Montezuma Immortal Cookbook

Just to be clear/fair, second/third/etc attempts will be counted as shadows.
I'll make a summary of all the entries in 6~8 hours as there are a lot... giving everyone a bit more time to check them all before voting time :)

I suspect you'll find more of us (see KidR above) have done more than one try. This was not a rule I was aware of from previous IUs.
 
well it's friendly competition, I don't have that big problems with anyone trying 2nd/3rd try... how could we control the saves anyway for cheating or someone reading spoilers from other players before playing?

I will not vote for saves since I can not offer fair amount of time for analyzing saves to have meaningful votes, so I hope people will decide wisely :-)
 
I, too, see no reason for someone not to replay or read the spoilers in advance, if they so choose.

The main goal here is learning. As long that goal is served, then the group is benefiting.


I, myself, try not to read the spoilers in advance, but it means being careful about which of those messages from "Civilization Fanatics' Forums" to read and which not to read, since spoiler tags don't show up in the email messages. This round, I played in one straight session, but in a previous cookbook I reloaded in one turnset more times than there were turns! :crazyeye:


As long as people aren't being extremely abusive, then I don't mind people choosing the level of reloading that they want to use, especially if they share their results, such as "I tried Work Boat first and Worker first, and I think that X strategy gives you a faster initial development." Just try to avoid doing things like:

a) Replaying and choosing a settling location that no one could have come up with without map knowledge
OR
b) Overly abusing knowledge of Resource locations, such as settling next to the far-away Copper in our game, knowing where it was from a previous session or reading a spoiler, without even bothering to learn Bronze Working first
OR
c) Reloading battle results. I don't care if you reload five turns back and decide not to start the war at all, but once the war starts, please just play it out. You'll learn far, far better that way and reloading battle results DOES defeat the purpose of learning how to successfully fight a war
 
I, too, see no reason for someone not to replay or read the spoilers in advance, if they so choose.

The main goal here is learning. As long that goal is served, then the group is benefiting.


I, myself, try not to read the spoilers in advance, but it means being careful about which of those messages from "Civilization Fanatics' Forums" to read and which not to read, since spoiler tags don't show up in the email messages. This round, I played in one straight session, but in a previous cookbook I reloaded in one turnset more times than there were turns! :crazyeye:


As long as people aren't being extremely abusive, then I don't mind people choosing the level of reloading that they want to use, especially if they share their results, such as "I tried Work Boat first and Worker first, and I think that X strategy gives you a faster initial development." Just try to avoid doing things like:

a) Replaying and choosing a settling location that no one could have come up with without map knowledge
OR
b) Overly abusing knowledge of Resource locations, such as settling next to the far-away Copper in our game, knowing where it was from a previous session or reading a spoiler, without even bothering to learn Bronze Working first
OR
c) Reloading battle results. I don't care if you reload five turns back and decide not to start the war at all, but once the war starts, please just play it out. You'll learn far, far better that way and reloading battle results DOES defeat the purpose of learning how to successfully fight a war

I agree that those are prudent rules to follow. I've been known to reload after a bad battle run once or twice, but that normally only happens when I'm experimenting to see what will happen in the first place.

I don't read spoilers before I play my turn set, except that this time I tried to make a rush work a couple of times, and then after failing at that and reading what others had done decided to see how a non-rush opening went. Given the difficulty of pulling off a rush in this situation, I favor going forward with a non-rush opening since it will be a very interesting challenge dealing with JC once he has Praets.
 
This is a gray zone I suppose.

I had in mind to play through the first try with no reloading whatsoever... there is learning to be done about concentration and planning of workers/cities.

Then submit the first try if you want.

Afterwards... feel free to re-try as many times as one likes, reload to try something else etc.
Those submissions would also be welcome, heck submit 10 times if you'd like! But it is only fair to tell that they are not first attempts?

Anyway, that is just my opinion. You may do as you please, I'm just the host here and we are all reasonable people, you can decide what is best for everyone :)
 
This is a gray zone I suppose.

I had in mind to play through the first try with no reloading whatsoever... there is learning to be done about concentration and planning of workers/cities.

Then submit the first try if you want.

Afterwards... feel free to re-try as many times as one likes, reload to try something else etc.
Those submissions would also be welcome, heck submit 10 times if you'd like! But it is only fair to tell that they are not first attempts?

Anyway, that is just my opinion. You may do as you please, I'm just the host here and we are all reasonable people, you can decide what is best for everyone :)

And that is fine as well. It just wasn't clear that we were following any particular procedure like this. I reloaded and tried different approaches on the previous IUs as did others and remarked on it in my comments without anyone saying anything.
 
Since the last cookbook turned out to be way too easy, I'll no longer give points based on how powerful the reached position is, but rather based on how likely other players are able to reach the same position when replaying the round (using a similar strategy) and how much there is to learn from continuing that save.

Because this is a continents map and as far as I can tell Frederick II and Julius Caesar are our only neighbours, I won't give points to rush games this time. While taking out Caesar early on is the most promissing move, it will make the rest of the game boring as hell.

:trophy3rd: (1 point): bobbyboy29
:trophy2nd: (2 points): vransam
:trophy: (3 points): drlake

:trophy2: (4th vote): obsolete - for the best rush and settling 1E.
 
I would like to share what I have learned from this round. I'm not a very experienced player and only recently started to play Immortal (I'm used to Monarch level), but this round in particular had some interesting lessons for me.

Usually I just settle in place and get on with it in a "In Firaxis we trust" mindset. In the last Immortal cookbooks I learned to think first and then move.

