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

Gotm 108 Spoiler

Discussion in 'Civ2 - Game of the Month' started by Peaster, Mar 5, 2010.

  1. burnt-offering

    burnt-offering Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2006
    Messages:
    4
    Well that was a marathon!

    Took me till 1908 to get across the board, and I wasn't holding back with the lead units.
     
  2. Ali Ardavan

    Ali Ardavan Mathematician Moderator Civ2 GOTM Staff

    Joined:
    May 29, 2002
    Messages:
    2,930
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    I stayed up all night last night and played till -325. My rule for the spoiler is having seen the rival's maps. I built Marco in -325 and exchanged maps with all but the Mongols two of whose cities I have already seen.

    I started reading a few responses in this thread and had to stop; I have a plane to catch.
    I will comment in more detail later. I will be gone for one week. I hope we get some serious extension (2-3 weeks) on this one. In fact, may I suggest we make it a 2-month GOTM and delay the next one (GOTM 109) to the next month. (If you are looking for an excuse to do this, how about the fact that it is the beginning of the 10th year of GOTMs.)

    I built my first city on the original spot and kept the other settler for improvements. I have about 8 cities now and have been in Monarchy (thanks to direct techs) since -1650.

    In my game Persians and Vikings have almost no techs either. I wonder how that happened.
     
  3. Magic_gorter

    Magic_gorter Moderator Moderator Civ2 GOTM Staff

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2006
    Messages:
    2,699
    Location:
    Amersfoort (Netherlands)
    Because of the huge map it's ok with me if you (and others) submit a bit later (max 2 weeks). I won't delay GOTM 109 if you don't mind.
     
  4. grigor

    grigor Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2001
    Messages:
    353
    What a Map!

    Celebrating Fundy with lots of trade really powers through the tree. I waited until I had a transport full at the various landings, then moved them to get enoug trade for the next advance. I stopped about three times to rushbuy all white techs. So I wasn't very efficient but I finished in about 30 realtime hours, so I am thrilled with that.

    I conquered the Romans before the end of the 19th century.

    Looking forward to an EC contest with Peaster in GOTM 109...:cool:
     
  5. haleewud

    haleewud Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Messages:
    341
    Location:
    Florida
    I think I have discovered why the Persians and Vikings had very few techs. When I was playing the game, I also noticed the the Persians, along with having no techs had no capital. I wondered how this could be.

    So after I completed the game, I went back to the original save file. Using the cheat mode, I looked at the Persian Map. The Persian capital (Persepolis) was located on a river-mountain square. A number of other cities (for all of the AIs) were likewise placed on river-mountains.

    It seems that the initial location of the AI cities were created using the Cheat Mode. After all the cities were placed, the terrain was hidden using another feature of the cheat mode. The game was then saved as a scenario. Finally the scenario was started to save the inital save for the GOTM.

    Now the cities on the river-mountain squares had no visibility to any of the surrounding squares (due to the hide terrain feature). Therefore the city's worker had no square to work. Since the city itself could only produce 1 food and the food box was empty, these cities starved themselves out of existence in 2 turns. The Persians and Vikings therefore lost their palace and both seemed to be stuck with 40 tax, 50 science, 10 luxury tax rate. With the massive corruption caused by the lack of a palace, they were never able to accumulate any beakers. Without Construction, they couldn't build a new Palace. So they spent the entire game being only able to build settlers, warriors, phalanx, barracks. In my game the Persians were also able to build the Colossus (since they started with the Bronze Working). Looking at other save files, it appears that the Vikings finally allied with the Romans somewhere around 1760 AD. They finally changed their tax rate to 30 (tax) 60 (science) and 10 (luxury). From that point on they were able to either make discoveries or get them from the Romans (or me once I contacted them).
     
  6. Magic_gorter

    Magic_gorter Moderator Moderator Civ2 GOTM Staff

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2006
    Messages:
    2,699
    Location:
    Amersfoort (Netherlands)
    I've played some hours yesterday and finally destroyed the Vikings. After getting cavalry I could easily destroy their riflemen. I am now heading to the russians. They are not having a demo government so I hope I can stay in demo myself and bribe their cities.

