News: BOTM 09 Final Spoiler

@Erkon has asked if trading every 10 turns with someone who has his hands full against you will delay the war forever. I think the answer is yes. What I am not so sure is what kind of trades set up a 10 turns grace period. In my limited experience:
Trading your resources for money -> no 10 turns of peace
Trading your techs for money -> no 10 turns of peace
Trading techs for techs -> yes, 10 turns of peace
Can anyone add more info, please?

I also noticed that giving a luxury ressource may also delay the attack. I managed to pull it out in one game with the SOD at my door (giving Brennus access to Gold for free)...It does not with food ressource for sure as Cesar DoW on me this very game after I gave him rice because he already got all the luxury ressources I had. So to be confirmed :)
 
* A question:
Does a war reset war plans? I mean, civ A had hands full. Civ B dowed civ A. At the end of the war, no hands full. Was it because the intended objective was civ B? Or if the intended objective had been the human player, would hands have become empty anyway?

Yes, a war resets it. You'll never know who the intended target was. ;)
 
I'm sure there are a few people who, when that happens, just don't bother or even pretend they didn't have time to play that game :(
Dang, my cover is blown... :)

Thanx for the game, the setup was really good - I managed to pull Wall, Oracle and Pyrs, but that definitely came at the expense of defence. So, it's Deity next - and I lost 2 previous...
 
@Lexad: your honesty gives me the courage to post my defeat story :goodjob:

I settled in place, 2nd city between stone and river, 3rd city by iron, 4th in the southern forests, and 5th along the river up north, by the cows. I had planned to settle the spot SE with the cows and flood plains, as well as the NE spot with the horses and pigs, but those became barb cities. I figured, "no problem, I'll just take them later", but Saladin beat me to the SE barb city (Phrygian) and Caesar beat me to the NE (Tarsus). This was the beginning of my downfall, since especially the SE city would have been a great addition.

I was afraid that Cyrus and Bismarck were too powerful, so I didn't even try going after them (I've never learned how to efficiently wage an early war, much to my detriment). Instead, as Gilgamesh started wiping out JC, I declared on JC, intending to take Tarsus. I came at him with about a 2:1 ratio of attackers to defenders plus 3 cats. I bombarded, suicided my cats, and sent in the troops. The first one did no damage at all with around 40% odds. The next one did damage but lost. The next three got terrible RNGs and died with over 75% odds! I didn't have enough troops left to take the city; I was so :mad:

Meanwhile, Bismarck declared on JC and moved his troops next to Tarsus before I canceled open borders. Needless to say, Bismarck ended up with the city :mad::mad:

Right then, Bismarck declared war on me, so I had to move most of my scant forces south to defend. After a close battle, he took the city on the SE iron (Rostov) from me. I was just not geared for a serious war, and he was reinforcing Rostov faster than I could muster an army to retake it. Frustrated, there was nothing I could do but make peace. He caught me off guard and I paid for it. I had to leave the game alone for a couple days just to cool down, but I vowed revenge :mad::mad::mad:

Fortunately, throughout this disastrous period I managed to stay tech-competitive with everyone and was even first to liberalism somewhat later. My infiltrated great spy (Persia) from the GW helped with this. I had a pretty good tech lead over Bismarck, and by this time he was pleased with me so I decided to play a little double-cross. Remember that Saladin still had Phrygian in the center of my territory. I really wanted that city, but Saladin was powerful and had open borders with Bismarck, and I feared reprisal. So, I bribed Bismarck to declare on Saladin (I managed to bribe him with non-military techs, so I had grenadiers but Bismarck did not), and then I declared on Sal and took Phrygian before he could draft/whip. I watched the German garrisons in Tarsus and Rostov slowly dwindle as they were sent off to the Arabian front, and then just as news arrived of the first German city falling to Arabia, I sued for peace with Sal and declared on Bismarck :mwaha: Tarsus and Rostov quickly became Russian, but before I could take any of his heartland, Bismarck made peace with Saladin and his forces came back to defend. But with the objectives of Phrygian, Tarsus, and Rostov firmly in my control, I was happy to make peace.

