Realpolitik CIV - An Interactive AAR

[arya126]

Yes and the barbarians will jsut be slaughtered, and rome will take the city first...so we should take it now. Barbs wont damage rome, so theres no purpose in waiting.

 

[arya126]

Yes but once we edit, people will have already read the post and might not see the edit. Alot of the time its likely that someone will post while you are typing, making sure its not a double post. And realpoltiks seem to naturally drift off topic when there are slow moments.

Scratch out in my post what i said about shaka being able to be converted. We should still try, though i hadnt seen that hed gotten confucianism by the end of the turnset.

Ravus- I dont think we will need any screens besides the one i already mentioned, since that WAS only half my plan, i just need to make a few changes to adapt to some stuff.

The only civic we are in is slavery to keep POP down and speed things along. I am thinking about a religious one, but i dont know if they are really worth the turn of anrchy AT THE MOMENT. Maybe later.

 

[Aysee]

No, we cannot CANNOT adopt christianity right now. Does no one realize that that will send foreign relations down the toilet?! We need to spread it around first, then try to convert some people, then adopt it.

 

[mechaerik]

I agree with Arya. We may want to wait to convert some people first.


Also, this isn't the largest thread on the site, but I'd be stunned if it wasn't the fastest growing.

 

[arya126]

Its the largest on the stories and tales for CIV4 by a long shot, and is getting up there in views.

And didnt i say to convert immediatly? Aysee is the one that wants to wait. Now that i think of it, waiting IS a good idea. Not too long though.

 

[Whosit]

Chinook needs to burn. We need to found a city between the Gold and Silver (now that LH has moved our Iberian cities, we no longer have Silver in our borders). Chinook stands in the way. We can resettle the city 1 tile north-east of the current position, and it will have access to 2 seafood resources, which is good (we probably can't steal the fish from Carthage if we kept the city). If our Archer has good odds on the Warrior (iffy, though), we should attack. Otherwise, build an Axeman or Swordsman to take the city.

Also, we definitely, most assuredly, do not want to adopt Christianity immediately, because everyone will hate us even more.

Libraries can wait. Few of our cities will benefit from them right now.

Troops: I may not be the Military Adviser, but I would not spam Swordsmen and nothing but Swordsmen. Remember that each unit has particular strengths and weaknesses. Swordsmen are best used for assaulting enemy cities (base 6 strength, +10% (+0.6) when attacking a city); as far as I know, we are not preparing for an offensive. A mix of Axemen (bonus vs. Melee units) and Spearmen (bonus vs. Mounted units), as well as a few Archers, would be a better course of action.

I would very much appreciate city screens for all our cities so I can get an idea of how we should proceed. Going pure commerce may not be the best idea, since it can stunt the growth of developing cities. Food is generally the most important until they are more developed. Commerce will come.

I must retire for the night, but I will try to provide a more detailed analysis on the morrow.

 

[W|M]

I agree with Aysee and Whosit. Another reason not to get swordsmen is that the barbarian city is very weakly defended: A few axemen will do the job. arya, stop panicking about money - remember that this is noble, and running a tech deficit is a good way to quickly get ahead.

Also, I know that there's an old IOT thread that's nearly 200 pages.

 

[Cull]

Old IOT with 200 pages? Last month it was. Not that old. It was like 10 pages a day, but most of it was spam. Easy to catch. Thanks to the Anti-Spam measure, IOT II and IOT5 when it comes out is going/is a lot slower, but still a little spammy. This thread is faster now. Although a lot of it is just useless spam, OT stuff, and double posts.

If it reallly so important, want until someone else comments, or EDIT it in. Make the EDIT in bold, and make sure to mention it in your next post if you really feel like it. This is mostly directed at MN, and a little at Arya. Make your posts long, and actually discuss stuff, not just smiley, no matter how awesome the joke/comment was.

I do have a question though. At the beginning, I thought actual civ stuff(city placements, actual civ reasons for civics, as well as the rest) was not what Realpolitik was about. I thought it was about the debating and character stuff. Lighthearter, if you can tell us if we disucss civ stuff, IC stuff, or both, that would be awesome.

MathNerd, pics please via gmail again. That would be win.

On military, I'm actually against too many spears. They really only counter chariots, and HAs, while axes, with the higher base strength, and, from what I believe, a higher flexiable role with the 5 str and 50% versus melee.

I would like to through out the idea of spamming swords and cats. Use collateral damage to hit the stack, and then use the high-str swords to kill. Swords are only matched by HAs in pure str, and axes in real combat. In terms of shields versus base str, I believe swords are better. In terms of melee-counter, axes are better. Just want to throw out that while axes/spears/archers are good, don't dismiss swords. Swords and cats, I believe, are better, but I'm in the miniority IMO.

What is EP BTW?