    Have some time this evening to play so mayby I can finally finish.
     
  7. Peaster

    Peaster Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2004
    Messages:
    1,295
    I was also happy with Fundy, and wish I had switched over sooner [from Republic]. I've never studied the different govts deeply, but expected Republic to work better here, for growth + trade.

    Assuming "before the end of..." means "before 1900AD" that's pretty good. It sounds like several of us, with very different strategies, finished within 100 years of each other. With a few more players still playing. I hope people will offer opinions on the best govt for this gotm, and for the fastest way to push troops westwards. I recently noticed that haleewud gave some stats on his engineers' speed, but I haven't analyzed that yet.

    What did you mean by "rushbuy white techs" ?

    I'm not 100% sure yet that I'll play 109 [ltd RL time], but an EC contest sounds like fun. Would you like to impose any special constraints [on units or strategies used, etc] ?

    @haleewud: Thanks for the Pers/Vik explanation. Makes sense. Sounds like it was mostly accidental, and it may have weakened the competition a little. But I liked the variety, and neither civ was a total pushover.

    My Vikings actually did quite well. They played ICS until they had about 15-20 cities, and then suddenly started getting a tech every turn or so, built the Great Wall, etc. My Persians were pretty weak, but they had many annoying settlers wandering around on important mt/river squares, which slowed me down quite a bit, probably as much as the normal civs.

    @MG: What is your date? Well, I guess you will post a log when you are done.
     
  8. grigor

    grigor Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2001
    Messages:
    353
    White techs - excuse me, I meant White Goods - the ones which show up in white on the City Advisor screen.

    Strictures for GOTM 109...Hmm...I was just thinking who conquers first by whatever means. King level means happiness isn't an issue until around 12 cities, right? I can't find the thread which charted the happiness for lower levels than Deity.

    I am trying the dollars over science strategy in some King practice games. So far I don't see much difference in settler speed, just later Monarchy. Let me try a few more before deciding.
     
  9. Magic_gorter

    Magic_gorter Moderator Moderator Civ2 GOTM Staff

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2006
    Messages:
    2,699
    Location:
    Amersfoort (Netherlands)
    I'm just past 1870 and almost reached the Russians. When finished I will post a complete log.

    After reaching the Vikings (IIRC) I changed to communism. Did help greatly for a bigger army. Don't know how much better fundy is because I don't change to that government a lot.....

    @Peaster.....I thought you wanted to play GOTM 109 as a comparison landing game but with lack of realtime (I guess both of us) we should wait till one of the next GOTM's.
     
  10. Ali Ardavan

    Ali Ardavan Mathematician Moderator Civ2 GOTM Staff

    Joined:
    May 29, 2002
    Messages:
    2,930
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    Peaster, this is not a standard game and standard techniques are probably suboptimal.
    My first goal was Monarchy and I switched to it as soon as I could but I do not plan to stay in Monarchy very long. Like GOTM 106 this is going to be a long game and ancient warfare is not going to be sufficient. In my game Romans are pretty advanced and currently ahead of me in power ratings (I am at year -325).

    Given the geograhpy of my capital at the extreme corner of the world, I am not planning on switching to Republic at all. Depending on how the game evolves I may have a period of growth in Democracy but plan on spending most of the latter part of the game in celebrating communism or celebrating fundamentalism.

    haleewud, typically I never build on a mountain. In this game I already have (I only have 8 cities so far) and plan many more. Looks like AI is not smart enough to do that in this game. Such cities will be mighty difficult to conquer.

    Grigor, I saw your response while composing this message. I still do not know what white goods are. Perhaps it is a feature of the multiplayer version of the game that is absent in classic.

    You finished this game in 30 real time hours! Wow! That is beyond amazing.

    Ditto. Good job, haleewud and thanks.
     
  11. Peaster

    Peaster Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2004
    Messages:
    1,295
    IIRC from Apolyton, "white goods" refers to city improvements [no?], but like Ali, I'm a bit confused, and don't see where they show up as white.

