G-Minor III

[Tabarnak]

It seemed like the only function of the capitol, late game, was to build a unit to escort a purchased settler to an iron deposit.

Yes, but if having enough happiness it's not a bad idea to annex a recently conquered capital and rush buy units, especially if you think you will not have sufficient forces to take down last civs.

Does Persia is also strong because he can kill everyone without iron? Great synergy with going honor for GG. Rush buying immortal from annexed cities can be a good idea.

 

[Martin Alvito]

I had to give up on the 3rd army idea.

I have as well. If Persia is getting into the 70s with Immortals, then there isn't a need for Iron. Even the fastest Iron game is still going to be in the 70s if everything goes exactly according to plan.

@Tabarnak: I figured that all of the better times involved annexing and rushing reinforcements on the front lines.

 

[Sun Tzu Wu]

@TMIT
I tend to agree with you but having stepped into this discussion I think you owe it to the rest of us to at least submit a game in this gauntlet. Insider discussion welcome. Outsider no.

"@TMIT" or @"everyone has hasn't submitted a game in this gauntlet"?

I strongly disagree with idea that a player must submit a game to a gauntlet to participate in its discussion.

Certainly, a player that isn't actively playing in a gauntlet has no vested interest in the outcome of a "banned exploit" ruling that may affect said gauntlet. Ostensibly, their comments are thus more likely to be less biased than those actively playing the gauntlet.

Perhaps, HOF staff not playing in this gauntlet should be banned from ruling on the "banned exploit" issue? In fact, it should be the other way around!

Certainly in the case of a HOF ruling affecting a gauntlet, one wants more outside input and comment and not less.

Sun Tzu Wu

 

[iggymnrr]

@Tabarnak: I figured that all of the better times involved annexing and rushing reinforcements on the front lines

I couldn't afford to do that since no 2nd culture ruin for honor GG. With 1 culture ruin, a two-army approach is like a genealogy tree. 1 immortal and 2 warriors can take down 2 civs each. So the first reinforcements from capitol scout/xp their way to targets each army is not attacking. Once 2nd policy is in for GG, annex/rush-buy pretending the annexed cities are each a new capitol: their units go scout/xp their way to targets each army is not attacking. When each army arrives at a new target, it merges with a reinforcement getting stronger. Make sense? I think I used only 5(or 6) immortals, 4 warriors and 1 scout. Anything else was for the sake of 2 iron.

Not skipping nearby civs (and selling them) also sped ironworking which came in handy:

Spoiler :

Only one non-river-crossing tile to attack from and, finding a way through mountains, remnants of other army caught up.

As to selling annexed cities: sell last city to next target for more cash and 1 less rush-bought archer defending.

@TMIT" or @"everyone has hasn't submitted a game in this gauntlet"?

I strongly disagree with idea that a player must submit a game to a gauntlet to participate in its discussion.

Certainly, a player that isn't actively playing in a gauntlet has no vested interest in the outcome of a "banned exploit" ruling that may affect said gauntlet. Ostensibly, their comments are thus more likely to less biased than those actively playing the gauntlet.

Perhaps, HOF staff not playing in this gauntlet should be banned from ruling on the "banned exploit" issue? In fact, it should be the other way around!

Certainly in the case of a HOF ruling affecting a gauntlet, one wants more outside input and comment and not less.

Sun Tzu W

True but the discussion was headed too much away from the gauntlet itself.

 

[walkerjks]

I strongly disagree with idea that a player must submit a game to a gauntlet to participate in its discussion.

Given my 10 hours/week play budget, I know I'm not going to be particularly competitive in any of these gauntlets. I still (hopefully) have something to contribute. ome ideas will be nonsense (i.e. swimming an army). Some ideas will be reasonable, even if still flawed (i.e. Japan for the UA). But I fully know, absent a miracle start, that I won't medal in any of these - just not enough time to experiment. Still fascinated by the strategies though.

And, ok, I guess I technically submitted a game to this gauntlet. Turn 200-something Songhai win. Woohoo!. It will at least contribute to someone else's bronze or silver medal, while placing 70th in the actual gauntlet. (And I might still squeeze an official Japan or Persia submission in before the deadline).

 

[Martin Alvito]

I couldn't afford to do that since no 2nd culture ruin for honor GG. With 1 culture ruin, a two-army approach is like a genealogy tree. 1 immortal and 2 warriors can take down 2 civs each. So the first reinforcements from capitol scout/xp their way to targets each army is not attacking. Once 2nd policy is in for GG, annex/rush-buy pretending the annexed cities are each a new capitol: their units go scout/xp their way to targets each army is not attacking. When each army arrives at a new target, it merges with a reinforcement getting stronger. Make sense? I think I used only 5(or 6) immortals, 4 warriors and 1 scout. Anything else was for the sake of 2 iron.

I'm confused; that's more or less a detailed version of what I was getting at. Capture, annex, rush, sell, repeat. Move new units to points where they can help you, whether that is the next target or the succeeding target. I've also switched to the two army model, though with France the reasoning behind the change was a little different.

 

[tommynt]

I havent tried France yet, but if u can get to Iron in like 35-40 turns it should be stronger then Persia - 1 sword can pretty much take a civ on his own - with some flanking - so all u d have to do is take 2 cities before turn 40 settle a iron - upgrade and then spread units out, 1 sword + something to each civ - might be done before turn 70.

Also I thought selling cities was banned so I rather didnt, d help the happy problems ..

 

[iggymnrr]

I'm confused; that's more or less a detailed version of what I was getting at. Capture, annex, rush, sell, repeat. Move new units to points where they can help you, whether that is the next target or the succeeding target. I've also switched to the two army model, though with France the reasoning behind the change was a little different.

