Myth01- Training Day- Regent

The roster should look like this, I believe:

Roster:

Northen Wolf - just played
Commando Bob - UP!
pol1 - on deck
Pinman - warming up
ngraner42
Yahya
 
lurker's comment:

It's been my pleasure, CBob.

Northen Wolf, reputation is a tricky thing, and the mistake that you made was one that we've all made. I think you were looking at microbe's article, which was written in 2005. Yes, I think it is wrong on that point. CommandoBob is right in saying that it doesn't make any difference with respect to India, though. I see ~6 cities in the last screenshot. Keep pumping out archers, settlers and swords (if you've got the iron hooked up) and put them out of your misery.

Bucephalus, that is exactly the game I had in mind. Thanks.

If you get a chance take a look at the link that Bucephalus provided. That team put a ship in space for the win without ever investing a single beaker of their own. No science slider, no scientists. Their rep got busted pretty early in the game and the game was at Demigod.

Like I said, the tarnished rep makes this game more difficult, but not impossible. Besides, this is a TDG and this has been a great learning opportunity.
 
I downloaded the save and took a quick look at it last night. Overall, we are pretty good shape and India will soon be history (in 10 to 20 turns from now).

I'll give a better write up later.

We are at 1000 BC and looking good.
 
I had PC issues last night (Blue Screen of Death due to PFN List Corrupt) and did not get a chance to look at the game. I'll try to do so tonight.
 
[Preflight]

Literature in 11
11 gold, +1 gpt

City Builds:
Beijing (7): vArcher in 1, grows in 5.
Shanghai (5): vArcher in 2, grows in 7.
Canton (4): settler in 5, grows in 5.
Nanking (4): settler in 6, grows in 5.
Tsingtao (3): worker in 7, grows in 7.

City Production:
vArcher [2] (Beijing and Shanghai)
settler [2] (Canton and Nanking)
worker [1] (Tsingtao)

Military:
04 Workers
05 Warrior
20 Archers
02 Curragh
Allowed Units: 20
Total Units: 31
Unit Support: 11 gpt

Resources connected to Beijing
01 Silks

Wonder Races
Oracle
  • Zimbabwe - Zulu

City Tweaking
I can fiddle with Nanking and grow the settler in in 4 turns instead of 6 by working the Spice Forest for 2 shields per turn. However, growth drops from 5 turns to 10 turns, which in turn means that Nanking would make the settler at size 4 and drop back to size 2. However, as I examine it further, I see that the settler will actually complete in 5 turns. Right now we have 8 shields towards the new settler. Settlers cost 30, so we have 22 shields to go. We produce 4 shields per turn, so in 5 turns Nanking will be at 28 shields. On that IBT the city grows to size 4 and the new citizen will work the Spice Forest for 2 more shields, giving us 30 shields. The settler is finished and built, and Nanking drops from size 5 down to size 3. So, no change to Nanking.

Settlers and Workers
So, in the next turnset we build 2 settlers. Both will be built in 5 turns. Where should they go?

One should go in the Calcutta area, either where Cacutta was or on the hill South of that tile. I prefer the hill since we don't lose any grassland by building a city. There are three BGs in that area also.
The other city should also go on a hill, but that hill is 3N of Nanking and on the way to the Iron to the NorthEast of Beijing. I think by the time this city is built the Indian situation will be winding down. And we do need to protect our northern borders. The only reason we haven't has been because of India.

We have two gangs of Workers; one pair on the former ruins of Calcutta (now just grassland) and the other pair is irrigating the oasis S of Canton. That pair will finish on the IBT.
The oasis irrigaters will move 1 South and road that plains tile (Turns 1 and 2). On Turns 3, 4 and 5 they will move to the hill 3N of Nanking. On Turn 6 they will move 1NE, onto another hill and road it on Turns 8 and 9, moving 1N again on Turn 10. Doing all this paves the way to build a city on the Iron that is the middle of the choke point.
The primary task of the Calcutta Clean up gang will be to connect Delhi (soon to be Chinese) with the rest of the empire. On Turn 1 they move 1S, onto a hill. On Turn 2 they move 1S again, onto a hill, which they will road on Turns 3 and 4. On Turn 5 they move 1SW onto grassland and road that tile on Turn 6 and Delhi is connected. Where they go after that depends on where we have captured cities.

Plan of War
We have 8 healthy vArchers just outside Delhi. We will capture it next turn. Since it is the capital and has culture, it will not autoraze at size 1. Bombay is the next biggest city, so it will become the new capital of India. Even if it is not, it will be the next major objective, since it has Wines next to it. I would like to send 5 vArchers to take out Bombay, but that depends on Delhi. Bombay should become Chinese on Turn 5 or so.

We also have 5 Archers 1SE of old Calcutta and 2 Archers further east that just destroyed an Indian city. The 2 Archers and 3 of the 5 Archers will head towards the city in the fog east of Delhi. They will meet on the grassland NE of that city in 4 turns and attack on Turn 5. The 2 remaining Archers will head to Delhi and beyond.

