I agree with you Reagan. I am also starting to see trading WM every turn as an exploit. No way a human player would trade his entire income every turn for an unchanging WM, like the AI often does. The AI would never give 1gpt for a WM (besides early in the game or when something major has been discovered), so it is really just a loophole that we are all taking advantage of.
LK38 - PTW, Deity Challenge
- Thread starter LKendter
- Start date
Sirian
Designer, Mohawk Games
The problem with AI sneak attacks is that this is the only way the AI declares war. They never outright declare.
I'm not talking about refused threats, or having spy activity caught. These are provocations. The AI never declares war without such a provocation except by sneak attack.
This whole aspect of the game is broken. IMHO.
With a broken game element, there is no happy solution. Since the AI is specifically programmed to keep its war plans secret until it has at least one unit in attack position, I consider it fair game. The AI will HAPPILY cheat the Hell out of you if you happen to sign any goods-for-payments deals with it. I got burned by enough of those, in the early days, that I will never be satisfied that I've obtained enough revenge until such time as this broken game element is fixed. While it remains broken, the AI is designed to lie, cheat and steal, in regard to signing deals while it has ALREADY GONE TO WAR WITH YOU, you just don't know it yet because the sneak attack is in progress.
Can this be exploited? Yes, it can. Is this exploitation good for the game? I don't know. I do consider it "fair" to the AI.
Making a deal with a dying civ is similar, and both come with risks.
Look what happened with my German deal. Germany did not die out quickly, as I expected. With just two nothing towns left on an island, I figured the Mongols would unload some ships up there and it would be over quickly. That didn't happen.
We STILL got a good deal on Nationalism. The price from any other trading partner was more than 270gpt. I paid 127gpt plus Industrialization. I made sure not to trade Germany any lux or goods as part of the deal.
There's an equal risk with the "Cheat the Cheater" move of buying tech for gpt from invaders. What if they don't attack? What if some other civ pulls their puppet strings? I have had it happen to me! I've paid big gpt for techs and had to eat the whole deal, because I misread the incoming attack. That doesn't happen often, but it can happen, especially on Pangaea and larger maps, with lots of AI's running hither and thither.
Bottom line for me remains the game balance. Should we let the AI have its sneak attacks with no means to fight back? I don't think so. I LIKE that it sneak attacks, but I DO NOT like that it does nothing else. That's pathetic. If it were less predictable, it would be less exploitable. In the mean time, I can and will play without swindling the cowardly swindler as a tactical option, in any games where the host wants to take it off the table. If it's not off the table, I have no qualms about using it because I don't consider it wrong. The AI is deliberately set up to function in such a slimy way. I say let it reap what it sows.
In my view of game balance, I don't see it as appropriate to remove an option from the player that the AI is programmed to use. That's why I consider it fair to be allowed to scroll ahead to change build orders. (Ever seen four wonders complete ON THE SAME TURN? I have. That's the AI scrolling ahead to swap its wonder to a different one after the one it was building was finished by another civ). This is also why I consider RoP abuse UNfair: the AI doesn't do any mass RoP abuse. It only does single-unit RoP abuse. So citing its single-unit RoP abuse as grounds to line up your entire army in attack position outside its cities is unbalanced and unreasonable.
Well, the AI will sign YOU to deals while it already knows it's coming to attack you. Something here ought to be fixed. Either the AI should refuse your deals (giving away that it is on a sneak attack, but that's another story), or it should RECONSIDER its attack plan after signing such a deal. If it were changes to be less predictable, less single-mindedly stupid, the game would be more fun.
Right now, it's not really fun, or fair, either way. If you don't set up the lying, backstabbing sneak attacker to pay a price for their sliminess, then you let them get away with betraying you. It becomes a cheat or be cheated scenario, with no fair outcome, only someone on top and someone on the bottom, and in that case, I consider fighting back diplomatically to be self-defense. The player should NOT be required to bend over and take it gladly. That is not what "honor" is really about, you know.
It's broken... and I hope someday it will get fixed. Either way they fix it is OK with me. Until then... you know where I stand.
As for maps... the AI's trade maps ALL THE TIME. They trade pennies back and forth and keep each other informed. If you get in on the action by trading maps yourself, you pay for your own map info by reselling it to others. The whole thing brings in pennies, only pennies.
The only factor there that CAN be exploited is that there is a minimum 1g cost for any map info at all. So you could explore fog with one movement, sell that one new tile of info (which is rightfully only worth a fraction of one gold) to all the AI's for 1g, move your unit again and bust another tile of fog, sell for 1g to all, repeat and repeat, whereas if you just moved the whole movement at once, and then sold, you'd only get 1g from each total. THAT can be exploitive in situations where every penny counts. You turn .05g map info into 1g cash, over and over, you pull something unfair out of the system, something for nothing. HOWEVER, if you selling a bona fide 1g worth of map info for 1g, I don't see a problem.
