Gotm 108 Spoiler

[Magic_gorter]

"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 ... ?

My mistake. For some reason I had the Russians in my head instead of the Romans. I've changed the post with Rome instead of Moscow.

I can make that log. I guess it's interesting to see how everybody moved along the map and where the biggest differences are when looking at moving west.

When I have enough time I will add this info to my log..might take a few days because this weekend I have not much time.

 

[Ali Ardavan]

...so I chose communism because I know more about it (don't really know what the big difference .....perhaps someone would explain them to me).

City trade arrows: both are like Monarchy: you get 1 on roads, 2 on ocean.

Unit Support: Communism is just like Monarchy (only first 3 are free); in fundy the manual says the first ten are free but in reality there is no unit support.

Corruption: None in fundy; very low in Commie. Furthermore, in Commy corruption is not a function of distance from capital as it is in Monarchy and Republic. This makes a big difference when your capital is stuck at a corner of the world.

Happiness: No unhappiness in Fundy. Every military unit positioned in a city makes 2 unhappy citizens content in Commie (up to 6 citizens).

Special units: Fanatic in Fundy; all spies are automatically vets in Commie. Fanatic is a wonderful defensive unit and at 20 shields it is cheap. Furthermore, the existance of it cheapens rushbuying of other units. Vet spies are pretty significant too as spies play an important role in modern warfare.

Celebrations: Both act like Monarchy: you get an extra arrow everywhere there is already one. In effect the city trade arrows become that of Democracy.

Senate: No senate interference in either case.

Reputation: The manual says fundy's reputation is less damaged by outrageous acts. I do not know if anyone has ever tested this.

Money: In Fundy all happiness infrastructure (temples, cathedrals, Colloseums?) contribute gold per turn (the amount is the same as the number of citizens they would have otherwise turned happy). Happiness wonders do not do this but keep in mind that since Michelangelo's is considered as a cathedral in every city it contributes as a cathedral. Bach and Shakespeare do not contribute anything. I am not certain about Oracle; has anyone ever tested it? Typically this produces more gold than you can spend.

Science: The max rate for science (or tax or lux) in Commie is 80%. In Fundy the max rate for science is 50%. The UI actually lets you set it higher but anything higher is turned into taxes automatically. Furthermore, and this is the largest handicap of fundy, all contributions to scince from city arrows are halved before they get applied. In effect this means that half of your science rate goes to waste. So if you set your science to say 40% it is equivalent to a uniform 20% corruption. There are player who coutneract this by setting science to zero, having one scientist, and relying on deliveries to fill up the tech box. But this is wasteful too (unless you keep extremely detailed records which is way too time consuming) since you have to overfill the box every time to be certain. This is exacerbated by the fact that in Fundy you are delivering primarily for science not money which you have more than you can spend anyway.

 

[Ali Ardavan]

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].

You can afford to ignore b) because you play for early conquest. When one plays for landing or high score one needs a lot more techs and thus cannot afford to ignore an important source of science whose significance grows with the size of your empire (the other two, a and c, do not).

May I suggest a personal challenge for you? This is one that I have done only once in GOTMs and 2-3 times in my personal games. Play with the goal of reaching 255 future techs (the maximum possible) before ending the game. We can even design a GOTM around this goal if there is enough interest.

 

[Peaster]

I've misplaced my log [it's been almost a month now]. I do have a number of saves, so here is some data from those. If people agree on some uniform format, I'll try to conform - seems to me we want data on growth [number of cities, major units, WoWs], advances, and progress westards. Trade data would be nice, but I don't have much, just the number of vans and the size of my STCs [I had 2 modest ones, with typical improvements, but almost no STC WoWs. The Persians beat me to Colossus]. Also, I normally annotate my logs with my strategies, but won't repeat stuff already in this thread.

3150 BC: Most west = S at 454 [this is the x-coordinate of the Settler]

1500 BC: 4 cities [2 East + 2 West], 2S [settlers], 3adv, Despotism,
Most west = port city of Edo at 419.
I've sacrificed some growth to go West, but don't have Mapmaking...
Probably my planning was weak in this early phase ... had no clear view of the GOTM yet.

1000 BC: no save available [must have gotten Monarchy, Mapmaking approx now]

500 BC: 12 cities, 3S, 7adv, Monarchy, pre-STC = size 2
Most west = S at 393
Without MPE, I'm blind to rivers/etc. My S is slowly crossing southern Spanish mts.

