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

JAR02, Always War Emperor

Discussion in 'Civ3 - Succession Games' started by jarred!, Apr 25, 2019.

  1. SuedecivIII

    SuedecivIII Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2019
    Messages:
    78
    I'd say walk worker east onto the BG. Then plant SE unless we get new info that would convince us otherwise.

    It's a long way away, but in another government the wines will be bonus food, so avoiding planting on them is ideal.

    If we're more worried about the short run, well, planting inland allows us the option of two well protected coastal cities 2 tiles from our capital (south of the mountain, and on the wines). A good option to have if things get ugly.
     
  2. Judminder

    Judminder Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2011
    Messages:
    129
    Just been catching up....
    I've never played an AW variant and the last game was the first time I've been involved in any Emperor game; solo or SG. Baptism of fire! So please can I get some clarification - if we see another Civ's unit, are we obliged to meet them and declare (or trade for hard goods then declare) or can we run away without declaring? If they meet us then we either immediately declare or trade for hard goods then declare (?)

    Regarding the start, this is the weakest part of my game. If there are jungle tiles to the South do we really want to move closer to them (worker turns to clear, possibility of disease etc)? Wouldn't the NE wines tile be better? Are we moving away from the coast to free up more greenery for our capital? I can see that SE does not have a BG thereby leaving all the BG tiles available. My usual thoughts are that, if moving on the first turn, it would only be to get to a coastal tile or for a huge defensive advantage. Otherwise I was under the impression that we would immediately be playing catch-up with the AI if we move. Just my thoughts - I appreciate that you folks all know what you are doing. Can someone spell out for me why moving SE is a good idea? Thanks.
     
  3. jarred!

    jarred! Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2017
    Messages:
    331
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    W-S, NC
    Generally, running away from borders is ok, but when a new civ's unit is encountered, war should be declared. You should check the diplomacy screen each turn so you don't accidentally meet a new civ and don't declare immediately (gasp! :p)

    Founding on a bonus food tile is a pretty big sin. The reason I suggested it was to give us extra commerce and immediate access to the coast. As CKS said, it also protects it from being pillaged. OTOH, we'll spend a majority of the game not in a despotism, so the wines will yield 3f, 1s, 2/3c. With 3 wines we're at +5 surplus food, and thus a 4 turn settler factory (at size 4-6, right?). It will be useful when claiming land we're liberating.

    EDIT: founding on a bg is another sin, which is why 1SE would be the easy choice. Staying in place gives us coastal tiles in our BFC that are only worth 1 food since the capital won't ever be able to build a harbor.

    Moving is better than staying in place. The loss of food, shields, and commerce from staying in place is way worse than the loss of a single turn due to movement to a superior spot.
    Moving to the coast isn't always needed, here we probably don't care about coastal wonders, although GLight or Magellan would be nice if we on a continents or archipelago map, but we can just capture them and any other wonder we want.
     
    Last edited: Apr 27, 2019
    tjs282 and Judminder like this.
  4. SuedecivIII

    SuedecivIII Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2019
    Messages:
    78
    IIRC you only get disease if your citizens are assigned to the diseased tile. Which is why you see it more often with flood plains.

    As for the move Judminder: You have a good point about being conservative moving the opening city, although non-accelerated production isn't super punishing when moving a single tile. But it does slow down the early game very slightly, which can have a small snowball effect into the lategame.

    Here's how I see it. If we care about the late game, we don't want to plant one off the coast. That will deny our capital 5 potential food in all those coast tiles where we'll never get a harbor. Planting on a bonus food tile isn't a huge sin in cases where the bonus food gets eaten away by the despotism penalty. But still, that would cost us an additional food.

    If we're more worried about the early game, and end up in a tough spot, planting inland would allow us to later plant along the coast, 2 tiles away, if we're stuck and really need some safe units for production/unit support.
     