I felt pretty good about getting revenge on Bismarck, but during the war I geared my economy too much towards military and lost the tech lead. I spent the rest of the game trying to catch up in tech, and though I never fully caught up, I was a contestant in the space race. That is, until yet another unfortunate event transpired. I had a defensive pact with Cyrus to keep Saladin off my back (he was still mad about Phrygian). Instead, the pact drew me into a war with Gilgamesh when he declared on Cyrus. The DoW canceled the defensive pact, and Saladin declared on me in the same turn without Cyrus having to come to my aid. This point was crucial, as most of Sal's forces were waiting in Persia to attack my unprotected northern border. If the defensive pact had stayed active and forced Cyrus to declare on Sal, he would not have been able to touch me. Instead, I ended up at war with the two most powerful civs, Arabian forces streaming through Persia into my northern cities and my pal Cyrus standing by and smiling :mad::mad::mad::mad:

I retired after losing a couple cities. I knew I would never have won the space race, but it would have been nice to see the end of the game. By the way, why do defensive pacts get canceled as soon as one party gets declared on? Wouldn't it make more sense for the pact to remain active as long as both parties are still at war with the aggressor? Would've saved me, anyway... *grumble grumble*

I have definitely learned a lot this game. I pursued a hybrid strategy of mostly peaceful teching with a long period of war in the middle... and it utterly failed :lol: It seems like, in general, it's better to do your warmongering either early (i.e. rush your neighbor), always (if you're going for conquest/domination), or never (as a peacemonger). Maybe it's just me, but fighting a war against a strong neighbor mid-game cost me the tech lead and any chance at winning. Then again, before the war I was probably too small to win anyway. I think I should have either taken out a neighbor early, or at least taken those two barb cities rather than just staying put for the early game.

In any case, I really can't complain, as this was the first immortal game I've ever played. I normally struggle to win on monarch, so I was quite happy to survive almost to the end :cool:

Thanks to the staff for a well-designed, challenging, and entertaining game. Sorry DS, I will not be submitting mine either :)
 
To continue the story.....From the first post:

At War with Persia at 500AD.- The city of Rostov had changed hands twice as battle raged so the score was 2:2 with everything to play for.

The Russian stack then went through the forests to surprise the Persian defenders in the closest Persian city and take the lead...3:2 to the Russians.

Then alas....A tactical error by the Russian leader "orb" led to the Persians re-capturing their city and taking Rostov back as well....4:3 to the Persians. - The Russians defenders dug in. - Then the full time whistle was blown on the first Russian/Persian war.- It ends 4:3 to the Persians...booooo cry the Russian supporters......but wait......a late decision by the fourth official sitting up in the Apostolic Palace returns Rostov to Russia. Woohoo....A 4:4 draw.

The Russians vow to win the next fixture...Persia away. - The Russian coach starts training the team in the new tactic of catapult attack.

The opportunity to kick off against the Persians comes when the Roman give the Persians a 6:0 drubbing from the West. - The Romans are top of the league but can the Russian underdogs gain from their experience from the first game.

Kick off Russia away to Persia with an enormous Cat stack and Musketmen.....The Persian defenders cant deal with the Russian tactics and the goals start flowing. - It ends 5:0 to the Russians and the Persian are relegated to history.

The Russians next fixture, Germany away, loomed. - The Russian coach elected to play a Cossacks, Treb, Riflemen tactic in a 8/4/2 formation.

But wait in 1910 a late change of fixture results in Russia playing Germany at home!!!. - The Germans opt for a fast paced Panzer tactic coming straight through the middle. - The Russians defenders cant compete with the fleet tracked attack. - It's not looking good for the Russians.

The game ends in 1925 with the Russians suffering a humiliating 10:0 defeat to the Germans.


The analysis:

The good bits: For an Immortal level game I was pleased as I didn't feel "out of it" immediately.

The bad bits: - I lost (again), and to be honest I didn't really have any idea about how I was going to win.

The interesting bits: - I watched the Romans nuke the Arabs out of existence. - Never seen an AI nuclear war before.

And strange but true: - The former Barbarian city of Ghuzz twice became the capital city of different civ's. (Once when the Russians were destorying the Persians and once when the Germans were destorying the Russians.)


A fun game.
 
Thanks for that Lexad! I'm sure every real human being, no matter how good a civ player, has bad games or bad luck occasionally. And I for one am impressed when someone whose results are normally up at the top of the scoreboard is honest enough to also tell us when they have a not-so-good game.