I expect that by Turn 5 India will be gutted. We should be able to take out the remaining cities at our leisure, which allows them to grow to size 2 before we attack (and thus prevents them from auto-razing). It is cheaper and easier for us to capture Indian cities than to build our own.

Next Builds
Beijing will keep making vArchers for a while, but I may peel off a settler if the Indian war is doing real good. Once it gets to size 8 it will produce 16 shields per turn, or a settler in 2 turns.
Shanghai will keep making vArchers.
Canton will make a worker after the settler.
Nanking will make vArchers for a while or start a temple as a library pre-build.
Tsingtao will start another worker when this one is done.
Delhi will proabably start a catapult.
Any cities we capture will probably start catapults also.

Revolt to Republic
If the war with India is strongly in our favor and the Zulus leave us alone. I might revolt to Republic on this turnset. Our unit support cost will soar in Republic until we get our cities up to size 6 and beyond. But once in Republic we don't need any MPs either. Our cities will grow faster since our lands will produce more food.

The problem with revolting too early is that we don't know how long our anarchy will be. Our workers will work slower, production will be down, corruption rampant and I don't think our cities will complete a single build during the anarchy. This is not something we want to do in the middle of a war.

[End of Preflight]
 
Hey CommandoBob, can you post a picture of the current state?

I'd like to have the graphic to go with your description. I can't load up Civ at work. :lol:
 
Btw, I'm still thinking that taking that peace treaty for 3-4 towns sounds good, as we can keep those towns, we can kill AI after that as our trade rep is broken anyway?
 
Btw, I'm still thinking that taking that peace treaty for 3-4 towns sounds good, as we can keep those towns, we can kill AI after that as our trade rep is broken anyway?

I am pretty sure that would make our rep worse. What we could do is make peace, wait twenty turns, and then declare war again. I think you don't take a rep hit if you do that.

But, if we wait twenty turns, we could be in some trouble with the Zulu, and we'd have to expand around India. That could be troublesome. If CommandoBob is going to destroy India on his turn, it's probably best to just do it that way.
 
lurker's comment: I just can't seem to keep my nose out of this game, but I've got a couple of comments on CBob's Preflight.

First, even though I'm never as detailed as CBob, one of the things that I've learned from him is that a good thorough preflight really helps me focus. Taking the time to write it all out helps even more. In a solo game, you've built the empire and should have a pretty good idea of what's going on. But in an SG, where you might not have touched the save for 40 or 50 turns, a good preflight will help you get your head around the "whos hows whys and wheres" of the game.

Second:
. . . .
City Tweaking
I can fiddle with Nanking and grow the settler in in 4 turns instead of 6 by working the Spice Forest for 2 shields per turn. However, growth drops from 5 turns to 10 turns, which in turn means that Nanking would make the settler at size 4 and drop back to size 2. However, as I examine it further, I see that the settler will actually complete in 5 turns. Right now we have 8 shields towards the new settler. Settlers cost 30, so we have 22 shields to go. We produce 4 shields per turn, so in 5 turns Nanking will be at 28 shields. On that IBT the city grows to size 4 and the new citizen will work the Spice Forest for 2 more shields, giving us 30 shields. The settler is finished and built, and Nanking drops from size 5 down to size 3. So, no change to Nanking. . . . .
[End of Preflight]
Please, team, forgive me if I'm being condescending or telling you things you already know. With that said, does everyone understand how the stuff I've emphasized above works? Settler and worker factories are a very powerful tool and, in order to manage them properly, it's important that you understand how growth affects production. On the IBT, food is counted and a city is checked for possible growth. If it grows, the new citizen is placed on a tile. If your governor is set to "Emphasize Production," the newly-born citizen is (usually) placed on the highest-shield tile available. (If you have not already done so, please go see your city governor and make sure that "Emphasize Production" is turned on.) The game then checks for shield production. That means that you get the benefit of the new citizen on the same turn that the citizen is born. If you want another example of this, go dig through Gma02. There was a very interesting warrior/settler factory at work there. It was a 4-turner and used an 8-shield-per-turn town to produce a 10-shield warrior in the 1st turn of the cycle.
 
Actually, now that you mention it, CBob's comments are confusing.

He said in his opening that Nanking is at size 4, and was growing in 5 turns (to pop 5).

He said he could change it so that Nanking produces 1 (I assume) more spt, so that the settler would complete in 4 turns, rather than 6, but then he concluded on analysis that the settler would actually be produced in 5 turns.

He says that on the IBT after the fifth turn, the city would grow to size 4 (I assume he meant 5 there), and the extra worker would contribute 2 more shields due to the governor having emphasized production - a good reason to learn that, I just realized. That means the settler would be produced, decreasing the city to size 3 (from 5), and decreasing the shield output accordingly.

Then, the city would still take at least 10 turns to grow, and even more to produce another settler.