Short of that, you're worrying over nothing. The AI's trade their maps every single turn in later turns when they have mature borders and lots of units roaming. (Each time their units pass by each other, is a chance for them to open negotionations, so the more units near other AI units, the more often they offer each other deals).
Map trades are important FOR THE MAP INFORMATION. I guess I'm in the minority in considering current intelligence on the map important. But hey, what do I know?
- Sirian
I'm not talking about refused threats, or having spy activity caught. These are provocations. The AI never declares war without such a provocation except by sneak attack.
This whole aspect of the game is broken. IMHO.
With a broken game element, there is no happy solution. Since the AI is specifically programmed to keep its war plans secret until it has at least one unit in attack position, I consider it fair game. The AI will HAPPILY cheat the Hell out of you if you happen to sign any goods-for-payments deals with it. I got burned by enough of those, in the early days, that I will never be satisfied that I've obtained enough revenge until such time as this broken game element is fixed. While it remains broken, the AI is designed to lie, cheat and steal, in regard to signing deals while it has ALREADY GONE TO WAR WITH YOU, you just don't know it yet because the sneak attack is in progress.
Can this be exploited? Yes, it can. Is this exploitation good for the game? I don't know. I do consider it "fair" to the AI.
Making a deal with a dying civ is similar, and both come with risks.
Look what happened with my German deal. Germany did not die out quickly, as I expected. With just two nothing towns left on an island, I figured the Mongols would unload some ships up there and it would be over quickly. That didn't happen.
We STILL got a good deal on Nationalism. The price from any other trading partner was more than 270gpt. I paid 127gpt plus Industrialization. I made sure not to trade Germany any lux or goods as part of the deal.
There's an equal risk with the "Cheat the Cheater" move of buying tech for gpt from invaders. What if they don't attack? What if some other civ pulls their puppet strings? I have had it happen to me! I've paid big gpt for techs and had to eat the whole deal, because I misread the incoming attack. That doesn't happen often, but it can happen, especially on Pangaea and larger maps, with lots of AI's running hither and thither.
Bottom line for me remains the game balance. Should we let the AI have its sneak attacks with no means to fight back? I don't think so. I LIKE that it sneak attacks, but I DO NOT like that it does nothing else. That's pathetic. If it were less predictable, it would be less exploitable. In the mean time, I can and will play without swindling the cowardly swindler as a tactical option, in any games where the host wants to take it off the table. If it's not off the table, I have no qualms about using it because I don't consider it wrong. The AI is deliberately set up to function in such a slimy way. I say let it reap what it sows.
In my view of game balance, I don't see it as appropriate to remove an option from the player that the AI is programmed to use. That's why I consider it fair to be allowed to scroll ahead to change build orders. (Ever seen four wonders complete ON THE SAME TURN? I have. That's the AI scrolling ahead to swap its wonder to a different one after the one it was building was finished by another civ). This is also why I consider RoP abuse UNfair: the AI doesn't do any mass RoP abuse. It only does single-unit RoP abuse. So citing its single-unit RoP abuse as grounds to line up your entire army in attack position outside its cities is unbalanced and unreasonable.
Well, the AI will sign YOU to deals while it already knows it's coming to attack you. Something here ought to be fixed. Either the AI should refuse your deals (giving away that it is on a sneak attack, but that's another story), or it should RECONSIDER its attack plan after signing such a deal. If it were changes to be less predictable, less single-mindedly stupid, the game would be more fun.
Right now, it's not really fun, or fair, either way. If you don't set up the lying, backstabbing sneak attacker to pay a price for their sliminess, then you let them get away with betraying you. It becomes a cheat or be cheated scenario, with no fair outcome, only someone on top and someone on the bottom, and in that case, I consider fighting back diplomatically to be self-defense. The player should NOT be required to bend over and take it gladly. That is not what "honor" is really about, you know.
It's broken... and I hope someday it will get fixed. Either way they fix it is OK with me. Until then... you know where I stand.
As for maps... the AI's trade maps ALL THE TIME. They trade pennies back and forth and keep each other informed. If you get in on the action by trading maps yourself, you pay for your own map info by reselling it to others. The whole thing brings in pennies, only pennies.
