Monarchists' Cookbook I

With these vote counts, it might be beneficial to re-explain how the voting is going to work.

Is the initial vote war or peace, then the save? Or is the war/peace a weighting towards a particular save?

For example, the war voters are split between Bley's save and futurehermit's. With weighted votes, this would leave OTAKU's save the clear winner. With tiered votes, the voting is near split between war and peace.
 
Diamondeye, I don't know why you brought up the trade route issue again. I know Bleys hates to hear this, but I'm sitting on the most foreign trade routes (9) (OTAKU has 8), and am tied with futurehermit for the most trade routes overall (24 foreign + domestic). I don't know who else has Compass, but I'm poised to build multiple harbors and convert more of my domestic routes into foreign routes.

I brought it up only because I had a few pages of new replies to siphon through, and I just multiquoted anything new to me while reading :blush:

I still think the best approach at the moment is to build a tech lead and take out Saladin. I'm interested to see where OTAKU's save might lead, because I know Suleiman and Joao will rapidly pull away in the next round, but I don't know that REX around Saladin can keep up for more than a round.

:confused: Please explain what you mean by "I don't know that REX around Saladin can keep up for more than a rounds" ?

But OTAKU's, like futurehermit's game from the first round, while being a different an intriguing approach, is a committed approach. For the same reasons futurehermit's was discounted in the first round, I think OTAKU's should be discounted here.

If the commitment is to a solution we find out most of us want (peaceful expansion, befriending Sal), I don't think we should discard it because OTAKU is "thinking out of the box"...

Which, to be honest, really only leaves r_rolo1's save, though I still haven't seen Diamondeye's. Vale's is the top choice of non-roster saves, but I understand you still want to go with roster players' saves.

I posted my save in the bottom of the longest post, I believe it is on page 20, though I am unsure.

And I still haven't seen any response regarding the highest production site on marble island. I know the save I played had no bearing on settling that site. Was I the only one to notice it? Were you all that convinced that settling on the marble was a good idea, or that settling on the eastern half of the island would ever be worthwhile given it's abysmal food situation?

If you read my writeup, you will notice I settled the marble aswell. Since the city has 5(?) grasslands, one of them with Iron, I judge it to be a fine site for city. It can work the grass iron, 2 grass hills, and up to four other grass tiles. It is suited for a slow and steady production site, although it will lack food later on. A lighthouse might help out, considering the coast would then be workable aswell.
 
Please explain what you mean by "I don't know that REX around Saladin can keep up for more than a rounds" ?
Keep up with the AIs. I should have specified.

If you read my writeup, you will notice I settled the marble aswell.
That's not the same site as the one I'm referring to, but I take it you're just responding before perusing the remaining posts, while your response is still fresh in your mind.

I brought it up only because I had a few pages of new replies to siphon through, and I just multiquoted anything new to me while reading
You presented it in a different, and insightful, manner that had me go back and check my own save just to confirm what I had thought.

If the commitment is to a solution we find out most of us want (peaceful expansion, befriending Sal), I don't think we should discard it because OTAKU is "thinking out of the box"...
As I see it, futurehermit's save from the first round was the best approach to wonderspam. Getting the ToA online ASAP was possibly the best approach to wonderspam, though how it would have jeopardized the Great Lighthouse I'm unsure (not at all, judging by how the game has played out).

The earlier free specialist, less incentive to settle the (crap) marble site, stronger GPP generation earlier were all reasons to support it.

But a less committed approach was taken. I'm not arguing against OTAKU's decision, as I don't think most players even viewed futurehermit's as a potential frontrunner. But I don't think it was even given the consideration it deserved. I suppose my gut reaction is to wonder what's different now.
 
With these vote counts, it might be beneficial to re-explain how the voting is going to work.

Is the initial vote war or peace, then the save? Or is the war/peace a weighting towards a particular save?