Is all that true?
 
lurker's comment: One other comment:

I'm not entirely clear on the mechanics, so don't quote me on this. With that caveat, . . . I think that tech costs are influenced by the number of civs still alive on the map. I think that by killing off India, you will reduce the tech costs. If I'm right, that will benefit you for the rest of the game.

Lurkers and BetterPlayers, can anyone confirm or refute that?
. . . . Is all that true?
Guess you'll have to tinker with it and see, now won't you? ;)
 
lurker's comment: I can confirm that eliminating a civ lowers tech costs. In a recent game, I destroyed a civ's last city and Electricity went from 5 turns to 4 without any other change being made. In my mind, that's enough proof for me.
 
Btw, I'm still thinking that taking that peace treaty for 3-4 towns sounds good, as we can keep those towns, we can kill AI after that as our trade rep is broken anyway?

I am pretty sure that would make our rep worse. What we could do is make peace, wait twenty turns, and then declare war again. I think you don't take a rep hit if you do that.

But, if we wait twenty turns, we could be in some trouble with the Zulu, and we'd have to expand around India. That could be troublesome. If CommandoBob is going to destroy India on his turn, it's probably best to just do it that way.
In twenty turns India should be dead. I plan on capturing three cities (Delhi, Bombay and the Fog City) in 5 turns. At this point India will have 4 cities left. I might be able to capture one more on my turns. By the end of my turns we should have units in position to finish off India early in the next turnset.

Two things could affect this plan.

One, if I revolt to Republic and the turns of anarchy extend into the next turnset for a turn or two, I might go ahead and play those turns and get us into Republic. Anarchy turns are sorta dull to play.

Two, if India has a settler still alive after we capture their last city, they are not dead. That one settler keeps them alive and in the game, because that settler can become a city. Ideally, we would leave a non-coastal city as the last one to capture, otherwise their last settler could be in a galley. This I'm-not-dead-yet ploy by the AI does not always occur, but it is something to keep in mind.


Actually, now that you mention it, CBob's comments are confusing.
I was confusing, now that I look at it again. Nanking will grow to 5 and on the turn it grows to 5 will finish the settler and drop down to size 3.
 
I usually do that take all from AI (3-4 cities, all techs, all gold, gpt) in every game, I can crush Ai later and those extra tech and free cities would be worth to us. Just my point of view...

AFAIK if our rep is broken (sorry!), it can't go anymore worser... We can backstab and do what we want, and rep would not go worser??? I still do not get how could I brake rep, as we had no RoP signed what to brake...
 
What broke our rep is very simple.

We had Chinese units inside Indian borders when we declared war.

I'll discuss the value of killing India now vs. killing India later at a later time. My wife has just shown up at work to take me home.
 
I usually do that take all from AI (3-4 cities, all techs, all gold, gpt) in every game, I can crush Ai later and those extra tech and free cities would be worth to us. Just my point of view.
If we were in a bad situation or in a war we didn't need, I would be inclined to make peace with India.

By a bad situation, I'm thinking of where we are outnumbered and outgunned and we need peace to build up our military and keep our cities. Or we have all our fighting units on one side of our empire and an AI attacks us on the other.

But here we have a pretty good situation. We have the larger forces and we decided on when we wanted to declare war. We're not aiming for a space victory but a conquest victory, so at some point India must die. India has better land than we do and a nice little bonus of Wines.

Even if we were planning to win some other way than conquest, we would still need to take out India to give us the space we need. I just find it easier, at this stage of the game, to remove India once and for all. Long term, we have less headaches with India gone. Mostly we don't have someone stopping us while we build a bunch of productive cities. And we can take them now, with units we have on hand, not 20 turns from now when they may have better defenders.
 
These screen shots were made after I fiddled with the Map Preferences Setting (Control + Shift + N). Once those are set then Control + Shift + M will show the map those settings; hitting Control + Shift + M again will return the map to normal.

It would be nice if the city names were visible along with the cities, but..... :dunno:

North China 1000 BC
NorthChina_1000BC.jpg


The Blue Dot is the city site I described, 3N of Nanking. The Red Line is the automatic road that is built when we build the city. The Brown/Orange Lines are the roads to the Iron and the Green Circle is where we would build a city on the Iron at the choke point.


South China 1000 BC
SouthChina_1000BC.jpg


Calcutta was 1N of the Red Dot. It's ruins have been improved upon (we built a road over them) and disappeared. The unknown Indian City is the Light Blue Dot.
 
AFAIK if our rep is broken (sorry!), it can't go anymore worser... We can backstab and do what we want, and rep would not go worser??? I still do not get how could I brake rep, as we had no RoP signed what to brake...

Any time you have units in an AI's territory, even without an RoP agreement, it is considered an "implied" RoP so long as you are not at war. For example, you may sail a boat into AI waters to explore their coast. They will ask you to leave, but they will not declare on you. That is an implied RoP, but not a signed RoP. Same with any other unit.

As others have already said, if you declare with a unit in the AI territory, it breaks that implied RoP and damages your rep.
 
Back
Top Bottom