Rat 24 - AWE Training Game

[ThERat]

nice start going for a granary. With this dry start it will pay off big time in the long run. I would settle the second city south of where the worker is currently, that way we grab the fish. I would start a rax in the 2nd city and go for military there. We don't want too many warrior (archers + spears). After BW, I would go for the wheel to grab horses (if there are any around).

Roster
Greebley - just played
ansar - up
Othniel - on deck
The Rat
Aabraxan
TheOverseer714

 

[Ansar]

nice start going for a granary. With this dry start it will pay off big time in the long run. I would settle the second city south of where the worker is currently, that way we grab the fish. I would start a rax in the 2nd city and go for military there. We don't want too many warrior (archers + spears). After BW, I would go for the wheel to grab horses (if there are any around).

I made a dotmap. Could I get everyone's opinion on it?

Spoiler :

WC -> BW -> The Wheel.

What should I do with the warrior in the chokepoint? Continue exploring or wait till they come to us?

 

[Aabraxan]

The warrior is neat one,but why keep uncontacted?

Because this is All-War. We're allowed to trade with a civ upon initial contact, but must declare war on them by the end of the turn. Thereafter, we may not make peace. We only get one shot at trading, and the only civs we'll find by exploring are ones that will try to kill us.

I made a dotmap. Could I get everyone's opinion on it?

Truth be told, city placement is a weak point of mine. That dotmap looks fine. I lean towards grabbing the dot SE of Salamanca for shields, raxes and an early group of archers (even though I know that "food is king" at this stage).

WC -> BW -> The Wheel.

What should I do with the warrior in the chokepoint? Continue exploring or wait till they come to us?

A little exploring might be nice, but we don't want to get carried away. Every contact is a new war.

I agree that WC was the right first choice, but what about slotting Wheel before BW? It doesn't get us a new unit, but it does tell us where horses are.

 

[Greebley]

I think I would send the warrior south two squares and then back up to block. Even if we know that it isn't connected, it might reveal a useful water resource.

I would put the choke city one square North on the BG. We get the shield back after size 7 and it is within 3 squares of the town to the N of it for better defense vs landings - I can be a commerce town working mostly sea squares.

BTW, we have started playing no initial trade because 1) the initial trade makes only a small difference in most cases and 2) Allowing a trade doesn't feel in the spirit of AW. For that reason I prefer AW with no trade, but we can play the traditional way if ppl want. I am flexible here.

The reason for holding off contact is to get some cities down without having to worry about attacks. Contact doesn't really gain us much and requires us to build more military. The AI do start off with initial units that we don't have.

Once we have a few cities, I would become more bold with the exploration. If we don't have Horses or Iron we have a strong reason to explore more. I think I would leave a warrior Permanantly on that square until we make contact or have back-filled all the lands behind it and are building cities forward. There will be no suprise attacks on our main cities that way and we only need defend the one square which means less military and faster settling.

 

[Ansar]

I think I would send the warrior south two squares and then back up to block. Even if we know that it isn't connected, it might reveal a useful water resource.

Ok.

I would put the choke city one square North on the BG. We get the shield back after size 7 and it is within 3 squares of the town to the N of it for better defense vs landings - I can be a commerce town working mostly sea squares.

I really hate settling on a BG, but whatever you think it's best.

BTW, we have started playing no initial trade because 1) the initial trade makes only a small difference in most cases and 2) Allowing a trade doesn't feel in the spirit of AW. For that reason I prefer AW with no trade, but we can play the traditional way if ppl want. I am flexible here.

I'll go with no initial trade.

The reason for holding off contact is to get some cities down without having to worry about attacks. Contact doesn't really gain us much and requires us to build more military. The AI do start off with initial units that we don't have.

Hopefully I won't meet anybody potentially harmful.

Once we have a few cities, I would become more bold with the exploration. If we don't have Horses or Iron we have a strong reason to explore more. I think I would leave a warrior Permanantly on that square until we make contact or have back-filled all the lands behind it and are building cities forward. There will be no suprise attacks on our main cities that way and we only need defend the one square which means less military and faster settling.

Ok.

Everyone agree with the dotmap I posted, though? Or do you have your own idea of a dotmap?