1 AD: 20 cities [4 in Spain], 15adv, Monarchy, pre-STCs = size 1,3
Most west = city at 393; 4S, 4 vans, 1 boat, 1 WoW = MPE.
No recent progress westwards. Blocked by Spain, but am colonizing there.

500 AD: 32 cities, 21adv, Monarchy, pre-STCs = size 3,4
Most west = phx at 313; 14S, 9 vans, 12ele, 3 WoWs = MPE,Pyr,HG.

700 AD: still, most west = phx at 313. Needed better troops vs Persians.

1000 AD: 56 cities, 26adv, Republic, STCs = size 5,7
Most west = w at 294; 23S, 17 vans, 21 cru [incl ele's],
6 WoWs = ... STWA, MC, JSB

1180 AD: have crossed sea 7, ready to make ports/canals on the small landmass there.

1500 AD: 75? cities, 33adv, Republic, STCs = size 12,12
Most west = w at 294; 34S, 67 vans, 38 cru, 32 dip
7 WoWs = ... Cope's

1700 AD: 90 cities, 44adv, STCs = size 15,16
Most west = boat at 170; 36E, 101 vans, 66 dragoons, 33 dip
WoWs = ... Leo, INC
IIRC, my game sped up in the 1700s [vans arriving, faster techs, RRs, Fundy...]

1816 AD: paratrooper enters Rome. 66techs. Approx 300 units, incl bombers, armor, 100 freight..
Finished in Demo for a few extra points.

 

[Peaster]

You can afford to ignore b) because you play for early conquest. When one plays for landing or high score you need a lot more techs and thus cannot afford to ignore an important source of science whose significance grows with the size of your empire (the other two, a and c, do not).

I'm gradually seeing that most landing players agree with this, but I do not. IIRC from my landing games, trade produces most of my beakers, and it grows faster than the size of my civ, faster than b). After paying the startup costs (approx 1AD? or 300AD?), I can usually get 1 tech per turn, which seems to be faster than most other players progress.

BTW - I think b) always produces more than c) in my games, and I agree it is somewhat important. And I tend to grow my civs until the end, which increases b). So, I partially agree with you. I just don't expend much mental energy trying to maximize b), as I do with a), and feel this is approx correct.

May I suggest a personal challenge for you? This is one that I have done only once in GOTMs and 2-3 times in my personal games. Play with the goal of reaching 255 future techs (the maximum possible) before ending the game. We can even design a GOTM around this goal if there is enough interest.

Aarrrgh! I appreciate that you are trying to help, but that sounds like a nightmare. I really don't enjoy playing long games, for score, or for techs for landing. IMO ICS is usually the best strategy, even for early techs / landing, so I play that way. In the late game, turns can take an hour each ... so 255 techs = 255 hours, which I just don't have.

If I played with only 10 to 15 cities, I might have different views on landing, maybe like yours. And I'd probably finish faster. But I think big is better.

I might be interested in another early landing gotm, trying to resolve our differences of opinion, especially since it's becoming "me vs the world". Also, I haven't played too many landing games, so I might be wrong about trade/etc, and might learn something.

On the other hand, I have played a few landing games (see GOTMs 63 and 75), and done quite well, after many many RL hours of effort. Also, I have argued my views in several CFC threads, and after poring over the responses, remain confident. That's why I'm not 100% eager to land again, and would do it only with a cohort of highly committed players, such as you and Magic [and.. ?].

 

[Ali Ardavan]

I'm gradually seeing that most landing players agree with this, but I do not. IIRC from my landing games, trade produces most of my beakers, and it grows faster than the size of my civ, faster than b). After paying the startup costs (approx 1AD? or 300AD?), I can usually get 1 tech per turn, which seems to be faster than most other players progress.

Trade primarily grows with the reach of your empire not its size. The two are often highly correlated though.

I have seen your results and I have been amazed at how soon you manage to get 1 tech per turn.

What I am not sure about is how long you can keep that up. Same kind of reasoning goes for city placement. If you place your cities close by (ICS style) it helps you a lot in the early stages of the game but it is a handicapp in the very late stages of the game if you try to max out your cities.

Aarrrgh! I appreciate that you are trying to help, but that sounds like a nightmare. I really don't enjoy playing long games, for score, or for techs for landing. IMO ICS is usually the best strategy, even for early techs / landing, so I play that way. In the late game, turns can take an hour each ... so 255 techs = 255 hours, which I just don't have.

