RBC12I - The Western Roman Empire

[Doc Tsiolkovski]

We were building a few Garrisons for MP duty only. From OTOH, Vp is something like 9500 for us, 8800 for ER, and 2800 for Sassis - the already have 2 VP locations.
IMHO (and that is somewhat confirmed by the ER team) Garrisons are not that useless, at least if the city is on favorable terrain.
We have absolutely no income ATM, all research and taxes are made by specialist, so stockpiling Cats really kills us - nevertheless, I completely agree they are much needed.

You are aware that a core city with a Temple and MP only gets 3/5 Laborers and has to run 2 Clowns, and accordingly has to work high-food tiles? Without a Market, they stay near useless towns (ok, they can spit out your beloved Cats ).
We're trying to survive rather than win in a few turns, so getting 2 more really productive cities should be out of question IMHO.

Our problem atm is that we have enough Legions to be in no immediate danger, but since our enemies are so far away, we desperatedly need HCs to reach them, that's why I focused on research (btw, even a Church in Rome and Neapolis will be worth it!); in the hindsight, it would have been better to go for Mil trad ASAP first, ERome picked Byz Ing (though the Dromons could help us). No, we cannot afford to build inferior units and send them on a long march to the frontline, our economy cannot handle that.

Re: Carthago - there's a Cat waiting to move to Pompej, but I didn't want to let it travel alone because of real Barbs; either ferry it, or wait for the Horse.

 

[Caesar_Augustus]

Ok, another question:

Many size 3 cities that had been optimized to support 2 specialists and make 6 fpt have been changed, and now most of them are pop 4 and need an entertainer as one specialist. These cities are all hopelessly corrupt and only produce 1 shield and 1 commerce, so letting them grow to size 4 is basically costing us -2 gold or -3 science beakers PER CITY. For a civ with serious economic difficulties that's a lot.

Here's a screenie of Aquicum:

If we fire the entertainer and hire another specialist, the city will go into disorder. But if we had kept this city at size 3, then we would have 2 extra gpt or 3 extra sbpt.

Here's another screenie, a before/after shot:

The extra tile worked provides no benefit, since this city is so corrupt. But since it has a 4 food tile, it can support an extra specialist.

For the next ruler: Here's a list of cities that should be micromanaged or starved down to size 3, and then set up to use 2 specialists. All are hopelessly corrupt and have no chance of ever producing more than 1 base shield and 1 base commerce a turn:
-Londinium (starve first. Also get rid of the native Roman Worker on England - we have a few slaves and legions there to build military roads, and any surplus terrain improvements in England would be useless due to the absolute corruption and unhappiness. Either disband him to save 1gpt or move him to Europe to help with some of the improvements needed for the cities listed below)
-Eboracum (starve first)
-Aquincum
-Augusta Trev. (cancel the worker's irrigation - that would put the cow tile to 5 fpt and cause Aug Trev to eventually grow to size 4, forcing us to fire a taxman/scientist and hire an entertainer).
-Lugdunum (needs a worker to irrigate the plains wheat to get up to +4 fpt; I had moved one there on my turn and had left instructions on what to do but akots must have moved the worker somewhere else).
-Augusta Vindelicum (this is a tough one, since the only potential 4fpt tile it has is a forested game, so you would have to chop the forest and then irrigate it. However, once all of our workers have improved Italy it'll give them something to do)
-Tarraco (Irrigate the Plains Wheat and starve down from size 4 to size 3)
-Burdigala (same problem as Aug. Vin.)
-Corduba (irrigate Plains Wheat)


Cities already set up this way:
Aquileia
Carthago Nova
Durcotorum
Legio
Vindobona
------
There are 16 turns remaining on the Marketplace in Antium. It already has a temple, so it doesn't need one for happiness, and only produces 5 commerce and 3 gold a turn, so cash isn't a reason for building it either. I could see building one here if it worked a few gold tiles or something, but there are none.

We're at 9,930 VPs, followed by E. Rome with 8,915 and the Sass. with 2,905. Looking at the power bar, we're the strongest, while the A-S and the Celts are the weakest. The E. Romans are 2nd, followed by the Sass, Huns, and Ostrogoths.

We may want to sign in the Vandals and Ostro vs the Sass and Huns, just to help out E. Rome a bit.

EDIT: Made a mistakte above: You don't have to irrigate the game tiles after chopping the forests, since it will already be at 4 food (+2 grassland, +2 game)

 

[Caesar_Augustus]

Originally posted by Doc Tsiolkovski
IMHO (and that is somewhat confirmed by the ER team) Garrisons are not that useless, at least if the city is on favorable terrain.