    Judminder likes this.
  5. tjs282

    tjs282 Un(a)bashed immigrant

    Joined:
    May 19, 2009
    Messages:
    2,097
    Location:
    ...just here for the job/ handouts/ woman
    I disagree. The Wines are the best tiles visible to us right now, so roading (and mining?) at least one of them should be our highest priority, since that will give us the most commerce (i.e. likely gold at this stage, but beakers very soon).

    Moving the Worker north to one of the Wines-tiles will also let us investigate the northwestern water-tiles immediately, to see if they're fresh: because if they are, then founding on the northern Wines likely becomes our best move. Potential 3 FPT in our capital (and no-Duct growth to Pop7+) likely outweighs all other considerations.

    But which Wines should the Worker move to? 1NW (or 1N) would expose the most additional tiles, but would also leave the Worker outside the cap's radius if the water is salty, and we then move the Settler SE. That's why I would (vote to) move the Worker 1NE, because that tile will be immediately useful regardless of where the Settler goes. If the Settler goes SE, then the BGrass tile(s) can be improved next. If we go N, then another Wines-tile would likely be the next priority.

    Grass-tiles can be roaded in 1+3T, or roaded+mined in 1+3+6 turns, i.e. less than 10-turn town-growth cycle (if we move the Settler SE and so have only 2FPT+1SPT in Tenochtitlan): just enough time to build a Warrior for exploration (we won't need MP until we reach Pop3, because the Wines will already be hooked, one way or another!).
    Contrariwise (AFAIK).

    Rather (and again, AFAIK!), the probability of disease striking a town is based on the number of disease-causing tiles in the BFC, regardless of whether they're currently being worked*. But the disease-risk is still so small (and with extra food, pop-losses can usually be quickly compensated) that it should not be a major consideration compared to e.g. avoiding founding 1 tile from Coast. And once the Jungle is chopped, the problem goes away anyway.

    (On which subject, how about going for all-out conquest, razing any AI-towns that we don't have a good reason to hold on to? That way, we'd have Slaves a-plenty?)

    *Military units stationed on a disease-causing tile for >1 turn may (certainly used to) drop dead occasionally, but I'm not sure whether I stopped seeing that problem in my games precisely because I stopped fortifying my units in Jungles, or because I started using a later patch-version(/Conquests) where it no longer happened...
    ... or where the bonus doesn't increase the tile's food-output beyond what you'd get from a town anyway, e.g. Wines on a Hill gives 2 FPT under normal circumstances, so no food would be lost by founding on a Wines-Hill.

    Another wrinkle to consider here is that Aztecs are Agricultural, so once we go Monarchic (or Republic, if we dare!), all our town-tiles will then start giving 3 FPT, not just the freshwater-towns (as under Despot). OTOH, if we have water to irrigate 1 or more Wines-tiles, they can go to 4 FPT, so I'd still rather not found on them if we don't 'need' to
     
  6. SuedecivIII

    SuedecivIII Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2019
    Messages:
    78
    >>The Wines are the best tiles visible to us right now, so roading (and mining?) at least one of them should be our highest priority, since that will give us the most commerce (i.e. likely gold at this stage, but beakers very soon).

    A roaded and mined wines tile is 2 commerce, one production, and 2 food, plus the happy face.

    The happy face is valued at one commerce, since we can convert commerce to happy faces at a 1 to 1 ratio using the happiness slider. (Its value increases when we plant a second city, but we'll road the wines before then). So a total of 3 commerce from the roaded wines tile.

    A roaded and mined BG tile is 1 commerce, 2 production, and 2 food.

    So this is a question of if we prefer 2 commerce or 1 production. Traditionally, I've always rated 1 shield being worth 3 gold. That's what you pay to upgrade units.

    So I still think walking to the BG is the better choice. It also reveals more land files for what it's worth. But it depends how you value commerce vs shields. But I agree that if we walk to wines, we walk to the one NE and not N.
     