You are absolutely right. Real time is a major concern. Unfortunately for me, most of my GOTMs end up taking close to an hour per turn near the end.

One way to limit this is the size of the available land mass in the world.

I might be interested in another early landing gotm, trying to resolve our differences of opinion, especially since it's becoming "me vs the world". Also, I haven't played too many landing games, so I might be wrong about trade/etc, and might learn something.

First of all, the world of civ2 is pretty small. So it is you vs. a few others.

Secondly, you are at this point the top player by a long shot so what you say carries a lot of weight.

On the other hand, I have played a few landing games (see GOTMs 63 and 75), and done quite well, after many many RL hours of effort. Also, I have argued my views in several CFC threads, and after poring over the responses, remain confident. That's why I'm not 100% eager to land again, and would do it only with a cohort of highly committed players, such as you and Magic [and.. ?].

I remember both those games. In GOTM 63 I could not believe your speed compared to mine and the fact that you came in second in the final tally beating many more experienced landing players speaks for itself.

I am up for the challenge as long as we can agree on a time when enough real time will be available. I firmly believe that I have as much, if not more, to learn from this practice as you do.

 

[Magic_gorter]

Perhaps CharlieChuck. He's one of the few players who are higher in the HOF and plays landing games.

@Peaster....I'm not saying that my way of playing landing games is better then yours but it just fits me better. I'm always amazed how fast you develop your civ in the early part of the game.

I guess what Ali means is when developing your other cities...they boost your science and you might be able to get 2 or more techs every turn at some point in the game. This is not possible with only van deliveries. Don't know if you had more techs every turn in those GOTM games you mentioned...but it makes live a lot easier (=less RL hours playing time)....

 

[Peaster]

Trade primarily grows with the reach of your empire not its size.

Why do you say this? Except for the arrival of special techs, reach usually increases linearly [slowly] while civ size increases exponentially [fast]. The total number of vans, and therefore the delivery bonuses, can increase at the same rate. Probably even faster, because a) trade gives a slightly better return (7%?) than civ growth (5%?) and b) an increasing percentage of cities can focus on vans, instead of defense/etc.

What I am not sure about is how long you can keep that up. Same kind of reasoning goes for city placement. If you place your cities close by (ICS style) it helps you a lot in the early stages of the game but it is a handicapp in the very late stages of the game if you try to max out your cities.

First, I am mainly interested in early landing, rather than GOTM score, because GOTM score is largely a function of patience. Not so much as Civ2 score, but a strong player can grow faster than 3%, and slowly increase their GOTM score by playing longer. So, I think Green is a safer measure of good strategy than Gold. Based on that goal, my thinking is roughly the following [but I haven't checked the numbers]:

Typical landing game goes like this: Build up a solid civ, with low corruption, decent defenses, room to grow, etc. Start serious trading around 500AD. Start getting [at least] one tech per turn around 1500AD. Finish around 1800AD.

My ideal landing game goes more like this: ICS until approx 1AD. Start trading around 500BC. Start getting approx one tech per turn around 300AD. Finish around 700AD. I win!

So, I am not concerned about maxing my cities. I'd be happy to get 2 techs per turn more often, but it is not very important overall. I don't have to keep my trade going strong more than about 20-30 turns, but don't see why it couldn't go on much longer.

One way to limit this is the size of the available land mass in the world.

I don't understand 100%. You are saying less land means fewer cities [for ICS], so less RL time required ? If so, I agree with your reasoning [for ICS players anyway. True for you too?]. But I think the distant cities are less important to EL.

I'd like the comparison game to be on a typical map, where people can test a variety of strategies, and any conclusions we make will apply widely. I'd be happy to see huts removed, to reduce luck, since that probably wouldn't favor one strategy over another. I'd prefer a map that supports trade in Hides, but won't insist on that.

First of all, the world of civ2 is pretty small. So it is you vs. a few others.

Thanks for the kind remarks [also to Magic]. I was starting to feel lonely.

@Magic: I certainly don't blame anyone for reducing RL playing time. But in strategy discussions like this, I try to focus on the goal [eg earliest possible landing] and ignore RL time, enjoyment, etc. That's how I'd want to play a serious comparison game, where we are trying to find the "best" trade strategies [I do play some other gotms just for fun, of course].

