[BTS] NZ's Shadow Game - Immortal Zulu

[Noble Zarkon]

Some of you will know me from the Civ 4 Hall of Fame where I'm one of the staff members, that's where I learnt how to cheese wins by setting everything up for maximum success As well as that from here I've developed over 12 years from struggling at Chieftain/Warlord to being competent at Monarch, I wanted to play a standard game and take it slower than my usual style so I thought a shadow game would be a good method. I was going to play Emperor but thought what the heck why not make it Immortal, everything standard / random / no huts & events.

I've rolled the Zulu, poor starting techs (especially with huts disabled) but an awesome UB and an interesting UU.

Here's the start:-

Well the Gold is nice but plains cow on it's own isn't great. It's likely SIP and hope for more food in the fog but first move the Scout 2E (via the unforested plains tile) to see what he discovers.

Thoughts?

 

[sampsa]

I'd say agri/hunt is good, maybe top 25% starting combo or around there. Not starting with fish/myst is good. Wheel is expensive but not very useful. If starting on a river I'd rather take hunting even. Mining would be the other attractive starting tech (besides agri).

I know where I'd settle (the best play here by an absolutely massive margin in my book) but I'll leave it as an exercise.

 

[Noble Zarkon]

I'll leave it as an exercise

OK - we have one source of food we don't want to move away from and we want to be on the river so:-

1. SIP seems obvious to me - maximises amount of riverside tiles whilst retaining the plains cow.
2. 1SW - kills the floodplain which doesn't seem smart.
3. 1W and 1 NW both kill a forest but allow a second city on the river to the East, is that worth it?

What am I missing?

 

[sampsa]

What am I missing?

There is a tile that you can settle on which gives not only an extra but also an extra for the next 500T. It's a -poor start so I wouldn't value the gold tile that high anyway. I mean yeah two farmed fp:s, cow, gold is +5 which is not bad, but it takes a lot of setting up. SIP is T13 worker, 1N is T11 worker.

 

[Noble Zarkon]

Ah yes the old "veterans settle on Gold", never even entered my head lol.

 

[sampsa]

I am curious what others think. Not everyone appreciates that idea I've gathered.

 

[pigswill]

Settling on gold ain't a bad option as with little food you'll struggle to work goldmine and grow. Maybe FPs to NE? Scout move 2E will clarify

 

[AcaMetis]

Gold is too high value long(-ish) term for me to want to settle on it, but honestly this is one instance where you can make a solid case for it. The only tile that could have a food resource is 2E1S of the settler, which looks like a Plains Hill, so ideally you'd be looking at Plains Cow and Plains Hill Sheep for food resources. Realistically you'd get nothing and farm both Floodplains to make up for the lost food of the gold tile, which will immeasurably delay the cottages you'd otherwise plant on there and (eventually) yield more at +2 than the gold mine at -2.

Something else I'd really want if I was going to settle a gold capitol is a second city to share that gold, ideally. Which, if you SIP, means settling somewhere north in Jungle land. Not ideal, barring the Scout uncovering resources on tiles workable pre-Iron Working. Which you'd get to faster working an early gold mine, sure, but still...yuck.

If I were playing I'd probably SIP anyway just because I'm so not used to settling on gold, but in terms of efficiency...might very well be the best play in this case.

 

[Fippy]

It looks like settling on gold picks up one more floodplain & river green..
which prolly means a Bur. cap becomes stronger than with SIP.
I think gold-settle should be stronger here.

 

[sampsa]

" is king" has been known for a VERY long time. People are still struggling a bit with what it means.

 

[sampsa]

prolly means a Bur. cap becomes stronger than with SIP.

Yes, I think when considering the strength of a capital (say ~1AD) one of the biggest factors is size. Bigger works more cottages (or even mines).

 

[sampsa]

Gold is too high value long(-ish) term for me to want to settle on it

Maybe this is one thing worth discussing. For me the window where gold-tile is good is not too long. Immediately at -cap explosion it becomes simply a mediocre tile for me. Once you have a library even a scientist leading to the generation of a GS offers similar payback. With granary is worth at least double compared to a and growth is just too beneficial to pass on. Say the window is... T25-T85 or around there? For me past T100 gold tile doesn't matter at all anymore. Maybe in a bureau cap that has grown to full size, sure.

