Monarchists' Cookbook I

[futurehermit]

So, basically, waiting for him to put a shrine down is probably a doubtful proposition at best...

 

[Nares]

However, war with Saladin will strike a heavy blow to our economy, since we're relying on him and the civs beyond him for our lucrative trade routes.

Saladin's trade routes are worth 1cpt more than your own internal routes (currently 2cpt for ToA Berlins).

Not exactly worth crying over. I also don't believe anyone has trade routes with any other AI.

One thing to note is that foreign trade routes won't really open up until players start building harbors. Also worth noting is that no one befriended Toku, so there aren't many foreign trade routes available.

I don't agree with expanding around him. Distance costs will be crippling, essentially turning all those "free" Great Lighthouse cities into net losses when they're founded. Building courthouses will be time consuming, and you could instead conserve commerce in order to build a stronger tech lead.

I chose to build a stronger core from which to expand, rather than overextending my position in order to pick up a few more resources. For what it's worth, I haven't even explored most of the worthwhile land east of Saladin, so I don't actually "know" the option even exists.

 

[r_rolo1]

So, basically, waiting for him to put a shrine down is probably a doubtful proposition at best...

If you want to do a mace + cats war vs archers + swords, without doubt. The AP is another issue... I would not be surprised that Saladin would be pretty near of starting it.

 

[Nares]

I could have skipped 2 of the forges and gotten 2 more settlers out. Or skipped the forges and barracks and gotten 3. What criteria are we making our decisions on, the now or the later?

The argument isn't about "the now or the later." Each approach makes trades.

You chose forges and production. My issue with it is that there isn't much to produce. Most of my cities are being built without the whip, and while forges would be a great help, only a handful (two, really) will see a significant return from a forge.

I chose to emphasize commerce because rather than work on a production lead into the next round, I want to work on a tech lead. I feel the increased commerce generated from expansion outweighs the increased commerce from getting a forge online.

Either approach provides some return now and in the future. I feel mine is more inline with my intended goal of invading Saladin with superior units.

 

[Nares]

The AP is another issue... I would not be surprised that Saladin would be pretty near of starting it.

Someone else pointed out that Saladin is no wonderhog. I doubt he'll build it.

 

[r_rolo1]

He's not a wonder hog ,but clearly has a spot for religious wonders in his heart. I bet he'll try the AP...

 

[Nares]

He's not a wonder hog ,but clearly has a spot for religious wonders in his heart. I bet he'll try the AP...

I just hope he doesn't bulb Theology for it. He won't, but still....his research rate sucks.

 

[Bleys]

You chose forges and production. My issue with it is that there isn't much to produce. Most of my cities are being built without the whip, and while forges would be a great help, only a handful (two, really) will see a significant return from a forge.

Forges add 11 hammers per whipped citizen. Also, what there is to build (according to my plans, anyway) is Cats and Galleys (after a handful of Axes, til I got Maces). That was my thinking when I put the forges and barracks down, and teched Construction, military build up.

Forges + OR also add a HUGE boost to the production of Commerce buildings like Markets and such. I just never see a Forge as a bad choice, it makes every subsequent building that much cheaper to build. Pays for itself pretty quickly.

 

[Nares]

Forges + OR also add a HUGE boost to the production of Commerce buildings like Markets and such.

I won't argue that they don't.

Given our terrain, I didn't see most cities having enough base hammers to even warrant a forge, however.

This doesn't discount bonus hammers from whipping. I prefer getting the other infrastructure online earlier, rather than delaying for a forge enhanced whip. If I wasn't planning on capping some of these cities at a monument, a granary, a lighthouse and a harbor, the delay wouldn't be as problematic.

I also have OR up, with full Hinduism spread, so I'm already getting bonus hammers on whips towards buildings. As I said, the only places I plan on building a forge, even with my silver trade, are in Berlin and Munich (3SE of Berlin), because both will be carrying the military production load given that they have the most productive terrain.

One of my moves this round was to start on a library in Cologne. I think perhaps I should have started on a harbor. On the bright side, a chop just came into Cologne, and can still be applied towards a harbor. Ultimately, that library will be useful as Cologne's cottages mature over time.

I honestly see that city only working four land tiles, and whatever coastal tiles it can manage. The four land tiles include two riverside cottages, and two non-riverside cottages. One riverside forest will be saved in conjunction with a grassland hills forest for the health bonus in Munich.

One argument against forge spam is that we're fighting a health cap primarily, and forges work against that. As such, I would only put them in cities which will greatly benefit, such as Berlin, which can handle the health penalty thanks to its heavy food surplus, and Munich, which can handle the health penalty thanks to its relatively low food surplus.

 

[OTAKUjbski]

So, basically, waiting for him to put a shrine down is probably a doubtful proposition at best...

I'm certain it'll eventually happen. I predict it happens towards the end of Round 3.

Saladin's trade routes are worth 1cpt more than your own internal routes (currently 2cpt for ToA Berlins).

Not exactly worth crying over.

