1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

General Planning: War Gaming the Map

Discussion in 'Team SANCTA' started by Krill, Dec 14, 2008.

  1. Krill

    Krill Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Messages:
    3,332
    Location:
    Stoke-on-Trent, England
    Simulation for start of turn 68.

    ---

    Thread renamed, name can still be changed if people want. Consider this the thread to discuss worker movements, city placements, workforce allocations and other stuff to do with the DoI as per the constitution. Votes will be held either in this thread on a poll by paw basis, or in their own thread fo major stuff such as city placement and naming, or wonder builds (I think it would be wise to start this after the copper city has been placed, as we already have concensus on the area to build the city in). Minor stuff like what to build in a city, where to move workers, can be detailed in this thread and left out of the turn reports when we end up with too many workers to keep track of.

    ---

    Spoiler :
    The Oracle came to the forefront of our discussions around the time we started AH, around t34. We knew that we had expanded faster than all of the other teams, the first team with a second and at least equal timing to a third city. We knew that we had gems and ivory, and that our first two cities, IS and CK were great production cities, capable of 26 hammers per turn at sizes 8 and 7 respectively with forges, and that we were not in need of any other techs in an urgent manner. So, we decided to go straight for Priesthood after AH, via meditation, and we managed to get the estimated turn of arrival down from turn 63 to turn 59, via various optimisations, but when Team Cavaleiros founded Buddhism immedatily after our turn 46, while we were still 6 turns from finishing meditation ourselves, we changed our aims from growth and getting the Oracle in CK with a few chops to all out getting the Oracle to screw them over as much as possible and get Metal Casting for ourselves. We chopped out a sixth worker instead of a granary in IS, which was still at size 3, shortly after building the settler for JD, made IS work the coast while growing, and got a cottage down in JD to work, so we shot straight from bottom of the GNP and top of the MFG to the opposite rankings, and sent all of the workers over to CK in preparation for a massive deforestation campaign. Micromanaging it so that CK built a granary manually until it was almost complete and timing it so that we could chop 2 forests into it the turn that we tech priesthood (as techs are finished at the end of a turn) for maximum overflow, we then chopped the remaining 5 forests the next turn to complete the Oracle in 1 turn with a perfect stealth build; the only way a team could have realised we were going for the Oracle was that on turn 54 we completed a tech 2 turns after completing another tech, which must have been Priesthood. Unfortunately for the Cavs, it therefore required a team to finish the oracle in 1 turn themselves without having any turns to prepare for it. So, on Turn 55, we painted a target on our backs; the first team to a wonder, the first team to three cities, the first team to the classical era, and the team with the highest soldier points with 4 warriors


    Spoiler :
    We have completed our first settler, by using our two workers to chop two grassland forests to speed the construction and that the city site will be on a plains hill 3 turns travel to the west of our capital to encompass an irrigated wheat and copper, and turn that city into a major production powerhouse. We need discussion on what we should build in this city over the coming turns, and more vocal support for or a counter argument against the current worker plan for this city, which invovles irrigating the wheat, then mining the copper and then roading the copper to the river to connect it to our trade network along the river. Memphus has produced a method that has not been posted in great detail revolving around chopping a further 2 workers and our third settler, and settling a site to our capitals south east containing several sugars, a grassland cow and an ivory on turn 46. This plan has not been discussed in great detail, nor has anything after this time. On a technological front there is a vague concensus that has been focused by our research path to AH via hunting after researching pottery (we already have hunting)


    ---
    Original post
    Spoiler :
    We are 4 turns out from researching BW and knowing if we do have copper near our capital. We have a plan in place to build a settler by turn 30 along with a second warrior on turn 21 and a second worker by turn 25. We don;t yet have anything definate planned for the rest of the game, at least nothing that has been posted about on the forum. The choice of techs to research is not set in stone; researching the Wheel then Pottery looks to be a good idea, but AH as a third tech in time to plant a city for the cow is not impossible.

    As nothing after turn 30 has really been discussed on the forum, the simulation is here for everyone with BtS to have a look at and so that everyone here has an easy tool to start to understand what our land and empire is capable of in the short and medium term.