 

[CharlieChuck]

...

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.

One thing that can't be ignored about b) is its contribution to making cities celebrate under democracy. Until you get Cure for Cancer, a city having 3 good trade routes will celebrate at a much lower % luxury. I realise this is going off on tangent, if your playing an ICS style landing you'll run out of room for growth anyway.

I'm up for 255 techs, but we'd need a huge deadline to be fair to all, especially with summer coming up. I haven't got any other strategies to try, but I would be interested in seeing how an ICS style works.

 

[Ace]

"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."

The reference is to the city list via the F1 key. City improvements are shown in white, while units are in yellow, and wonders are in light blue.

 

[Ali Ardavan]

I guess what Ali means is when developing your other cities...they boost your science and you might be able to get 2 or more techs every turn at some point in the game. This is not possible with only van deliveries. Don't know if you had more techs every turn in those GOTM games you mentioned...but it makes live a lot easier (=less RL hours playing time)....

Exactly. If your main source of science is trade the max you will ever get is 1 tech per turn. If you are going after a significant number of future techs, it pays to get your empire to a stage where you can get multiple techs per turn. When I play such games I sometimes get 3 techs per turn (1 from trade, 2 from cities) in early and mid FTs and then it drops off to 2 techs per turn (1 from trade, 1 from cities) with an occasional miss when tech cost gets near its max (about FT 167).

Why do you say this? Except for the arrival of special techs, reach usually increases linearly [slowly] while civ size increases exponentially [fast]. The total number of vans, and therefore the delivery bonuses, can increase at the same rate. Probably even faster, because a) trade gives a slightly better return (7%?) than civ growth (5%?) and b) an increasing percentage of cities can focus on vans, instead of defense/etc.

I should have been more clear. Size could mean how many cities you have or it could mean how large your cities are. Trade (for science not for gold) is primarily a function of your reach (how far you can deliver) and city size (how large your cities are). Even with a small number of cities you can fill out the science box every turn.
Beyond a certain number of cities (10 to 30), your primary growth in science comes not from your SSC (which is close to maxed out by this point), and not from your reach (probably reached the whole world by this point in time) but from science you get from non-SSC cities. The way an EC (and to a lesser extent EL) player plays you already have what you need by this point and can afford to ignore the rest.

So, I think Green is a safer measure of good strategy than Gold.

I would say Green is a quicker and a different measure of good strategy since a good strategy for Blue is somewhat different than a good strategy for green.

I don't understand 100%. You are saying less land means fewer cities [for ICS], so less RL time required ? If so, I agree with your reasoning [for ICS players anyway. True for you too?].

Exactly.

I'd like the comparison game to be on a typical map, where people can test a variety of strategies, and any conclusions we make will apply widely. I'd be happy to see huts removed, to reduce luck, since that probably wouldn't favor one strategy over another. I'd prefer a map that supports trade in Hides, but won't insist on that.

I agree with the point about huts removed. I would like to add that it is better for the map to be known to remove another element of luck.

One thing that can't be ignored about b) is its contribution to making cities celebrate under democracy. Until you get Cure for Cancer, a city having 3 good trade routes will celebrate at a much lower % luxury. I realise this is going off on tangent, if your playing an ICS style landing you'll run out of room for growth anyway.

Good point.

I'm up for 255 techs, but we'd need a huge deadline to be fair to all, especially with summer coming up. I haven't got any other strategies to try, but I would be interested in seeing how an ICS style works.

I second that. If we are going to have 255FT challenge, it should be at least a 2 month game.

 

[Magic_gorter]

This might be an idea for celebrating when CFC is 10 years....which is october this year. We could even make it a 3 month special (last three months of the year). Of course there will be GOTM's in november and december but those will be "small" games.... perhaps special maps celebrating 10 years CFC.

Is it an idea if somebody else then me creates the map for that GOTM (the 3 month special). I still have several ideas for maps which will take a lot of time to create.

I am also thinking about a sea batlle map (not with modern boats) for next GOTM with almost only ocean tiles. That will be a total different game then we're used to play.

 

[Ali Ardavan]

I love playing on special maps. The idea of a 3 month special is great. I have my own ideas but since we are digressing way too much in this thread I just placed my idea in its appropriate thread.

(By the way, Magic it is time to unsticky some of the older GOTMs. There are too many sticky ones right now.)