We all have at least 4 cities .. most 5, which means a loss of 5 cities * 4 traderoutes * -1 CPT = -20 ...

... none of us bring in more than 100 CPT, so that's at least a hit of -20% (-25% on avg since most bring in ~75 CPT).

I also don't believe anyone has trade routes with any other AI.

I'm sorry, but you believe wrong.

OTAKUjbski has with Suleiman.
Bleys has with João.

I don't agree with expanding around him. Distance costs will be crippling, essentially turning all those "free" Great Lighthouse cities into net losses when they're founded.

Either we take a hit expanding militarily or via peaceful expansion ... either way, we're gonna take a hit.

 

[Nares]

We all have at least 4 cities .. most 5, which means a loss of 5 cities * 4 traderoutes * -1 CPT = -20 ...

Most of those are internal. Only Berlin should have any foreign trade routes at this time.

You'll only lose the foreign trade routes, and they'll be replaced by internal trade routes once you declare.

It's dependent on the number of cities Saladin has, but the loss is about 1cpt per city.

ToA adds an additional 1cpt per route, so at most you're losing 2cpt per city below five that Saladin has, and 1cpt for every city above four that Saladin has.

OTAKUjbski has with Suleiman.
Bleys has with João.

Trade route connections and actual trade routes are totally different things. The connection allows for resource trading and for trade routes to be established, but it does not guarantee the establishment of those routes.

As I noted, most players have only a few (3-4) foreign trade routes, all with Saladin. I have a few more in my save thanks to Toku. Taking information from Snatty's guide (no link, sorry), most cities won't have foreign trade routes until they build a harbor or a market.

Either way, it's very possible to open those trade routes with AIs other than Saladin very shortly after declaring war. I have open borders with Toku, and so all I would need to do is take Mecca. Without Toku, all one would need to do is take out Medina in most games.

Either we take a hit expanding militarily or via peaceful expansion ... either way, we're gonna take a hit.

This is true, but we're not likely to engage in military expansion for another 1000 years. We've got a tech lead to pursue, and an army to build, including a flotilla to ferry our troops.

I feel that I have enough health and happiness, from harbors and trade as well as from HR, that I don't need additional resources at this time. Most of my cities will develop too slowly to make use of extra resources now, and burdening myself with a net loss city doesn't facilitate my tech lead or the assemblage of my army.

 

[OTAKUjbski]

I'll put it this way then. According to the info screen:

futurehermit has 12 CPT from Saladin
Bleys has 22 CPT from Saladin and João
OTAKUjbski has 31 CPT from Saladin and Suleiman
Vale has 19 CPT from Saladin

 

[Nares]

futurehermit has 12 CPT from Saladin
Bleys has 22 CPT from Saladin and João
OTAKUjbski has 31 CPT from Saladin and Suleiman
Vale has 19 CPT from Saladin

You're concluding that the loss of the foreign trade route is the net loss, when you're not factoring in the replacement of that route with an internal route.

I'll admit I was wrong about the trade routes some players have with Joao or Suleiman. Checking each and every trade route that every player has is something I haven't done. Your Cologne has an impressive four foreign routes with Suleiman, which you'll keep even after declaring war on Saladin. I don't know if that's an effect of having met him so early, the result of distances, or some other factor, as I only have limited routes in my game.

But, as I said, all the foreign trade routes will be replaced with internal routes, at a loss of 1-2cpt per route. Even the 2cpt loss is questionable, as ToA would boost internal routes to 3cpt I believe, so you're actually only losing 1cpt per foreign route.

 

[Nares]

Looking back on it now, many of you don't even have a city setup which would enable four 2cpt internal trade routes per city. Only my game offers that, and then only because I considered it a priority to an extent.

So the loss would be fairly significant currently, but with some additional expansion it won't be as harsh.

The loss indeed seems to be 2cpt for the internal ToA routes vs foreign ToA routes, as well.

 

[Bleys]

Nares, I kind of hate to bring this up, but you keep referring to your game, yet you didnt play from the best-ball, you played from your own first round save. Had we all played from our own first round saves, I would hazard to guess that most of our games would look quite different. I guarantee I would have taken a different game-plan if I had continued my game in the 2nd round (I wouldnt have had to tech Masonry and Polytheism, for example), but the only player who actually did that was rolo.

I dont think its realistic to continue comparing all our games to yours because of this. Next round will get even crazier, I can tell already, with options opening up in many directions. Of course you have better synergy with your own plans from the first round, you played your own shadow. Your 2100 BC save was VASTLY different from the save we all played from.

 

[Bleys]

Looking back on it now, many of you don't even have a city setup which would enable four 2cpt internal trade routes per city. Only my game offers that, and then only because I considered it a priority to an extent.

See, this is another case of instant gratification without considering what lies in the future. By the time we are ready to DoW on Sal, I am pretty sure many of us will have explored more and found other cities to trade with in short order, and probably founded at least 1 other city on the last island to the South, or even one on the island past Sal. I guess I just dont see the problem losing some TRs for a few turns, only to have them replaced by other TRs in the not-so-distant-future. War hurts the economy in many ways, we all know that.