    So play and discuss; what can people do about getting IW to get the gems hooked up asap? What about getting that super quick third city next to the cow by chopping that settler? What is our tech rate like by cottaging our capital asap?
     

    Attached Files:

  2. regoarrarr

    regoarrarr Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2001
    Messages:
    846
    Location:
    Cincinnati, OH
    I would like to do some planning, but I do not have BtS (till Christmas). Can somebody post me a listing of the current plan (as detailed as possible) as well as the total beakers required for 2-3 techs (so I can figure out the multipliers based on the base tech costs)

    Then I will run some sims
     
  3. Ronnie1

    Ronnie1 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Messages:
    7,613
    Location:
    47.48N 117.77W
    That 1st link does NOT hook to what I was expecting.

    I expected a test game file...was I mistaken about the intention?
     
  4. Krill

    Krill Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Messages:
    3,332
    Location:
    Stoke-on-Trent, England
    Sorry, went AFK to annoy some of the new freshers living near me. One of the few enjoyable things for me to do now (god my life is sad...)

    The link has been corrected. slight screwup on my part, never checked it was the correct link.

    Regoarrarr, Here are the tech costs:

    1. BW = 179
    2. Wheel = 89
    3. Pottery = 119
    4. Alphabet = 448

    We are playing on a standard size map with 5 civs on monarch difficulty, from what I can tell. We settled on a plains hill, built a workboat first using a 3 hammer tile to build the wb in 6 turns and then immediately started working a coastal fish tile to build a worker. We settled on turn 0. Do you need any more info?
     
  5. regoarrarr

    regoarrarr Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2001
    Messages:
    846
    Location:
    Cincinnati, OH
    Thanks for the info - I'll get something up and running tomorrow. In your original post, you talked about a plan to build a settler by turn 30 along with a second warrior on turn 21 and a second worker by turn 25.

    Can you provide the details on that?
     
  6. Krill

    Krill Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Messages:
    3,332
    Location:
    Stoke-on-Trent, England
    Turn 19: Research BW, research X (wheel), end turn hit size 2, 3 food overflow
    Turn 20: Farm is complete, work fish and wheat, end turn complete warrior, 1 hammer overflow
    Turn 21: move worker to flatland forest, build worker@8f+4h [11/24 food stored]
    Turn 22: worker chop
    Turn 23:
    Turn 24: Worker finish chop, end turn worker complete, 5h overflow
    Turn 25: W1, W2 move to forest
    Turn 26: Workers chop, wheel researched, 12b overflow (we have both optional prequisites) into pottery not taking into account the free beaker, if we set research to 0%
    Turn 27:
    Turn 28: W1,2 finish chop, end turn settler complete, 0 overflow
    Turn 29: W1,2 do something (if we want to settle the wheat, we can road turn 29 and 30 to get there one turn sooner) end turn settler complete, 0 overflow
    Turn 30: Do something.
     
  7. Memphus

    Memphus Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Messages:
    5,233
    Location:
    Canada
    i am thinking if we have bronze then we get pottery.

    if we don't have bronze we go AH. if we have horses, then we go pottery.

    if we have no horses then we go IW
     
  8. Krill

    Krill Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Messages:
    3,332
    Location:
    Stoke-on-Trent, England
    OK, Let me start this thread in earnest by posting some of my thoughts. Having run through the simulation to turn 60 several times and run through it even more times to the settling of our second city, I have come to the conclusion that one of our (or my, rather) assumptions about the opening 30 turns is if not faulty, then quite a dangerous assumption.

    When we come to settle the second city, almost all of the time I have come across a barb animal when moving the settler to the plains hill, sometimes a bear, sometimes a lion or panther, and too many times (more than once) I lost the settler in the sim. In the interests of safety and not losing the game due to one unfortunate dice roll, I think that we ought to pull the first warrior off scouting duty earlier and use both warriors to protect the settler until we settle the city if we settle the wheat (more on this option later). This is...less than idea, IMO, but I would rather lose the 10 turns of scouting than a settler. We could send the second warrior north first and circle around to intercept the settler by the time it steps foot on the forest hill to our west under the guard of warrior 1 fairly easily, so that even if we lose 1 warrior to bars we still get hte city founded in time, so one of the warriors can go off scouting again.