 

[Magic_gorter]

I will unstick them as soon as the HOF results are up. This way it's easier for me to see what my workload is. Planning to do GOTM 103 monday and then trying to do some more the next days.

I will copy a part of the posts in this thread to a new thread for the 10 year anniversary of CFC....

 

[Peaster]

@Ace: Tx!

@rest: No Logs ?? No Stats ?? I can probably add to post 44 above, if anybody cares.

 

[Magic_gorter]

Sorry forgot to post it

turn year
1 4000 Kyoto
2 3950 start learning Ceremonial Burial
4 3850 Osaka
8 3650 Ceremonial Burial->Alphabet
19 3100 Alphabet->Code of Laws
33 2400 first Contact with Mongols->get Map Making
36 2250 Code of Laws->Monarchy (thanks to Map Making)

Status at -2000
Population: 0.08M; Cities: 4; Government: Despotism
Gold: 8; Cost per turn: 0; Total advances: 7; Production: 2MT; 0 polluted tiles
Wonders:
Units: 3 Wariors, 2 Settler
Romans No contact
Viking: No contact
Spanish: No contact
Persians: No contact
Mongols: No contact

44 1850 >0,1M
48 1650 Monarchy->Currency / MONARCHY
54 1350 War with Mongols / destroyed Horsemen near Japanese city
56 1250 Currency->Trade
61 1000 >0,2M

Status at -1000
Population: 0.21M; Cities: 9; Government: Monarchy
Gold: 13; Cost per turn: 0; Total advances: 7; Production: 24MT; 0 polluted tiles
Wonders:
Units: 4 Wariors, 3 Settler, 1 phalanx
Romans No contact
Viking: No contact
Spanish: No contact
Persians: No contact
Mongols: Enraged, War, No Embassy

64 925 Trade->Mysticism
67 850 >0,3M
69 800 reached ocean #8. with warrior
78 575 Marco Polo build/ destroyed Nisnaspur (got Polytheism)
79 550 got Pottery from Roman
81 500 >0,4M

Status at -0500
Population: 0.42M; Cities: 13; Government: Monarchy
Gold: 225; Cost per turn: 0; Total advances: 10; Production: 36MT; 0 polluted tiles
Wonders: Marco Polo
Units: 3 Wariors, 5 Settler, 1 phalanx
Romans: Cordial, 248g, 7 cities
Viking: Cordial, Peace, 421g, 9 cities
Spanish: Enraged, War, 294g, 6 cities
Persians: cordial, peace, 371g, 8 cities
Mongols: Enraged, War, 167g, 2 cities

83 450 Iron Working and Writing via trade
87 350 Mysticism->Literacy / got Literacy via Trade
88 325 start learning Philosophy (lost city after Mongol attack) / Hanging Gardens build
89 300 >0,5M
96 125 Philosophy->Monotheism->Seafaring / >0,6M
98 75 >0,7M

Status at +0001
Population: 0.76M; Cities: 17; Government: Monarchy
Gold: 66 Cost per turn: 0; Total advances: 16; Production: 57MT; 0 polluted tiles
Wonders: Marco Polo, Hanging Gardens
Units: 1 Wariors, 3 Settler, 7 elephants, 4 crusaders, 1 caravan
Romans: Receptive, Peace, 231g, 7 cities
Viking: Receptive, Peace, 600g, 15 cities
Spanish: Icy, Cease Fire, 309g, 7 cities
Persians: Enthusiastic, peace, 441g, 10 cities
Mongols: Uncooperative, War, 213g, 4 cities

103 40 >0,8M
104 60 capture Kasghar (warrior code+4g)
107 120 got Bridge building, Masonry, Construction, Mathematics via trade
108 140 >0,9M/ capture Tabriz (Horseback Riding+
112 220 >1M
118 340 silk to Karakorum 42g
119 360 capture Karakorum (27g)
120 380 Bribed Bokhara (54g) / Mongols destroyed
126 500 Seafaring->Medicine

Status at +0500
Population: 1.47M; Cities: 21; Government: Monarchy
Gold: 102 Cost per turn: 2; Total advances: 23; Production: 61MT; 0 polluted tiles
Wonders: Marco Polo, Hanging Gardens
Units: 1 Wariors, 11 Settler, 2 phalanx, 4 elephants, 16 crusaders, 13 caravan
Romans: Neutral, Peace, 259g, 7 cities
Viking: Receptive, Peace, 898g, 19 cities
Spanish: Neutral, Peace, 446g, 10 cities
Persians: Neutral, peace, 793g, 15 cities
Mongols: destroyed