Maybe they won't be useless when we're facing Raiders, but once the Maurauders and Warlords start coming we'll wish we could have 2 att vs 3 def rather than 2 def vs 6/8 att.

Originally posted by Doc Tsiolkovski
You are aware that a core city with a Temple and MP only gets 3/5 Laborers and has to run 2 Clowns, and accordingly has to work high-food tiles? Without a Market, they stay near useless towns (ok, they can spit out your beloved Cats .

Antium is already size 3 with a temple and a MP, and has 2 happy citizens and one content. At size 5 it would have 2 happy, 1 content, 2 unhappy and would produce between 8-9spt. Plus it has 2 unused Fish (3 commerce) so the luxury tax will help with the unhappiness. So I still don't understand why we would need to spend 100 shields for a marketplace there.

And read my Epic 38 report to see just how effective Cats can be in an AW type of game.

ERome picked Byz Ing

Doh, that bites. Ah well.

Re: Carthago

Ah ok, good thinking. Have the reg Barbs been bad in Africa?

EDIT: Just noticed that Dromons cost the same as Galleys (30 shields), so we can upgrade our galleys for free! Dromons also bombard @ 2 with a RoF of 2, so they'll be nice for hassling coastal improvements and bombarding units along the coast.

EDIT #2: Actually, we should keep buidling that Market in Antium, because in 6 turns when Monotheism comes in we can switch it over to a Church, which makes two citizens content and only costs 55 shields with our Religious bonus.

 

[Doc Tsiolkovski]

Actually, I cannot follow your argumentation, and I think I also don't like terms like 'I left intructions'.
You may notice that all far away towns are at size 3, since the reasoning behind is obvious. The ones above named size are that for good reason, most of them grew while receiving a chop. Londinium can feed 3 Specialists with Irrigation.
Lugdunums worker was moved away by me, since I considered that improving our core tiles is top priority.
Aquincum could grow once we have more Lux, and at size 7 it will reduce unit support. If not, this one is close enough to skim of a Worker if we'd need one in our core. In general, if this was my solo game, we'd already have 5 Lux, thus bigger cities were better.
We are not facing Warlords now, and we will only face Pillagers or Warlords from our current Allies anyway, and this is something that diplomacy has to take care of. Neither the AS nor Vandals are supposed to ever get Iron. But to achieve that, we had to move our Legions N, and use a few Garrisons for the Danubian cities.
And akots and myself seem to agree that we don't need cities that can build lots of cheap stuff, we need cities that are able to handle HCs, or at least Legions -in other words, they must reach size 7+. With 4 Lux soon, a market is by far more effective than a Church.

No need to point out how useful Cats are, but nobody will claim 'a few' Cats will help. If we could afford lots of them (s.v. Sid Celts), that could be the way to go - though it's rather contradicting to emphasize on offensive (which I agree with), but concentrating on slow units that can NEVER reach the lands of our strong opponents. For us, the way to go would be HCs ASAP. Hun Warlords next to our cities simply may not happen, we must be able to kill them before. Turtle mode is wrong, fighting far away from our cities ensures victory.
If you think this Scenario can only played with Weenie Armies, play it as solo game. I halfways (that is, about 20 more turns)played it my way already, and for me, it worked well.
I may have heavily disagreed with picking Monotheism, building Settlers in the only 2 productive cities besides Rome, spending most money for cash-rushing instead of getting HCs sooner, and not trying to get more Lux at #1 priority, but that was your decision, and as long as it doesn't result in immediate catastrophies, I don't rant about it.

No bashing, but a SG should be 'democratic'. If I make a mistake, feel free to me. If akots and me prefer a different but IMHO equally logical strategy, no need to turn on 'teacher' mode, especially if that topic was repeatedly expanded on in my report as well.

End of rant.

 

[akots]

IMHO, the only way of survival is legion armies. Cats can be useful but not in the long run. When a warlord or even pillager is wounded, he would not retreat if facing a garrison because chances of winning the combat are still high enough. Archers might be completely useless if not for scouting, occasional pillaging and scaring horsemen. HC might be good but way too expensive. Legions are the only cost-effective military.

Another IMHO but in Despotism which has corruption similar to Imperialism, the only way to survive is to build productive core. It may be too late but there are still few useful tiles around Rome to squeeze in a couple more cities. And everything should be mined and brought to maximal size even in less productive cities closer to the core. If they can reach 10 shields, it would be 2spt instead of 1. Those cities which have forest in their radius can have some additional shields from chopping. Worker costs 1gpt and brings 1spt chopping so we are essentially buying 1s for 1g. Having a taxman brings 2gpt which is not enough to buy 1s. However, minus taxman plus worker gives minus 3gpt which is essentially the same. Hence, final result is the same. Especially if the city is back again to pop 3. So, the city is allowed to rapidly grow to size 4, gets a clown, then builds worker getting back to pop 3 and hires 2 taxmen. So, we get both chopping worker and 2 taxmen within 20 turns.

