GOTM 28 Spoiler 1 - End Of Ancient Age, Full View of Starting Continent
- Thread starter ainwood
- Start date
Txurce
Deity
CKS, the barbarians knocked off a few of your escorted settlers in all of your games? If so, that is horrible luck, and would throw off anyone's game.
zagnut
Monarch
OPEN PTW 1.27
Obviously, the lack of Iron and Horses was the major feature of the Ancient Age. I had expanded into the Mutton Valley just to get the Lambs that were there. That was a fortuitous decision as events turned out. The placement of my two cities in the mountains and valley were the same as jaafits. See map at end of post and jaafit's map here
As someone else mentioned, the Persian tech pace seemed to be accelerated. They were 4 techs ahead of me at 1000 BC. In 925 I discovered Mathematics and decided to trade Persia for Iron Working. That was when I discovered that only they had Iron. That changed the entire flow of the game for me. With only a 2 attack unit against a 4 attack unit, I had to plan to survive before anything else. I did not want to wait until their Immortals attacked and hope for the best. However, I am happy to see that you who chose that path were able to survive.
My plan was simple: Fortify Spearmen on all of the mountains bordering the Persian land, research Horseback Riding and then attack them with the mobile Horsemen. Good plan until there were no horses. However, at that point I had managed to fortify units on all of the mountains. Now the plan would have to be implemented with Archers. I was going on the offensive regardless.
I discovered Horseback Riding in 730 and then took as much time as I could to build up my supply of Archers. The revised plan was to send 2 stacks of Archers and Spearmen to attack both Gordium and Susa at the same time. I have never used ROP Rape in any GOTM game, but sometimes our morals must give way in difficult situations. I didnt think I had quite enough units, but Persia had moved Immortals into the Mutton Valley and next to my city. I signed a ROP agreement with Persia and moved one square to be next to both Gordium and Susa. See the tactical situation at that time on the map at the end of this post.
On the next turn I captured both Gordium and Susa and destroyed the enemy units in the Mutton Valley. Persia was never able to mount an effective counterattack, sending no more than 2 units at a time which I attacked and killed before they could attack me. It was not hard to do because I controlled all of the high ground.
Persepolis, which had a population of 9 pop rushed some units and was soon down to 5. That meant they got no defensive bonus and made the capture of that city, and the Pyramids, much easier. 6 turns after the first two cities, their capital fell. One turn later I captured the city of Arbela which had their Iron, and Bactra, on the east coast.
Then I made peace and took all of their techs. Several turns later I declared war again. Since I had no way of trading contacts, I didnt have to worry about adversely impacting my reputation because none of the other civs would ever know that Persia existed.
Obviously, the lack of Iron and Horses was the major feature of the Ancient Age. I had expanded into the Mutton Valley just to get the Lambs that were there. That was a fortuitous decision as events turned out. The placement of my two cities in the mountains and valley were the same as jaafits. See map at end of post and jaafit's map here
As someone else mentioned, the Persian tech pace seemed to be accelerated. They were 4 techs ahead of me at 1000 BC. In 925 I discovered Mathematics and decided to trade Persia for Iron Working. That was when I discovered that only they had Iron. That changed the entire flow of the game for me. With only a 2 attack unit against a 4 attack unit, I had to plan to survive before anything else. I did not want to wait until their Immortals attacked and hope for the best. However, I am happy to see that you who chose that path were able to survive.
My plan was simple: Fortify Spearmen on all of the mountains bordering the Persian land, research Horseback Riding and then attack them with the mobile Horsemen. Good plan until there were no horses. However, at that point I had managed to fortify units on all of the mountains. Now the plan would have to be implemented with Archers. I was going on the offensive regardless.
I discovered Horseback Riding in 730 and then took as much time as I could to build up my supply of Archers. The revised plan was to send 2 stacks of Archers and Spearmen to attack both Gordium and Susa at the same time. I have never used ROP Rape in any GOTM game, but sometimes our morals must give way in difficult situations. I didnt think I had quite enough units, but Persia had moved Immortals into the Mutton Valley and next to my city. I signed a ROP agreement with Persia and moved one square to be next to both Gordium and Susa. See the tactical situation at that time on the map at the end of this post.
On the next turn I captured both Gordium and Susa and destroyed the enemy units in the Mutton Valley. Persia was never able to mount an effective counterattack, sending no more than 2 units at a time which I attacked and killed before they could attack me. It was not hard to do because I controlled all of the high ground.
Persepolis, which had a population of 9 pop rushed some units and was soon down to 5. That meant they got no defensive bonus and made the capture of that city, and the Pyramids, much easier. 6 turns after the first two cities, their capital fell. One turn later I captured the city of Arbela which had their Iron, and Bactra, on the east coast.
Then I made peace and took all of their techs. Several turns later I declared war again. Since I had no way of trading contacts, I didnt have to worry about adversely impacting my reputation because none of the other civs would ever know that Persia existed.