For example, the war voters are split between Bley's save and futurehermit's. With weighted votes, this would leave OTAKU's save the clear winner. With tiered votes, the voting is near split between war and peace.

The voting will be as follows:

War/Piece Vote:

Each player votes whether he prefers a warlike approach, or a peaceful approach. Diamondeye will act as a tiebreaker, if needed.

The war/peace decision is dominant, meaning that if the majority votes for war, a war save will be chosen.

Each player chooses:
1) What save they prefer for war,
2) What save they prefer for peace,
and 3) Whether they prefer war or peace.

Vote 3 is dominant - an example:
we 5 roster players vote,
3 choose FutureHermits' save for war,
2 choose Bleys' save for war,
4 choose OTAKUjbskis' save for peace,
one chooses Vales' save for peace
3 vote for war, two for peace.

Now, as most voters want war, a war save is to be chosen. Since FutureHermits' has most (OTAKUs' is a peace save), it is his save that is chosen.
 
EDIT: X-post with Diamondeye. :blush:

With these vote counts, it might be beneficial to re-explain how the voting is going to work.

Is the initial vote war or peace, then the save? Or is the war/peace a weighting towards a particular save?

For example, the war voters are split between Bley's save and futurehermit's. With weighted votes, this would leave OTAKU's save the clear winner. With tiered votes, the voting is near split between war and peace.

Since this is a new voting system, it'll ultimately be up to Diamondeye (the :king:) to determine how the best ball is chosen.

I was under the impression the "war vs peace" vote would resolve first. The losing strategy's votes are exhausted (discarded), and only the winning strategy's votes are considered. (Like an instant runoff of sorts.)

Spoiler A running tally of votes :
Diamondeye: tiebreaker: Peace (OTAKUjbski) / War (futurehermit)

Bleys: War (Bleys) over Peace (OTAKUjbski)
futurehermit: War (futurehermit) over Peace (OTAKUjbski)
OTAKUjbski: Peace (OTAKUjbski) over War (Bleys)
r_rolo1: Peace (Vale, OTAKUjbski) over War (futurehermit)

Nares: War (Bleys) over Peace (OTAKUjbski)
slobberinbear: unknown
Solon70: unknown
Vale: unknown
Winston Hughes: ("soft vote"?) War (futurehermit) over Peace (OTAKUjbski)
 
Oh, I didn't realize my opinion was being solicited, I thought I was just hanging out, hehe.

For peace, I have a strong preference for OTAK's save, as I think the overseas foothold is extremely important.

For war, the decision is tougher, but I believe Bleys has the strongest position.

My preference at this stage would be for peace simply because I think there's a lot of good land to be grabbed overseas, and time is of the essence.

There were a lot of impressive saves this round, I learned a lot from studying the approaches.
 
Thanks vale.

I was hoping to see that kind of information more heavily demonstrated in this series than in others, if only because there's more emphasis in looking at others' saves themselves, rather than just the report.
Problem for me is that to explain some of the thoughts, I really need the screenshots (like the whip of the galley at that exact moment). And I never think to take that many while I play a round.

Incidentally I'm not a roster player so I don't think I have a vote.
 
And I never think to take that many while I play a round.
I now spam screenshots of any game I plan on reporting from. It helps make up for not using some sort of auto-log as much as it helps you capture all kinds of moments (important or amusing).

I think had 84 screenshots totaling 16.8Mb from that last round, and I missed a few.
 
Oh, I didn't realize my opinion was being solicited, I thought I was just hanging out, hehe.

Incidentally I'm not a roster player so I don't think I have a vote.

I'm pretty sure non-roster players have votes. How heavily the :king: weights them is still up for discussion in the MC Bullpen.

@ vale:

That being said and especially because of your save submissions so far, your opinion (vote) is warranted and respected.