It is indeed a matter of playing style. We should think of perspective, not only of immediate survival which heavily depends on legions at the moment.

Edited: cross-posted with Doc.

Originally posted by Doc Tsiolkovski
In general, if this was my solo game, we'd already have 5 Lux, thus bigger cities were better.

It is very risky but possible strategy. These remote cities can survive for some time before Sassanids crush Eastern Rome and get to them with their units. If we can ship some legions from Rome to arrive there in proper time and defend them, it would be a good thing to try. Personally, I think we have enough production to survive without luxuries but it's worth trying. Building more cities is very risky.

Third IMHO, we needed emergency cash reserve. For example, if I had not stockpiled 200g, Aquincum would be certainly razed by Huns. You never know, Celts may very well land a couple of pillagers next turn somewhere in Iberia... We would need to buy some units there. Cash-rushing courthouses also is an option. They pay back in 10 turns. Churches... They seem to work like cathedrals. Would not build them normally like don't build cathedrals if not going for 100K victory. Market is a good thing if there are more than 4 luxuries.

Edited again: We need more leaders and more armies. Assaults on Huns and Sassanids (as well as probably Ireland) are very unlikely to be efficient enough to eliminate them. We can though try to get rid of Vandals, Anglo-Sax, and Franks with enough armies. Visigoths can be also slaughtered then. Ostrogoths should be kept allied with us against Huns at least and Sassanids as an option. It migh be also better to move some horsemen to Eastern Rome VP locations in Greece when they are minus 5 cities. May be even settle some in the long run. About Franks again... They are my weak point... As soon as they start building pillagers, they should be slaughtered. We cannot keep this Frankish snake alive for a long time. It might be that Anglo-Sax would settle in their area and their newly built small cities would be easy to get with armies.

 

[Doc Tsiolkovski]

akots, you're right, cities would be too risky, I was thinking only of 2 more colonies in the Sinai, this works especially effective since the legionary to protect can help building the road to it.

Cash reserve is crucial, I agree; we're currently at ~100gp only, since I tried to get some research online, but we're currently not under pressure anywhere. If the Franks sneak attack us, that would mean game-over anyway .

 

[akots]

Originally posted by Caesar_Augustus
And read my Epic 38 report to see just how effective Cats can be in an AW type of game.

No offense, but I read about 10 pages and looks like mm in that game is a very weak point especially in the start. I would recommend some reading by Cracker instead about the opening moves. A must read on mm in Despotism. And his classical work on forestry operations as well.

Also, I don't like starving cities unless absolutely necessary. If it is a clown, I'll feed the clown and try to build a worker. They are the people of Rome and we must protect them, not intentionally starve them. If we do, we are not better than barbarians.

 

[Caesar_Augustus]

Originally posted by Doc Tsiolkovski
No bashing, but a SG should be 'democratic'

I may have heavily disagreed with picking Monotheism, building Settlers in the only 2 productive cities besides Rome, spending most money for cash-rushing instead of getting HCs sooner, and not trying to get more Lux at #1 priority, but that was your decision, and as long as it doesn't result in immediate catastrophies, I don't rant about it.

I think that it's these two sentences which demonstrate the key differences in our perspectives on SGs.

First of all, why wouldn't you say anything if you thought my initial strategy was flawed???? I find this really frustrating. When I play a SG, I analyze and criticize other players' moves because I expect them to do the same to me. I want to become a better Civ player, and SGs are the best way to do this. I don't intend any disrespect with my comments, and I get the feeling that you, Doc, feel that I am trying to 'command' this team. Far from it. I'm trying to get discussion going, and that's why I'm posting so much, analyzing the moves of my teammates and trying to explain the rationale behind my decisions. I want to learn from you guys: learn different approaches and strategies for this game.

I think I also don't like terms like 'I left intructions' . . . 'no need to turn on 'teacher' mode'

Again, I feel that I've been misunderstood as I wasn't trying to command or teach. I'll agree, in hindsight perhaps 'I left instructions'... seems a little strong, perhaps I should have said something softer like 'my plan for this worker was . . .'. Everything done by me was naturally up for veto by the next ruler, but I wanted to clarify what my intention had been. Also, if someone does veto something I'd like to know why it had been done, not because of courtesy or anything but because I want to understant the strategy behind doing it. I thought it was obvious that my comments were designed to foster criticism and further discussion, and not some sort of ultimate, true, and final plan. Are you perhaps put off by my frequent use of screenshots? I don't use them to 'teach', but to easily clarify what my strategy is so that anyone who cares to can then easily criticize or comment upon my strategy.