  7. jarred!

    jarred! Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2017
    Messages:
    331
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    W-S, NC
    I'll play tonight, I was seeing if anyone else has a strong opinion either way. I prefer working the BG first for military reasons, we'll double our production at pop1 giving us a warrior for exploration and one as an MP before we hit pop2. We'll have wines connected before we hit pop3 so we won't need to use the luxury slider early.
     
  8. Elephantium

    Elephantium Elephants think that people are cute, like puppies

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2006
    Messages:
    4,911
    Location:
    Minneapolis, MN
    I'm with tjs; road, then mine the wine tile. I don't think we'll lose in the first 20 turns based on having a Warrior on turn 10 instead of 5. Meanwhile, the extra commerce will give us a boost. What are you going to set for starting research?
     
  9. jarred!

    jarred! Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2017
    Messages:
    331
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    W-S, NC
    I was going BW first since we start with WC. After that, if we meet an industrious civ that we can trade for masonry, go for cats? IW would be more valuable if we have a mountainous start, and Wheel/HBR if we have a flat/plains start.
    Should we just beeline to Iron so we can (attempt to) deny our immediate neighbors of it?
     
  10. jarred!

    jarred! Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2017
    Messages:
    331
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    W-S, NC
    News: We meet the Japanese, but can't get The Wheel from them without giving them Warrior Code, so I don't do it. We defeated the warrior that we met as well.

    Log:
    Turn 1, 4000BC:
    Move worker 1NE and discover....another wines tiles and the coast.
    Move settler 1SE

    Turn 2, 3950BC:
    Worker roads
    Found Tenochtitlan>warrior
    Make citizen work wines
    Research to Bronze Working at 100%, due in 23 turns
    Treasury: 10g, 0gpt

    Turn 3, 3900BC:
    zzz

    Turn 4, 3850BC:
    zzz

    Turn 5, 3800BC:
    Worker finishes road, begins mine

    Turn 6, 3750BC:
    zzz

    Turn 7, 3700BC:
    zzz

    Turn 8, 3650BC:
    zzz

    Turn 9, 3600BC:
    zzz

    Turn 10, 3550BC:
    zzz

    Turn 11, 3500BC:
    Teno:warrior>rax (10T)
    worker finishes mine and moves to BG
    warrior heads south to scout city sites

    Turn 12, 3450BC:
    Borders expand
    Teno grows to size 2, new cit works BG
    worker mines
    warrior continues south

    Turn 13, 3400BC:
    warrior south again

    Turn 14, 3350BC:
    warrior discovers we seem to be out on the Yucatan

    Turn 15, 3300BC:
    warrior moves

    Turn 16, 3250BC:
    warrior moves

    Turn 17, 3200BC:
    warrior moves

    Turn 18, 3150BC:
    Teno: rax>archer
    worker finishes mine, begins road
    MEET THE JAPANESE
    We both only have starting techs. We don't have enough to get The Wheel. We'd have to give them Warrior Code.

    IBT:
    Japanese warrior attacks and loses!

    Turn 19, 3100BC:
    warrior heads to nearby mountain

    Turn 20, 3050BC:
    We learn Bronze Working, I set next tech to IW, but this can change

    The World:
    known world, 3050bc.png
     

    Attached Files:

  11. jarred!

    jarred! Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2017
    Messages:
    331
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    W-S, NC
    Roster:
    jarred-just played
    CKS-up
    tjs-on deck
    judminder
    suede
    Elephantium

    In this situation, I think we have to settle south aggressively and not dawdle in our tiny starting location. I like 3S or 2S,1SW for a first city, and maybe 2E,1S to keep it out of the war path. A city 6/7S of the capital would be a nice jumping off point, and potentially a useful canal later.
    I thought it was clear, but it might not be, that the Japanese came from the south. Us being up both WC and BW on them makes an early raid a tasty prospect.
     