None of us are at a level where we even WANT to be this crazy on the micro-management of the game (at least I sure dont). The TRs will happen, they will grow, we will get more once we open up Harbors, and set up cities on the island east of Sal. One of the beauties of the TR economy is that much of it is automatic, and requires very little in the way of micromanagement, leaving more time to concentrate on tiles and production. Any war is still a ways off, leaving more than enough time to explore further, and if we choose not to have a war at all, OTAK is already in a position to expand his trade route area by quite a bit.

So yes, a war next turn would suck, a lot of trade routes would suffer. But we arent going to war next turn, or the turn after, or 10 turns after that. A workboat on Auto-Explore is going to go a long way to fixing any TR problems that the war would bring, and if we strike quickly enough, it would probably barely be a blip in the overall scheme of things, especially 100 turns from now when we are at the end of the next set.

 

[futurehermit]

I'm thinking after 19 pages of discussion maybe it is a good time to start thinking about consensus-building for a best ball for the next round? Maybe we are still waiting for more saves, but can we come to some consensus on the top 2-3 and then try and narrow that down? We can all promote our own saves for another 19 pages but we have to choose one at some point.

Maybe that means we have to decide on war vs. peace in terms of expansion? Anyone want to summarize the main pros and cons of each?

 

[Nares]

See, this is another case of instant gratification without considering what lies in the future.

How is that instant gratification?

I chose to settle sites on four different landmasses in order to ensure four 2cpt internal trade routes in every city.

I chose not to settle three cities on a non-primary landmass, because that third city generates a massive increase in the colonial expense maintenance cost for each of those cities.

I don't see how anything I've done so far precludes me from doing something in the future.

What, exactly, do I gain from not settling those cities? They're producing a net commerce gain currently, so I can readily identify what I would lose by not settling them.

Are the minimal number of GPP you're generating that I'm not generating worth not settling those other cities? Is the culture you're generating from wonders worth anything at all?

Is there some sort of soft cap that prevents me from settling more than six cities? Not that I'm aware of.

I don't feel that my first round save was so drastically different from r_rolo1's save that I wouldn't find myself in a fairly similar position from either save.

I didn't micromanage like a fiend. I feel yourself and vale engaged in more micromanaging than I did. What I did do was engage in some macromanagement, and I think that's what has made my position stronger.

I look at these saves and I see a number where the Great Lighthouse hasn't been leveraged at all. Why build it, then? It's a huge cost, with no production modifier, and offers little GPP.

I can understand minimizing the number of cities you settle if you don't have the Great Lighthouse, but everyone has it, and everyone except OTAKU should be sitting on six cities, because they're all providing a net gain, and will continue to provide a net gain for a long time to come, possibly even until victory.

If I'm reaching that "future" first, and I am doing so with a strong core of cities, how is that sacrificing "for the now?"

 

[Bleys]

Um, its 10 AD and we have crappy land, so I chose to build Wonders and Forges and head for a more military stance than jam out a couple more poor cities?

I have 2 on each landmass, which is a perfectly reasonable current status. You also chose settlers over wonders and forges, which is fine, but we will all have 6, then 10, then more cities soon enough. I am kind of hoping to be able to settle some better cities than the choices I have right now.

I will agree that most of us should have settled at least a 5th city down one the southern island, but its 10 AD. The GLH WILL be utilized pretty well as soon as we have secured some more land to REX into.

As for your "strong core of cities", I see a pile of rather poor ones with a couple decent ones. I decided NOT to settle the crappy spots THIS MINUTE in favor of more production, more solid wonders for this map (Colossus and ToA, regardless of your view, ithey were dirt cheap and we will make money on the seafood tiles and GPPs alone), and more internal infrastructure (forges and barracks). I am getting ready to go to war. THEN I will REX, especially on that new, big island.

I guess we just have opposing views on Wonders, but dont think I wont REX, I would just rather REX to better spots.

And yes, your save is MASSIVELY different from rolo's man, you popped a tech in a hut, have a completely different tech path, etc etc etc. Come on. Should we all go back, and play our 1st round saves, so we can all compare Apples to Apples with YOURS? Thats not the format.

 

[OTAKUjbski]

... maybe it is a good time to start thinking about consensus-building for a best ball for the next round?

...

Maybe that means we have to decide on war vs. peace in terms of expansion?

Since the decision is essentially war vs. peace, I think all players should make 2 votes: 1 for a "warmonger" save and 1 for a "peacemonger" save. (No limit on whether they can vote for their own save or not.)

If the voting player prefers war, then their warmonger save will be #1 (peacemonger #2). Likewise, if the player prefers peace, then their peacemonger save will be #1 (warmonger #2).

For example, my Round 1 vote would've been something like #1 r_rolo1 (peace) & #2 slobberinbear (war).​

Sound fair? It's just a take on Vicawoo's recommendation earlier.