Gauntlet Three

[godotnut]

I just finished my first marathon attempt with Liz, and this one went much better. I won in 1719 this time, shaving over two centuries off.

That's still practice, but I feel pretty good about the progress. I could have finished earlier if I had access to marble. The big holy buildings--catherdrals, etc.--are all double production speed with marble. This makes marble more important than stone by a long shot in this gauntlet. So if you have the choice between a start near stone and a start near marble, take the marble and chop your Pyramids sans le rock.

But I had stone. Oh well. I can also say that it's possible to get a few good wonders, even with a non-industrious leader on Emporer. I landed Stonehenge, Pyramids, Parthenon, and the Sistine Chapel. Those are the exact same wonders that I landed with Qinn last night. So much for the industrious trait. Choose philosophical or spiritual instead.

I founded six cities, all coastal but one to take advantage of the financial trait. Obviously, you will want to be operating under the caste system and pacificism as soon as you possibly can. I received probably around a dozen great artists, four great prophets, and one engineer. I played against Mao, Cyrus, and Catherine. I managed to found three religions again, the same ones (Hinduism, Judaism, and Christianity).

I was only attacked once the whole game: a half-hearted effort by Cyrus, who only sent one knight and two cats. I bribed everyone. I gave away everything I didn't need. For example, copper late game is pretty useless, as was the stone, after I fell behind in techs. Also, you may want to give away or trade your luxury resources. You won't need the happiness bonuses when you're running a culture bar at 70-100%.

I noticed that the AI researched techs WAY WAY faster at marathon than at quick. So you may want to plan for that.

If I do this again, I will stay with marathon and Liz, and switch to tropical climate. I will wait till I have a start near marble with land for three well-fed cities for culture/great people farms and a few others to help with tech. I may try a pang map to take advantage of tech trades, but I really hate the idea of playing for hours setting up a win, only to have it snatched away by a sneak attack. One small continent is all you really need. An ideal situation would be continents so close that you meet your neighbors early, but with water between you to disuade them. I guess I'll keep the sea level low, to encourage more land and narrower boundaries between continents if I don't try a pang map.

@Masquerouge: I've noticed that at quick speed on small maps, the AI doesn't develop tech as fast. When I won those games in 1930, only one opponent was even building the SS, and he wasn't far along.

What's the best time so far with this gauntlet?

 

[walkerjks]

That's still practice, but I feel pretty good about the progress. I could have finished earlier if I had access to marble. The big holy buildings--catherdrals, etc.--are all double production speed with marble. This makes marble more important than stone by a long shot in this gauntlet. So if you have the choice between a start near stone and a start near marble, take the marble and chop your Pyramids sans le rock.

Not quite true -

Stone doubles production - Judaism, Christian,
Marble doubles proudciton - Islam, Hiduism
Copper doubles production - Buddhism, Confucianism, Taoism

 

[Orca]

Marble is most important though.

 

[Shillen]

I could be wrong but I think all the wonders that give great artist points are sped up by marble. So based on that I prefer to have marble than stone nearby. Both is great of course.

 

[walkerjks]

A question for the warmongers -

Which scenario (starting with the Incans) looks better to you?

1) Start with 3 opponents, and conquer 1. This leaves you reasonable maintenance and 2 opponents to facilitate trades.

2) Start with 4 opponents, and conquer 2. This leaves you bigger, and you still have 2 trading partners.

3) Start with 3 opponents, and conquer 2. This leaves you biggest, but with only a single trading partner. I would want to leave Mansa. You can't conquer him anyway with quechas (you could obviously leave him out of the game), but he is one of the only leaders willing to trade tech even he is the only civ with that tech.

Any thoughts? The thought of a single opponent is attractive as you should be able to get wonders (and late religions) fairly easily. I'm not sure how much this slows down overall tech pace.

I'll probably also try this one (though it's a bit too random for my tastes):

4) Start on a ring with 11 AI opponents and 1 tile width connections. Conquer your immediate neighbors. Defend your choke points against whatever your crazy neighbors throw at you.