    Another option, which required quite alot of thought to put together, involves not settling the wheat site but instead settling 233 of the capital. Yes, there is overlap of 4 tiles; this can be a good thing, so long as the unforrested grassland tile doesn't have copper (hoping...), but here are the pros and cons of such a city:

    PROS

    1. we only need to have a warrior on that tile 233 of the capital for one turn to protect the settler, so either the second warrior can explore to our west and warrior 1 can circle aroudn for the settler, or warrior 1 can wander off and warrior 2 can defend our capital then the new city.

    2. The capital is, for good or bad, a great hammer city for the early game, capable of 2f+14h per turn at size 5 working 2 plains hills and a grass hill, and 1f+17h per turn at size 5 when we hook up the gems. Doing this inte capital means we don't have to build a granary here just yet to slave and we are not at risk of slave revolts. "But what about the cottages and our bureaucratic capital?!" I here Memphus cry; the advantage of having the 2nd city so close is that the second city can work two grassland cottages that the capital can also work, so those cottages will mature and we keep the medium term advantage of cottaging the capital. It is also feasible to have the capital work 2 cottages, 2 food and 2 hills at size 6, and having the second city work the cow, two grass hills, and the other two grassland cottages at size 5, so the capital is capable of 4f+11h per turn, 4 turn workers or 7 turn settlers, nothing shabby, and the second city is capable of 2f+9h (at size 5).

    3. The second city has what looks like 9 none overlapping grassland tiles, another 2 overlapping river tiles, 1 none overlaping grass hill, 2 overlapping grass hils, a grass cow and a further 4 none rivered grasslands. This is an awesome city to move the capital to, capable of supporting 15 cottages compared to the current capital that has 5 grassland tiles and is a much better hammer city (much more suited to being the Heroic Epic city than the capital). This city would be capable of a levee, making a further 13 hpt.

    4. The workers don't have to wander off to the other city site just yet and can improve tiles for both city cites to use so the new city becomes more productive sooner than the wheat city.

    5. We have to research AH next instead of pottery/wheel; we will know where our horses are sooner. We won't start cottaging unntil the capital is ready to grow by using the cottages, allowing us some more time to chop the forrests and improve more important tiles first


      CONS
    6. Tile overlap; obvious that it slightly sucks, but it doesn't detract from a good city site IMO

    7. The second city is surrounded in jungle; doesn't really matter as there are enough tiles to work prior to the discovery of IW, and afterwards doesn't really matter as we'll have to deal with it later anyway

      • The wheat city is a production powerhouse, whereas this cow city is a bit on the weak side for production; I'm not advocating not settling the wheat site, just that as a second city, it is a bit risky, and requires us to immediately get a third worker so that we can continue to improve (read cottage) our capital fast enough for pop growth and improve the new city asap, whereas we can mine a hill, build a third warrior and grow to size 3 before we need to get the third worker for the cow city.

      • The wheat city allows our capital to focus on commerce much sooner; indeed it does, but it also slows our growth quite a bit by not working the mines in the capital, so the cottages are a traded off, delaying our later settlers quite a bit and requires the capital to invest in a 60 hammer city improvement when we aren't focussing on hammers, further slowing expansion. The cow city removes the need for the granary, and still keeps the cottages so the trade off with the cow city is that we gain cottages and there maturity and a good production city now but lose the useage of a production city in the medium term (turns 30-60).

    8. Fogbusting; the wheat city is a better fogbuster than the cow city. True enough.

    9. We have to research AH next instead of pottery/wheel; slows cottages slightly, but not majorly, circa 5 turns.
     
  9. Memphus

    Memphus Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Messages:
    5,233
    Location:
    Canada
    hmmm very convincing.

    while I love bureacracy...there is 1 thing that overpowers it: proper National Wonder placement.