I guess what I'm getting at is: when you disagree with something, come out and criticize! No need to say 'end of rant' - I felt your last post to be one of the best in this thread, as you explained your strategies and thoughts on the game in greater detail and now I have more appreciation for what you were trying to do on your turns. If anything, you should type 'end of constructive criticism'! Basically I really enjoyed your post, because criticism is the only way for not just me, but all of us, to become better players. I have no problems when somebody calls me out on my strategy and actions - I welcome it and encourage it. I'm certainly not afraid to criticize when I see something that strikes me as odd. If you ever think that my criticism is more vicious than constructive, let me know because it's certainly not my intent and I'm here to have fun and learn, not be a jerk.

@akots: Thanks for checking out my report - I was hoping some of the players in this game who might not normally frequent RBCiv might check it out. While I've read the two threads you've mentioned, I'd appreciate it if you could PM me on some of the mm mistakes that you think I've made - I'd really love to improve upon that aspect of my game. Or if you don't want to PM, you could head on over to RBCiv and post your comments in the game report thread.

More strategy thoughts:
-Good call on the Wounded Warlords not retreating due to high odds, I hadn't thought of that. I agree, Archers were only useful to build in outlying cities until we got our horses hooked up.
-I also agree with akots on the more cities in the core - it's why I wanted to get some settlers out of Neapolis and other core cities early. Also some interesting thoughts on the midde-core and 10spt cities.
-@Doc: "Londinium can feed 3 Specialists with Irrigation." While this is true, at least one of those specialists would have to be an entertainer due to disorder at size 5, so it's basically the same as having a size 3 city with two non-entertainer specialists.
-Luxuries: I'm not sure if the Sassanids will target our Luxury colonies in Africa or not. If they come full steam around the Black Sea, then we're in luck. But I agree that cities on/near the colonies are a bad idea - colonies all the way.
-

Turtle mode is wrong, fighting far away from our cities ensures victory.

Exactly. Offence is king in this scenario.

@Corrado and HannibalBarka: You guys out there?

EDIT: Just had a though about making gold from WM. If we can get a horse to explore Africa, we'll have enough new map info every 2-3 turns to sell our WM to E. Rome, Ostro, Vizi, Franks for some gold. akots and Doc, how are the other civs financially? Did they have a lot of gold to offer for WM trades? Of course, this assumes that we even have 1 horseman to spare, but for +5-10gpt it could be worth it.

 

[akots]

I don't like to use pm. Can you please post the thread link.

 

[Caesar_Augustus]

Epic 38 Scenario Outline

Here's the thread link:
Epic 38 ECC Mayan Slavetrader Report Thread

I'm at response #7

 

[T-hawk]

A note on war weariness, that will apply to both of these Rome games...

A government type with Low war weariness (Republic in the standard game, Imperialism here) will never automatically collapse, but will eventually reach a maximum nonincreasing level of weariness. This state is one unhappy face for every citizen in a city including specialists (specialist citizens do not generate "normal" overcrowding unhappiness.) Once that maximum level is reached -- not sure if you're at it already, but it's likely -- any entertainer is actually doing nothing other than keeping himself happy.

IOW, growing any city that's at its happiness limit is useless, because the new citizen will just have to be a clown, because it contributes an unhappy face and thus must make itself an entertainer to balance that out. Better to work shield/commerce tiles instead of food, or if possible hire some economic specialists instead.

 

[Corrado]

I'm still here, but I'm swamped- I'll be able to play Tuesday night.

 

[Caesar_Augustus]

Although it's been more than 24hrs since Doc posted the save, I hate to do a skip, since Corrado hasn't played yet and Hannibal's status is still uncertain. So here's the plan: whichever of the two first posts 'got it' within the next 24hrs can take the game and play. However, if neither has posted a got it within 24hrs of this post, then I'm going to step in and grab it.

@T-Hawk: Wow, thanks for the info! That explains some of our unhappiness problems (ie in the screenshot above, Aquincum at size 4 needs to hire an entertainer as one of its two specialists).

EDIT (crosspost with Corrado): While I hate to slow this game down, I don't want you to miss out, so playing by Tuesday should be fine - just post a 'got it' before you start playing. However, HannibalBarka, if you can grab and play before Corrado's Tuesday got it please do so.

 

[Doc Tsiolkovski]

@Caesar_Augustus

Again, I feel that I've been misunderstood as I wasn't trying to command or teach

Well, since you managed to upset akots and me at once, you must admit it sounded that way...friends again ?