130 580 Michelangelo's build
131 600 build first coastal city / got Republic via Trade
135 680 reached next land mass
147 920 Medicine->The Wheel / got University via trade / silk to Madrid 132g+136 / captured Madrid (Great Library+57g)
148 940 >2M / captured Salamanca (36g)
150 980 capture Seville (28g)
151 1000 bribed Barcelona (25g)

Status at +1000
Population: 2.54M; Cities: 29; Government: Monarchy
Gold: 167 Cost per turn: 4; Total advances: 26; Production: 109MT; 0 polluted tiles
Wonders: Marco Polo, Hanging Gardens, Great Library, Michelangelo's
Units: 1 Wariors, 18 Settler, 2 phalanx, 4 elephants, 19 crusaders, 3 trireme, 2 diplomat, 25 caravan
Romans: Neutral, Peace, 123g, 8 cities
Viking: Receptive, Peace, 1343g, 22 cities
Spanish: Enraged, War, 213g, 6 cities
Persians: Neutral, peace, 1056g, 17 cities
Mongols: destroyed

152 1020 captured Bilbao (20g)
153 1040 silk (80g)
154 1060 captured Saragossa (41g)
155 1080 >3M / dye 280g / captured Valencia (lighthouse+41g)
156 1100 The Wheel->Engineering
157 1120 capture Cadiz (35g)
159 1160 silk 184g / capture Granada(32g)
160 1180 gold (160g)
161 1200 silk 84g
162 1220 Engineering->Invention / silk 104g + salt 112g
163 1240 silk 96g / destroyed Malaga / silk 112g + 64g+64g+72g
165 1280 Invention->Chemistry / gold 58g + silk 62g+40g
166 1300 Leonardo's build / silk 32g
167 1320 copper 72g
168 1340 >4M / hides 42g+32g
170 1380 salt 80g / bribed Jinjan (27g)
171 1400 Chemistry->Gunpowder
172 1420 capture Isthakr (54g) / silk 62g
173 1440 gold 64g+56g/ bribed Zohak (85g)
174 1460 gold 54g+36g
175 1480 capture Ergili (55g)

Status at +1500
Population: 4.56M; Cities: 39; Government: Monarchy
Gold: 1077 Cost per turn: 7; Total advances: 30; Production: 137MT; 0 polluted tiles
Wonders: Marco Polo, Hanging Gardens, Great Library, Michelangelo's, Lighthouse, Leonardo's
Units: 2 Wariors, 33 Settler, 4 phalanx, 28 crusaders, 1 legion, 3 trireme, 2 diplomat, 26 caravan
Romans: Receptive, Peace, 177g, 8 cities
Viking: Receptive, Peace, 1831g, 26 cities
Spanish: Uncooperative, Cease Fire, 215g, 1 city
Persians: Enraged, war, 1153g, 14 cities
Mongols: destroyed

177 1510 gems (52g)
178 1520 silk 76g
179 1530 Gunpowder->Explosives / captured Hamadan (55g) / bribed Gulhaman (106g) / silk 96g+88g
181 1550 gems 100g + silk 130g
182 1560 >5M / bribed Pasargadae (Colossus+79g) / hides (76g) + gems (32g)
183 1570 Explosives->Astronomy
184 1580 REPUBLIC (need faster science)
185 1590 bribed Bactra (106g) / silver 50g
186 1600 >6M / gems 60g + silver 52g
187 1610 silver (78g)
188 1620 King Richard build / capture Susa (53g) + bribed Antioch (74g)
189 1630 Astronomy->Navigation / silk 220g / capture Sidon (83g) / dye 120g + gold 90g / reached the seccond sea
190 1640 dye (68g)
191 1650 Navigation->Physics / >7M / captured Vallodalid (Spanish destroyed) got Feudalism and 246g / captured Gordium (46g) + Darius Kabir (42g)
192 1660 captured Tarsus / bribed Sardis + Samaria / hides 43g / reached small landmass between Persian and empty landmass
193 1670 >8M
197 1710 Physics->Steam Engine
198 1720 Cunaxa / beads 26g
200 1740 beads 88g + silver 18g
201 1750 Steam Engine->Railroad / Cannae / gold 82g / reached empty landmass (the Vikings have some cities on it now)
202 1752 >9M / silver 56g
203 1754 silver 105g
204 1756 dye 44g
205 1758 Banking via Great Library / Railroad->Democracy
206 1760 >10M
209 1766 Sun Tzu build
212 1772 bribed Tyre (89g)
214 1776 >11M
215 1778 beads 76g + gold 11g
216 1780 gold 46g
217 1782 gold 148g + 50g + silver 59g
218 1784 gold 48g + 18g
220 1788 Sanitation via GL
222 1792 >12M / gold 118g
223 1794 Democracy->Industrialization / hides (259g) + silver 187g
224 1796 Darwin build->Industrialization->Theology->Communism
226 1800 bribed first Viking city