  12. Elephantium

    Elephantium Elephants think that people are cute, like puppies

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2006
    Messages:
    4,911
    Location:
    Minneapolis, MN
    Point of information: 4000 BC is Turn 0, not Turn 1. Likewise, 3050BC shows up in-game as Turn 19, not Turn 20.

    Bummer about building a rax before the first settler. Paying maintenance while building that settler is a drag on our early economy.
     
  13. CKS

    CKS Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    2,344
    Well, we are probably not going to get overrun quickly with that nice mountainous choke. I agree that a canal would be nice 6S of the capital, but that city will be a lousy city - it is all mountains and coast. 4S also gives us a canal but has a better tile selection. Do we need a canal city there? That is hard to tell right now, but we shouldn't mess it up until we know the situation. We might not particularly need one, or we might want one farther south.

    I'll propose a dot map this evening.
     
  14. tjs282

    tjs282 Un(a)bashed immigrant

    Joined:
    May 19, 2009
    Messages:
    2,097
    Location:
    ...just here for the job/ handouts/ woman
    Oh wow. Loadsa food, no freshwater, and not much space. This is looking dangerously like another (60%?) Archi-map...

    If we're going to DoW everyone on sight, then we can't tech-trade (and since we don't appear to be beelining to GLib or a better gov, either), we will likely not get Construction/Ducts anytime soon. So we might as well found our towns assuming that they will top out at Pop6 for the foreseeable. Since the most imminent threat(s) will come from the south, I agree that we should settle southwards, but (much as I dislike ICS!) I think we should rather consider planting our core towns at CxC again in this game (at least N/E/S/W, tho' maybe CxxC diagonally). We can always Worker/Settler-abandon the in-betweeners later, if we decide we need to (or if the game goes as far as Electricity! ;) )

    Wasn't expecting the wars to start so soon, either. But now that things have kicked off, we are going to need a substantial stack of units to fight for us. Although we've got that fantastic Mountainous choke-point there, just perfect to inflict some serious attrition on the incoming, Tenoch isn't yet big enough to build sufficient Archers to staff it -- so I think it should still be building Warriors, not Archers just yet (without MP, or LUX%, it's going to riot on growth in 2T as well -- unless the Archer will finish on growth?).

    And I also kinda wish you had given the Japs WarCode for Wheel. It would have shown us where the Horses were (you never know...), and Toku might also then have started building (16-shield) Archers instead of (8-shield) Warriors. Why do we want him building Archers, I hear you cry? (I have good ears!) Because his Archers will lose >50% of their combat-rounds attacking our (10-shield) vWarriors fortified (+25% Def) in Mountains (+100% Def), whereas our vWarriors still have a ~50% prob of killing his Archers on the flat -- so we would likely lose fewer units/shields than he would. But now we're at war, we can't ever trade...
     
  15. SuedecivIII

    SuedecivIII Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2019
    Messages:
    78
    Depends if we're doing ICS or not. If we're doing ICS, I think 4S is ideal, then plant 2 south a little later. If not, 2S 1SW is best. That will allow us to road down south fastest, on a path that lets our worker mine 2 BGs.

    Whatever the case, I think we likely want a city on the tip of that jungle peninsula, and another one 2E1S to pick up that BG.

    As much as I love ICS, I should point out that we're teching IW and math, and we're an agri civ. So the possibility of aqueducts isn't too far in the distant future, if we're interested.

    Depend how the situation down south goes. We might run into fierce resistance down south, and draw up defensive lines. In that case we'd want more cities up north. Or we might just plow forward, and keep funneling settlers and military units to push farther. In that case we might get away with looser planting.

    Attached is a quick dot map. Purple would be good plants in all cases. All of them combined would cover all land tiles. Red circles are available spots (in addition to the purple ones) if we want to plant a little tighter. Yellow would be balls to the wall ICS if we want to start slaving swordsmen/horsemen.
     

