GOTM 36 Pre-Game Discussion

[solenoozerec]

I'm hoping that this (very good) example would be permissable. Peter's plan was to secure the west against us - the Swedes I mean - and later create a flavour of European culture, which fitted well with the values of his family.

So apart from the palace rank bug (not sure Peter knew about it ) I see a few other reasons for a jump like this:

1. Enable future expansion (in the Baltic area) and maintain present expansion.
2. Protect yourself against flips by moving your capital next to a strong cultural power.
3. Protect a great powerhouse - in this case Kiev. Scandinavians running up and down the Dnipro River must have been a foul sight to Peter.

Comments?

Looks like Peter played civ3 a lot before he became a tzar.

Just one correction: creation of European culture flavor certainly fitted with his values, but I am not sure about his family values. At least, his son Alexis and Alexis’ mother had different values.

Also, the way he built this capital sounds to me like a pop rush. I am not sure that this is possible in any of civ versions.

And regarding point 3. I wish Firaxis will make river travel possible in civ4.

 

[solenoozerec]

BTW, I think Ainwood has chosen England not so accidentally . It is 199th anniversary of the Battle of Trafalgar

 

[ainwood]

BTW, I think Ainwood has chosen England not so accidentally . It is 199th anniversary of the Battle of Trafalgar

Actually....

Thanks for the info!

 

[Jove]

Arrrr, I've been gone awhile and I'm confused about two issues:
1) Rings don't matter in Conquests, right, but they still have an effect in PTW?
2) The Forbidden Palace in Conquests doesn't do much far away from the capitol, right, but in PTW it works just fine far away?
I got nailed on both these issues in the COTM, and want to get it straight.

@AlanH- Thanks for the hard facts. It's surprising how many of the basic details I do not know! The point of the question was, well, when I see Archipelago I think 'land shortage'. But that isn't really the case, is it?. If we see 1% now, we could fit in 100 or more cities without triggering domination. It's really a mobility issue. So... all this talk of Palace jumping isn't necessarily hot air. But potentially a waste of perfectly good cities too, right? I mean, a good FP, a GL now and then and you can just rush new palaces. Unless the GL is on the wrong side of the world...

Also, isn't the Battle of Trafalgar where Lord Nelson, the famous Brit, was killed? Maybe this would be a good time for a bio...

 

[jeffelammar]

Arrrr, I've been gone awhile and I'm confused about two issues:
1) Rings don't matter in Conquests, right, but they still have an effect in PTW?

Yes, Rings are still the way to go in PTW. Corruption works as it did in the orig.

2) The Forbidden Palace in Conquests doesn't do much far away from the capitol, right, but in PTW it works just fine far away.

Correct again. The FP in PTW works as a new anchor for all palace distance calculations, so it is itself a rank 1 city no matter what.

 

[A'AbarachAmadan]

Correct again. The FP in PTW works as a new anchor for all palace distance calculations, so it is itself a rank 1 city no matter what.

Does this mean if I set up my RCPs around my Palace and FP at the same distance that they will all be the same rank? So in theory, I could have 2 rank 1 cities (Palace & FP) and if I used RCP=3, I could get 8 more each?

Doesn't the distance from main capital factor still make the ones around the FP have a significantly higher corruption?

 

[Denniz]

Does this mean if I set up my RCPs around my Palace and FP at the same distance that they will all be the same rank? So in theory, I could have 2 rank 1 cities (Palace & FP) and if I used RCP=3, I could get 8 more each?

Doesn't the distance from main capital factor still make the ones around the FP have a significantly higher corruption?

Take a look at this War Academy article Link.

 

[jeffelammar]

Just to be clear. (I know it's in the link dvandenberg put there, but...)

There are two types of corruption both changed by a FP
1. Distance - The number for distance is based on the smaller of two distances. Your distance to the Capitol and your distance to the FP.

2. Rank - Your rank is the number of cities closer to the Capitol than your distance to the closer of the FP and the Capitol.

This leads to some spectacular side effects including what is known as the "Rank Corruption Bug." This was fixed in C3C by overhauling the corruption system, but lives on in it's full glory in PTW.

 

[Cuivienen]

Does this mean if I set up my RCPs around my Palace and FP at the same distance that they will all be the same rank? So in theory, I could have 2 rank 1 cities (Palace & FP) and if I used RCP=3, I could get 8 more each?