Yep. Lexad is absolutely one of the premier players on these forums, IMHO 2nd to none. Goes to show the random number gods can get the best. BTW, I hate random events, turn them off all the time. ;)
 
Settle in place, I quickly chop a settler to found the second city near the stone, one near persepolis one near horse/clam and a last one south near copper stone...leaving a barb city within my "frontier" near the 2 cows and what would be later the iron location.

Got the GW and pyramids, keep power rating with barracks and axes but was too slow to take the barb city which went to the germans...who decided to build the maussolum there to push my culture.

So with 2 cities south so so and 3 good one, I build a force of early cats/axes/spears (no iron :( ) to go after cyrus. A great spy helped me to keep tech wise but the war with cyrus had to stop because he got maces and treb when i was still with cats/axe/spear :P Managed to take 3 cities before I set for peace and tried to catch tech wise.

A few turn later bismark declared on me with elephant maces while I was with Sal and him in the hindu group...GUess spy and my refusal to go vs gilgamesh pissed him...or just my south cities with little if no defender :P

I managed to whip longbows/wall/spears to keep away the first attackers when JC arrived with a huge stack of horse archer/pret/cats/maces. To make it a bit sweeter cyrus declared on me the very next turn our peace treaty was over.

3 civs on my back with tech inferiority for me...Oki I thought game over here....JC took easily my south city with horse while i was whipping crazy longbows and spears but a miracle happened

...saladin DoW on gilgamesh and bribe bismarck to go with him...so bismarck was not on my back, I managed to steal machinery and could stop JC and cyrus which were stupidly attacking my longbows/spears on forested hills while roaming their horse archers :)

I managed to take back my city from JC and he accepted peace...I then went for a revenge vs cyrus that I completly wiped with treb/maces...

Meanwhile i managed to pull a late liberalism to steel (my poor economy after all those wars astonished me) because Wang having philo/education went for nationalism and constitution !!! First time I see that.

I rushed to rifling/cannon and took revenge on bismarck with state property boosting my production. I took the maussoleum city first and started one of my 3 15 turns golden age.

I could have gone to domination around 1500 having tech lead except wang with cossacks / rifle / cannons but it seems like a too long game to me.

I thought why not going to a peaceful space victory ? Wang and JC were worst enemy and slashing every so and then and saladin/gilga as well.

While pushing for science I build all spy point buildings in all cities and I did not need to trade for a single tech (100% science I got around 800 spy point per turn with 2000 beakers). I realized that you can very easily switch religion from other civ (like 600 spy points :eek:). I put wang on my side thinking that i could launch fast...

Seems i did not concentrated enough as Wang declared on me (oki he got like -7 for we catch your spy causing trouble...hell we are russian :D). He took one north city and I switch to nationalism to mass a big army to face his huge SOD. I even accepted peace when he was almost begging for it
after I killed most of his troops...and then he was backstabed by JC which totally roll him. JC was huge so I made everything to make him please even if I could face him without problem (was like 1500 points ahead of him, miles away tech wise with a huge productiion but already assembling space ship parts). So I declared on wang then after gave him free tech free everything :p..I also made him switch to hindu. JC wiped Wang then Gilgamesh (I bribed him to go see elsewhere) and even gave me a city near my empire from wang as a token of our friendship :goodjob:

My old friend saladin and new one JC looked in the sky to see my victory in 1909...

My very first win at immortal, I guess to put on the side of the easy start...but i was quite happy to get my neck out of the hole.

Lesson learned...

Never give up :)
A mix of spy economy supported by buildings is very nice at the end of the game
I need to focus more on diplomacy
I need to make shorter post :crazyeye:

Got like 6 or 7 GG in this game...last 2 did nothing:lol:
 
Well done, Nioco :goodjob:

Nioco: While pushing for science I build all spy point buildings in all cities and I did not need to trade for a single tech (100% science I got around 800 spy point per turn with 2000 beakers).

Techs around that time cost about 10k espionage points, right? So you could steal about every 12 turns or so? Did you succeed most of the time?