 

[Masquerouge]

@Masquerouge: I've noticed that at quick speed on small maps, the AI doesn't develop tech as fast. When I won those games in 1930, only one opponent was even building the SS, and he wasn't far along.

What's the best time so far with this gauntlet?

He. That's good to know. I'll give a try at quick then.

On a side note, I was pretty disappointed by Hatty in my last game. She declaredwar on me ! Hatty, you just bought your ticket off this gauntlet

 

[Big_Ben]

Hatty kept getting hiduism before I did, so I took her out. Mansa kept getting the oracle before I did. When playing for religions like I do those two aren't viable. My last game with was Cyrus, Peter, and FDR. Cyrus and FDR both seperated me from Peter. They both declared on Peter. I was doing ok. I turned down declaring war on Peter a couple of times. They made peace, then war again. I thought FDR popped up and asked me to declare on Peter so I said yes. It was the other way around FDR stomped me pretty bad. Would have done ok but not great.

I am sticking with Cyrus and Peter. Not sure who will be #3, maybe Frederick or Bismarck but I can count on both to war at some point.

 

[Orca]

Which scenario (starting with the Incans) looks better to you?

3) would be nice if you could do it costeffectiv.
I noticed that there isnt too much danger to get Domination win because land % you need seems to be higher on higher levels.
With Incas the aggr trait is a waste after that however. I looked out for some civ with good UU and better traits but there doesnt seem to be anything eye jumping. Egypt could be worth a try also.

 

[LulThyme]

A question for the warmongers -

Which scenario (starting with the Incans) looks better to you?

1) Start with 3 opponents, and conquer 1. This leaves you reasonable maintenance and 2 opponents to facilitate trades.

2) Start with 4 opponents, and conquer 2. This leaves you bigger, and you still have 2 trading partners.

3) Start with 3 opponents, and conquer 2. This leaves you biggest, but with only a single trading partner. I would want to leave Mansa. You can't conquer him anyway with quechas (you could obviously leave him out of the game), but he is one of the only leaders willing to trade tech even he is the only civ with that tech.

Any thoughts? The thought of a single opponent is attractive as you should be able to get wonders (and late religions) fairly easily. I'm not sure how much this slows down overall tech pace.

I'll probably also try this one (though it's a bit too random for my tastes):

4) Start on a ring with 11 AI opponents and 1 tile width connections. Conquer your immediate neighbors. Defend your choke points against whatever your crazy neighbors throw at you.

I have been thinking about this very question.
My first tried I conquered 2 out of 3 as fast as I could but the maintenance killed me.
I'm still thinking what my new approach would be.

 

[walkerjks]

I have been thinking about this very question.
My first tried I conquered 2 out of 3 as fast as I could but the maintenance killed me.
I'm still thinking what my new approach would be.

Maintenance is a problem under any scenario. In the Inca games I've tried so far, I've researched wheel and pottery first. In the peaceful games, I go Bronze and then wheel and pottery. If I can't start building cottages when I get my 3rd city, maintenance will slow the entire ancient age down.

 

[solidwoody]

This was my first try at an emperor and culture win so I think I did pretty well other than I did not get the win after having three cities at legendary (around 1822).

Me – Elizabeth
Asoka
Isabella
Mansa
Map - Pangea Small
Speed – Epic

I restarted until I had quick access to stone, coast, and two bonus foods. London had stone, hill pigs, rice, and a 4-tile inland sea. I built the Pyramids, Stonehenge, Great Library, Statue of Liberty, Hanging gardens and Notre Dame. National wonders included Forbidden Palace, Globe Theatre, Hermitage, National Epic, Oxford University, and Wall Street. I tried to group wonders in the three culture cities.

Tech was Bronze, Masonry, Myst, Animal Husbandry, Wheel, Agg, Writing, and Alpha. I think (don’t have my log at work) I popped one or two early techs from huts. Trade for most of the early techs with alphabet. Only one civ had Iron Working so I researched it next. Then went Lit, Dram, Music (I was First). Not sure on the rest but I was first to Liberalism. This seemed strange because Asoka and Mensa were way ahead of me on Techs. I was in third place the whole game.

