RB4 - Desert Runner

Hi,

jameson said:
My take on starting wars is that you usually need more troops than you think you need
I agree, especially if you want to take cities fast in the initial punch. During my turns, I felt we were very light on military even for peace time - I haven't looked at the situation now, but if you think we need more time for military build-up, then don't declare yet. An early war can slow us down, so we might as well make sure we will gain something out of it, too.

If you feel we have enough units already, feel free to :hammer: away, though. :)

-Kylearan
 
Oh, and one more thing: What about building some spearmen? Gandhi will have war elephants, and since we can't build pikes (which will hurt us...), we don't have a clear anti-elephant unit. Spears would fight as good or bad as our own elephants or macemen against them, but they would be a lot cheaper. On the other hand, they won't be useful against anything else, so I'm not sure...

-Kylearan
 
If we attacked now, about all we could take is Madras. More buildup is certainly a good idea, and adding in spearmen is a necessity as Kylearan mentioned. A two-pronged attack with a stack in the north to get the iron would be cool, but would take quite a bit longer to prepare.

I guess I set up that force just in case jameson wanted to attack, but in a personal game I'd build up a bit more first, too.
 
Inherited turn: lone change is in Persepolis moving a worker from an unimproved grassland to a mined hill for a gain of a turn on a mace.

980 AD (1) Ghuzz and Tarsus start longbows, the one Tarsus just completed goes to the Ligurian town. Gordium completes library, starts barracks. We do want to reinforce our Eastern border, 2 lone axes are guarding the closest towns there.
I missed Persepolis growing into unhappiness, it'll need some cheap MPs to keep growing.

1000 AD (2) We get a call from Hatty:

(I took a screenshot here, but somehow it isn't in the screenshots directory ).
Anyway, she wants us to stop trading with Peter the Great.
We haven't discussed how we feel about Peter, but he looks like an obvious next target after we take out Gandhi ( a turn of phrase which makes me feel rather queasy given how he died ! ;) ). So I give her what she wants.

As thanks, we get no bonus with Hatty, but we do get a penalty from Peter :mad:.

1010 AD (3) Pasargadae Elephant - Mace. Persepolis also continues with Mace production, Susa will pop out some spears next. Arbela continues its missionary position, er, production.

1020 AD (4) I had Bactra pop out an archer (helped with a chop) which now provides MP happiness for our capital, a Missionary arrives to spread Confucianism so it can safely grow again.

1030 AD (5) Military build up continues apace, Alex wants us to stop trading with Gandhi. We comply. Again, we get no bonus with the Greeks, we do anger India.

I to catch sight of what could be a rather tricky tactical problem:



The axe has two combat promotions and a melee promotion, we need to be able to take him out somehow but I'm uncertain what would work best. Probably an Elephant ?

1040 AD (6) Rarely do I get such good research times at this stage of the game at this level: most techs between 4 and 8 turns. I took another screenshot here which wasn't to be found in the screenshots directory either.

I pick Paper next, for one thing because it'll allow us to trade maps for some crucial intelligence and because it leads to education and liberalism, which I think we have a decent shot at to get there first. I'm not that fond of muskets because you can't upgrade to them and they take long to build. We can probably skip them until we get to rifles or Grenadiers.

1050 AD (7) Working...

1060 AD (8) I decide to trade Engineering to Russia in exchange for Optics and 250 gold to keep up deficit research a couple of turns longer, fund an upgrade and grab a tech useful on the way to Astronomy.

1070 AD (9) More longbows being built, I do think we should squeeze in the odd monastery here and there.

Gandhi now refuses to talk to is, he'll have to one last time though !

1080 AD (10) It'd be somewhat bad form to attack on my last turn, but I think we're pretty much safe to go now. Next player could probably start the invasion right away, just be sure to hand out some promotions first.

Here's the army:



(main stack, the other stack consists of a half dozen maces and a spear). EDIT: looks like I messed up the screenshots, the situation in the last turn is identical except there are several extra maces there with more on the way. We've also got longbows in most of our cities now, Gordium might need some reinforcing though depending on where the Indians are.



There's a missionary on GOTO to Susa, sorry.

Here's the save.
 
Hi,

looking forward to some action! :hammer:

The axeman is indeed best fought with a war elephant, I think.

Last time I checked, Gandhi lacked the technology for macemen, so we have a slight tech advantage for the upcoming war. Still, the prospect of having to face lots of war elephants makes me a headache, but we will see...