Doesn't the distance from main capital factor still make the ones around the FP have a significantly higher corruption?

Someone did a study at one point that revealed that RCP around the FP has no effect whatsoever.

 

[ainwood]

Someone did a study at one point that revealed that RCP around the FP has no effect whatsoever.

Only for cities that are closer to the Forbidden palace than they are to the palace, and only if there are no cities closer to the palace than they are.

In short - if the closest city to the palace is at (say) distance 4, then all cities that are distance 1, 2, 3 or 4 from the FP will have rank = 1.

 

[solenoozerec]

I hope when I will wake up tomorrow I can check what predator “bonuses” are. Just curious.

 

[King Of America]

Looking at the screen capture, I notice that the tile 2 NE is blacked out. Makes me think that ainwood's hiding soemthing that would make us want to move towards it.

The SW tile looks like a good place to move, except that it has no river, which if understand settlerfactory-ology is a drawback.

I think the regular grass 1 E and then 1 SE has a lot of potential -- it's on a river, and has 3 BG and 3 forests in its initial 8 squares (plus the mystery square on expansion, either from Palace or, if it's not the first site, a Temple on expansion).

If we were playing Regent, I'd meander over (assuming good scout report), but on Emperor, I'm a bit hesiatnt to spend 2 turns walking.

 

[Roland Ehnström]

The SW tile looks like a good place to move, except that it has no river, which if understand settlerfactory-ology is a drawback.

Well, only if you play C3C as an Agricultural civ (river = 1 extra food under despotism).

-- Roland

 

[AlanH]

Looking at the screen capture, I notice that the tile 2 NE is blacked out.

That's standard lack of visibility behind a hill, same as to the NW. Of course, it *could* also be ainwood being devious, but he doesn't have to doctor the screenie for that fog to happen.

 

[King Of America]

@ Roland--what I meant that you need a river or access to fresh water to grow to 7 without an aqueduct. Many of the 4-turn settler/warrior pump models require the ability to reach a pop of 7 in the last settler turn.

@AlanH -- guess I'm still a muggle for fog-gazing. Still, just because there's a normal explanation doesn't mean ainwood's not out to get us...

 

[Xevious]

@ Roland--what I meant that you need a river or access to fresh water to grow to 7 without an aqueduct. Many of the 4-turn settler/warrior pump models require the ability to reach a pop of 7 in the last settler turn.

Actually, I believe the settler pops before the actual growth to size 7. If the town ACTUALLY grew to size 7 first it would empty the granary, which it does not in those situations.

 

[Renata]

About a 5/7 settler factory without a river: has anyone tried it? What Xevious says makes sense to me, but I've never tried to pull it off. The one thing I'm curious about is the extra shields from the 'virtual citizen' on growth to size 7. I'm guessing you don't get them, which could affect being able to pull off the factory if you're tight on shields.

As for a regular old 4-6 settler factory centered on the grass north of the cows: there are two bonus grasses in sight. That's enough right there to build a settler in four turns at size 4 and 5, even with both cows irrigated. (Turn 1 & 2 working both BGs, the city tile and either two cows or a cow and a regular mined grass: 7 shields. Turns 3 & 4 at size 5 adding another regular mined grass: 8 shields. That makes 30.)

[ just checking ] Corruption doesn't hit your capital any earlier in emperor than monarch does it? [/just checking ]

Renata

 

[AlanH]

We had one once. We set it up for 5-7 in an SG (the gotm 24 reprise) forgetting about the lack of a river. It was supposed to get into full gear on my turn set, and it failed. The Settler didn't pop at the interturn transition from pop 6 to pop 7-back-to-5, because the city tried to grow but couldn't, so we didn't get the bonus shields we were depending on, which are actually produced by the extra citizen. We were able to fall back and run it MM-optimised as a 4-6 factory instead.

I assume the extra citizen appears for long enough to produce a couple of shields, but disappears before the head count that decides the granary has to double in size.

 

[klarius]

In addition that you don't get the shields, you will also fall back to size 4.
You build the settler on size 6 the food box is full, but you need another turn to grow from 4 to 5.
This effect should be well known to anybody ever peeling off a settler or worker from a city not able to grow.

 

[Renata]

*slaps self upside head* Of course. So you'd be back to size 4 with growth the next turn.

Renata