 

[arya126]

Raed the thread Cull. If you read it, you would understand that EP=Emergency Powers. A party leader that is not president can vote to give EP to the president in times of crisis determined by the game host (LIghthearter). Then 2 other party leaders have to support him. The president cant vote. With EP he can postpone elections, declare ML with limited repercussions, and land hard on the opposition.

I like swordsmen alot. I think we should limit how many axes and spears we build now, since swordsmen are more multi-use, and are better than both of them alot of the time. Axes have a chance of winning against swords, sow e should still have a few of them. A few spears too, but more to upgrade to pikemen later than to serve against chariots. Swordsmen and axes can take down chariots easily.

London should focus on swordsmen units. Birmingham will focus on axes. Liverpool on galleys. CN on archers. Nottingham on archers. Chinook on spears.

We should keep Chinook. I can see your logic Whosit, but that was where i planned a city in the first place. The barbs played right into our hands. Taking it would mean the gold and silver would soon be in our borders, and would save 2 settlers that can either go elsewhere, or not be built and we can use the production on military or such.

Actually realpolitik is (i believe from my understanding) about CIV stuff. WE MADFE IT ABOUT IC when we started all that IC stuff. I didnt even know what was going on at first. But the purpose of this is to solve issues in the game, like what civics to adopt, what techs and such, but LH puts a bit of an IC spin on it to seem like we are really in that time preiod, rather than in the future playing a game.

IC is, in my opinion, the junior partner in the combo of CIV stuff and IC.

Cull dont get mad at us for doing that stuff. I admit i double post and such, but its quicker just to write a 'quick reply' rather than edit in.

I will panick about money all i want. You know that it is -^ right? We only have 11. We will be at 0 in 2 turns! Then in my games research is set to 0% and gold is automatically 100%, and if it stays at 0, a strike ensues. Basicly the equal of anarchy...so lets not get to 0 huh?

I never said to make the libraries now. But they should be a future priority.

 

[Whosit]

I like swordsmen alot. I think we should limit how many axes and spears we build now, since swordsmen are more multi-use, and are better than both of them alot of the time. Axes have a chance of winning against swords, sow e should still have a few of them. A few spears too, but more to upgrade to pikemen later than to serve against chariots. Swordsmen and axes can take down chariots easily.

Again, I am going to advocate for a greater mix of units with less focus on Swordsmen. One thing I'd like to note, arya, since you are not familiar with BTS is that Chariots have been upgraded in BTS: They have a 100% strength bonus when attacking Axemen, which means that Axemen will get owned by Chariots.

Axemen get a 50% strength bonus vs. melee units, which Swordsmen are. That's +2.5 strength, for 7.5 total. An axeman is going to beat a Swordsman (6) in a straight-up fight. Swordsmen own Archers, Chariots, and Spearmen. Axemen own Spearmen harder.

We should keep Chinook. I can see your logic Whosit, but that was where i planned a city in the first place. The barbs played right into our hands. Taking it would mean the gold and silver would soon be in our borders, and would save 2 settlers that can either go elsewhere, or not be built and we can use the production on military or such.

Keep it if you like, but we're not getting that Silver until one of our cities reaches 100 culture, and that Fish is still going to waste. +6 food never to be used . . . .

Cull dont get mad at us for doing that stuff. I admit i double post and such, but its quicker just to write a 'quick reply' rather than edit in.

It's really just as fast to edit.

I will panick about money all i want. You know that it is -^ right? We only have 11. We will be at 0 in 2 turns! Then in my games research is set to 0% and gold is automatically 100%, and if it stays at 0, a strike ensues. Basicly the equal of anarchy...so lets not get to 0 huh?

Strikes only occur if you are running 100% gold and you still have a deficit. The game will automatically reduce your sliders if you would otherwise run out of money. Running a deficit is actually a good strategy most of the time, but I don't have time to go in to the numbers just now.

Edit: OK, I may have a moment after all. In Civ, there are a few reasons to run a deficit, especially at 100% science. In addition to the fact that Civ has some rounding/truncating issues, running max science at a deficit is strongest when you have beaker multipliers (read: Libraries, Universities, Observatories) in place. Often, players will run 100% gold while building Libraries, build up a cash reserve, then go to max science at a deficit. Why is this good? Well, you're stretching your money further.

Every 4 Gold you save up becomes 5 Beakers with the multipliers in place because Libraries multiply beakers by 25%. True, you could try to run the slider as close to break-even as possible, but you're not getting the most out of your money that you could. Costs are basically static, although Courthouses can reduce city expenses.

Let's say that your base income (read: Commerce) is 100, and there are, oh, 20 gold in expenses. Break even would be slider at 80%. With a Library in every city, you'll get 100 beakers this way.