The point is, in a SG I will criticize if someone makes sth I consider wrong, but I will not complain if I notice something was done different than I would have made it. We did some pretty and contraproductive moves already in this game, not because of individual mistakes, but due to absence of any discussion about the goals we want to achieve next. The dumbest move: You build a Settler in Carthage, akots ferries him to Italy, and I bring him back to Africa, about 8 tiles away from Carthago, to finally found a city about 20 turns after the Settler was ordered.

So please, let's stop here and discuss. Our situation is pretty screwed already.
We must survive for approx. 60 more turns, and thus we need to get something like an economy and production base.

1) Core cities.
We need them. Currently our core is Roma and Neapolis. This won't work, at least Antium must reach the same level. Even if we sink 155sp (Market and Church) into Antium, it will be worth it, if it can build a Legion every 4 instead of every 6 turns after that. This also is the city to join spare Workers.
Our 1st ring cities are Antium and Neapolis, plus Veii and Cumae; those 2 cannot grow ATM, so they are best used for Horses, but infrastructure should be worth it once the terrain for the top 3 cities is improved.
A 2nd ring does not and will not exist - we're simply too far over the OCN. Now, if we'd manage to get them into WLTKD, they would be productive....
Ravenna, Aquilaea, Carthage have more all about 50% waste already. Those cities should spit out minor troops or Settlers, no need to further improve them.

Corruption cannot get worse, we should try to get some more small cities in Italy - but those won't be productive, so be careful about the locations, they need to be outside the 1st ring. Only reason to found them is helping with unit support, since they'll need no protection; even if the produce only Wealth, they should be worth it.

2) Unit selection
We all agree that we should get as many Cats as we can afford, no need to discuss this again.
But IMHO Archers are completely worthless now, even more than Garrisons (the ZOC is nice, and they at least protect from the white folks). Throwing Archers against Warlords (even redlined) seems to me - the chance they'll be turned into Marauders makes it a . But of course, C_A, if you build a few Archers , and we a few Garrisons, we have a good mix.
Horses are fine, no question.
Legions rule atm. Now, if we get a few more Leaders, I agree with akots they are superior to HCs; if not, we'd have to focus on HCs.

3) We'll be alone soon.
That is the most scary thing in this game, the presumably early demise of our only friend. IMHO - and that is what we really need to discuss, the N wars are pretty self-explanatory - we need to prepare us for that.
That means to me:
We must become a Sea Power.
We must have an Africa Corp, preferable including a Legionary Army - remember, filled Armies cannot be ferried! - and a Settler.
If the Sassis managed to capture Alexandria, we must retake it; we could station Troops next to it, if we see Sassanids approaching. The Lighthouse would be a great help...
Then, we should plop a Settler at Port Said, and station a Legion Army (hopefully...) and some Cats there. And Dromons should take care of the Seas.
IMHO, that is the most effective way to secure Africa - 3 VP locations and 2 Lux we cannot afford to lose. And if we soap up the Ostrogoths, the Sassanids won't be able to reach is at all (and in nearly every game if seen the were fighting the Huns anyway)

4) Northern Wars.
A big problem is that we cannot tell how many cities the Vandals and AS have lost, since we wouldn't know if our Allies already destroyed some; stupid AI will resettle the same spot ASAP.

Current Standings (ERome is 4 down):
Vandals - at least 2
AS - at least 3
Celts -2

The smaller (mainly Archers) Army group should be sufficient to take any newly AS founded city; if we kill the Migrant, city count won't rise - too bad the AI gets that instant Spear .

The main forces should strike the Vandals as fast as possible (ok, some leader fishing is fine). Concentrate on their southern cities, there is no Iron in the North.

And then...kill the Franks. They are the biggest threat for us in my opinion. They could easily take 4 cities. We should start to reinforce especially A. Treverorum and Ducorturum. Since this is near enough, I think here our Cats will really help us.
We could sell them Wines ATM (they have their own, but not connected yet), but after the 20 turns, we should strike.

5) Tech
Now this is the one topic where I'm completely unhappy. We effectively researched Monotheism in 40 turns! E Rome managed to have Byz Ing in 30, without being able to use specialists...
Mono wasn't a bad choice by itself, but the research time is inacceptable. We could have gotten Mono + Byz Ing (traded) + Mil Trad around turn 50; and a few HCs in 20 turns would be extremly helpful while killing the Franks. Any other tech after that is pretty much optional, but Dromons, Churches and HCs are desperatedly needed.
Can we all agree on keeping a cash reserve of ~150gp, and focusing on research otherwise? It simply doesn't make sense when one player tries to max our gold, and the next one beakers. I don't say we must research (though I think so), but we must focus on either gold or science.


@C_A. Fog-busting to make our Map tradeable is a good idea, we'll have a Horse in Africa soon - though me think it is needed to watch for Sassis as well. But we have 2 Galleys in Britain...