I've been looking for a way to use espionage, but in the early game it seems like running the slider and diverting from research is not worth it. So I have a little survey for everybody out there (my answers included):

1) On a scale of 1 to 5, how important was espionage to your strategy? 2

2) What did you primarily use espionage for (active or passive)? Stole 4 techs with infiltrated great spy, caused 2-3 city revolts to lower defenses

3) How much did you use the espionage slider? Hardly ever. The max I ran was 10% espionage for a few turns at a time to get enough for city revolt.

4) Did you concentrate your points against one or two civs or spread them evenly across multiple civs? In early and late game, mostly against Cyrus for tech steals. Mid-game against Bismarck for city revolts. Never against anyone else.

5) On a scale of 1 to 5, how would you rate the success of your espionage strategy? 3

6) What was responsible for the success or failure of your strategy and what would you have done differently? Great spy from GW was responsible for most of my success. Failures were the result of not knowing whether to throw points at Cyrus or Bismarck and thus not having enough on either to steal tech in mid-late game.

Ok, survey over. Thanks in advance! :D
 
Well done, Nioco :goodjob:



Techs around that time cost about 10k espionage points, right? So you could steal about every 12 turns or so? Did you succeed most of the time?

I've been looking for a way to use espionage, but in the early game it seems like running the slider and diverting from research is not worth it. So I have a little survey for everybody out there (my answers included):

1) On a scale of 1 to 5, how important was espionage to your strategy? 2

2) What did you primarily use espionage for (active or passive)? Stole 4 techs with infiltrated great spy, caused 2-3 city revolts to lower defenses

3) How much did you use the espionage slider? Hardly ever. The max I ran was 10% espionage for a few turns at a time to get enough for city revolt.

4) Did you concentrate your points against one or two civs or spread them evenly across multiple civs? In early and late game, mostly against Cyrus for tech steals. Mid-game against Bismarck for city revolts. Never against anyone else.

5) On a scale of 1 to 5, how would you rate the success of your espionage strategy? 3

6) What was responsible for the success or failure of your strategy and what would you have done differently? Great spy from GW was responsible for most of my success. Failures were the result of not knowing whether to throw points at Cyrus or Bismarck and thus not having enough on either to steal tech in mid-late game.

Ok, survey over. Thanks in advance! :D

1) 1
2) passive. One city revolt.
3)0% entire game
4)divided points essentially just between my two border civs - which meant many points wasted as I eliminated Persia and Germany and later Korea.
5)2 (which is higher than usual for me)
6)I always fear spies will ruin my diplo, so active spy missions too much danger except when at war. I am also very unlucky with tech stealing, very rarely get one even if I have enough points. Also, it is a useless strategy while you are tech leader.
 
Spys? What's that? :)

No use for them, tech leader and (mostly) peaceful.
 
Well done, Nioco :goodjob:

Techs around that time cost about 10k espionage points, right? So you could steal about every 12 turns or so? Did you succeed most of the time?

Ok, survey over. Thanks in advance! :D

I got tech at about 50% cost. Wang and saladin got a city not far from my capital, I got open border and switch Wang to my religion. It average at 8k, the highest I stole being rocketry if I remember well for 10k indeed :) but many good one like medecine are around 6k so I could stole rather every 10 turns...In fact i adjusted my research exactly to match my neighbour. Success rate was lower than indicated for sure. At 50% theoritical success rate I average rather 20-30% (I kept always 5/6 spies in the nearest AI city).

I've been looking for a way to use espionage, but in the early game it seems like running the slider and diverting from research is not worth it. So I have a little survey for everybody out there (my answers included):

1) On a scale of 1 to 5, how important was espionage to your strategy?

3

2) What did you primarily use espionage for (active or passive)?

Stole early tech (calendar, feudalism, metal casting, machinery) thanks to early great spy (GW)...switch neighbour to my religion and stole many late tech (like 6). No use for city revolt. I find that one harassing, you need to keep lots of spies in all cities that you wanna invade...you often got bad relation with the future invaded and many are catch or fail. Easier to use air unit/cannons for rifle warring (I almost never do late warring though)

3) How much did you use the espionage slider?

Never

4) Did you concentrate your points against one or two civs or spread them evenly across multiple civs?

early game, just to keep in touch with who is researching what so mostly advanced civ (Wand/Cyrus) then only my neighbour (Saladin/Wang)..and after Gilga and JC as well to perform counter espionnage mission all the time while building space ship.