 

[Othniel]

The dot map looks fine based on the limited info we currently have. I agree with Greebly on placing the chokepoint city on the BG. CxxC spacing is going to be more important than preserving a few BGs.

Tough looking start, really. We certainly seem to be on the end of the continent with the tundra and northern positioning. Scouting north to confirm that would be nice.

I typically go for an early settler before the granary because if a second spot has +2fpt capability, mathematically it pays off to go settler first. However, in our water-less start, the granary first looks good to me. So, there.

Also, it'd be nice to get a second worker soon to start spitting out roads. Perhaps grab one from the capital after the settler?

I like settler to the cow area first and get a chop for the rax. Going to the fish first works well too.

Not playing for early contacts is really feeling foreign to me. . I vote for no initial trading on getting a new contact.

 

[gmaharriet]

Roster
Greebley - just played
ansar - up
Othniel - on deck
The Rat
Aabraxan
TheOverseer714

I don't see my name on the roster, but since the other trainees are in the order they signed up, I believe that would put me after TheOverseer714, which is fine with me.

I'd agree with no initial trades. Dry start is tough, but at least it makes the decision easy on whether to mine or irrigate food bonuses.

 

[Mumpulus]

lurker's comment:
Regarding settling spots: since there's no fresh water, I'd settle on plains rather than on grassland. Therefore the spot ThERat indicated, south of the worker, looks better to me. It also gives you the most flexibility for micromanagement, as you can switch between shields and commerce with the same amount of food.

Regardless of whether you go with that spot our the one Ansar proposed, I'd found that town first, before going for the cow, because it can immediately use improved tiles.

One aspect that the trainers have not mentioned so far is micromanagement. Because this is a favorite subject of mine, allow me to chip in: because of the high degree of overlap between towns' workable tiles, MM tends to present many more possible combinations than in a regular game. Especially in the early turns (the BC years at least), there are often opportunities to squeeze out some extra shields or coins that can make a big difference.

I saw the AWM game we're playing in Gr18 mentioned. Rest assured that that game has turned out much more difficult then this game will be (probably). In fact, that game is a good illustration of why you want to avoid early contacts in AW.

And one last thing: since there seems to be so much interest in this, maybe it would be worthwhile to start another game with a second team? Would there be other players interested who were too late for this game? If there is enough interest, I wouldn't mind starting up a second game with similar settings, maybe with the Chinese.

 

[ThERat]

corrected Roster

Greebley - just played
ansar - up
Othniel - on deck
ThERat
Aabraxan
TheOverseer714
gmaharriet

 

[ThERat]

here is my take, but we can discuss that more in detail when more of the map is visible in the north

 

[Ansar]

I'll go with ThERat's map, then.

Got it (I'll play in the afternoon, have to go to a test this morning).

 

[Greebley]

His dot map looks good to me too and solves some of the mentioned issues (settling on the BG and distance 3). I would add a city s-sw-sw of the capitol (or 2 west of the blue dot to the south of the capitol). Squeezing in cities for extra unit support often makes sense in AW. Probably not worth building until better land is all taken. 3 SW of our capitol could also be considered, but that is next to a Volcano and not the best of spots.

 

[Ansar]

save

Pre-Turn
Everything seems in check.

IBT - Nada.

1. 2710 BC
Salamanca settler -> settler. (5 turns)
Lower lux slider by 10% and gain +1 gpt.
Warrior moves south and spots goody hut in our area.
Settler goes towards ThERat's spot.

2. 2670 BC
Worker mine -> road.

3. 2630 BC
settle Rat Falls, begin warrior.

4. 2590 BC
Warrior spots Silks.

5. 2550 BC
Salamanca grows.
MM to get one more gpt.

6. 2510 BC
Salamanca settler -> settler
Lower lux slider to zero to gain +3gpt.

7. 2470 BC
Warrior begins heading back.
Rat Falls warrior -> Rax (14 turns)

8. 2430 BC
settle Greebley River, begin warrior.

9. 2390 BC
Salamanca grows, use warrior in Rat Falls instead of lux slider.
Lower science to 10% and still get Warrior Code in 1 turn.

IBT
Warrior Code -> Bronze Working (18 turns at 60% science).

10. 2350 BC
Nada

Edit: MM after the picture to get +1 gpt.