Annexation increases culture cost, kills honor GG. If 1 culture ruin a person has to WAIT before annexation and rush buy at the front. In other words, a 2 culture ruin start with a double warrior upgrade and its a double GA at turn 40 to go for the gold ~turn 67.

Edit: It looks like Persia can also do a 3 army game in ~80 turns too. I stumbled across this on a quick game when I accidentally started down liberty and got the double culture hit. Endgame got to be complete mayhem, nearly losing a city to a barb. Might have pulled it off against a strength 11 city at the end. But to avoid being zoned by a barb I DoWed to in order to avoid the zone in order to reach the last civ capitol. Forgot to sell last city ... You got it. An archer defender was purchased. Exciting game.

 

[Max M.]

Also I thought selling cities was banned so I rather didnt, d help the happy problems ..

And it seems to be banned now (or no?). Curiously, I have just submitted a game using this "technique" (fortunatly I already have a "clean" sub-80 game there - for happiness I was just giving cities out *for free* - not selling).

 

[Martin Alvito]

Annexation increases culture cost, kills honor GG. If 1 culture ruin a person has to WAIT before annexation and rush buy at the front. In other words, a 2 culture ruin start with a double warrior upgrade and its a double GA at turn 40 to go for the gold ~turn 67.

Ah, I see the disagreement now. If you don't get a double Culture ruin, you're going to lose. I think it's possible to win without double upgrade, but a lot of stuff has to break right.

@tommynt: You need two Swords and a heal promotion (or a lesser unit) to take an undefended city. You hit for about 6, and you take about 3. You need another unit of some kind to take a defended city with Swords. The best games with Iron I've had have gotten it in the early 30's, so if Immortals can go sub-70 you can't beat them with Iron.

As far as selling cities goes - you can sell them as long as you don't retake them.

 

[iggymnrr]

And it seems to be banned now (or no?). Curiously, I have just submitted a game using this "technique" (fortunatly I already have a "clean" sub-80 game there - for happiness I was just giving cities out *for free* - not selling).

For all intents and purposes, lux sales are banned in this gauntlet. Finish times are so fast there's nothing left to sell except cities.

 

[Martin Alvito]

For all intents and purposes, lux sales are banned in this gauntlet. Finish times are so fast there's nothing left to sell except cities.

Sell them for straight GPT to the most distant civ available.

 

[Max M.]

For all intents and purposes, lux sales are banned in this gauntlet. Finish times are so fast there's nothing left to sell except cities.

And you still can sell your initial mining lux to your neighbour and conquer her after the deal expires (yes, with a "three army" approach).

 

[ras9929]

El Dorado + FoY start...
Gold, Cow, Wheat...

Thought I had a chance until no culture ruins..3 map ruins!\

Still going to get a good finish...

 

[walkerjks]

And you still can sell your initial mining lux to your neighbour and conquer her after the deal expires (yes, with a "three army" approach).

Or just sell luxuries for gpt and don't worry about breaking the deal.

After seeing the deals they throw at you for peace, I'm not sure that selling the luxury is better than simply declaring war as soon as you meet someone.

 

[iggymnrr]

And you still can sell your initial mining lux to your neighbour and conquer her after the deal expires (yes, with a "three army" approach).

The point is finish times are getting so fast that a person has to wheel an army up to that AI and say, "I'd like to kill you now, but thing is, since I sold you that lux, I have to wait 5 turns to do so. I'm an ethical warmonger. Murder isn't a sin but stealing is."

 

[Max M.]

The point is finish times are getting so fast that a person has to wheel an army up to that AI and say, "I'd like to kill you now, but thing is, since I sold you that lux, I have to wait 5 turns to do so. I'm an ethical warmonger. Murder isn't a sin but stealing is."

Optimally it is ~T15->T60 deal, so...

I'm not sure that selling the luxury is better than simply declaring war as soon as you meet someone.

Indeed, I think "peace gold farming" is the thickest source of gold (even if city selling is allowed - it comes later anyway).

 

[iggymnrr]

Optimally it is ~T15->T60 deal, so...

And so winning at turn 55 is impossible? What are we supposed to do reroll maps until mining is popped from a ruin?

 

[Max M.]

And so winning at turn 55 is impossible?

I don't know. If I'm not mistaken there's no sub-75 games so far (though considering most of them are "unlucky" ones - we will see some T65 breaktrhough eventually - but earlier? hmm...).

What are we supposed to do reroll maps until mining is popped from a ruin?

We get Mining not later than T15 the usual way.

Actually, I'm not pushing the "initial mining lux sell" as the only way to go - I just mentioned it as one possible option: one can get his ~200+5pt at ~T15 (and leave this civ for 45 turns) or get a potentially bigger sum 7-8 (?) turns after DoW (and leave the civ for 10 turns after). Situation depended.

 

[iggymnrr]

Quote:
Originally Posted by iggymnrr
And so winning at turn 55 is impossible?
I don't know. If I'm not mistaken there's no sub-75 games so far (though considering most of them are "unlucky" ones - we will see some T65 breaktrhough eventually - but earlier? hmm...).

Quote:
What are we supposed to do reroll maps until mining is popped from a ruin?
We get Mining not later than T15 the usual way.

Actually, I'm not pushing the "initial mining lux sell" as the only way to go - I just mentioned it as one possible option: one can get his ~200 at ~T15 (and leave this civ for 45 turns) or get a potentially bigger sum 7-8 turns after DoW (and leave the civ for 10 turns after). Situation depended.

The problem arbitrary bans on things right now is that the game is in poor shape. Each new ban just creates more animosity. Personally, I'm beginning to wish for no limits on gold exploits. The AI is so bad: no mercy. Why should I pretend the have a clue when they don't? I like to go to an AI and kill, rape, pillage, burn and dig up it's mother's grave and change it's ancestral lineage. They're that bad.