But if you saved up cash for, oh, 10 turns (800), and then ran 100% science (which would last 40 turns if everything remains static), you'll generate 125 beakers per turn. Running break-even for 50 turns = 5000 beakers. Saving up and running 40 turns = 5000 beakers. No difference, right (it's also not less, but anyway)? Here's where it gets a little more tricky. Remember those rounding/truncating errors I mentioned? You usually don't have these even values when playing Civ. Running at less than 100% either way, you tend to lose a few coins here and there. It's not much, but it can add up over time. In reality, running at break-even would probably result in a little less than the "binary" approach.

Furthermore, the Binary tactic is usually best used when you are building beaker multipliers since the gold you save up will get the benefit of the multipliers later. It's really a micro-management tactic, but it's used by most of the advanced players I know, and if nothing else, the math shows that Binary is at least equal to other methods.

The main point, though, is that deficits are not inherently bad.

 

[ilduce349]

so is it clear that we are going to run 70% science?

 

[W|M]

More.

 

[MathNerd]

More.

Ilduce, read the post above you.

Also, I won't be able to be on much today.

And finally, does anybody from the administration want to comment on how the administration gave in to the opposition's demands WITHOUT MAKING THEM PAY?

 

[Whosit]

And finally, does anybody from the administration want to comment on how the administration gave in to the opposition's demands WITHOUT MAKING THEM PAY?

Not on the record.

 

[arya126]

More.

Ilduce, read the post above you.

Also, I won't be able to be on much today.

And finally, does anybody from the administration want to comment on how the administration gave in to the opposition's demands WITHOUT MAKING THEM PAY?

Well it was my plan all along. I was the first one to advocate bulbing theology instead of CoL. I have been FOR christianity ever since we decided to get a religion. So your demand was really just demanding that we follow our original policy. Some other members of this coalition may have not wanted it, but the president (me), who gets the final say, wanted this to be done LONG before you started demanding it. Rather, you fell into agreement with our policy once Whosit showed you my way was more cost efficient.

That is my official statement to explain the administration 'supposedly giving into demands" which we did not happen to do.

We really cant afford more than 70% one way or another. We are running -6 deficits right now, while we only have 11 gold in the treasury. It will take 2 turns, and the research will plummet. So we will, in 2 turns, be forced to run a much lower research rate. Currently, i believe we are at least on average with tech. Alphabet should be starting to leak to other people, and the religious techs should be traded for whtever we can get from the other CIVs. We just researched a string of religious techs, most of which most of the CIVs dont have. say we wait till currency, then trade them for decent sums of gold. Thats normally how i get my treasury to get major increases, that fund the upgrading of my military. Trade techs (normally old ones) for 200-300 or more gold.

I prefer not to edit. It seems slower to me. Idk why, but quick reply works better unless im using quoting.

 

[MathNerd]

Well it was my plan all along. I was the first one to advocate bulbing theology instead of CoL. I have been FOR christianity ever since we decided to get a religion. So your demand was really just demanding that we follow our original policy. Some other members of this coalition may have not wanted it, but the president (me), who gets the final say, wanted this to be done LONG before you started demanding it. Rather, you fell into agreement with our policy once Whosit showed you my way was more cost efficient.

That is my official statement to explain the administration 'supposedly giving into demands" which we did not happen to do.

We really cant afford more than 70% one way or another. We are running -6 deficits right now, while we only have 11 gold in the treasury. It will take 2 turns, and the research will plummet. So we will, in 2 turns, be forced to run a much lower research rate. Currently, i believe we are at least on average with tech. Alphabet should be starting to leak to other people, and the religious techs should be traded for whatever we can get from the other CIVs. We just researched a string of religious techs, most of which most of the CIVs dont have. say we wait till currency, then trade them for decent sums of gold. Thats normally how i get my treasury to get major increases, that fund the upgrading of my military. Trade techs (normally old ones) for 200-300 or more gold.

I prefer not to edit. It seems slower to me. Idk why, but quick reply works better unless im using quoting.

IMO, those are all excuses. If you really wanted a religion from the start WHY DID YOU SEND WHOSIT TO CONVINCE ME NOT TO BULB???

 

[Whosit]

IMO, those are all excuses. If you really wanted a religion from the start WHY DID YOU SEND WHOSIT TO CONVINCE ME NOT TO BULB???

Actually, I started talking to you on my own initiative, and the negotiations went from there. I did not know arya's position at the time.

 

[arya126]

Im sure you remmeber that i was MIA without access to a computer from tuesday to saturday last week. Like whosit says, he took the iniative because i bvelieve he did not want to bulb originally. The actions of one person in the coalition do not represent us all. We may be in the same opinion, but our views still differ occasionally.

And they are not excuses. They are an explanation. Just like you asked for.

 

[W|M]

Nope. Excuses, just like a weak politicians always make.

 

[MathNerd]

Well, you then have significant infighting in your coalition.

Anyway, I would quote you, Arya, but this is when you began your period of absence. Now that I read back through it, I'm starting to wonder if that was a complete coincidence.