The only factor there that CAN be exploited is that there is a minimum 1g cost for any map info at all. So you could explore fog with one movement, sell that one new tile of info (which is rightfully only worth a fraction of one gold) to all the AI's for 1g, move your unit again and bust another tile of fog, sell for 1g to all, repeat and repeat, whereas if you just moved the whole movement at once, and then sold, you'd only get 1g from each total. THAT can be exploitive in situations where every penny counts. You turn .05g map info into 1g cash, over and over, you pull something unfair out of the system, something for nothing. HOWEVER, if you selling a bona fide 1g worth of map info for 1g, I don't see a problem.
Short of that, you're worrying over nothing. The AI's trade their maps every single turn in later turns when they have mature borders and lots of units roaming. (Each time their units pass by each other, is a chance for them to open negotionations, so the more units near other AI units, the more often they offer each other deals).
Map trades are important FOR THE MAP INFORMATION. I guess I'm in the minority in considering current intelligence on the map important. But hey, what do I know?
- Sirian
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2001
- Messages
- 20,064
@Gothmog - why did you trade goods to Germany with the known diplomatic screw over possibility?
1000 AD - The one thing that is scares me in the goods to a possible dead civ with Germany.
To make matters worse, we are dependent on a the goods going through a Persian port
The next 18 turns will be very scary, as we can't afford to lose our right for gpt trading. To make matters worse, Persia is at war Germany.
The only build change I make is Hippo to infantry. I want to start getting at least one infantry a city, and I don't want to depend too much on upgrades as we need every dime for techs.
I cancel two workers mining by hopelessly corrupt Minsk.
1010 AD - With Russia getting pounded on by the Mongols, I give Cathy education for $9 and a worker. I would rather us have the worker. I wont' repeat my German mistake.
It must have been a while since maps were traded, as I am getting several bucks from each civ. Scandinavia gave me $12.
(I) I did it just in time, as the Mongols have wiped out the Russians.
1040 AD - Look at the picture below
Yes, that is the Airport symbol by Persia!
(I) India and Germany sign a peace treaty.
1050 AD - I don't know what suddenly stopped our deal with Germany.
Were are at least partially screwed
Scandinavia is doubtful for refining at $2121, but would never accept such a deal if we add $1/turn.
We are also screwed with Korea on gpt.
Refining is starting to show up, but India will still take gpt and needs our wines, so I will wait for them to get refining. Plus I would to get it at a lower civ price.
(I) Our Ivory supply now cost $1/turn more.
Our incense supply now cost $1/turn more.
WTH? Now Scandinavia will take gpt for the incense? I guess we are just screwed on buying tech.
The Mongols get the last India city, and I get to watch 2 cavalry armies go bye.
OUCH - I missed one earlier - Cadiz was building a bank, yet it didn't have a factory yet. At 16 shields after corruption, a factory is worth the bother.
1060 AD (I) Persia eliminates the Germans.
WAHOOO - Korea and Mongols ally vs. Persia.
India and Mongols sign a peace treaty.
Our gems deal goes gets $2/turn added to the price.
India declares war on the Mongols
1070 AD - Persia is in Anarchy, the tech leader is dropping out of Democracy [dance]
1080 AD - GACK, now the Mongols, India and Persia won't take tech for gpt. We are really screwed now.
I seem to remember that tech stealing has a better chance under anarchy. I spend 2972 to attempt a theft and we get caught
We are at war with Persia. Well so much for acquiring steel and using to get it to get refining.
Sorry guys, but I felt this was our best chance.
1090 AD (I) India and Persia sign a trade embargo against us.
Here is a screen I haven't seen to often, and hope not to see again.
1100 AD - Korea needs rubber, and will give us $32/turn for it.
Summary - If we are going to win this game, there is no question that Persia must take a beating.
I think a war with Persia is almost guaranteed, or they will launch way before us.
The trouble is a Mongol war is probably coming soon.
@All - did I weed out with trying to steal a tech from Persia?
LKendter
Reagan (currently playing)
Sirian (on deck)
Gothmog
Speaker
Remember, 10 turns per round from now on - STRICT 24 hours got it, total 48 to complete.
http://www.civfanatics.net/uploads3/LK38-1100AD.zip
1000 AD - The one thing that is scares me in the goods to a possible dead civ with Germany.
To make matters worse, we are dependent on a the goods going through a Persian port
The next 18 turns will be very scary, as we can't afford to lose our right for gpt trading. To make matters worse, Persia is at war Germany.
The only build change I make is Hippo to infantry. I want to start getting at least one infantry a city, and I don't want to depend too much on upgrades as we need every dime for techs.
I cancel two workers mining by hopelessly corrupt Minsk.