    In this plan (above):

    Current capital becomes: Heroic Epic & West Point ==>also fueling our navy It will eb centralized within our empire so can provide units east and west as required.

    Cottage City: (overlapped tiles) Becomes new Capital, & Oxford University with crazy maxed out townss.

    Wheat city: Ironworks. Production city. We build wonders here. Also serves a a secondary military production city (land units only).

    I agree with this plan

    However the deciding factor is still copper. if Copper shows up near the wheat then we go that way. :)

    Krill ill show you how to get the settler there without getting attacked :)
     
  10. Krill

    Krill Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Messages:
    3,332
    Location:
    Stoke-on-Trent, England
    Glad you approve


    I agree with this as well, I don't want to be building warriors at turn 50...

    Please do. One other question: it is possible, if we settle for the wheat, to speed the settling of the new city by one turn by roading two tiles west of our capital at the cost of 4 worker turns. How would this affect your unit movements?
     
  11. Memphus

    Memphus Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Messages:
    5,233
    Location:
    Canada
    Gettign the mine on the hill is more import IMO.

    in your simulation you move the workers onto the same forest to chop. In mine I don't.

    you save 2 worker turn's this way :) which allows for the mine to be completed...but unfortunately not enough road... As soon as we dsicvoer BW on that interturn we can all discuss how to get the settler to where the bronze is.
     
  12. AutomatedTeller

    AutomatedTeller Frequent poster

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2006
    Messages:
    7,540
    Location:
    Medford, MA
    I'm not so worried about overlap - so we have a size 20 and a size 18 city, instead of two size 20 cities. If it's a great site early, this is the right way to go.
     
  13. Memphus

    Memphus Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Messages:
    5,233
    Location:
    Canada
    oh BTW if we go bronzeworking AH ==> we discover AH the turn the settler is done...so that would mean we coudl see where the horses are before planting a second city as well. (drawback is we lose the ability to Road)
     
  14. Krill

    Krill Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Messages:
    3,332
    Location:
    Stoke-on-Trent, England
    Er...no, I do keep the workers separate...(response to below: np, I just wanted to type that out quickly and easy to understand for Regoarrarr. I failed, then...)and it is possible so as we research the Wheel third (which isn't a given, obviously) as we can get the first road immediately after the second set of chops, when the settler is 1 turns from completion, and finish the second road on the wheat before we move the settler (174, for example). Next turn move the settler 17 to the grass forest hill and bobs your uncle, so to speak.
     
  15. Memphus

    Memphus Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Messages:
    5,233
    Location:
    Canada
    sorry you are right i misread:

    Turn 25: W1, W2 move to forest
     
  16. Memphus

    Memphus Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Messages:
    5,233
    Location:
    Canada
    so after the settler...i was thinkign about maybe chopping otu anotehr WB and sailing around the map....thoughts?
     
  17. Krill

    Krill Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Messages:
    3,332
    Location:
    Stoke-on-Trent, England
    Definately doable. Needs to be weighed against getting another worker though, especially if we go for the wheat city. WB would shoe horn into the cow city plan more easily IMO, but that's without doing any serious simming of it, but definately doable.
     
  18. Memphus

    Memphus Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Messages:
    5,233
    Location:
    Canada
    why not 333 (SW SW SW)

    2 less tiles of overlap. less Peaks. but a little more unknown....

    Spoiler :
     
  19. regoarrarr

    regoarrarr Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2001
    Messages:
    846
    Location:
    Cincinnati, OH
    Does it look like the tiles 66, 69 and 99 of the cows are coast / ocean?
     
  20. Krill

    Krill Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Messages:
    3,332
    Location:
    Stoke-on-Trent, England
    That picture's from the simulation I made, I haven't added all of the tiles that have their edge uncovered by the FoW, only some that we can see, like hill forest and jungle, so do not fog gaze; you have been warned :D

    The answer (well, only reasons that I can think of) are that there will be 1 less hill we can use, and there is one less river grassland we can improve before IW, which in case of a jungle spread would be slightly annoying but not game breaking. The counter is of course, that we have 1 extra peak, so the problem is moot really, as 333 works fine
     

Share This Page