Txurce
Deity
Zagnut, excellent start. I got quite a kick out of your RoP treaty-breaking, given your recent post elsewhere! By the way, this was my plan as well - almost from the start, once I saw who our neighbor was, as I had little doubt the only iron would be down south. (Doesn't it feel more legitimate to break such a treaty early in the game against a bigger opponent?)
DaLightHorseman
Chieftain
zagnut,
you mention ease with ROP rape, but how did you know that the persians had not made contact with somone else?
i thought the contact trading was deferred, is there some way you can tell whether they had lived in isolation?
i know you can get a rough idea after embassies : ie you can only establish an alliance against a civ you both know, however if only one civ knows the third party then no alliance is available.
this seems quite a risk to take, they could have met all other civs and you rep is dirt for quite a while.
you mention ease with ROP rape, but how did you know that the persians had not made contact with somone else?
i thought the contact trading was deferred, is there some way you can tell whether they had lived in isolation?
i know you can get a rough idea after embassies : ie you can only establish an alliance against a civ you both know, however if only one civ knows the third party then no alliance is available.
this seems quite a risk to take, they could have met all other civs and you rep is dirt for quite a while.
![[civ3mac]](/images/smilies/macciv3.gif "Mac Civ3 Icon [civ3mac]")
1.29This time, I have to report lots of failures and a slow start.
Delhi was founded SE on the forrest, but I wrongly gambled on being able to trade for pottery soon and thus started research with writing-literature. Wrong. And I also failed this time to setup a settler factory. And the Great Lighthouse was built by an overseas civ. And the only goodie hut we saw were popped by a Persian warrior. To finish the bad news (you all know it by now) we are alone w Persia and without horses or iron. Until the "Great Lighthouse civ" came and settled on the ivory in the north.
Now the good news. Bangalore NE of Delhi was a great city and built both Great Library(slowly) and Hanging Gardens (w Great Leader). There were 2 barb camp locations N and NW of Delhi, but we used them to train archers and getting 25g several times. We were able to settle Bombay in the mutton valley and Madras on the SE hills towards Persia. Both got walls and archers/spears for defense. We twice asked Persian settler/escort pairs to leave and Xerxes declared war. Thus we always started the war with some fresh slaves. In the first war between 1175bc and 825bc we only saw 1 immortal and we fed him an redlined archer to trigger the Persian Golden Age while they were still in despotism.
After 2 turns of peace, Xerxes declares war again in 750bc. After we killed 5 of his immortals, we get hbr for peace in 610bc just when a stack of immortals appeared. And we created Great Leader Chandragupta and he hurried the Hanging Gardens. No cities were conquered in the first 2 Persian wars.
The Lighthouse civ reached our continent 1075bc giving us iron working and map making for literature and another civ's galley showed up 925bc giving us philosophy and mysticism for literature (Persia gave wheel and pottery) . When Bangalore finished the Great Library 390bc, contacts became important and we sent suicide galleys (One lost, one survived). By the time we enter Middle Ages in 70bc, we are in contact to 4 more overseas civilizations and are number 4 in world ranking. We are strongest in culture because of the cheap temples and will attempt to culture flip one or both of the northern ivory thieves cities.
Persia has the Pyramids built for us in Persepolis and once we have war elephants, we will start the 3rd Persian war. Decisive this time, hopefully.
Middle Ages continue here.
dojoboy
Tsalagi
Two good ideas I know of but haven't had the awareness to do in game. Good job, tao.
No, just the first time around. It wasn't quite that bad. The second time I think I lost only one worker (with a warrior escort - I didn't send out anybody unescorted). The third time I don't think any barbs attacked my wanderers (as opposed to me attacking them, which I did), although they did hit a city with no defenders.
I don't think I have a game that is good enough to be thrown off yet.
zagnut
Monarch
For those of you who do not know, I have been a vocal opponent of ROP Rape. I used it here because I thought it would give me an unfair advantage, and I was right. But I would still like to see it banned.
However, it is interesting how we rationalize the use of an evil tactic if it suits our purpose.
TechStep is right. I did not know for sure, but I was willing to gamble that no other civ had made contact. We are on a small continent and any civ that made contact with Persia, probably would have made contact with me. Also, I was willing to take any reputation hit in order to survive against a larger, more aggressive, opponent.
zagnut
Monarch
No other civs "discovered" our home continent until after the Middle Ages. One of them built the Great Lighthouse, but never thought to take the long drive across the seas.
I made contact with 5 other civs before the end of the Middle Ages by sending out a couple of suicide Galleys. I have had terrible luck with them in the past. In GOTM 27 I just quit sending them because every one was lost. However, in this game the Gods smiled on me and my first 2 Galleys made contact. Can I still call them suicide Galleys?
Boyd
North of 60o
It is really fascinating and instructive to see the various responses to the Indian dilemna - no strategic resources and the Persians.