1010 AD - With Russia getting pounded on by the Mongols, I give Cathy education for $9 and a worker. I would rather us have the worker. I wont' repeat my German mistake.
It must have been a while since maps were traded, as I am getting several bucks from each civ. Scandinavia gave me $12.
(I) I did it just in time, as the Mongols have wiped out the Russians.
1040 AD - Look at the picture below
Yes, that is the Airport symbol by Persia!
(I) India and Germany sign a peace treaty.
1050 AD - I don't know what suddenly stopped our deal with Germany.
Were are at least partially screwed
Scandinavia is doubtful for refining at $2121, but would never accept such a deal if we add $1/turn.
We are also screwed with Korea on gpt.
Refining is starting to show up, but India will still take gpt and needs our wines, so I will wait for them to get refining. Plus I would to get it at a lower civ price.
(I) Our Ivory supply now cost $1/turn more.
Our incense supply now cost $1/turn more.
WTH? Now Scandinavia will take gpt for the incense? I guess we are just screwed on buying tech.
The Mongols get the last India city, and I get to watch 2 cavalry armies go bye.
OUCH - I missed one earlier - Cadiz was building a bank, yet it didn't have a factory yet. At 16 shields after corruption, a factory is worth the bother.
1060 AD (I) Persia eliminates the Germans.
WAHOOO - Korea and Mongols ally vs. Persia.
India and Mongols sign a peace treaty.
Our gems deal goes gets $2/turn added to the price.
India declares war on the Mongols
1070 AD - Persia is in Anarchy, the tech leader is dropping out of Democracy [dance]
1080 AD - GACK, now the Mongols, India and Persia won't take tech for gpt. We are really screwed now.
I seem to remember that tech stealing has a better chance under anarchy. I spend 2972 to attempt a theft and we get caught
We are at war with Persia. Well so much for acquiring steel and using to get it to get refining.Sorry guys, but I felt this was our best chance.
1090 AD (I) India and Persia sign a trade embargo against us.
Here is a screen I haven't seen to often, and hope not to see again.
1100 AD - Korea needs rubber, and will give us $32/turn for it.
Summary - If we are going to win this game, there is no question that Persia must take a beating.
I think a war with Persia is almost guaranteed, or they will launch way before us.
The trouble is a Mongol war is probably coming soon.
@All - did I weed out with trying to steal a tech from Persia?
LKendter
Reagan (currently playing)
Sirian (on deck)
Gothmog
Speaker
Remember, 10 turns per round from now on - STRICT 24 hours got it, total 48 to complete.
http://www.civfanatics.net/uploads3/LK38-1100AD.zip
Sirian
Designer, Mohawk Games
The tech steal was a gamble, but imagine if it had worked! We'd be in much better position. Now... we're not, but still a lot of game left to go.
War with Mongolia can be avoided by signing MPP with them. That means forgoing trades of any kind with any of their enemies, and wouldn't be my first choice, but we surely don't want to tackle both Persia and Mongolia at the same time, so it's worth considering. The Mongols will NOT attack us if we have MPP signed with them and are at war with all their enemies. A military alliance with them vs Persia would be another possibility.
Heck, if we could sign every civ in the world to alliance vs Persia, that might be best of all. Of course, that means honoring the alliance, to be sure to have the option again in future.
How did we end up with a wrecked reputation again? I must have missed the offending deal(s) in the reports.
Anyway, however we got to where we stand now, these are our cards and it's our load to play out the hand.
- Sirian
War with Mongolia can be avoided by signing MPP with them. That means forgoing trades of any kind with any of their enemies, and wouldn't be my first choice, but we surely don't want to tackle both Persia and Mongolia at the same time, so it's worth considering. The Mongols will NOT attack us if we have MPP signed with them and are at war with all their enemies. A military alliance with them vs Persia would be another possibility.
Heck, if we could sign every civ in the world to alliance vs Persia, that might be best of all. Of course, that means honoring the alliance, to be sure to have the option again in future.
How did we end up with a wrecked reputation again? I must have missed the offending deal(s) in the reports.
Anyway, however we got to where we stand now, these are our cards and it's our load to play out the hand.
- Sirian
It's appropriate that Sirian's post has card references, because I just finished my poker game tonight and decided to check-in on this SG before crashing into bed. I wish this game were going as well as my poker game went. It appears things aren't so grand in the kingdom of Carthage.
A wise sage has asked how we could have gotten ourselves into a reputation fiasco. Well, from the archives of a previous leader of Carthage, who shall remain nameless (his initials are G.o.t.h.m.o.g.): "We need RP so I trade Iron, SP, WM, Wine (India no longer wants ours), Horses, and 140gpt to Germany for it (we may get out of some of this gpt as they only have 1 city left - sound familiar?)." Germany's demise meant that we could not uphold our end of the goods-for-tech bargain, thus we get the reputation hit for Persia's extermination of Germany.