    Attached Files:

  16. jarred!

    jarred! Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2017
    Messages:
    331
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    W-S, NC
    I guess CKS gets to play 11 then!

    Would a more 'default' opening be to produce warriors until pop 3-4 and then build a settler? I read some games where, as militaristic, barracks were built early. But I do understand the maintainence cost is a waste if we end up not building the archer or any other units before the settler.

    We are at 4spt with 2 turns done on the archer, so it won't finish on growth. Switching the build to a warrior would be an option if we wanted an MP.

    The 6S city would be rather poor, and maybe redundant if we plant a canal city to the north (neither of them may actually be needed), but would be important to control units coming north, especially if we're starting slowly.

    I realize I wasn't very clear, they wanted pottery and warrior code for the wheel, would you still make that trade? I probably wouldn't have pulled the trigger on the 1:1 trade either, admittedly. Would you also make the trade if we had BW instead of WC? Or if we had The Wheel and they had BW/WC? (i.e. rules for trading first tier military techs)
     
  17. CKS

    CKS Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    2,344
    I would have traded pottery and warrior code for the wheel, simply because we don't have the chance to trade much in this game, we need the wheel to see horses, and no-one else starts with the wheel. However, it isn't a big deal to me either way.

    Here is my proposed dotmap.
    CityDotMap.png
    It looks a little skewed, but it gives each town space for 6 citizens to work land tiles (except for light blue). Aquaducts and harbors will give the towns space to grow once that is a possibility.
     
  18. Elephantium

    Elephantium Elephants think that people are cute, like puppies

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2006
    Messages:
    4,911
    Location:
    Minneapolis, MN
    @jarred! Yah, I'd build a few reg military units, then the first Settler, then rax. It's a little more aggressive for growth (and risky if you meet multiple enemies right away!), but I like the economy boost. OTOH...looking again at the threads I linked, this is a typical set of opening moves. We'll be all right.

    @dotmaps: For sued's dotmap, I like how you've planned out all the cities in the area. There's a lot of overlap with CKS's map, and I think we can take those as given. There's a tradeoff with the purple ring between Tenoch and the red canal-city circle. It's generally good to leave the capital's BFC clear, but moving it next to the bananas lets it grow faster once we revolt to Monarchy. Thoughts?
     
  19. SuedecivIII

    SuedecivIII Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2019
    Messages:
    78
    Yeah it looks like we're in agreement except for the city on the west coast. That's an important one too, since it will likely be our second city.

    I think there are pretty solid arguments in favor of four spots (1S1SE, 2S1SE, 3S, 4S).

    The one thing I definitely feel though is our second city should be somewhere to the south. That will allow us to work the tiles of that city while building a pipeline down south to funnel units and settlers.
     
    Judminder likes this.
  20. CKS

    CKS Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    2,344
    I'm in agreement about growing toward the south. My vote for the second city is the blue dot (1S1SE of Tenochtitlan) rather than the SuedecivIII's purple ring on the west coast because blue dot has access to 3 BG tiles, while purple has only one. I'd like some more shields in our second town, and I don't think Tenochtitlan will work all its BG tiles - blue could take some. (Actually, since we have no rivers, we'll be hurting for commerce. Tenochtitlan may need to work the wines once we have other towns to build units.) Purple ring has several forests, but only one 2-shield tile to grow with. I don't like 3S just because it blocks 4S, where I think we'll want to build a canal city. 2S has access to 4 BG, but only after a cultural expansion or the planting of two more towns. 4S feels too far away for city #2.

    Edit: Thoughts about research? Are we okay staying with iron working? It is 30 turns at max right now (once the road completes).

    If we are on an archipelago map, alphabet needs to come up soon. We can build curraghs, meet AI while we still have something to trade, and declare without consequences. If we delay it too long, then we won't have anything to trade. If we aren't on islands, then alphabet is only a tech needed on the way to catapults and the great library.
     
    Last edited: May 2, 2019

Share This Page