Rat 24 - AWE Training Game
- Thread starter ThERat
- Start date
Othniel
fighting for Achsah
ThERat
Deity
Othniel, the MM of the workers is alright, I just wanted to point out the reasons for my actions as this is a training game. Some people group them some let them work alone...matter of taste
Othniel
fighting for Achsah
Sounds good. Discussion of the whys and whens of MM is always an excellent way to refine one's game skills. I'm glad you brought up your observations.
Here is my take on worker stacking:
On stacking, roading is the one thing that is most efficient to do seperately.
For example assume we have 3 workers.
Seperate: 1 turn to move onto square 3 turns to road = 4 turns.
Together: (move + road) three times = 6 turns.
However efficiency isn't always whats important. For example above is best if you are improving squares near cities. But if you want to build a road between towns, it is worth the 6 turns to use 3 workers to get the road quickly.
Similarly, a mountain can take 9 or 18 turns to road which seems to long. I usually like stacks of 3 workers for mountains as a comprimize.
A final factor is that towns grow slowly. If I town is working 1 unimproved square it is best use the 3 workers together to get the square improved as fast as possible. If it had 3 unimproved squares, then building roads seperately will mean you will finish 2 turns earlier. I think the best for that case is to build the roads seperately but then combine to build the mines.
----------------
For building mines and rails then combining is better. 3 workers can build 3 mines in 6 turns. 3 stacked workers build the 3 mines on turn 2, 4, and 6. So by stacking them you can use the mine from turn 3-6 and another on 5-6. giving you 6 more shields.
--------------------
In huge games I often don't combine workers simply because you get hundreds of workers improving squares that don't matter much (corrupt cities or squares not yet used). If each worker is seperate you only need to order each worker once every 3. 6, 9, etc turns. Stacking means they have to be ordered every turn.
--------------------
For AW only, I find that roading mountains/hills that I want to defend is much higher priority than in regular games (near towns). The reason is for the flexibility of having units on the mountain move off and do something else the next turn. I like putting a Spear or two on said mountain so the AI cannot occupy it - the road allows the Spears off to defend a town more quickly if need be.
On stacking, roading is the one thing that is most efficient to do seperately.
For example assume we have 3 workers.
Seperate: 1 turn to move onto square 3 turns to road = 4 turns.
Together: (move + road) three times = 6 turns.
However efficiency isn't always whats important. For example above is best if you are improving squares near cities. But if you want to build a road between towns, it is worth the 6 turns to use 3 workers to get the road quickly.
Similarly, a mountain can take 9 or 18 turns to road which seems to long. I usually like stacks of 3 workers for mountains as a comprimize.
A final factor is that towns grow slowly. If I town is working 1 unimproved square it is best use the 3 workers together to get the square improved as fast as possible. If it had 3 unimproved squares, then building roads seperately will mean you will finish 2 turns earlier. I think the best for that case is to build the roads seperately but then combine to build the mines.
----------------
For building mines and rails then combining is better. 3 workers can build 3 mines in 6 turns. 3 stacked workers build the 3 mines on turn 2, 4, and 6. So by stacking them you can use the mine from turn 3-6 and another on 5-6. giving you 6 more shields.
--------------------
In huge games I often don't combine workers simply because you get hundreds of workers improving squares that don't matter much (corrupt cities or squares not yet used). If each worker is seperate you only need to order each worker once every 3. 6, 9, etc turns. Stacking means they have to be ordered every turn.
--------------------
For AW only, I find that roading mountains/hills that I want to defend is much higher priority than in regular games (near towns). The reason is for the flexibility of having units on the mountain move off and do something else the next turn. I like putting a Spear or two on said mountain so the AI cannot occupy it - the road allows the Spears off to defend a town more quickly if need be.
gmaharriet
Ancient Crone
I find the detailed explanations enormously helpful. Often I'll already know some of it, but be missing other pieces, and it helps to have the gaps in my knowledge filled in. Even if it just gives me an alternative way of looking at possible choices, I'm grateful for the discussion. Thank you!!!
TheOverseer714
Overseer
Marathon session! Things went quite well. I'm gonna need 2 posts for the screenshots.
TheOverseer714
Overseer
Marathon session, took about 7 hours. All went quite well, it's gonna take 2 posts to get all the screenshots on. Heres the turn-log, hope it's enough
Spoiler :
![[party]](/images/smilies/partytime.gif "Party [party]")
Second MW attacks Spanish rSword, kills clean, promotes to elite. cats near Nevertheless (3-1), eArcher kills redlined English rArcher clean, nets another MGL!