There is no confusion about what the AI will and won't accept per-turn deals for. They will likely not give us hard goods (e.g., tech, workers, etc.) for per-turn compensation. They will give us per-turn deals for per-turn deals (e.g., a luxury from them for 20 gpt from us).
We're in a world of hurt. I'll try to keep us from digging deeper in our hole during my turn, which will be played tomorrow when I'm not bleary eyed and still thinking about whether the odds of drawing to a gutshot straight when there are three of the card I need left in the deck vs. the amount of money the pot is offering me justifies a call.
If anyone has any thoughts about the direction we should take, please feel free to voice them. We appear to be at a really critical stage in this game, so let's make sure we're all on the same page before we continue. If only we could check-raise semi-bluff Persia with our not-so-great hand and sucker them into folding.
A wise sage has asked how we could have gotten ourselves into a reputation fiasco. Well, from the archives of a previous leader of Carthage, who shall remain nameless (his initials are G.o.t.h.m.o.g.): "We need RP so I trade Iron, SP, WM, Wine (India no longer wants ours), Horses, and 140gpt to Germany for it (we may get out of some of this gpt as they only have 1 city left - sound familiar?)." Germany's demise meant that we could not uphold our end of the goods-for-tech bargain, thus we get the reputation hit for Persia's extermination of Germany.
There is no confusion about what the AI will and won't accept per-turn deals for. They will likely not give us hard goods (e.g., tech, workers, etc.) for per-turn compensation. They will give us per-turn deals for per-turn deals (e.g., a luxury from them for 20 gpt from us).
We're in a world of hurt. I'll try to keep us from digging deeper in our hole during my turn, which will be played tomorrow when I'm not bleary eyed and still thinking about whether the odds of drawing to a gutshot straight when there are three of the card I need left in the deck vs. the amount of money the pot is offering me justifies a call.
If anyone has any thoughts about the direction we should take, please feel free to voice them. We appear to be at a really critical stage in this game, so let's make sure we're all on the same page before we continue. If only we could check-raise semi-bluff Persia with our not-so-great hand and sucker them into folding.
Sirian
Designer, Mohawk Games
Well the sad part of that is, little Germany with its two mighty island villages, probably paid us a combined 6gpt or thereabouts for us throwing in those resources in that deal. Resource value is directly proportional to civ size/power.
Well, who wanted a boring "cruise to diplo victory" finish anyway.
Saddle up, boys! We're going to war! :shotgun: :arrow:
- Sirian
Well, who wanted a boring "cruise to diplo victory" finish anyway.
Saddle up, boys! We're going to war! :shotgun: :arrow:
- Sirian
The link to the most recent version of the game is broken (the file name was missing the "_"). Who was it cracking the 
about checking one's links after posting the .zip? Hmmm . . . [dance]. The corrected link appears below.
http://www.civfanatics.net/uploads3/LK38-1100_AD.zip
about checking one's links after posting the .zip? Hmmm . . . [dance]. The corrected link appears below.http://www.civfanatics.net/uploads3/LK38-1100_AD.zip
Sirian
Designer, Mohawk Games
Hehe, those who live by the whip shall, erm, well you get the idea.
I too have felt a boomerang lashing from time to time.
But... for whom exactly are you correcting the link, Reagan? You're the one playing. I don't need a link to LK's result. I need a link to yours. This afternoon would be a handy time for me to slip this in here. Uh... most of tomorrow is busy.
- Sirian
I too have felt a boomerang lashing from time to time.
But... for whom exactly are you correcting the link, Reagan? You're the one playing. I don't need a link to LK's result. I need a link to yours. This afternoon would be a handy time for me to slip this in here. Uh... most of tomorrow is busy.
- Sirian
I know some people like to look at the game even if it's not their turn. There are also others who enjoy shadowing games they find interesting. The correction was made for the benefit of all man(and woman)kind, including those folks.
I will give a good effort towards completing my turn this afternoon.
I will give a good effort towards completing my turn this afternoon.
Pre-turn: MM several cities to increase growth without slowing production time. We need to remember that the speed of production now is measured in turns and not in shields. In other words, unless we can shave a turn off of a units build time, food is more important than shields. Our humble civ honorably retired several of its warrior units, which were costing 1 gpt each while contributing very little to our military power rating. We had all kinds of Teamsters (workers) who were sitting idle (the idle part is redundant and the Teamsters-as-workers reference contradictory, I know) in our territory, while there were unimproved tiles and tiles that should shift from mines to irrigation within our borders. In the words of Homer Simpson: I always wanted to be a Teamster . . . so lazy and surly. 