    If you play for dollars over science, be sure to spend the dollars ASAP [roughly] to IRB settler production. Wild estimate = you can produce each settler approx 2 turns faster this way. By the time you get near monarchy, you may have 1-2 "extra" cities, can make maybe 20% more beakers than usual [by switching back to science over dollars], and can catch up in science quickly. I admit I haven't analyzed this very carefully - but the idea seems good, and my impression from comparison games is that it works pretty well.

    GOTM 107 was unusual for me, and it didn't go exactly this way. You led in science, and we had about the same number of cities in the 2000BC era. But in that game, I was trying to play "lean", and kept approx 5 extra settlers around for roads/flotillas. Not sure I played so great, and I didn't get quite the predicted science boost, but I got other benefits [eg outposts], and eventually did OK in science.

    109: OK, we'll just go for Green, then. 12 cities sounds about right, but even I get out of Despotism long before that !

    @Magic, about a landing game: I'm not sure how much I/we could learn from another landing comparison game. During the recent trade thread "argument", it seemed a lot could be learned [hence the suggestion], but after reviewing some old GOTMs, it seems less. Dunno ... maybe if a group of players is very very interested in this, enough to cooperate in taking notes and discussing strategy, it could be worthwhile.

    @Everyone: Are you up for a fairly serious comparison game, in some upcoming GOTM, focusing especially on growth and trade strategies for landing ? With robust discussion ? If people agree, I'd prefer to narrow the goal, for example to earliest landing, for the sake of a clearer comparison.

    @Ali [and Magic]: Thanks for the comments on govts; I partially understand. Could you explain your thinking in more detail ? For example, I can see how a Demo growth phase fits in nicely, but it will come fairly late - so why avoid Republic ? [corruption in the West? ... is that so important?]. Also, what features of this GOTM cause you to favor Fundy/Com over Demo in the long term [Bloodlust and unit support? Senate interference? the special units?]. Also, do you plan lots of trade, and does that affect your choice of govt ?
     
  12. Ali Ardavan

    Ali Ardavan Mathematician Moderator Civ2 GOTM Staff

    Joined:
    May 29, 2002
    Messages:
    2,930
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    I am definitely interested. My usual style of play is landing and I always take detailed notes anyway. We just need to make sure this happens at a time when everyone has enough real time available for it. One suggestion I have is to play on a small to medium map (to reduced the amount of real time needed).

    I am going to be avoiding Republic manily because of Corruption. Monarchy to Republic is always a fairly close trade off. What you gain in extra arrows are offset by unit support and extra food for settlers. Rapid growth through celebrations are pretty difficult in Republic due to corruption also. With geography like that of this game the trade off is just not worth it and I rather wait till I can switch to a modern form of government.
    My choice of Fundy/Com over Demo is because of the bloodlust nature of this game: fighting a war for conquest (not for expansion or trade outposts) is too difficult in Democracy for all the common reasons: senate interference and unhappiness caused by troops being away. (Unit support in late game is not a big deal as most everything is rush bought anyway.) I definitely plan lots of trade and that is why I want a celebrating Fundly/Com.
    The special unit of fanatic in Fundy and vet Spies in Commy are nice too but not deterimental factors for me.
     
  13. Ali Ardavan

    Ali Ardavan Mathematician Moderator Civ2 GOTM Staff

    Joined:
    May 29, 2002
    Messages:
    2,930
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    I am curious. Has anyone else done a map analysis on this game? I did not publish my results as I usually do in the game thread partly because I started so late and partly because there is almost no conclusion gained from the initial info.

    In my opinion, in this game where there are only 3 terrrain types (Mountain, ocean, and grass) revealing all those specials hidden by the abundant grass is not something to ignore.
     
  14. Magic_gorter

    Magic_gorter Moderator Moderator Civ2 GOTM Staff

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2006
    Messages:
    2,699
    Location:
    Amersfoort (Netherlands)
    No nobody did a map analysis IIRC....