ThERat
Deity
3 MGL's 
Great timing for the GA. We should use it to get a head start for our new palace, maybe we can swap the rax to a palace in Centralia?
I would fill the empty army with our UU. A fast army though low on defense, could be crucial for fast zone defense. If the situation gets tense somewhere or if we want to attack a city, we can use it. As long as it is not exposed to enemy troops.
As for the tundra towns, take the Koran city, bu I would wait with the other 2 until they grow so we can keep them and do not need to waste settler for that.
The Roster:
Greebley - out from 15th onwards, still can play one more set?
ansar -
Othniel
ThERat
Aabraxan
TheOverseer714
gmaharriet - up
Great timing for the GA. We should use it to get a head start for our new palace, maybe we can swap the rax to a palace in Centralia?
I would fill the empty army with our UU. A fast army though low on defense, could be crucial for fast zone defense. If the situation gets tense somewhere or if we want to attack a city, we can use it. As long as it is not exposed to enemy troops.
As for the tundra towns, take the Koran city, bu I would wait with the other 2 until they grow so we can keep them and do not need to waste settler for that.
The Roster:
Greebley - out from 15th onwards, still can play one more set?
ansar -
Othniel
ThERat
Aabraxan
TheOverseer714
gmaharriet - up
ThERat
Deity
I had a look at the save. I would try and get more infrastructure up. Some cities in our 'new core' should go for raxes (some don't need walls any longer as they aren't frontline cities such as Nanking and Chengdu).
The new capital must have gotten a forest chop into the rax as it is not possible to swap to a palace.
I would also swap Rat's Fall to an aqueduct as it wastes food (and after that a harbor) and Alleniel to a harbor
Be careful, Alleniel needs to employ a taxman to avoid unhappiness.
Personally I would always use the 4th leader to get the pentagon. 4 unit armies are so much stronger than 3 unit armies. It is quite hard to redline a healthy 4 unit army, but that's quite possible with 3 unit armies.
So, I suggest to use the next MGL for it. If we hit the limit on armies, we can also build the Heroic Epic. For people who do not know it, it will increase the leader chances from 1/16 to 1/12 IIRC.
The new capital must have gotten a forest chop into the rax as it is not possible to swap to a palace.
I would also swap Rat's Fall to an aqueduct as it wastes food (and after that a harbor) and Alleniel to a harbor
Be careful, Alleniel needs to employ a taxman to avoid unhappiness.
Personally I would always use the 4th leader to get the pentagon. 4 unit armies are so much stronger than 3 unit armies. It is quite hard to redline a healthy 4 unit army, but that's quite possible with 3 unit armies.
So, I suggest to use the next MGL for it. If we hit the limit on armies, we can also build the Heroic Epic. For people who do not know it, it will increase the leader chances from 1/16 to 1/12 IIRC.
Othniel
fighting for Achsah
Did we want to use an MGL for a palace rush?
gmaharriet
Ancient Crone
Got it! Very impressive turnset Overseer. 
I took a quick look at the save. Being new at such intense early warfare, I have a few observations and questions.
My general impression is that we have a very large front on 2 sides, but not a lot of troops for defending such a wide area or moving forward to attack. All of our armies are partially wounded and, it's not my usual practice to use an army at less than full strength...need advice on whether to fortify them for healing or attempt attacks on the enemy. One of our wounded sword armies looks close to attacking an English town in the S/E...is it enough to attack on its own? wait until healed and attack alone? wait for reinforcements?
We have one lonely 3/4 MW poised to attack the Korean tundra town. Should he retreat to heal and wait for reinforcements? Also, we have very little defense in our core. Should we keep a few MWs or Swords in the north for defense?
Should the settler in the S/W under the sword settle in place, or was it planned for some other spot?
I had planned to ask whether to hold the empty army for MDIs when available, but ThERat has already answered that question. It will be filled with MWs.
Any/all other advice/suggestions will be most welcome.
I took a quick look at the save. Being new at such intense early warfare, I have a few observations and questions.
My general impression is that we have a very large front on 2 sides, but not a lot of troops for defending such a wide area or moving forward to attack. All of our armies are partially wounded and, it's not my usual practice to use an army at less than full strength...need advice on whether to fortify them for healing or attempt attacks on the enemy. One of our wounded sword armies looks close to attacking an English town in the S/E...is it enough to attack on its own? wait until healed and attack alone? wait for reinforcements?
We have one lonely 3/4 MW poised to attack the Korean tundra town. Should he retreat to heal and wait for reinforcements? Also, we have very little defense in our core. Should we keep a few MWs or Swords in the north for defense?