 

[Ansar]

Also, new lands for us to claim.

Blue dot indicates where warrior is headed and should stay fortified.

Silks, and plenty of rivers.

Btw, no contacts yet.

 

[Greebley]

Looks pretty good to me. I think I might switch the settler to Barracks for the capitol. It slows growth some, but keeps the shields higher (by keeping the capitol larger than size 1) and prepares us in case there is contact - we could then build Vet Archers right away whenever contact is made. Completing the settler isn't bad either, but it may mean using Regular Archers if we suddenly need an Army.

So my suggested build order would be barracks-settler-archer (contact would make that Barracks-Archer instead).

I should mention that Vet units definitely seem worth while over regular ones. The extra hp really seems to make a difference, especially when the enemy are regulars.

Definitely need another worker or two. I think I would finish the warrior in Greebley River and start an worker next.

Exploration does show that we will want to expand past the choke for the Luxuries and access to the river. I would consider placing the next cities in the choke and past it and skip the tundra cities for now. We can backfill later.

 

[Ansar]

Looks pretty good to me. I think I might switch the settler to Barracks for the capitol. It slows growth some, but keeps the shields higher (by keeping the capitol larger than size 1) and prepares us in case there is contact - we could then build Vet Archers right away whenever contact is made. Completing the settler isn't bad either, but it may mean using Regular Archers if we suddenly need an Army.

I was thinking about switching the settler to barracks too, but wasn't sure so I just left it as it was.

I should mention that Vet units definitely seem worth while over regular ones. The extra hp really seems to make a difference, especially when the enemy are regulars.

Yeah, you're right. In my current Solo game as the Spanish, my regular Cavalry could definetily be better off as veterans.

Definitely need another worker or two. I think I would finish the warrior in Greebley River and start an worker next.

That's what I would have done, and it is what I do in my solo games.

Exploration does show that we will want to expand past the choke for the Luxuries and access to the river. I would consider placing the next cities in the choke and past it and skip the tundra cities for now. We can backfill later.

It's not like Tundra is very attractive on it's own, to be honest.

Btw, do we just leave the goody hut alone?

 

[Aabraxan]

Btw, do we just leave the goody hut alone?

I would think so. Eventually, our cultural boundaries will pop it, and unless the AI loads up a galley or crosses our lands (neither of which seem likely to happen soon), they're not going to pop it.

 

[Greebley]

I would leave it for now as well. If the enemy starts having boats then our towns need to be protected and a few barbs will be easy to deal with. Therefore if we have an enemy and they have boats we should be able to pop the hut. Right now we want to concentrate more on expanding.

Roster:

Greebley
ansar - Just Played
Othniel - Up
ThERat - On Deck
Aabraxan
TheOverseer714
gmaharriet

 

[Othniel]

Ahh, some nice rivers and a lux. That'll be nice. I think that in the not too distant future, a palace jump will need to happen to the river area. I agree that we should settle forward across the chokepoint and leave the tundra alone for now.

Agreed on changing Salamanca to a rax. If I'm counting right, we're getting +3fpt from the capital, so that means growth every 4 turns. Not great, but we'll live with it. With a rax, we can easily set up an 8 turn settler-vet archer cycle with shields left over (Running it from size 2 to size 4 and using one additional mined BG at size 3). Also, running the capital this way may save us on the lux tax. Any other suggestions on how to manage Salamanca or does that sound good to everyone?

I definitely like more workers and will put Greebley River and probably the next settlement on workers.

I plan on going for the cow / chokepoint area as the next settlement.

Depending on how MM the worker turns go, I might chop to help the Rat Falls rax. We'll see though, as mining the BGs and roading may be more important. Build archers exclusively until we meet another civ?

I'd like to send the next warrior built to explore the tundra. I'm guessing we won't meet any civs, but if we do, that would send us to war. Any thoughts on that?

For research, I see BW is next... Are we planning on IW next or going for The Wheel next. Also, did we want to prioritize the Alpha-Math route to get Cats or wait on that until we get HBR?

This is not my "got it", although I'm up next. I'll wait to hear back before I do an official pre-flight post.

 

[Aabraxan]

. . . palace jump . . . .

I was thinking the same thing.