    @Peaster: I changed to republic at some point (because of hapinness control) and at the time I wanted to change to democracy I met the Vikings who had a demo government. I chose communism (for vet spies) instead because the senate wouldn't stop me attacking them. I did not trade very well so my discoveries came slow. I should have changed earlier to a better government because it slowed me down pretty much.
     
  15. Peaster

    Peaster Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2004
    Messages:
    1,295
    I'm mainly interested in how well various trade strategies work in early landing games [see the slightly ugly trade thread in the general forum]. Also, there seems to be an unfinished "debate" between the lean solo/ELG style and the slowthinker/ICS styles, which we could explore. I think the map should be medium to large for a fair comparison, and preferably normal in other ways [terrain, available sea routes]. I'm not sure why a large map would lead to a much longer landing game, but medium is OK with me.

    I'd want to learn more from this than a typical gotm. Eg, we might describe our overall strategies / beliefs in advance, decide on new stats to keep track of, etc. For example, I generally refuse to build a trade van that will return less than 65g, and want an average return over 200g, but several players disagree on this. It is hard to tell who is right from traditional logs, but I think we could track the effects of our various strategies with a little extra effort. I am still undecided about playing, but your post, and Magic's, have peaked my interest.

    Thanks, I see. I chose Republic for the growth through celebrations, and the extra arrows for better trade bonuses. This worked pretty well for my Eastern cities, including an STC, where corruption was not so bad. I didn't care too much about corruption in the West, since those cities were smaller, and less involved in trade - more into pushing further West. I don't regret going to Republic, but the benefits seemed to decrease eventually, and I wasn't sure how to get out. I was racing for techs such as Explosives, RR and Corporation, so I got to Democracy fairly late, and chose soft Fundy at that time.

    Thanks again. That agrees with my somewhat limited experience. But I am surprised - I thought most CFC players totally believed in Starlifter's "Power Democracy" and that this game would be no exception. Maybe that is mainly for landing games, dunno.

    I didn't do a map analysis, and didn't even think of hidden specials. I believe that on most maps, in most conquest games, they are a waste of time. But you are right - they are a real possibility here, especially near an STC.

    @Magic: I am a little confused [...always]. I see why you wanted out of Republic and Demo but why did you choose Comm ? I'm not very familiar with Comm, but have heard it is roughly Monarchy 2.0 ... eg, not bad, not great. How did you use vet spies against a Demo govt ? BTW - That was pretty unlucky that your Vikings had Demo. Also

    "I should have changed earlier to a better government because it slowed me down pretty much."

    You mean Republic slowed you down ? and it slowed your trade / science especially ? Hmmm... I always thought Republic was relatively good for trade, but maybe this long long map is an inhibiting factor.
     
  16. Magic_gorter

    Magic_gorter Moderator Moderator Civ2 GOTM Staff

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2006
    Messages:
    2,699
    Location:
    Amersfoort (Netherlands)
    I don't remember much games where I played fundy...so I chose communism because I know more about it (don't really know what the big difference (IIRC science is 50% at fundy and stays 100% at communism) is between fundy and communism.....perhaps someone would explain them to me).

    The veteran spies I used to sabotage some units of the Viking to prefent attacking/destroying my cavalry.

    I had the feeling because of the huge corruption (I was suprised how high it was in the west part - there were hardly any beakers for science left) the science went very slow. I had no other options at that time but should have delivered more vans earlier to own cities instead of foreign cities (which I couldn't reach at that time). If I could have changed to demo, communism and perhaps fundy (don't know if there is no curruption for fundy) there was no curruption and faster science.

    Really don't know if fundy would help much more....but after changing to communism science went up pretty good in combination with van delivery.....which made it a lot easier to defeat the Vikings.
     
  17. Peaster

    Peaster Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2004
    Messages:
    1,295
    I can probably explain Fundy, at least. There is no unhappiness or corruption, and rarely any support problems. Temples, HG, etc add gold instead of happiness, so your economy will probably skyrocket, even without much trade. The bad news is an [approx?] 50% science penalty on cities (but not on science from vans). It is the usually the best choice for conquest players in a long game like this one. But if you need science, you will need to trade a lot.

    If you want more info, I think Nethog has posted a chart of all the govts, and their main features. But no strategy tips there IIRC.