Status at +1800
Population: 12.88M; Cities: 65; Government: Republic
Gold: 366 Cost per turn: 46; Total advances: 43; Production: 348MT; 0 polluted tiles
Wonders: Marco Polo, Hanging Gardens, Great Library, Michelangelo's, Lighthouse, Leonardo's, Colossus, Sun Tzu, King Richard, Darwin's Voyage
Units: 49 Settler, 17 musketeers, 45 crusaders, 10 caravel, 3 diplomats, 46 caravan
Romans: Receptive, Peace, 296g, 10 cities
Viking: Receptive, Peace, 1044g, 30 cities
Spanish: destroyed
Persians: Uncooperative, cease fire, 115g, 1 city
Mongols: destroyed

229 1806 >13M
231 1810 J.S. Bach build
232 1812 Communism->Magnetism
234 1816 Statue of liberty build
236 1820 changed to Communism
237 1822 bribed last Persian city->Persian civ destroyed
238 1824 Magnetism->Espionage
241 1830 >14M
243 1834 reached sea near Viking mainland
247 1842 Espionage->Corporation
248 1844 Womans Suffrage build
250 1848 >15M
251 1850 Corporation->Theory of Gravity / reached Viking landmass / captured Twaite
252 1851 Eiffeltower build
253 1852 copper 628g / capture Sigtuna
254 1853 Theory of Gravity->Chivalry / >16M / oil 408g + silver 422g + dye 422g + oil 308g + oil 174g + dye 314g / capture Holmgard (Oracle)
255 1854 Chivalry->Leadership / United Nations build
256 1855 capture Larne
257 1856 coal 845g + spice 1128g / captured Aldeigjuborg
258 1857 Leadership->Tactics / >17M / dye 884g + silk 1212g / capture Jarlshof+Skara
259 1858 Tactics->Genetic Engineering / >18M / copper 624g + silk 1014g + oil 424g / capture Kvivik
260 1859 Genetic Engineering->Atomic Theory / copper 904g + silk 1466g / captured Kaupang
261 1860 Atomic Theory->Electricity / Cure of Cancer build / silver 426g
262 1861 silver 654g+670g + gold 818g / capture Hladir + Birka
263 1862 Electricity->Electronics / Isaac Newton build / >19M / silver 432g + silk 368g / capture Viborg / silver 306g + gold 162g + 374g
264 1863 Electronics->Refrigeration / gold 634g + 662g / captured Roskilde
265 1864 Refrigeration->Steel / oil 526g + silver 1038g+714g+534g / captured Jarrow
266 1865 Steel->Machine Tools / Hoover Dam build / >20M / silk 1680g+829g / captured Lindholm + Westness
267 1866 Machine Tools->Miniaturization / silk 760g + gold 660g + silver 334g + silver 760g + oil 1128g / captured Lunde + Ravning Enge
268 1867 Miniaturization->Refining / >21M / captured Hedeby / captured Jelling
269 1868 Refining->Combustion / Vikings change government / >22M / captured Odense
270 1869 Combustion->Automobile / captured Asskrig (magelan's
271 1870 DEMOCRACY / >23M
272 1871 Automobile->Mobile Warfare
273 1872 >28M / bribed last Viking city-> Vikings destroyed
275 1874 Mobile Warfare->Mass Production / >33M
276 1875 Mass Production->Computers / >36M
277 1876 Computers->Robotics / >39M
278 1877 SETI Program build / >40M / bribed Syracuse
279 1878 Robotics->Flight / >43M
280 1879 >45M
281 1880 Flight->Radio / >48M
282 1881 Radio->Advanced Flight / >50M
283 1882 Advanced Flight->Rocketry / >53M / reached last sea near rome
284 1883 Rocketry->Space Flight / >57M
285 1884 Space Flight->Combined Arms / >62M
286 1885 Combined Arms->Nuclear Fission / Apollo Program build / >67M / captured Rome / Romans destroyed

 

[Peaster]

Thanks, Magic. I spent a few minutes looking for differences between our games and didn't find anything huge. At 1AD, our growth was similar [I had +3 cities, but you had +1 WoW. I had crossed the sea, but you had more units]. By 1000AD, I had many more cities, but I'm not sure that matters much on such a long map. Probably it helped with trade + science + WoWs, but not with pushing basic EC units west.