Both basic strategies appear to have worked - first strike and defense of the Mutton Valley.
What I am looking forward to is seeing how it affects the next age.
I know that my forward looking defense of the Mutton Valley (walls, barracks and archers) saved me, and it gave me a good position for the middle ages in that I had infrastructure, et cetera in my Core, but it meant that I had an intact Persia to contend with in the Middle Ages. That problem was not resolved for some time and shaped the rest of my game, but that is for the next spoiler.
Great posts thus far. I hope to read many more on this subject.
Both basic strategies appear to have worked - first strike and defense of the Mutton Valley.
What I am looking forward to is seeing how it affects the next age.
I know that my forward looking defense of the Mutton Valley (walls, barracks and archers) saved me, and it gave me a good position for the middle ages in that I had infrastructure, et cetera in my Core, but it meant that I had an intact Persia to contend with in the Middle Ages. That problem was not resolved for some time and shaped the rest of my game, but that is for the next spoiler.
Great posts thus far. I hope to read many more on this subject.
dojoboy
Tsalagi
Even in this situation, I think the key to dealing w/ Persia is/was number of units. One could eradicate Xerxes' people or live along side them as long as Xerxes believed (calculated) India to be too strong. Persia's aggressive rating though is going to cause at least one war.
I'm looking forward to reading the post by the person who chose not to give in to fear but decided to give Persia a chance to prove it belongs among the civilized nations of the world.
denyd
Emperor
Dojoboy:
That will be me. My middle ages spoiler will discuss that.
I've got a question for the powers that be:
It seems like the higher scores in the past have come from those who win via domination/conquest or those who reach the domination threshhold and then milk until the desired victory is reached. Taking that into account, it would seem that those who took on Persia and destroyed them and are now out conquering new lands would outscore those of us whose defenders gallantly held Mutton Valley. Is that true??
Thanks
That will be me. My middle ages spoiler will discuss that.
I've got a question for the powers that be:
It seems like the higher scores in the past have come from those who win via domination/conquest or those who reach the domination threshhold and then milk until the desired victory is reached. Taking that into account, it would seem that those who took on Persia and destroyed them and are now out conquering new lands would outscore those of us whose defenders gallantly held Mutton Valley. Is that true??
Thanks
akots
Poet
I have no compaints about Persia being too agressive or behaving badly. I tried to settle south of Dehli in the valley and beyond in the very beginning and was building mostly spearmen for defence and temples/libraries in that region. Knowing that Persia is usually agressive, I have captured one of their settlers early in the game and they did not retaliate much. Then, we had RoP for quite some time to get these 2 workers back home through all his territory and Xerxes was always polite and never moved a unit in India without a reason. He actually helped a lot with northern barbarians. On the other hand, Persia has almost all ancient wonders because they had golden age in late Despotism/early Republic and were very good research partners although not very cooperative in trading because they had few contacts with other civilizations.
Actually, Persia was a great neighbour to have! Xerxes was a next door friendly guy who did all wonder-building and gave hand in barbarian fighting and research. Since he was building mostly wonders, by the end of AA their military was not so huge and they did not have much culture. Certainly, iron is a problem but Elephants can hadle pikemen rather well.
Edited: predator, PTW 1.27f
dojoboy
Tsalagi
More often true than not I'd say. But, some advances help boost the overall score (e.g. certain facilities). I'm more often a builder than warmonger so my scores rarely get very high. I think 6950 is my highest ever, in a personal game, and it was by domination.
Txurce
Deity
denyd, an early conquest of Persia will help anyone's score, almost regardless of what victory condition is being pursued.
I'm playing predator, and had no problem with Persia throughout the ancient age. My army was weak for the first half of the era, until I began to build up an archer force. I did have an embassy there, traded lots of tech, and paid tribute once.
I'm playing predator, and had no problem with Persia throughout the ancient age. My army was weak for the first half of the era, until I began to build up an archer force. I did have an embassy there, traded lots of tech, and paid tribute once.
I couldn't agree more. It's so weird seeing all these posts that read:
India-->:love2: <--Persia. I mean, what the heck?! It didn't even OCCUR to me to leave Xerxes alone, and NOT wipe him off the continent!! I'm beginning to think that I'm a very bad person.
Can't wait to read and post re the Middle Ages!
Sir Bugsy
Civ.D.
Raijer - excellent point. I wonder if given any civ on our same continent we would tolerate their existance. As soon as I knew it was the X-man and me, I knew he had to go. But I wonder if it had been France or India (obviously not in this game) or another low aggression civ. I think most of us would still press to wipe them off the continent.
So the point is: for most of us we want to own our own continent, the question is how quickly we can do it. With the X-man there, he was a dilemma for most of us.
So the point is: for most of us we want to own our own continent, the question is how quickly we can do it. With the X-man there, he was a dilemma for most of us.
Similar threads
- Sticky