Should the settler in the S/W under the sword settle in place, or was it planned for some other spot?
I had planned to ask whether to hold the empty army for MDIs when available, but ThERat has already answered that question. It will be filled with MWs.
Any/all other advice/suggestions will be most welcome.
ThERat
Deity
I am generally no fan of such expeditions. I would wait for more MW's from our capital. Usually those enemy towns keep archers and would counterattack, thus a single attacker won't cut it.
Yes, I would settle as we do have 2 armies for counter and defense. In fact I would try and hold that area. If you do not move an army at all it will heal during the IT even after attacks. Thus, sometimes it is better to not counter potential attacker but absorb them and heal in the IT. We do have a MW army there that could theoretically kill 3 units a turn. If you keep the sword army on top, we can then attack. Of course, more catapults at the western front would help a lot.
As I can see the English come from the east and the rest (3 of them) from the west. Thus, catapults in the west would help a lot.
This depends on the situation as it develops. If the English keep on sending archers/spear combos I feel we can use the army to attack.
I too would have more defenders everywhere, but we did expand very rapidly, so that is expected. Coastal towns should have some defense available, the core could be fine but we ultimately need MP's though 0% lux is already very nice.
edited:wrong quote
gmaharriet
Ancient Crone
I kinda think this was meant to be a reply to my question about attacking the English town with the army in the S/E. I think I'll let it heal for a turn before attacking. If I'm misunderstanding your reply, I'm sorry and please let me know.ThERat said:
ThERat
Deity
sorry quoted wrongly, have edited that
TheOverseer714
Overseer
I think the 6 turns of Anarchy was what held me back, i didn't want a GA during anarchy or lose too many units with none being built. I think we could change Centralia to a catapult, finish that, and then we could start the Palace there with untainted shields. I debated myself what to do with my 3rd MGL, I guess I could have left him unused, but that would make us unable to get more. I wanted the pentagon in our new capital, but that could go in any safe city, so that was dumb of me.
I guess all the documentation made me punch-drunk.
I also played the extra turns to get us even again, which was consolation for the 6 anarchy turns I think that might've been my most productive turn set in any game of civ 3.
I guess all the documentation made me punch-drunk. I also played the extra turns to get us even again, which was consolation for the 6 anarchy turns I think that might've been my most productive turn set in any game of civ 3.
ThERat
Deity
Actually the pentagon can be built in a city that would need some culture expansion to fill gaps etc. Nice free culture
gmaharriet
Ancient Crone
As much as I dislike holding up play any longer, I've further studied the save and have some additional thoughts...some of which may run counter to suggestions already made.
Do we really want the palace to jump to Centralia? I looked at the production queue from the City View and, though it's greyed out, even if we could switch to a palace now, it would take 118 turns at its current 4spt. I'd like to rush the rax there for 36g and maybe build another spear for defense. I should think we'd need an MGL to rush the Palace, but I also realize we need an MGL for the Pentagon, so I'd like to hear more discussion before I do anything.
As for the empty army, we have only 2 3/4 MWs right now. I'd like to finish the MW in Rat Falls before starting an aqueduct and the MW in Alleniel before starting a harbor. There is an archer due in Gmawanda in 1 which I'd like to switch to an MW in 2. Those, together with 1 current MW healed would both fill our army and reinforce the attack on the Korean town in the north.
We have expanded very quickly, and I'd like to consolidate what we have before expanding further, playing cautiously and defensively for a few turns. I don't know if that's in the "spirit" of AW or not, but I'm a bit lost at the moment. Maybe I'm in "over my head", and my feelings would not be hurt if someone else would like to play the turnset. If not, I'll play tomorrow after getting additional team input.
Do we really want the palace to jump to Centralia? I looked at the production queue from the City View and, though it's greyed out, even if we could switch to a palace now, it would take 118 turns at its current 4spt. I'd like to rush the rax there for 36g and maybe build another spear for defense. I should think we'd need an MGL to rush the Palace, but I also realize we need an MGL for the Pentagon, so I'd like to hear more discussion before I do anything.
As for the empty army, we have only 2 3/4 MWs right now. I'd like to finish the MW in Rat Falls before starting an aqueduct and the MW in Alleniel before starting a harbor. There is an archer due in Gmawanda in 1 which I'd like to switch to an MW in 2. Those, together with 1 current MW healed would both fill our army and reinforce the attack on the Korean town in the north.