I had a total of 10 cities three were flipped from Isabella. The culture cities were the first the founded. York (2nd) was in a flood plain with access to gold and Bronze. Notty (3rd) was on an inland coast (1f, 2c) with pigs. I was originally going for coastal cities with Collasas but Mansa built it before I researched Metal Casting. Also one city was founded on a coast with river access and Gems. Turned out to be 2nd in commerce to the capital.

I founded no religions but had 4 spread to me. Late in the game (1590) I realized I should drop Culture to min for happiness and use gold to rush cathedrals and temples. I had +200% in London and York and +300% in Notty. Until Pacifism I never selected a religion and then went to Buddhism (Asoka and Mansa both had Buddhism). Upset Isabella but was able to keep her cautious or better until Asoka took her out of the game.

Built one axeman for happiness and then used the few troops from culture flips in other cities. Never had war declared on me. Only war was Asoka vs. Isabella.

Mistakes I made included not spreading religion to minor cities fast enough and not building temples earlier. I had a city with cows, rice and fish that I didn’t set to GP farm earlier. York and Notty I did not put Artist Specialist in until late supported 3 and 2. Also due to either how slow I was or how fast AI was they converted to Emancipation around 1600. At the time I was running minimum culture in order rush cathedrals so had to beeline to democracy.

Now the biggest issue I had my cities to legendary around 1820. The game didn’t end and I didn’t create a save file until around 1860. If I look at the victory status screen it shows that I have 3 cities but I have not received the win. I played until the 1900’s and no win.

 

[Dianthus]

Now the biggest issue I had my cities to legendary around 1820. The game didn’t end and I didn’t create a save file until around 1860. If I look at the victory status screen it shows that I have 3 cities but I have not received the win. I played until the 1900’s and no win.

Could you send me the save file? Send it to hof@civfanatics.net and I'll take a look.

Oh, and welcome to CFC!

 

[Smirk]

I tried the early rush with incas, but its heavily map dependant or I just haven't much experience (skill) with them yet.
They aren't all that effective, you are literally throwing away hammers both using them and building them (because of the new chop rules where you can't have excess greater than the cost of the last build). I'm able to take some cities but ultimately the losses are great enough that I need a large starting force or try it a bit later with maybe theocracy to get woodsman upgrades to speed up the process or some other useful combination.

Skirmishers are even worse, the extra first strike and natural 4 power should make the better than the inca but they aren't two times better thus the cost ratio doesn't compare.

In light of those failures I figure the old standby of swords will work just as well and not require much of a early sacrifice, but thats even if you want to try early conquest. Which I don't think it required and maybe not even effective but we'll see what happens with the gauntlet.


I'm now of the opinion that pyramids is about the only close to required wonder and then getting an engineer from that to rush another useful wonder, maybe Sistine's is a good opening. I've stopped bothering with stonehenge and oracle mainly because of the prophet points although getting these coupled with an early caste switch might prevent you from ever getting a prophet. Worth the effort in lower difficulties but I haven't tried it yet at this one.
My reasoning is that you get a base +12 culture from a great artist and an additional +2 from Sistine's. Sistine's effective culture is massive if you have specialists which is why I feel getting an engineer to grab it quick is worth spending an early leader on. And so no other super specialist is as good joining, nor are any of their buildings. As to the question of where to join, I've been joining early ones to my capital as I know whether its going to be one of the three, and if it far outpaces the others, that just means less great works need to be built there at the end. YMMV


On other topics I tried a coastal based game and it was very effective. For one the early lighthouse is fantastic for commerce. Getting all your cities on the coast with good land is a challenge though. The lighthouse coupled with the colussus and a financial civ might allow you to drop to 100% culture quicker and in so doing make those coastal tiles more powerful than cottages. It would be tough to achieve but an interesting map with some well played lakes on coastal land with both of those wonders could quickly and easily win this in the midgame from mainly culture slider (and the rest goes to cash rushing the cathedrals).