5) On a scale of 1 to 5, how would you rate the success of your espionage strategy?

4

6) What was responsible for the success or failure of your strategy and what would you have done differently?

GW, huge production in all city thanks to state property --> easy to get Jail/security bureau/ and forgot the last one :lol: in all cities...plus running spies as great people (liberty statue with >20 cities...plus lots of food with state property). It earns me a late War with Wang...Well 5 spies catched in a row every 10 turns can piss anyone :D
 
Quick thought experiment :confused:: say A is running 80% research and generating 800 bpt, researching techs that cost about 6000 beakers (a tech every 7.5 turns). Now say B has the same economy but is running 70% research and 10% espionage, generating somewhere around 700 bpt, thus a tech every 8.6 turns. How many ept would B have to make to justify his 10% espionage?

So the difference between the tech rates is 1.1 turns per tech, meaning that after discovering 7.8 techs, or about 59 turns, A will be one full tech (6000 b) ahead of B. Thus, B must successfully steal a tech every 59 turns or so to justify spending 10% on espionage. If all his tech steals succeed, then B only needs about 6000 ep over 59 turns, or about 102 ept at 10% espionage. However, assuming the success rate of tech steals is about 66% for a stationary spy, to make up for failed tech steals B actually needs at least ~9000 ep every 59 turns, or 153 ept.

So 153 ept is the statistical break-even point, meaning that over a long period of time (i.e. the whole game) A and B will achieve the same tech progress. However, over the course of a single 59-turn period, the results could be quite different. For instance, at 153 ept B will be ready to attempt a tech steal at around turn 40. If B steals successfully, he is one third of a tech ahead of A in research (A: 800bpt*40t = 32000b total vs. B: 700bpt*40t + 6000stolen = 34000b total, or 2000b difference) with no penalty to him. If B fails the steal, he is now two thirds of a tech (4000 beakers) behind A in research with nothing to show for it. In fact, unless B wants to eat that 4000 beaker loss, he is committed to running 10% espionage for another 40 turns so he can try another steal. During that time, A will continue to lead by about a full tech, and even if the second steal is successful, B will still be 2000 beakers behind in research (better than 4000, but still...) Another successful steal at turn 120 is required for B to fully catch up with A.

No matter what, by diverting 10% from research to espionage and generating 153 ept, B will be behind in tech for the first 40 turns, though he will gain passive espionage benefits. Based on the first steal, B has a 66% chance of gaining a marginal tech advantage over A at turn 40 and a 33% chance of suffering a marginal tech disadvantage for at least 80 more turns (2 more steals).

But let's examine the feasibility of generating 153 ept at 10% espionage. If B is generating 700 bpt at 70% science, then each 10% on the research slider is about 100 bpt. Since 153 ept is needed to justify long-term use of the slider for tech stealing, the conversion rate between the research and espionage sliders would have to be about 1.5 ept for every bpt. Specialists will affect the overall ept but will not alter this minimum conversion rate. Getting 1.5 times as much espionage as science from commerce+buildings is really unlikely, unless B has built lots of jails and intelligence agencies and runs nationalism but has few libraries/universities. In fact, even with jails/intels, B would be smarter just to run 80% science and steal tech a little less often with the raw ept from the buildings. Since most people build science buildings before espionage buildings the only way I can see to get the 1.5 conversion is if you run spy specialists with either nationalism, jail, or intel agency. But you almost certainly won't get that rate from the slider.

Conclusions: diverting the slider from science to espionage for tech steals is not a good long-term research strategy (this may have already been obvious to some of you, but I needed to work it out on my own :confused: :D). That is not to say that you should never run the espionage slider (clearly there are other purposes for espionage), just that you shouldn't do it only for the sake of periodically stealing techs. Running spy specialists for that purpose, however, may be worthwhile with sufficient espionage bonuses, but that hypothesis will need further testing :mischief:

Edit: I just realized my entire analysis hinges on my assumption that if you undertake a mission and fail, you lose the espionage points. Is this true?
 
@reuster: You do not lose any ep on failed missons.