Spoiler A running tally of votes :
Diamondeye: tiebreaker: Peace (OTAKUjbski) / War (futurehermit)

Bleys: War (Bleys) over Peace (OTAKUjbski)
futurehermit: War (futurehermit) over Peace (OTAKUjbski)
OTAKUjbski: Peace (OTAKUjbski) over War (Bleys)
r_rolo1: Peace (Vale, OTAKUjbski) over War (futurehermit)

Nares: War (Bleys) over Peace (OTAKUjbski)
slobberinbear: unknown
Solon70: Peace (OTAKUjbski) over War (Bleys)
vale: unknown
Winston Hughes: ("soft vote"?) War (futurehermit) over Peace (OTAKUjbski)
 
My biggest hang-up with his save was ONLY the Wonders and GPP generation
To be honest, his first round save offered the best GPP generation of all the saves, by focusing on the ToA, the biggest GPP source of all the wonders, first.

This is what I'm referring to when I say his approach was dismissed for being committed. It was indeed committed to the ToA, but the ToA was the best first wonder to be built. Delaying it for marble is arguably a :smoke: move, especially given this marble site.

Which is funny, because a less committed approach was chosen, yet almost everyone took it and went with wonderspam, which futurehermit's first round save was better suited for.
 
Well, I don't feel like I deserve to have my ATI video card go bad :rolleyes: but the autoupdate thing is something I didn't consider and that I will look into. I'm looking at the new ATI HD 3870X2 if I do have to replace the card.
 
To be honest, his first round save offered the best GPP generation of all the saves, by focusing on the ToA, the biggest GPP source of all the wonders, first.

This is what I'm referring to when I say his approach was dismissed for being committed. It was indeed committed to the ToA, but the ToA was the best first wonder to be built. Delaying it for marble is arguably a :smoke: move, especially given this marble site.

Which is funny, because a less committed approach was chosen, yet almost everyone took it and went with wonderspam, which futurehermit's first round save was better suited for.
I disagree with the Marble argument you make. Marble plus IND leader made the ToA much cheaper, delaying it until then is a stronger move IMHO. I do not agree that the Marble site is useless, it WILL grow, albeit slowly, and early on, citizens can still be whipped for 56 hammers with a Forge. Sure, it wont ever run specialists, but it WILL grow, it WILL work cottages, and have trade routes, etc etc. You have cities on top of cities that are going to end up VERY cramped in the long term, and that may well be the better strategy "overall", especially at higher levels, but this is Monarch, and that city wont hurt us one bit. It saved a major amount of hammers on 2 wonders, and will continue to provide Marble on a 2-hammer city tile for the rest of the game.

Building the GLH, which has no resource component, and is usually built before the ToA by the AI, was the better plan, IMHO.
 
Building the GLH, which has no resource component, and is usually built before the ToA by the AI, was the better plan, IMHO.
You said it yourself.

This is monarch.

And apparently with a bunch of total non-builder AIs, judging by the dates wonders are dropping.

Also, being IND makes the marble less of a necessity.
 
Nares makes two very important points here :)


You said it yourself.

This is monarch.

... Monarch is exactly the level we are playing, and the level we are training for. While I do not want to offend the players from higher levels, and I certainly don't want to scare them away, since they provide tonnes of nice additions to the thread, we are not immortal/emperor players, and too much nitpicking at saves for making those small mistakes that are not allowed on emperor+ has, imo, a bad influence on the atmosphere of the thread. So has, ofcourse, flaming and too much nitpicking in general, racking down each others' saves, etc.

I just want people to know that I would like us to avoid this. Even though this is a concurrent succession game, we are working as a team. Repsect each other, and the choices they make. Asking questions as to why someone has done something different is fair game, but please keep the tone friendly. I am only saying this now so I won't have to later, and I hope everyone understands.

And apparently with a bunch of total non-builder AIs, judging by the dates wonders are dropping.

Also, being IND makes the marble less of a necessity.

In my game, Ramesses popped as colony, which could be one of the most negative events, since: 1) he is a wonderwhore (and probably the only one this game), 2) He is not easily dispatchable (being a vassal of Suleiman, being far away, etc).