I finally said enough and imposed martial law, signed an executive order officially declaring such union activities to be seditious, and ordered them off their butts and back to work!
Military summary: I decided to see if we can fight our war with Persia without help from anyone. They picked a few spots to bombard at our new city sites and almost immediately took Tblisi, which the Mongols then captured and subsequently lost to Persia. Mongols and Korea signed an MPP, which was almost immediately triggered and resulted in Korea declaring against India. I focused our production on a mix of artillery and infantry, while completing infrastructure improvements in many cities.
Diplomacy summary: With our income at a pretty high level, I decided it sure would be nice to be able to buy tech with gpt. Persia gave us peace and Steel for 390 gpt. I then brokered Steel around to: India for 318gp+101gpt, Korea for 210gp+78gpt, Mongols for 563gp+46gpt, and to the Vikes+710gp for Refining. Net cost for Steel and Refining, at least twenty turns of peace with Persia, and 381gp = 165gpt. We lost our Persian spy on the next turn. When I went to replant him, the Jerk caught us and re-declared war. I assure you that I had no intention of this happening. I thought that he would not re-declare while our peace deal was in effect. On my last turn, after failed attempts on prior turns, we finally re-established a spy in Persia, who promptly stole Atomic Theory from the Jerk. I sold it around for: 98gp+128gpt from Korea, Communism+2gpt+Oil+713gp from Mongolia, 643gp from Vikes, and 36gp+18gpt from India.
Foreign Relations summary: Persia has begun Hoover Dam. Persia and Korea are now at peace. We have RoP agreements, without gpt payments, with all civs but Persia. That has brought everyone to Polite status with us, with the exception of Annoyed Korea. Korea is providing us Spices+5gpt for Coal. I acquired Furs from the Mongols in order to deal with our post-hospitals population growth.
Domestic Summary: I put the native Teamsters to work as citizens/taxpayers in core cities. We have a couple of stragglers on pollution detail and have our foreign involuntary laborers completing improvement of tiles in our wonderful land. We are no longer conducting research of any kind. Our GDP is a wonderful 1176gpt and our treasury has 6054gp in it. [dance]
Looking forward: We have sufficient net income to attempt a tech steal every three turns or so. We should consider doing that until we reach tech parity and then beginning our own research. We could then begin a pre-build for the UN and have a real shot at it, not that a diplo victory is too likely (but we can always hope). Unfortunately, we have no domestic Oil. Fortunately, there is some in the Mongol territory east of Rusaddir, which we could pretty easily take if a war broke out with Mongolia. We also have a lot of outdated units that either need to be upgraded or disbanded. The two remaining warriors can be retired next turn. Persia has two cities on our continent, which we could take in order to force peace concessions, if we want.
Our fate passes to your more-than-capable hands, Sirian.
http://www.civfanatics.net/uploads3/LK38-1200AD.zip
I finally said enough and imposed martial law, signed an executive order officially declaring such union activities to be seditious, and ordered them off their butts and back to work! Military summary: I decided to see if we can fight our war with Persia without help from anyone. They picked a few spots to bombard at our new city sites and almost immediately took Tblisi, which the Mongols then captured and subsequently lost to Persia. Mongols and Korea signed an MPP, which was almost immediately triggered and resulted in Korea declaring against India. I focused our production on a mix of artillery and infantry, while completing infrastructure improvements in many cities.
Diplomacy summary: With our income at a pretty high level, I decided it sure would be nice to be able to buy tech with gpt. Persia gave us peace and Steel for 390 gpt. I then brokered Steel around to: India for 318gp+101gpt, Korea for 210gp+78gpt, Mongols for 563gp+46gpt, and to the Vikes+710gp for Refining. Net cost for Steel and Refining, at least twenty turns of peace with Persia, and 381gp = 165gpt. We lost our Persian spy on the next turn. When I went to replant him, the Jerk caught us and re-declared war. I assure you that I had no intention of this happening. I thought that he would not re-declare while our peace deal was in effect. On my last turn, after failed attempts on prior turns, we finally re-established a spy in Persia, who promptly stole Atomic Theory from the Jerk. I sold it around for: 98gp+128gpt from Korea, Communism+2gpt+Oil+713gp from Mongolia, 643gp from Vikes, and 36gp+18gpt from India.