Before I started the game I was intrigued by the blue circle and suggested to scout 1N and then 1 SW to check for coastal resources:

Spoiler :

Civ4ScreenShot0000.jpg



After this move with the scout I zoomed in on the map and noticed the coastline to the west:

Spoiler :

Civ4ScreenShot0001.jpg



I used the dotmap tool to mark a coastal city and decided to settle on the ivory and then played the game as I thought best, which turned out to be a failure, because I wasn't prepared for the barbarian pressure.

In the last 2 cookbooks (Washington and Hammurabi) there weren't a lot of barbarians around due to the maps, so I restarted the game and learned how to spawn bust. I did reasonably well with 4 cities and 1 settler to build a 5th on the next turn:

Spoiler :

Civ4ScreenShot0008.jpg



By now I had looked at the other games and tried another couple of games, 1 trying to rush with Jaguars and 1 building the Great Wall ("take that, you barbarians!").

With the rush attempt I learned something: beelining Iron Working without a lot of commerce takes a lot of time. This made me rethink my first moves and I concluded that settling on the riverside ivory costs you a valuable 1+ commerce. I also realized that when you start with Hunting and Mysticism you don't have any of the 3 prerequisites for Pottery (Agriculture, Fishing, The Wheel). :crazyeye:

I got a bit confused by thinking that maybe settling in place was better all along, but then I saw how obsolete settled 1E at the cost of losing a turn. Getting more rivers in the capital is worth it. Lesson learned. But then I saw Dhoomstriker's late submission and I saw a move I hadn't considered before:

Spoiler :

Civ4ScreenShot0003.jpg



Moving the settler 1SE and 1E nets even more riverside tiles. From his screenshots I mistakenly thought Dhoomstriker suggested to even settle 1E further (the 'Mr. Tricky' tile), but that was just my old fear for too much overlap kicking in (see 'settle here' and 'or settle here' in the above screenshot). Sharing the corn with a city on the blue circle is fine and losing a forest with settling is not that big of a deal.

Anyway, with hindsight I learned a lot and I only hope I can apply what I've learned a next opening.
 
Heh.. I only take 1 try, but I don't think more goes would make any difference :P

3 points: Grashopa
2 points: Dhoomstriker
1 point: Fleme

Bonus point: Obsolete
 
I also don't want to play out a rush save (despite that it might be the strongest) for many of the reasons already stated. Apologies to all who pulled off a great rush:

3 points: Dhoomstriker. Was a toss up between his save and Grashopa's, has one less city but they're in nicer spots, a bit better developped and the economy is in a better position to recover IMO.

2 points: Grashopa. 6 Cities, nuff said.

1 point: Fleme. Solid save, game is easily winnable from there.

Bonus point: (good idea kossin)
Obsolete. Probably the best rush position and his playstyle is always entertaining.
 
Regarding settling SE-E from start location - we gain +1riverside ivory and lose 1 grassland hill. Means you trade 1:hammers: for 1:commerce:. Hammers are more valuable then commerce IMO. And sure not worth losing a turn.
 
Regarding settling SE-E from start location - we gain +1riverside ivory and lose 1 grassland hill. Means you trade 1:hammers: for 1:commerce:. Hammers are more valuable then commerce IMO. And sure not worth losing a turn.

Well being autoconnected to the river saves the need for 1 early road, and since we could see the coast there was good reason to believe that making some more "backyard" space to the NW would be worth it. But I definitely agree about capital hammers and the lost turn, and I was happy to SIP as well.

Cottageable grassland is totally overrated for capitals anyway - you generally don't have time to work them for 50-100 turns at least, if not a lot more than that. They are a mid-game consideration (if you get to the mid game) - it's a bit like the people who settle a capital in anticipation of a levee, although not quite that crazy. Floodplains are a different matter to grassland though - positive tile food plus commerce is very powerful. I love capital floodplains!
 
I did not SIP. Settled on riverside ivory 1SE, thus losing this tile for work. But Still got 2nonriverside ivory and 3 grassland hills in BFC. I think this is the best location despite less riverside tiles.
 
Regarding reloads abusing: I would not mind if we setup map with HOF enabled. Never played it, but it log's every time player loads the map, right? It will make sure that if someone made a right move, it really was thanks to analysis only.
For example last map there was a complaint regarding several participants, who (including myself) moved settler to coastal hill and got fish in BFC.

Also this might encourage discussion. Something like:
"Turn15: Got worker out, should I build warrior or work boat next?"
Or
"What should my worker improve first, this rice or this gold?"
etc.
 
We can already see reloads: retire from game, see # of sessions. Adding HoF would be pointless unless someone with access to the verification process would check the various saves.

Besides, I like to use a save that can be used without modifications and like to think we can trust players. I mean, if you want to reload 200 times and then submit here... you're not going to learn much and certainly won't earn any "street cred" or anything.
 
We can already see reloads: retire from game, see # of sessions. Adding HoF would be pointless unless someone with access to the verification process would check the various saves.

Besides, I like to use a save that can be used without modifications and like to think we can trust players. I mean, if you want to reload 200 times and then submit here... you're not going to learn much and certainly won't earn any "street cred" or anything.

Did not know about that. Where again can I see it?

I did not mean include HOF because I don't trust to someone. I completely agree with Dhoom in this regard. This is learning thread and it does not matter if people tried several times. Personally I'd encourage people make retries for learning purposes and share results.

I proposed HOF just to eliminate possibility of complaints in the future. Once again, personally I don't care at all about retries.
 
When you retire the game and watch the replay screen, you can see the # of sessions being mentioned.
 
Back
Top Bottom