And yes, IND makes marble less of a necessity, but still, I don't think it should be underrated. While none-IND leaders gain a 100% increase by marble, IND leader get a 67% (100 / 150) bonus - still awesome, especially for the later wonders (for marble, GL and Sistine comes to mind)
 
And apparently with a bunch of total non-builder AIs, judging by the dates wonders are dropping.
Maybe you are thinking of Emperor, or perhaps Normal speed (althought that shouldnt make much of a difference) but based on this table:
For comparison (and to satiate my own unbridled curiosity), I looked back on the last 4 games I played at Standard/Monarch/Epic and ALC 17 & 18, and these were the dates the various early wonders fell on:

Code:
		Game 1	Game 2	Game 3	Game 4	ALC17	ALC18	'Avg'	'Order'
Stonehenge:	2050BC	1350BC	2275BC	1525BC	1325BC	1775BC	1716BC	(1)
Great Wall:	1700BC	1475BC	1000BC	1375BC	1350BC	485BC	1230BC	(2)
Oracle:		1375BC	800BC	1000BC	1100BC	550BC	1050BC	979BC	(3)
GLH:		1050BC	1000BC	485BC	125BC	525BC	155BC	556BC	(4)
ToA:		410BC	335BC	1060AD	365BC	670AD	700BC	13BC	(5)
Colossus:	140BC	175AD	685AD	685AD	155BC	1000AD	375AD	(7)
Pyramids:	35BC	100AD	490AD	625BC	5BC	640AD	94AD	(6)
We are pretty well in line with the Monarch "norm", at least in these examples. I my game, it went:

GLH: 1175 BC
Oracle: 1100 BC
ToA: 485 BC
Colossus: 185 BC

Of course, when the human player builds them, its difficult to gauge the AIs "building speed", and I also think that in the example above, the math is a bit biased because the Human player obviously built it themselves in those games as well. What were the dates in your game, since you only built the GLH?

I would love to see an actual study on this topic. Play a pile of games, dont build a single wonder, and record the years the AI builds them.
 
So I attempted to do a second round micromanaged example and after going through I see some of my later in the round screenshots are lacking. But I can walk through up until the Great Lighthouse is built which shows the general idea of the rest of the round.

The main point of this is to show off the power of the three population whip.

Spoiler :
So to give a preview of what is to come by the end of the round:

endresult0.jpg


There were no negative events and no positives. The Oracle was built in 1450BC. The Great Lighthouse finished(as you will see) in 1125BC. The Temple of Artemis was completed in 675BC. The Colossus was completed in 440BC. The Great Library was built in 155BC. And now the Hanging Gardens has 66 hammers invested into it.

But back to the beginning. Since this is all about the power of the three pop whip, it is interesting to note that the settler that is partially built is already perfect for 3 pop whipping. Any more and he will be in 2 pop whip territory. Our first step is to spend 2 turns in anarchy adopting Hinduism and Slavery, after which we will put a hindu temple in the queue above the settler to grow while waiting for pottery to be ready.

The reason to do the anarchy now instead of later, is that our worker will be busy improving tiles while we are in anarchy, thus minimizing the number of turns we must work unimproved tiles.

Commerce is key at the moment as our bottleneck will be the speed with which we finish the research of pottery. As usual, the city governor can handle this if we know what to ask for:

commerceiskeynow1.jpg


The next turn, the south mine is complete and the city governor dutifully updates without our help:

reasonforearlycivicreligionchange2.jpg


The worker is ferried back over to the main island. He will mine the north hill then chop a couple of forests. Although it is painful to lose the forests, the early influx of hammers will ensure we get the key infrastructure built in addition to the wonders we desire.