 

[Big_Ben]

The key to rushing with quechuas is to take your first one and head to the nearest capital. It is on a hill you may as well start over. If it is on flat ground just move your quechua next to it. If you get there early enough they will have 2 archers and send 1 to attack you. If it is later they will both defend. Defend the initial attack and go for the vs archer promotion and let him heal. Then hit the city. If another archer popped up will take you a try or two. Should be easily sackable though.

I don't know if it is worth going for taking out a second civ though. If you do plan to hit a second civ I would research bronze working first and have your capital work on a barracks from the beginning. Whenever you take out the first civ use their worker to chop rush quechuas in your capital.

I would keep the first capital but I would probably raze the second capital. If you keep it, it will kill your maintainence. You can live off of the cash from taking out the cities for a little while.

I doubt playing as the inca will be in the top 3, but it is a viable strat. Easier to master than some of the others.

 

[BlueRenner]

I managed a 1598 win. Qin vs Washinton, Mansa, and Victoria on a small marathon Pangea.

I don't think I'll play with Victoria again.. she likes rushing Music too much.

Towards the end of the game I had one of those thunderbolt moments when I realized I was doing something totally wrong. I think on my next game I'll be able to shave a century or two off that time.

More later.

- Bill

 

[godotnut]

@walkerjks: thanks for the heads up about the marble vs stone production bonuses on the holy buildings. Good to know.

 

[Big_Ben]

I tried playing as Ghandi on team battleground LvR. It wasn't that bad, I got stuck with Mao who declared war and pretty much killed me. It has some possibilities though. I think that map may be a decent choice. Either for playing Incas and quechua rushing your one opponent or picking extremely peaceful civs. If you city is near the coast your cultural boundaries will leak far enough out to see opponent galleys and make contact.

Something else about that map is that each side has all of the resources. I made sure I had marble from the start. I ended up with iron and mao didn't have any. I probably should have built swordsmen and taken a few of his cities or even wiped him out. The problem was that he had horses and I didn't, so he got me with horse archers and cut off my copper. Couldn't make pikes to hold him off.

The only bad thing is that it is a small map. So you will have close borders from the beginning. I only had the chance to found 1 city. Flipped 2 more and probably would have flipped 1-2 more. I had a space in the corner blocked off that I would have settled eventually too.

I think my next try may be with the incas and try and take my opponent out. Would give me lots of freedom to build once my cash situation gets better. I will see how it goes.

 

[solidwoody]

Could you send me the save file? Send it to hof@civfanatics.net and I'll take a look.

Just emailed the file let me know what I or the game did wrong.

 

[BlueRenner]

Managed a 1430 win, again as Qin. Opponents were Washington, Elizibeth, and Mansa. Small Temperate Pangea Marathon.

I built almost every wonder on my path to Liberalism, intentionally losing the Parthanon with about 1000 hammers in it to fund the thrust to Calendar. I'm not sure which one of the AIs it is (didn't check), but they always prioritize the Parthanon.

I made one major mistake during the game. In the late game, where you're basically just clicking "next turn" and waiting to win, I had forgotten about one automated worker. When I finally noticed him he was at my capital, uprooting towns to put in farms!! That screwup cost me about 5 turns, as my capital fell from being culture-leader to culture-lagger. I didn't even reassign that worker -- straight execution. I you have to make an example of things like that.

I also manipulated my great people poorly. I had maybe a half dozen of them in the game.. only two artists. With a little planning, I could have gotten three artists and trimmed 20-30 turns of my time.

Given that I had both marble and stone, and that there was no war, and that I didn't make any major blunders, I'd put the minimum time for this gauntlet at around 1370ish. Anything less and you're clearly a better gamer than I.

- Bill

 

[Big_Ben]

Go under options and check that automated workers leave existing improvements. It helps out a LOT from that stuff happening.

Has to be Mansa that goes for the parthenon, he gets oracle on me.