Foreign Relations summary: Persia has begun Hoover Dam. Persia and Korea are now at peace. We have RoP agreements, without gpt payments, with all civs but Persia. That has brought everyone to Polite status with us, with the exception of Annoyed Korea. Korea is providing us Spices+5gpt for Coal. I acquired Furs from the Mongols in order to deal with our post-hospitals population growth.
Domestic Summary: I put the native Teamsters to work as citizens/taxpayers in core cities. We have a couple of stragglers on pollution detail and have our foreign involuntary laborers completing improvement of tiles in our wonderful land. We are no longer conducting research of any kind. Our GDP is a wonderful 1176gpt and our treasury has 6054gp in it. [dance]
Looking forward: We have sufficient net income to attempt a tech steal every three turns or so. We should consider doing that until we reach tech parity and then beginning our own research. We could then begin a pre-build for the UN and have a real shot at it, not that a diplo victory is too likely (but we can always hope). Unfortunately, we have no domestic Oil. Fortunately, there is some in the Mongol territory east of Rusaddir, which we could pretty easily take if a war broke out with Mongolia. We also have a lot of outdated units that either need to be upgraded or disbanded. The two remaining warriors can be retired next turn. Persia has two cities on our continent, which we could take in order to force peace concessions, if we want.
Our fate passes to your more-than-capable hands, Sirian.
http://www.civfanatics.net/uploads3/LK38-1200AD.zip
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2001
- Messages
- 20,064
Persia has begun Hoover Dam.
I hope we have a pre-build going somewhere
=================================
LKendter
Reagan
Sirian (currently playing)
Gothmog (on deck)
Speaker
Remember, 10 turns per round from now on - STRICT 24 hours got it, total 48 to complete.
I hope we have a pre-build going somewhere
=================================
LKendter
Reagan
Sirian (currently playing)
Gothmog (on deck)
Speaker
Remember, 10 turns per round from now on - STRICT 24 hours got it, total 48 to complete.
Sirian
Designer, Mohawk Games
I could not disagree more with this assertion. There is a flaw in this thinking. I urged you not to disband any of our units, and you've vetoed that. Out of my hands, but no way any others will be decommissioned on my watch.
Combat is not the only use for units. Units are needed for flip suppression garrisons, for MP duty if we end up back in militaristic government (likely if war is our path to victory), for rapid pacification of resistors in captured cities, and for all sorts of other sundry duties for which obsolete units are suited, such as shore blockades, pillagers, decoys, rail patrol (to keep the line open through our territory or especially friendly allied territory) and more.
Disbanding units does not increase our production capacity to build combat units. The pennies saved at this point on upkeep costs are beyond negligible. It's possible to choke on too many units in some variants, in the middle ages, but that doesn't apply here.
I see this as a strategic mistake. The choice is not between having 20 modern units and 20 obsolete units vs having 40 modern units. The choice is between having 20 and 20 vs 20 and NONE. That latter is clearly weaker, and could be decisively weaker in some situations. If I run into any situation where I need another warm body and none are available, expect me to draft just to get a unit to do something that a disbanded regular warrior could have taken care of.
This is the same thought process by which Lee prefers all vet units. I started there when I started playing Civ3, but I've since learned better. I happily build many regular warriors in the early game and never get rid of any of them, because there is always a use for them, and there is always some benefit to having such extras around.
I finally persuaded Lee to stop balking at nonvet units in the early game. I believe they still grate on his nerves, but moving past such considerations is what has enabled him to play on Deity now.
First our rep goes in the drink, now our extra units are discarded. You guys really want to make this end game challenging, eh?
And we have a prebuild waiting to snag Hoover? Somehow I'm guessing not. I'll see if I can pop a leader. Not much time, though.
We are "blessed" to be playing in interesting times.
OK, I got it.
- Sirian
I do remember saying something along the lines of "Carthage is building a rifleman, but can be switched to Intelligence Agency the next player thinks we will get Economics in the next 6 turns." Implied in this was that Carthage would use the Military Academy, at 6 turns to build, as a prebuild for Hoover. Has the Intelligence Agency been built?
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2001
- Messages
- 20,064
I finally persuaded Lee to stop balking at nonvet units in the early game. I believe they still grate on his nerves, but moving past such considerations is what has enabled him to play on Deity now.
Me thinkest somebody overrates his influence
The main influence you had over me was "people = power".
I still get vet units going as soon possible, the only real difference is I concede regular warriors and an occasion regular spearman until I get a chance for barracks.
However, I do agree with you on obsolete units.
I have been know to take cavalry along with my tank stack late in the game. Why? - It never fails that the I will find some spearman, longbow or over out of date units at the bottom on a stack. This lets me keep the tanks on the heavy weight units.