The turn before Pottery is in we whip the settler (after making sure that we aren't killing too much commerce):

whipsettlernow3.jpg


The turn after, we insert a granary into the queue. The overflow will build it in one turn:

niceoverflowintogranary4.jpg


I guess this is a good time to mention that I like to engage in binary research. Most of the time it is either 0% or 100% for me. My thoughts are (besides the previously mentioned rounding issues that may or may not still exist) that by getting the necessary gold first then deficit researching, you are minimizing the amount of time you hover around low gold totals. When you have too little gold, you are vulnerable to certain nasty events. For instance the forge fire, deforestation, or slave revolt events are all much more manageable if you have the money to pay them off.

But that is just an aside.

You will see we make Hamburg into a bustling and vibrant city. Not quite, but the commerce right now is really important and it isn't like there are a billion winners down there pre-improvement. It is building a lighthouse because the worker is sticking around up north until copper city is improved:

hamburgsfoundingandmicro5.jpg


Alright, so not much happens between now and the beginning of the major micromanagement, so there are no screens. Essentially, the worker finishes mining the north hill, the Hindu temple finishes, and the oracle is sped along with the help of one of the chops. A forge is built a turn and then immediately whipped in Berlin and then the Great Lighthouse is started. The worker chops another forest into the Great Lighthouse and there isn't much to think about until we get to size 6.

Once we get to size 6 though, because the Great Lighthouse will be finished relatively soon, we can use the overflow of a 3 pop whip to speed it up possibly. Warning: math ahead.

First, we can see that a turn built into a Settler will produce 18 hammers (this is true whether the 6th "tile" is the clams or an engineer (thanks to the forge). I will choose the engineer when it is relevant because I value the GPP more than the commerce. Anyway that's another aside.

So 18 hammers from the turn of production prior to the whip. The whip will produce 135(1.25) ~ 168 hammers. The three tiles we work post whip while the settler finishes building will produce 12 hammers (+7F and +5 hammers).

So after all that production is in the Settler will end up with 198 hammers. So 49 of those will overflow, but when the forge is factored out (dividing by 1.25) that is 39. The tiles worked the following turn will produce 4 hammers and with the production bonuses our total hammers the turn after the whip will be (39+4)1.75 ~75. So the magic number for us is when the GLH is less than 75 hammers from completion:

magicnumberlighthouse6.jpg


So we build and whip the Settler here and voila, the turn after:

itslikemagic7.jpg


Yay!

During the rest of the round, the idea behind these types of calculations remained the same, but the numbers changed as we settled a Great Engineer and a Great Prophet or enjoyed resource production bonuses to certain wonders. And my screenshots got less dense.

End result was 6 cities and the wonders listed.

Copper city was founded with the Great Lighthouse settler and improved with a Forge and Barracks to start churning out Axemen at stagnated population 2. So the army is actually reasonable since that city came earlier.
 
Vale, that's fascinating stuff, thanks for taking the time. I'm really interested in how the good players squeeze more settlers out, because I have a real problem focusing on expanding at the pace I should.

One thing though, you did all that math to make sure the whip of the settler would finish the GLH. But realistically, the only thing that matters is that whenever you whip the settler, all the overflow goes into the GLH (so you can claim all the production bonuses). If you had started the settler and whipped him 2 turns before you did, for example, your end result would have been a GLH with 2 turns left on it - in other words, it seems like there's no extra benefit from whipping the settler at the exact moment it will finish the GLH. Or am I missing something?
 
My point, and I could be wrong, is that it seems like the GLH finishes in the exact same amount of time whether you whip the settler sooner or later. In fact, if you whip the settler sooner... you have a settler sooner. I assume I'm missing something simple.
 
No whipping the settler early can cost a turn because you spend a few turns in a regrowth cycle where you aren't working the mines as much.

The timing is important. Definitely a few turns early and it costs a turn (or more). A turn late and it costs a turn. The math might work out whipping the Settler one turn early, but it was close (I think in this case I had 2 hammers to spare which probably means the timing window was certainly exact).
 
Back
Top Bottom