About promoting units when starting the invasion: Only promote a few units when declaring war on Gandhi, not all! Hand out a few promotions anticipating attacks against the stack so we will have some strong defenders, but leave the rest unpromoted. Gandhi might attack the stack with catapults, so we might need the promotions to do some quick healing.

Please promote spearmen towards formation (combat I -> combat II -> formation), as their sole purpose is to slay war elephants. Other units can be dealt with better with macemen or our own elephants.

We will also need one medic in the stack.

Regarding diplomacy: We might not see an improvement in relations with Hatty or Alex, but I'm sure it's there. I think internally, the game has a finer scale to track relations than the display shows.


Roster:
Kylearan
jameson
Snaproll
hiob -> UP NOW
dopplex -> on deck
Zeviz

-Kylearan
 
Lurker comment/question:

On jameson's last turn, Hatty asked you to stop trading with Russia, which you did. Then later in the turn, you traded a tech to Russia. Did you take a rep hit with Hatty for that?
 
Lurker's comment: AFAIK the "stop trading" action cancels all existing ongoing deals (open borders, resources, gpt), not one-offs (techs etc). Trading with Russia after that wouldn't affect that deal, but will almost certainly get them a rep hit with her under the "You traded with our worst enemies!" category.
 
I checked the save just to be certain and sure enough, we had a -1 modifier with Egypt for trading with Hatty's worst enemies at the start of my turns and a -2 modifier at the end (we're still at +6 overall though) . We also incurred a -1 penalty with Peter for having stopped trading with him which still existed at the end of my turns.
 
So it's confirmed that tech trading marks you down as 'trading with our worst enemies'? Ouch.
 
Merzbow said:
So it's confirmed that tech trading marks you down as 'trading with our worst enemies'? Ouch.

Honestly I can't quite believe this... the human player can't see AI tech trades among AIs... why should AIs be able to see tech trades between other AIs and the human player?
 
Merzbow said:
Honestly I can't quite believe this... the human player can't see AI tech trades among AIs... why should AIs be able to see tech trades between other AIs and the human player?

I love the diplomacy of this game. Not only do you have to worry about what a decision means for the direct civ involved, but you have to worry about its reverberations with all of the other civs. That is not so bad on its own, but is further complicated that civs will constantly ask you for stuff, forcing your hand. If not paid attention to, you can end up enemies with everyone!

As for this particular complaint, I think it's reasonable that they will find out that stuff. Similar situations happen in the world (although I don't believe that the "real world" should be the basis for game mechanics decisions in general). Example - we found that countries have shared nuclear technology with others, etc...
 
Yes, but in CIV4 the AIs and the human player are granted an equal playing field when it comes to access to information - fog of war, etc. Why should this be any different?
 
You can tell who is trading tech to who if you pay really close attention, although I agree this requires a level of attention that is too much for just about anybody (including me). I agree with you there - we should maybe be notified when an AI to AI trade happens. Good point.
 
I agree, something for a patch...just a little message like: ``AI1 has traded blah for blah with AI2!''
 
I don't think the AI looks at whether you traded techs, I think it looks at whether you have a "+(?) Our trade relations have been fair and forthright" modifier with their enemy. Of course the player can just as eaisly call an AI up and ask them what they think of the human's allies, basing relations that way.
 
Hi,

jameson said:
I checked the save just to be certain and sure enough, we had a -1 modifier with Egypt for trading with Hatty's worst enemies at the start of my turns and a -2 modifier at the end (we're still at +6 overall though)
That's interesting! I already had noticed if you sell techs for gold, that this will have an influence on your relations. I have yet to see a straight tech-for-tech deal to make a difference in relations; your trade involved gold as well (in addition to a tech).

Trading techs has less influence than ongoing deals, though.

Regarding whether the human player should see AI-AI tech trades, I don't think this is really necessary. You can already see the whole set of relationship modifiers each AI has with each other civ in the diplo screen; how that particular "-2 traded with worst enemy" between two AIs happened is not important IMHO.

-Kylearan
 
oh...sorry

i was quite busy the last few days and will be until sunday, so i guess it would be good to skip me until then :-/
 
I'm going to need a skip too for mine - this is just a bad week for me with work. Backlogged already. Should be good by the time my turn rolls around again though.
 
Back
Top Bottom