when I went into mercantilism, and stayed in bueraucracy as soon as I got it. The organized religion gaffe was a bit of a mistake though. Is anyone financial/spiritual [just checked, no]? Otherwise I may try Peter since the research instittute is the biz, and the extra health will be handy for coal plants/labs and the like (although I got the 3 Gorges Dam instead). I went for Genetics after rocketry/computers for the health bonus. I also went biology straight after SciMeth to grow my production cities a bit more. Not much farmable land on a highlands map.

I put off getting scientific method until I had researched everything I could that was required for space so as not to obsolete the Great Library. I think that was a good plan. I probably should have teched industrialism before starting building apollo though.

EDIT: Peter also starts with a scout I think. Hmm...

I got 2 workers and 1 settler from huts. I also got a tech, can't remember what it was now. Mansa was a great trade partner, I got calendar and some other low value tech fom him when I was miles ahead. Both were 1 turn of research trades

 

[Harbourboy]

financial/spiritual

Good old Mansa Musa!

 

[ParadigmShifter]

Right, don't know how I missed that one. The mint looks pretty "mint" too.

I did get lots of scientists from Liz though (and 1 priest - settled in Ironworks city - and 1 engineer). Used the engineer on 3 Gorges Dam I think (and the fusion one on the Space Elevator even though only the engine was left, it saved a couple of turns anyway).

Was 100% research most of the time, the free GM from economics got me 780 odd gold from Mansa's capital.

Edit: I also built the pyramids stupidly late as well, later than the 1300AD odd Great Wall. How can anyone lose a game on Settler/Duel? Flipped 3 of Mansa's cities, razed one after flipping.

EDIT2: Actually the mint probably isn't good at this level, because I ran 100% science most of the time unless I had a 1 turn tech, when I lowered science slider it to as low as it would go to raise a bit of cash for running 100% again. I setlled all my scientists in the capital except the first (academy in capital), did 2 lightbulbs I think (printing press and something else very late on that I forget now).

 

[ParadigmShifter]

If I played as Mansa that would mean Mansa isn't the opponent though (although it was random opponent in this game I lucked out with Mansa). He's so soft I think I would miss him if I played again, the only annoying thing was having to turn down his repeated demands for being vassalized (I think he did that 3 or 4 times). At least he has SOME tech to trade and isn't likely to surprise me with a war.

If I played Mansa I would probably pick Wang Kon as the opponent since he is Financial/Protective (I'm not going to have any wars at all so protective doesn't matter). Don't know how likely he would be to "do a Monty" though.

 

[Harbourboy]

The opponent is virtually irrelevant in this game, isn't it?

 

[ParadigmShifter]

Yeah but I'd like a financial one so I can at least pick up a few techs I miss out along the way. I'm wondering if the opponent would ever invade at this level, even Monty. Like I said it was my first game on settler level, I don't think I'll play it again after this gauntlet. Kind of makes GMinor17 seem really really hard in comparison (the Monty/Noble/Oasis one that we both enjoyed so much that we came last and second to last )

 

[azzaman333]

In a game started at 2 am in the morning I got 1926AD playing OCC without Coal or Aluminum as Bismark against Tokugawa on a Continents Map. It's incredible how easy these are.

 

[ParadigmShifter]

Do you start on the same continent as the AI in a continents map?
The continents must be pretty small on this size map anyway

EDIT: I agree this is the easiest game I'd ever played. Like I said I could have won conquest by accepting Mansa's vassal offer in 140AD, and I hadn't even attacked him or anything. Quite amusing change of pace from the major though (which I started having a go at last night, despite never playing on Emperor before (and never having won on Monarch). Wow that is a bit harder, but I am surviving at the moment, even took a city of Freddy, will probably pay for that in the next session.

 

[WastinTime]

The opponent is virtually irrelevant in this game, isn't it?

Why not 2 opponents?

 

[ParadigmShifter]

Are 2 opponents going to make it any quicker? I suppose they will share tech so you might be able to get some better trades, or you could stomp one of them for free cities but you don't really need to build any units after macemen at this level it seemed. Settlers don't take long to build either.

With 1 AI civ the domination limit is 70% so you aren't likely to win that way by mistake, what is the limit with 2?

 

[Infantry#14]

Why not 2 opponents?

wouldnt that make the domination limit lower? I think land grabbing is more important (perhaps excluding the desert and the tundra)

 

[Harbourboy]

you don't really need to build any units after macemen

I didn't build any units after warriors.

 

[ParadigmShifter]

Probably a good plan that. I built a few axes for barb defence and some maces got built after I obsoleted axes and axes were being built, plus I built maybe one or 2 more for hereditary rule happiness, didn't build pyramids till stupidly late on. I shouldn't have bothered building a stable in 2 cities for the 1 horse archer that I built either. Aha! I remember the tech I popped from a hut now, horseback riding. Wouldn't have bothered with it otherwise I don't think.

So if you just have warriors the AI doesn't even attack because you look weak then?

Did you even bother with hooking up copper then until you needed it for space parts?

 

[Infantry#14]

ok, I give this a try and I launch at 1660 AD.

Use elizabeth, cottage spam wherever there is space. By the end, I can get get tech that are 2-3 turns.

I receieved quite a lot of great people, but I only spent them on the last golden age after I built Taj Mahal. The rest I just use to lightbulb future tech as I dont need the extra golden age.