We have expanded very quickly, and I'd like to consolidate what we have before expanding further, playing cautiously and defensively for a few turns. I don't know if that's in the "spirit" of AW or not, but I'm a bit lost at the moment. Maybe I'm in "over my head", and my feelings would not be hurt if someone else would like to play the turnset. If not, I'll play tomorrow after getting additional team input.
In AW there are definitely consolidation of position turns. Also I have definitely played very conservatively until I know the position.
There is nothing wrong with not growing for a while provided growth continues at some point. Reasons include a desire to build infrastructure, stabalizing a front line, etc.
I will load up the game and see if I have any other comments...
There is nothing wrong with not growing for a while provided growth continues at some point. Reasons include a desire to build infrastructure, stabalizing a front line, etc.
I will load up the game and see if I have any other comments...
I would put a city between Xinjian and Shanghai to stabalize that front line. It would need a road from Xinjian to the new town.
Xinjian should get a Spear so we are not defending with sword if we get attacked.
For the palace move, I was thinking we were going to abandon our current one for the free move. To do that we would need to shrink the cities near the current capitol and grow Centralia. There is an article on how to do it. I have not tried it.
One plan would be to get a settler out for Greebley River, Rat Falls, and then join a bunch of workers to Centralia so that is the spot chosen.
In any case I think we need to finish the Forbidden Palace first, I think so we have 9 turns before we can do anything about it, so I don't think you need to worry about it too much gmaharriet.
I will disagree with ThERat on a Mounted Warrior Army. I prefer the defense 2 of swords even if it means slower speed. The defense 1 means we either have to keep it back behind our lines or with a Sword army.
I think we need more units to attack the towns to the north. if 1 unit loses there is nothing to follow up with to kill an injured unit.
As I stated, I think playing defensively until you feel comfortable with the position is perfectly fine. The other time to do it is if you feel we might get an initial rush of some enemy. I would definitely keep a sword army near our southern front line in a place to react to a Korean rush. We will get one at some point.
There are presumably 3 civs to our South and only England (so far) to the north. I would stabalize our current front line with China, build a city between Xin and Shanghai as I mentioned before and then consider expanding toward England. The front line will get longer if we go south, but could be shorter if we expand north if there is only England.
As a general rule when we have two fronts like this, deal with the easier front first. That is England. If we take them out and they are the only one to the North, we are down to a single front.
So If I was playing that would be my goals: Stabalize the Chinese front where it is and shift the war to expansion toward England.
I would definitely switch Xinjian and Shanghai to walls. We can expect a Korean and Spanish rush. I would even rush the walls when the towns grow to size 2. Keep at least one Army ready for said rush and get defending Spear.
A final point - expansion often stops when you face the initial rushes of an AI. This is nothing to worry about provided we can expand later.
Xinjian should get a Spear so we are not defending with sword if we get attacked.
For the palace move, I was thinking we were going to abandon our current one for the free move. To do that we would need to shrink the cities near the current capitol and grow Centralia. There is an article on how to do it. I have not tried it.
One plan would be to get a settler out for Greebley River, Rat Falls, and then join a bunch of workers to Centralia so that is the spot chosen.
In any case I think we need to finish the Forbidden Palace first, I think so we have 9 turns before we can do anything about it, so I don't think you need to worry about it too much gmaharriet.
I will disagree with ThERat on a Mounted Warrior Army. I prefer the defense 2 of swords even if it means slower speed. The defense 1 means we either have to keep it back behind our lines or with a Sword army.
I think we need more units to attack the towns to the north. if 1 unit loses there is nothing to follow up with to kill an injured unit.
As I stated, I think playing defensively until you feel comfortable with the position is perfectly fine. The other time to do it is if you feel we might get an initial rush of some enemy. I would definitely keep a sword army near our southern front line in a place to react to a Korean rush. We will get one at some point.
There are presumably 3 civs to our South and only England (so far) to the north. I would stabalize our current front line with China, build a city between Xin and Shanghai as I mentioned before and then consider expanding toward England. The front line will get longer if we go south, but could be shorter if we expand north if there is only England.
As a general rule when we have two fronts like this, deal with the easier front first. That is England. If we take them out and they are the only one to the North, we are down to a single front.
So If I was playing that would be my goals: Stabalize the Chinese front where it is and shift the war to expansion toward England.
I would definitely switch Xinjian and Shanghai to walls. We can expect a Korean and Spanish rush. I would even rush the walls when the towns grow to size 2. Keep at least one Army ready for said rush and get defending Spear.
A final point - expansion often stops when you face the initial rushes of an AI. This is nothing to worry about provided we can expand later.