Whoever signs the next Alliance with Ostrogoth/ Franks, try to get their WM! They were at peace with the other Barbarians for a few turns, and we really need to know where the Vandals and Huns are.

Rules Q: If the Franks haven't connected Iron/ Horses (btw, a good reason to not take Kiel too soon!) so far, are we allowed to park a unit there? 'Dastardly' or 'Exploit!' ?

 

[Charis]

These Rome games are brutal! That's a good thing, but alas, the harder the game, the more it brings a magnifying glass to what would normally be small items. Very subtle points, like when to NOT let a city grow anymore (by choice!), order of research, as well as big points such as "How the #%$@ are we going to defend ourselves?!" are coming to the fore. This game has good players in it, but the differences in style are leading to frustration. I'm glad you're recognizing this and discussing strategy more. Playing for fun with a role, playing for fun to learn, and playing for fun to demolish the opponents are all valid paths, but if we're not careful we assume others have the same goal as we do.

You guys can definitely pull this one out! Good luck, and may your
brothers in Eastern Rome guard your back!
Charis

PS-EDIT@RulesQ - Exploit to park on a friend/neutral resource in *their* territory (but of course quite allowed when at war, and you can blockade ones in neutral territory.)

 

[Caesar_Augustus]

Originally posted by Doc Tsiolkovski
friends again ?

Hey, we always were in my eyes

About the settler, the one you moved to Africa wasn't the same settler I built in Carthage - at the end of my turns the settler was in a galley 2 turns away from Italy, and akots founded Antium with it on his 4th turn in 458 AD. At least that's what I gather from his report, since I don't think he would have left the settler sitting in the galley for his 10 turns. He'd have to clarify that. And hate to criticize more after the last few posts, but building another city in Africa was a mistake IMO, especially if you had to bring a settler all the way from Italy to do it! But I think you admitted earlier that a colony would have been better, and the extra city will help our economy by +5gpt so it wasn't . And with our new Africa plan, Africa should never be in danger anyway.

Our situation is pretty screwed already.

Blasphemy! I actually think we're in decent shape within the context of this scenario:

-We have the Vandals and the Anglo-Saxons on the run.
-Once we get a few Dromons up to England, the Celts will never get a chance to get off of Ireland (we can bombard their curraghs/galleys to the bottom of the sea as soon as they leave an Irish port).
-We can concentrate the majority of our forces on the Danube frontier and the forests of Germany).
-Our enemies are still only coming at us with Raiders and Horsemen.
Gold:
I completely agree with keeping a gold surplus. On my turn, I concentrated more on cash-rushing and semi-research because I wanted to quickly rush barracks in our core so we could start pumping out units, and to rush units in England to make sure we took out those Scottish cities. As it was, we got lucky and managed to barely take out those cities. So while it would have been nice to have researched more quickly, if I had started to do so on my turn and not done any cash-rushing we probably would have lost England. EDIT: When I passed off the game after the initial 13 turns there were 11 turns left on Monotheism research - but akots had lots to contend with, and needed to rush units in Aquincum to stave off the Huns, as well as fire some of the scientists to hire taxmen in order to deal with rising unit costs.
Africa:
I was about to completely disagree with your plan, Doc, since I didn't want to commit more military to Africa, until I came across the bit on Port Said. That's brilliant! If we can build a fort on that 1-tile chokepoint East of Alexandria, we can basically stop any Sassanid offensive into Africa and have safe colonies (well, not safe from reg barbs but anyway) on the Dyes, Ivory, and Incense. Conversely, we could found a city on the same spot and build walls for the same defensive bonus, and as Justus II said in the other thread, every 1 pop city is effectively +5gpt when considering unit costs, wealth, and taxman.

Our dromons could take care of any Sass. boats, forcing them to march all the way north. However, I'm not sure if I agree with parking an Army down there - we need all of the Armies we can to take out Vandal, A-S and Frankish cities, and also to protect against the Huns. But I do think we should consider parking some legions and cats down there right now so we can build more colonies - and also we might be able to take some of th hear off of our E. Roman brothers, since it is the Sassanids who are taking it to them, as can be seen by the now-green borders of Ephesus ).

I don't think we should wait for the Sass. to take Alexandria or anything just so we can re-take it and get the Lighthouse. +1 movement isn't worth a sizeable Sassanid force past the chokepoint. However, once E. Rome falls we should definitely park units on the Thessalokia, Constant, Athenae, Cyrene, and Alexandria VP locations.

@C_A. Fog-busting to make our Map tradeable is a good idea, we'll have a Horse in Africa soon - though me think it is needed to watch for Sassis as well.

Another bonus to fog-busting is that we can frag the many barb camps that have spung up down there. We may want to think of having two horses down there - Africa could very well turn into our top source of gpt!