I crossed the first sea approx 35 turns earlier [but not with a large force] and stayed about 35 turns ahead in the race westwards until the end. Not sure I understand this 100%. In reading your log, I'm assuming you didn't usually bypass unconquered cities, like I did.

You built Leo's much earlier [and therefore researched Invention earlier]. I usually delay Invn/Nav until last in my early tech tree, to preserve trade bonuses, but I have never been quite sure about that idea. I can't tell which worked better here just from our logs. Eventually, I got about 30 turns ahead of you in science, but am not sure that mattered ; we seemed to move thru the Vikings + Romans at approx the same speed, even though your Vikings were tougher.

Maybe if others post logs, I'll try for a more careful comparison. Or someone else can.

 

[Magic_gorter]

I think the biggest difference was you bypassed the enemy. I did stay to long in monarchy which caused I didn't researched well. However Republic didn't work as I aspected but perhaps when moving earlier to it could helped me more.

Because I did not trade much I decided to go for Leo. Upgrading my troups was important at that time...

 

[CharlieChuck]

Some stats, forgot to save at 1ad, but have saves at 120bc and 180ad

I messed up at start by building capital on a mountain river

3100bc 2 cities 1 warrrior, 3 techs research code of laws, furthest city west 494
2250bc 4 cities 2 warriors, 4 techs research monarchy, furthest city west 486
1450bc 7 cities 2 warrior 1 horse, 6 techs research currency, furthest city west 486 found mongols
750bc 11 cities 4 warrior 1 horse 6 ellies, 9 techs research maps, furthest city west 477 MPE not yet built
375bc 13 cities (incl karakorum) 4 sett 5 warrior 1 horse 6 ellies 4 vans, 12 techs (not researching anything), MPE nearly built 12 shield left, furthest city west 435
Mongols defeated between 125bc and 120ad (thjnk it was 80AD)
120 ad 19 cities, 6 ellies 1 dip 1 trirems, 17 techs research republic, 3 wonders MPE, colossus HG, Persians built lighthouse??, west city 419, 2 ellies about to land on spanish continent

will post more later

 

[Peaster]

Some stats, forgot to save at 1ad, but have saves at 120bc and 180ad

I messed up at start by building capital on a mountain river

.... 120 ad 19 cities, 6 ellies 1 dip 1 trirems, 17 techs research republic, 3 wonders MPE, colossus HG, Persians built lighthouse??, west city 419, 2 ellies about to land on spanish continent

Is this 120ad or 120bc ? Either way, it seems you are approx as far along as MG and I were at 1AD, despite your weak capital. 3 WoWs is very nice, and defeating the Mongols early has to help.

@MG: Bypassing an enemy can save lots of time on a normal map, and it was a key idea in GOTM 58, which I based my GOTM 109 plans on. But this map is so narrow, it was hard to bypass civs effectively. I had to defeat over half the Spanish and Persian cities before passing them. And all the Vikings, IIRC. So it helped, but maybe not hugely.

I am still undecided about Leo, and about the best govt between about 1AD and the discovery of Democracy / SoL [maybe around 1500AD ??]. There will be big corruption whatever you do, and I was not totally happy with Republic, since cele-growth is the main benefit, and it doesn't last that long. Just an idea ... switch from Monarchy to Republic, for about 12 turns, to cele/grow some decent sized Eastern cities. Then, switch back to Celebrating Monarchy, to avoid ongoing support and Senate problems, and still allow strong trade. Then, as soon as you get Demo, build SoL and switch to Fundy. All that celebrating would be expensive, but I think you could pay for it easily with lots of trade.

Actually, IIRC getting to Demo was a low priority for me - I wanted Engineers and RRs more urgently. Not sure about this decision either... Fundy was a bigger help than expected. Gee, this was a complex game.