If you really get in a unit shortage, you can leave the center of you empire defended with the junk. The AI considers an easy target as an EMPTY city - why tempt fate? A musket isn't an empty city.
Emergency upgrades - if you have cash heavy like us - upgrade muskets for extra infantry asap.
Junk attackers - I have already sent old swordsman against the ai to either:
1) Kill some junk 1 hp defense units (longbowmen)
2) Steal some workers with warriors, just to avoid risking the good units.
@speaker - I planted a SPY in Persia - intelligence agency was built.
Battlefield medince was not built so that we had a fallback for the shields if we missed on Hoover.
Me thinkest somebody overrates his influence The main influence you had over me was "people = power".
I still get vet units going as soon possible, the only real difference is I concede regular warriors and an occasion regular spearman until I get a chance for barracks.
However, I do agree with you on obsolete units.
I have been know to take cavalry along with my tank stack late in the game. Why? - It never fails that the I will find some spearman, longbow or over out of date units at the bottom on a stack. This lets me keep the tanks on the heavy weight units.
If you really get in a unit shortage, you can leave the center of you empire defended with the junk. The AI considers an easy target as an EMPTY city - why tempt fate? A musket isn't an empty city.
Emergency upgrades - if you have cash heavy like us - upgrade muskets for extra infantry asap.
Junk attackers - I have already sent old swordsman against the ai to either:
1) Kill some junk 1 hp defense units (longbowmen)
2) Steal some workers with warriors, just to avoid risking the good units.
@speaker - I planted a SPY in Persia - intelligence agency was built.
Battlefield medince was not built so that we had a fallback for the shields if we missed on Hoover.
@Sirian -- I re-read all your posts on pages 5-9 and did not see any comments about not disbanding obsolete units. If they were in a post previous to that, I must have missed them or they slipped my mind. I did not make a conscious decision to "veto" any directive you gave. When I inherited the game, I felt we were paying a significant percentage of our GDP in military costs. At the time I disbanded the units, it seemed like an either-or proposition between old and new units. That was especially true because of our apparent need to pay cash (thus having to pinch pennies at every opportunity) for techs. After the tech trading, it is clear that the 9 gpt saved is a drop in the bucket for our economy. That said, I will be beyond shocked if the loss of fewer than ten warriors causes our doom. Our game has problems, but that isn't one of them.
@all -- I did not inherit a pre-build for Hoover and did not start one because I thought we were SOL for any chance to get it, given our situation.
@all -- I did not inherit a pre-build for Hoover and did not start one because I thought we were SOL for any chance to get it, given our situation.
Your wish is my command. One pre-build coming up! How can that be, you ask? Well, we <ahem> "acquired" Atomic Theory at the end of my last turn. I, like you, had absolutely no hope that we would be in a position to have a shot at building Hoover. As it is, that thought is probably accurate because Persia started work on it at least four turns before we got AT.
Sirian
Designer, Mohawk Games
We have exactly three workers and sixteen slaves as I start my round. What is the plan here?
* To become inundated with pollution (because we can't clean it up fast enough)?
* To let Persian bomber fleets off their carriers strip our coastal cities bare (because we can't repair the damage fast enough)?
* To forego construction of fortified positions to better control the battlefield (because what few workers we do have are trying to catch up to the pollution and repair tasks?)
* To forego any use of radar towers (because we don't have workers to spend to build any)?
* To forego military engineers to improve logistics to the front?
* To add more of those invaluable taxmen to our maxed out city populations?
![[pimp]](/images/smilies/pimp.gif "Pimp [pimp]")
Sirian goes hoarse screaming at his monitor! News at eleven.
:rant: :saiyan:
And here I was complaining about getting rid of a bunch of old military units. Well the good news is, I drafted many of the workers that got added into the cities, and we don't have the unit shortage problem any more.
Full report to follow.
- Sirian
* To become inundated with pollution (because we can't clean it up fast enough)?
* To let Persian bomber fleets off their carriers strip our coastal cities bare (because we can't repair the damage fast enough)?
* To forego construction of fortified positions to better control the battlefield (because what few workers we do have are trying to catch up to the pollution and repair tasks?)
* To forego any use of radar towers (because we don't have workers to spend to build any)?
* To forego military engineers to improve logistics to the front?
* To add more of those invaluable taxmen to our maxed out city populations?
Sirian goes hoarse screaming at his monitor! News at eleven.
:rant: :saiyan:And here I was complaining about getting rid of a bunch of old military units. Well the good news is, I drafted many of the workers that got added into the cities, and we don't have the unit shortage problem any more.
Full report to follow.
- Sirian