@Charis: Pull this one out?! Ha, this one is in the bag!

 

[akots]

IMHO the game will be decided by our legion armies CRUSHING everything everywhere. Other issues like economy need some attention but are not crucial. Squeezing out some more shields and income is good point but not decisive. We are going to face about 20-50 warlords within 40-50 turns, so 10 extra cats... They'll chew and spit on them.

I was not upset by Caesar_Augustus in any way and am not upset by Doc (and by my own play ) and by how the game goes. I think we are doing OK. C_A during his reign did a good job drawing gorgeous schemes, conquered Scotland and started development of the core while screwing up something else. I tried to surivived and got a leader further developing the core and screwed research because I had to. Doc continued to develop the core and got some progress in Africa while playing a risky style. It all seems to go rather smooth. To victory or defeat? Well, it's only Demigod. We cannot lose to Demigod... not seriously.

Archers are indeed a dangerous unit to build. We must cut our losses in combat against warlords and pillagers to minimum for the enslavement. More cities is also dangerous. Building Mediterranean fleet might ruin the economy. Dispatching legions to Africa is risky because we might need them at home. Every positive strategy has some drawbacks. Well, if we do nothing like indeed it was in Rome in IVth-Vth centuries, it would still be probably OK. And if we do something, it would be some good and some bad both but probably not something that would ruin the game completely. Just get to 4-5 armies and all problems are solved... The map is so rich that possibilities to try are indefinite. And they all may be good or all may be bad as well. However, qualification of individual players does not suggest a possibility of real failure IMHO.

I remember building 2 settlers in Carthage to settle around Rome. Intention was to have a really dense build in the core to work every useful square with minimal distance corruption. Total 2 cities were built near Rome adding 9% to rank corruption in Milan and Ravenna which is less than 1 shield out of 10. I thought Milan could handle another 4.5% but Doc decided to ship the settler to Africa. Also good. Especially if there is a way to get these luxuries without real risk of losing cities.

@Charis: No offense, I have deep respect for every player in the East Rome game. Just ranting. I'm a poet after all and must insult somebody from time to time to survive.

And look at the other Eastern Rome game! They have probably loaded scenario as West Rome, looked at it, decided that on Demigod it is too tough and went for Eastern Rome which is substantially easier to handle. It is more compact and has more access to luxuries. So, Realms Beyond is in this thread indeed!

 

[Corrado]

Double-post.

But as long as I'm editing it, let me add what I forgot to say:

For the next player- I've been sailing 3 workers out east to go pick up the spare luxes out there- there's an incense and a gems in Sinai, and there's a single Dye hanging out between the two Byz cities on the coast. Yeah, sure, we can't hold them, but while we have them, our people will be much happier and more productive, so keep going for them ASAP.

 

[Caesar_Augustus]

Only gave it a brief lookover, but everything looks good Corrado! Any Warlords yet? How are the VPs?

Are you only playing 8 to even out the year number? Or are there more turns to come? If the former, there's no save, and if the latter, no problem, you've waited awhile and certainly deserve 10 turns!

Any horses exploring Africa yet?

Re: Christianity: personally I would have gone for Mil. Trad., since in addition to one of the Christian wonders (religious trait) we'll need Justinian's too (militaristic), for a total of 1050 shields. That's a lot. The Eastern Romans don't have to worry about that; since they're Commercial/ Religious and already start with the Lighthouse in Alexandria (comm.), they only need to invest 450 shields for a GA.

Also, you saw how expensive it was to trade for Mil. Trad. - we may be hard pressed to pony up for it if the Byz do go for it.

Minor complaint though, since our Legions are doing a good enough job that HC aren;t that essential yet.

 

[Corrado]

And thus, in 392 AD, began the reign of Emperor Corradius.

Regarding what has been said so far:

I agree with CA that we need to focus on the core cities, and turn the outlying cities into Specialist towns. We're building a lot of outlying barracks, which may seem good for our military, but that's 1 gp of upkeep each that we really can't afford right now, especially in cities that have net 1 spt.

Each city built is worth 5 gpt, as explained in the other thread. But unlike Eastern Rome, there is no real safe place for us to build extra cities. Spain might work, but a couple of AS horsemen on the loose could also crack us.


Switch Carthage to a Settler to set up Port Said.

Switch Antium, Ravenna to a Courthouse. Switch Legio, Corduba, Augusta, Tipasa to a Legion.

Swith Avericum to a Horseman.

Get the Visigoths to pay us 28 gold for an alliance against A-S.

Get 45 gold and TM from Franks for Wine.