 

[AcaMetis]

That is pretty much the timeframe I was referring to. Very early on goldmines are great for getting those super early techs quickly, of course at the cost of having to work a 0 tile (one reason I'd really want to settle a second city that can share the gold, so that if either city is building a worker/settler it can work the gold while the other takes food and grows). But once you get to the point of Monarchy in future preparation for Bureau you'd definitely want 3 floodplains cottages over a gold mine, which working the gold mine early is invariably going to delay given you'll want to farm those floodplains to compensate for the missing food.

 

[a pen-dragon]

The best reason not to settle on the gold would be a food resource on the probable plains-hill 2E1S, which would have to be sheep. Except the aforementioned hill the only legal unknown tiles for resources would be in the forests for calendar resources, which would not help the start. Is plains-hill-sheep worth staying? I do not think so, since compared to an unimproved floodplain all that is won is 2 and that really looks like a solid production start, so that would not be very important. IMHO farmed floodplains are better in this position.

Thus I would move the settler on the gold, and those who want could meanwhile reroute the scout via 1SW, 1SE and then 1E, 1SE to check out that hill. If there is food there the settler can always come back on turn 1 to make the delayed SIP.

 

[BornInCantaloup]

I'd scout SW, SW. I think this has the best chance to uncover corn or pigs. It certainly uncovers the most tiles anyway. There is a world where settling 2W would be reasonable.
Scout can then go search for neighbours in a clockwise pattern.

 

[Benginal]

I'm with BiC here. This start is so meh that I'd be inclined to go exploring for a few turns and try and find food. Going northeast along the river is tempting, but it looks like me might run into jungle. That leaves west at the best option. I'd be inclined to start by sending the settler to the hill 2w1s.

The sip spot is a great for a second city. Can work the flood plain, cow, and gold and chop out workers and settlers while the cap grows.

Intriguing start!

 

[sampsa]

This start is so meh

 

[BornInCantaloup]

I'd be inclined to start by sending the settler to the hill 2w1s.

To be perfectly clear : I think the argument to settle on the gold is very strong (food poor cap), barring better food opportunities.
I certainly wasn't advocating to move the settler in the blind

Shaka being EXP is very nice, here, be it to get a 10T worker and farm a floodplains or to get a 13T worker, unlock a better food tile which can be improved easier and grow faster.
Given the food situation, I kind of doubt that settling the 2H city tile would trump getting better food. The gold spot isn't bad at all, it's just food poor ; it's really easy to get to 8Hpt to get a worker overload early.

Anyway, I'd move the scout, first. Then it's easier to make comparisons.

 

[Benginal]

Hahaha, fair enough. Perhaps in my old age I just like wandering around with the settler when I can find an excuse to! And I don't mean it's a bad start. I just mean it's pretty sub-average, meh, if you will.

To be perfectly clear : I think the argument to settle on the gold is very strong (food poor cap), barring better food opportunities.
I certainly wasn't advocating to move the settler in the blind

Shaka being EXP is very nice, here, be it to get a 10T worker and farm a floodplains or to get a 13T worker, unlock a better food tile which can be improved easier and grow faster.
Given the food situation, I kind of doubt that settling the 2H city tile would trump getting better food. The gold spot isn't bad at all, it's just food poor ; it's really easy to get to 8Hpt to get a worker overload early.

Anyway, I'd move the scout, first. Then it's easier to make comparisons.

Yeah, I see that you're right. We can uncover almost all the same information with the scout and then don't run the risk of stranding our settler.


My more reasoned take: It's not obvious to me that sip or gold are such strong settles that we should immediately cast out the possibility of spending two turns settling on better food to the west or southwest.

 

[drewisfat]

I don't think settling on gold makes sense when we put a microscope on worker turns. If we SIP we've got things to do immediately: farming FPs and mining gold. Plus, once we work the gold we unlock more options with BW/AH/Pot faster. If you settle the gold, worker can't improve the mine and doesn't need to farm FPs. This is even more important because we're an EXP leader with a lot of trees to chop as well, so I would want to go heavier on workers early and unlock granaries faster than I otherwise would.

Bureau capital wouldn't be my plan with Shaka on a pangaea. I'd forego liberalism and most of the associated bulbs for more early war. So the option of working gold and sticking an academy in the capital appeals to me as well.