    I'm getting the feeling that most players have a very different view on science from mine. IMO science comes mainly from 3 sources:

    a) Initial bonuses from vans, including ones from an STC.
    b) Beakers from normal cities [including from ongoing trade routes]
    c) Normal beakers from an STC.

    At least in my games, I have more control over a) and c) than b), so I tend to ignore b), even though it might give 20% or more of my beakers. I don't worry much about corruption unless it is clearly affecting a) or c). After approx 1ad, I usually get approx 2/3 of my beakers from a), so I tend to equate science with trade at that point. So, I am mainly planning around good bonuses [eg 200g or more, on average]. In this game, that meant a dozen or more decent cities in the West [size 7 or so, without huge corruption] delivering demanded vans overseas to AIs [mostly]. Also, speed matters, so it meant roads, bridges, ports, pets, etc.

    It seems that several of us got similar results in this gotm [similar speeds thru the tech tree], so I'm not saying I have the best possible strategy, but it seems OK. Are there any other, very different views ?

    Why couldn't you reach foreign cities ? Is this before you crossed the first sea ?

    I don't know Comm well, but I suspect you'd have enjoyed Fundy more.

    It sounds like several of us had a similar problem, of not getting enough science quickly, to get to the advanced govts [comm, fundy, demo]. I am still wondering what went wrong with Republic, but in my game, I think it was mainly the cost in shields to support so many military units and settlers, which made it harder to rush buy vans quickly. Or maybe it just took a long time to build up a swarm of vans and deliver them. Maybe corruption too ? [will have to check some saves].

    Another odd feature of this map is how thin it was, and how little good land was available. This probably affected me more than most [non-ICS] players ... my civ seemed much less powerful than usual. It probably also hurt players who like very very big cities.
     
  18. Magic_gorter

    Magic_gorter Moderator Moderator Civ2 GOTM Staff

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2006
    Messages:
    2,699
    Location:
    Amersfoort (Netherlands)
    Yes I couldn't reach AI cities until reaching the Spanish. If I replay this game I know now that I must trade earlier to get extra science beakers. I was hoping to get more beakers from my own cities in Republic and hoped getting Democracy soon to build the Manhatttan wonder for the best governments.

    I should try fundy more if I need more money instead of science (from cities). I guess it wouldn't make a big difference at the point I chose communism but if I had it earlier I could RB some things easier.

    I'm almost finished. Rome survived first attacking round and has only 1 defender left. So the next round will finaly be the last one....

    Edit: I just finished at 1885AD......When my log is complete I will post it.
     
  19. Peaster

    Peaster Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2004
    Messages:
    1,295
    It might be worthwhile to replay 1-2 turns of your game in Fundy, just to see the differences. It is an unusual govt, easy to manage, probably worth knowing about, at least a little bit. If anyone is especially interested in this govt, they could hunt down Starlifter's "Power Fundy" thread.

    "Moscow" ? I assume this is not a typo, since you refered to Russians earlier. But my white civ was the Romans.

    It sounds like most of us finished within about 50 years of 1885 AD. Surprisingly uniform. Not sure anyone has posted a log yet ... anybody interested in careful comparisons ? If so, IMO we should include the [approx] dates we reached each sea and each new land mass. Maybe stats on #war units, #vans, #techs ... ?
     
  20. CharlieChuck

    CharlieChuck Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Messages:
    305
    Location:
    england
    Finished. It was a real hard slog. Conquest in 1874ad in hindsight I made a fair few mistakes could have knocked a few years off that. I finished with 21,000 gold with nothing to really spend it on. What I should have done was switch back to Demo and subverted the Romans at the end to allow a bit more city growth, but didn't think of that until too late.

    My governments were Monarchy, Republic (but that didn't yield much growth), back to monarchy again for the Mongols (I think it was the mongols, the first or second civ nearest to us) then Republic, Democracy and finished off with Communism.

    Finsihed off the final two civs with Bombers and paratroopers. Had loads of units that were unused but needed moving every turn, this slowed it down too.
     

Share This Page