394 AD (1):
Army attacks Zuchabar twice, killing two Spears.
XIV attacks Vandal marauder, -1/kill.

396 AD (2):
III attacks Vandal marauder, wins but is red-lined.
Army hits Zucchabar twice more, killing two spears, and razing the city.

398 AD (3):
Rome Legion->Legion. Neapolis Legion->Legion.
I Minervia leader-fishes on a Vandal marauder, but gets nothing.

IBT: 2 Barb Galleys attempt to sink one of ours, and instead they promote it.

400 AD (4): Augusta Vindelicum Barracks->Legion.

Franks are moving into our city range, which worries me. Decide to offer them Construction for Alliance against the Vandals, 28 gold, and their TM.

Neither XIV or I pop a leader, but they do kill two Vandal Marauders. The army kills a third.

IBT: Visi and Sassanids sign an MA against Eastern Rome and the Franks. Refuse Clovis' request for an alliance against the Visigoths.

402 AD (5): Aquinicum Barracks->Legion.

Kill 2 marauders, one AS, one Vandal.

IBT: AS found a city on a destroyed spot. They were smart enough to wait until we no longer had units adjacent to it. But not smart enough to wait until our units were more than 2 spaces away.

404 AD (6): Rome Legion->Legion. Massilia Courthouse->Legion. Durcotorum Catapult->Legion. Lugdunum Walls->Legion. Antium Courthouse->Legion.

Visigoths attack Eastern Rome; we are forced to declare on the Visigoths.

Franks and Ostro begin Scourge. Ostros unwilling to ally against the Visi for any price.

Army kills a Vandal.

IBT: Vandals aren't smart enough not to form a city right next to our forces. Specifically, our army.

406 AD (7): Discover Monotheism.

Oof. Decisions, decisions. Go for MT and the 5/2/2, or for Christianity and two Wonders that can alleviate our unhappiness problems and possibly give us a Golden Age?

Well, the Byz can't possibly have gone towards Christianity; at worst, they went up Monotheism. So we'll go for Christianity and hope they get MT before they lose another 4 cities.

Neapolis Legion->Legion. Carthage Settler->Legion. Milan Temple-> Legion. Aquileia Temple->Legion. Tingis Worker->Wealth. Veii Horseman->Legion. Cumae Garrison->Legion.

Well, trading for Byz ingenuity would cost us nearly everything we have. So no dice as of yet.

2 Legions kill 2 Visi spearmen in Athanaguerva.
Army kills the 2 spearmen in the new Vandal city of Aleria and destroys the town.
2 Legions kill the 2 spearmen defending the new AS town of Lindsey, and raze the city.

Ivory is now hooked up. Cities are re-arranged to fit. We can replace nearly all of our Entertainers now with Taxmen and Scientists; after some movement and tuning, we are even in gold (with 252 in the treasury) and will have Christianity in 16 turns.

IBT: Huns and Franks sign peace treaty.

Byz ends our deal for the Dyes. Apparently, they've lost enough sources that they were trading us their only one.

406 AD (8) Luckily, due to War Happiness from our Visi war, we get no riots, but much re-arranging is necessary. But with the 19 gpt back in our treasury from the dead deal, we now will get Christianity in 11 turns at +0gpt.

Legion kills another Visi spearman in Athanerawhatever, but the backup Legion is too wounded for me to want to risk attacking the last spearman.

IBT: AS move to re-settle the land we just destroyed for the 2nd time. Visi marauder attacks a wounded Legion, but promotes it.

408 AD (9) Rome Legion->Legion.

Kill 3 Vandal spears in their capital of Hippo Regius.

IBT: Huns and Ostrogoths MA against us.

410 AD (10) Ravenna Courthouse->Church.

Kill a spear and destroy the Visi city of Athanaswervia.


Okay, folks. We're not in horrible shape. Admittedly, everyone except the Franks and Eastern Rome are at war with us. And Eastern Rome won't trade Byz Ingenuity to us, and we're a ways away from Military Tradition. Eastern Rome still leads the world in being-about-to-fall with 4 cities gone.

But, we have 13410 VP, which is the most of anyone. Our Legions are still the top unit in the field, as I've seen nothing but Marauders and Spearmen. We're 20 turns at most from MT, which is better than any stinkin' barbarian. We also now have Churches, which may be handy for keeping our core cities in order and releasing the lux taxes' death grip on our economy. At 55 shields, they're a bit bigger than a Legion, and they cost 1 g., but they keep 2 people happy, which would put a bunch of clowns back to work if we're willing to slow down Legion production. The Vandals and A-S are at 3-4 cities gone each, but more importantly, we've knocked them down to their central core cities, which means that their production rate is extrmely slow.

But I'm the relative n00b compared to my fellow players, so I leave that as something to be discussed.

Ave Imperator!