1) On a scale of 1 to 5, how important was espionage to your strategy?
5
2) What did you primarily use espionage for (active or passive)?
Both
3) How much did you use the espionage slider?
Occasionally: to get the passive boni vs. certain civs up online after a tech steal, and to quickly get enough ep to steal key techs.
4) Did you concentrate your points against one or two civs or spread them evenly across multiple civs?
Research should be known from every AI, above that concentrate on 2 AI for tech stealing
5) On a scale of 1 to 5, how would you rate the success of your espionage strategy?
4
6) What was responsible for the success or failure of your strategy and what would you have done differently?
I settled the first GSpy, but maybe stealing some early techs would have been better. Full AI research knowledge is crucial for the Liberalism race, and also for deciding what to research vs. what to steal. Very early Communism and early stealing of Democracy rocks. Espionage really shines after getting these two key techs. (No wonder Jesusin doesn't know what a spy looks like :lol:)

Even if you are the tech leader, espionage can speed up your research. Plan what to steal, and don't research it. A spy yields 4 ep + 4 beakers, a sci only 6 beakers. In mid-late game, you cities' ep mulitpliers will be the same or even higher than the beaker multiplier. And finally, there are tons of free ep points from buildings.
 
Very early Communism and early stealing of Democracy rocks. Espionage really shines after getting these two key techs. (No wonder Jesusin doesn't know what a spy looks like :lol:)

Communism? Democracy? :confused:
Are those spy-enabled techs? They must be UBs, since I had never heard of them. :lol:
 
It seems I'm not ready yet for Immortal. I definitely don't like playing at this level. That must have been the reason I threw away a rather strong start, in the vain hopes of getting a quick and painless religious victory.

I settled in place, with 2nd city up in 3000BC, then went wonder crazy. Moscow finished GW 2425BC, StPete got SH 2150BB, Moscow got Mids 1675BC. City #3 up in 1670BC, #4 in 1375BC.

Then I started to mess up things. 1st GP was born in 1075BC - a GE. As I wasn't considering Religious VC yet, I saved him just to "waste" it on the GLib, when I learned Lit, as late as 365BC! A few turns later, against all odds (should've been a GS) a GProphet was born. I couldn't resist the temptation to turn a long game into a short one (sorta achieved this goal, though :rolleyes:), so I burned him to get Theo, and then on started building missionaries and the AP.

Quick summary:
Religion spread:
.Sumeria 185BC;
.Persia 125BC;
.Rome 35BC;
.Korea 220AD;
.Germany 335AD;
.Arabia ca.400AD (gifted missionary as it was under Theo);
.Russia converts to christianity: 145AD, AP built 295AD, then back to no religion. Stalin elected AP leader t194/310AD.

Then bad news: Cyrus/JC declared on me t196. It looks like the few turns I spent under Christianity were enough to annoy them (they went from pleased to cautious). I was able to bribe Germany to declare on Cyrus but they didn't help me much. A few whipped Lbows weren't enough to hold Cyrus' SOD. Ten turns later the AP city fell. I quit in disgust and went to play the Noble level WOTM - maybe I could win that one.
 
After defeating Kyros I started to beeline rifling. During this time I attacked the Germans two times (first: Mace/Cats second: Mace/Trebs) and in either war I just succeeded in capturing one town and than my army lost the battle for Berlin.

So I learned a lesson. Either concentrate on teching or on fighting but both doesn't work well. I didn't researched engineering and it took ages till the AI was willing to trade it.
Ok, finally I got the rifles and the drafting starts. The first wave went through Bismarcks and Saladins land to reach Gilga. The latter build second army took the smaller cities of Bismarck and Saladin.
Gilga had no rifles at this time so I also could took his land without big resistance. After filling a few gabs with settlers I got a Domination win (1718).

Because I run a pure SE economy money was really a problem until I got communism and switched to state property.

The Good:
- SE with the pyramids is really strong. Fast teching and tons of GS.
- My first domination win on a standard map.

The Bad:
- Two almost senseless wars with Bismarck. I should have researched engineering by myself to support the attack with trebs ( and maybe knights).


I discovered rifling in 1285 and it took more than 400 years to reach the domination. The wars were almost fought as fast as possible, no town sieges. Ok, I could have build some more settlers in advanced but I think the main point to get a competitive domination date is to attack Bismark earlier successfully.

Regarding spies: I only use them for passive counter espionage (in all BTS games I played so far) because I am mostly tech leader and I also fear the negative impact on diplomacy when a spy is caught.
 
Conclusions: diverting the slider from science to espionage for tech steals is not a good long-term research strategy (this may have already been obvious to some of you, but I needed to work it out on my own :confused: :D). That is not to say that you should never run the espionage slider (clearly there are other purposes for espionage), just that you shouldn't do it only for the sake of periodically stealing techs. Running spy specialists for that purpose, however, may be worthwhile with sufficient espionage bonuses, but that hypothesis will need further testing :mischief:
[/B]

You also forget that intelligence agency and jail give +100% spy points...thus the slider is enhanced towards spying...and with good relations with the civ you are aiming at, you got cheaper cost in spy points than beakers.
 
Contender start. Settled in start position. Built second city by stone. Barracks in both. Warrior stole Cyrus's worker. Built Stonehenge, GW and mids. 2 axmen on way to Persepolis got lucky on barbs and got promoted. Cyrus had 2 cities but only archers. Took Persepolis then peace for techs. As soon as peace treaty was over destroyed Persians and got another worker.
Fairly straight beeline for Theology. Got Theology and GE same turn. Built AP next turn. Spread Christianity to weak cities in each civ. Checked what civ Wang Kon liked and switched to that. Gave him every tech when I got it. After only a few turns in Christianity converted to his religion during goldage. Made it to +9 points with him. Built defense units until first vote just to keep Bismarck and Saladin at bay. Sure nuff, Wang voted for me. Religious victory 625AD. Got 69 votes, needed 67.
 
You also forget that intelligence agency and jail give +100% spy points...thus the slider is enhanced towards spying...and with good relations with the civ you are aiming at, you got cheaper cost in spy points than beakers.

@ Nioco: I was factoring in the jail/agency bonuses but at the same time assuming that most people build more libraries/universities/observatories/labs, which neutralize this bonus when comparing the two. This may change in the late game for some people, depending on build priorities, but for me I tend to build at least lib/univ/obs before even a jail (though I might rethink my strategy after this analysis...). You are correct, though, in that I did not account for the decrease in the cost of espionage due to open borders, trade routes, etc.

My most serious error was (as I realized a few minutes after posting :blush:) that I wrongly assumed that espionage points were lost after a failed mission. Because they are not lost, the situation is quite different and most of my analysis is invalid :mad: Most notably, the necessary base exchange rate between the research and espionage sliders (with no modifiers from buildings, open borders, or anything else) is 1, not 1.5. This means that if you get significantly reduced espionage costs from open borders, trade routes, etc. or if your cities have more espionage bonuses than science bonuses (i.e. more jails than libraries/universities combined) then your modified conversion rate would be less than 1, in which case using the espionage slider for tech steals actually makes sense as a long-term strategy. And, as karmina pointed out, the spy specialist (+1b+4ep, no rep) is more effective than the scientist (+3b) if you use the espionage points to steal at a reasonable conversion rate.

So I'm definitely rethinking my strategies over here... didn't realize espionage could be so powerful as I've never relied on it before.

Disadvantages:
1) either being limited to stealing one civ's techs or having to spread your espionage between multiple civs, thus decreasing your tech steal rate.

2) the annoying process of building spies, moving them in position, waiting several turns for cost decrease, not to mention having to repeat the process if you fail, and

3) the obvious diplomatic penalties.

Advantages:
1) more efficient teching with enough espionage bonuses,

2) simultaneous passive espionage benefits against other civs, and

3) greater flexibility of espionage points vs. beakers (in case you need to change someone's religion on a dime :lol:)

For the next BOTM noble: the EE challenge! Once you research alphabet, the research slider must stay at 0% for the rest of the game. No scientists either. Who's interested? :D
 
For the next BOTM noble: the EE challenge! Once you research alphabet, the research slider must stay at 0% for the rest of the game. No scientists either. Who's interested? :D

Sold.

I remember reading a deity walkthrough illustrating the total espionage economy and being totally blown away. Not a single library built IIRC. I don't remember the author - anyone able to dig out the link?
 
Back
Top Bottom