[BTS] Saved Game - What to do here?

[LincolnOfRome]

Wow. You are really in a great position to take the continent very early. I see you are already warring Pacal. That is a few hundred years faster than me.

 

[Gumbolt]

Oh Pascal is dead.

Declared on Toku and bribed Shaka in.

5 cities including capital down. 4 left. He may vassal to Shaka.

Bulbed part of engineering. Got 2x Gr artist. Not sure what to do with them.

Up to 30 cities. Settling islands now and took 2 barb cities. Plus other empty land. Shaka has 11 cities. I have whipped quite a few court houses as upkeep was 13-15 in many cities.

Why hold back on such a strong house.

My only concern is that the continent land may not get me to 64% land. Currently at 30% but I need double that.See what island cities I can find. Will need to kill off Shaka. From what I can see he has no actual stack. If he does it's inside Toku land and out of sight. He did send a mini stack of 6-7 units at Toku but most of these died thankfully. He does have phants.

Tech wise I am way behind you. Won't have edu/philosophy/Nationalism by 1000ad. Could roll 1-2 golden ages. Will try trebs/phants vs shaka.

 

[sampsa]

@LincolnOfRome checked the Rags-saves. Not saying you played it poorly, but I think it is possible to get so much more from that start. I can't really see any real strategic focus. You can do a bit of this and a bit of that on emperor and still demolish the AIs.

Rather than start a slow war at 1AD, you'd be better off starting a quick war at 700AD i.e. if you want to go for elepult, go earlier. Alternative is to get cuirs as early as possible, then continue the conquest immediately to the other continent. Win date of say 1500AD is possible.

 

[Gumbolt]

So 900ad.
Toku now dead. Lost 4 units on his final city so to stop Shaka taking it. Shaka and 2 other ai left. Bit worried as still only got 37% of land.

Shaka 15% of land and 11 cities. So 52% with his land. Need 12% from empty land. Nearly at 40 cities. Of which 3 in revolt due to capture. I figure I need 65 cities to do this. Need to spam a few more settlers here.

If game can be won with just this continent and islands then 1500ad should be easily beatable. 1AD phants rush on immortal would be punished.

Must admit my micro and macro fell apart a bit here. E.g. workers reaching food resources. Unimproved resources. Toko has a nice GP farm spot but unlikely to be used.

I am getting bad war unhappiness but I have the troops to take down Shaka. I have a secondary stack waiting on his northern borders. Just pushing out troops here and there and getting CHs.

 

[LincolnOfRome]

@LincolnOfRomeI can't really see any real strategic focus.

I did have a strong start and did have sub-optimal victory date, so some criticism is fair. Strategy involves the movement of forces in battle. In my 100 AD save, I am moving elephants and catapults toward Huyana Capac's capital. Would you have moved your forces differently? How can you tell from my saves that I am handling wars badly?

Rather than start a slow war at 1AD, you'd be better off starting a quick war at 700AD i.e. if you want to go for elepult, go earlier. Alternative is to get cuirs as early as possible, then continue the conquest immediately to the other continent. Win date of say 1500AD is possible.

This criticism is a bit more constructive. Avoid wars where you don't have a technological military advantage. Six horsemen at 1000BC is better than ten horsemen at 500BC. If I can get civil service before 1000BC, I could have attacked with elephants and catapults at 500BC rather than 1AD. By quick war, you aren't suggesting macemen and trebs war at 700AD, but rather a war with cuirassiers. With this start, I could have probably have aimed for cuirassiers before 700AD.

If game can be won with just this continent and islands then 1500ad should be easily beatable. 1AD phants rush on immortal would be punished.

I had Shaka conquered and all the islands settled before 1700. There is even an unsettled continent on this map that I settled. I thought once the borders popped, I'd have a domination victory. It didn't happen. I was rolling over Justinian's muskets with tanks at the time I got a diplomatic victory. You have to plan on attacking the Justinian's and Saladin's continent if you want a domination victory.

 

[sampsa]

Strategy involves the movement of forces in battle.

For me, no. Moving units is tactics, the decision when to go to war (for example) is strategy. Though I'm not sure if that's very relevant even.

How can you tell from my saves that I am handling wars badly?

I have no information on how you handle your wars and I have never claimed that I do.

I'm not sure if you understood what exactly I meant with "I can't really see any real strategic focus". I meant that you aren't picking a strategy and then executing it as efficiently as possible. This isn't meant as criticism, just pointing out how you could improve.

If I can get civil service before 1000BC, I could have attacked with elephants and catapults at 500BC rather than 1AD.

I'm not sure if oracling CS is the best way, since it's unclear (to me at least) if that leads to fastest attack date. In general, faster cuir attack leads to faster conquest, though it's not always true.

 

[LincolnOfRome]

By strategy, do you mean aiming to be the first at a military technology then? You can win military games by getting key military technologies long before AI is ready and taking advantage of these technologies quickly.

There are several tricks that will work for a philosophical leader but won't work for others such as the math bulb. It will be the same for avoiding fishing and meditation to use great scientists to bulb engineering. With a philosophical leader you can also use great merchants to upgrade a bunch of warriors to axemen for a catapult attack. In the first game I shared, the math bulb for chopping out extra horse archers came too late because the leader wasn't philosophical. Lymond pointed this out. I tested it out. The math bulb come much quicker with a philosophical leader.

With a non-philosophical leader, you need a strong economy and a great bureaucratic capital helps. The aim of this is to get to key military economies quickly. If you have horse and iron, cuirassiers are great to aim for. If you have horse, but no iron. cavalry work. If you have iron, but no horse, aim for steel. Cannon attacks with muskets, grenadiers, or riflemen are all possible. If you have no strategic resources, you need to be the first to infantry and artillery.

 

[sampsa]

By strategy, do you mean aiming to be the first at a military technology then?

In the broadest context, by strategy I mean "how are you planning to win the game?". Here your chose to oracle CS, invest into several wonders, attack with elephants in the ADs and attack with cuirassiers post 1000AD. While separately none of these is wrong per se, they don't form a consistent strategy. I think the question "can't it be improved?" is not only fair, but mandatory.

 

[LincolnOfRome]

In the broadest context, by strategy I mean "how are you planning to win the game?"

That's a very clear criticism though not completely fair. I think it is very clear that my overall goal was a military victory (domination or diplomatic).

Here your chose to oracle CS, invest into several wonders,

You seem to suggest that I may be producing too many wonders. Gumbolt is playing a very similar game. I think we are both dedicating similar hammers to wonders.

It is fair to say that I was later in my attacks than I should have been. I may be producing more military forces than are necessary. I think I could also be whipping the smaller cities more. I also might not need barracks and stables everywhere. I can whip an unpromoted war elephant for two population and it will be out a lot sooner. I think if I focus on getting key military techs as soon as possible and getting the war started without delay, my game will be a lot stronger. Using wonders right can support rather than hinder that.

 

[sampsa]

That's a very clear criticism though not completely fair.

I'm answering your question on what do I mean by strategy. There is nothing critical or unfair about that.

I think it is very clear that my overall goal was a military victory (domination or diplomatic).

I don't mean only the victory condition, but also a very concrete "how?". Once you know how, then you should try to find the fastest, most reliable way to achieve it.

You seem to suggest that I may be producing too many wonders. Gumbolt is playing a very similar game. I think we are both dedicating similar hammers to wonders.

No, I am suggesting that your strategy is not coherent, or at least that it could be polished quite a bit. I haven't looked at Gumbolt's game.

It is fair to say that I was later in my attacks than I should have been. I may be producing more military forces than are necessary. I think I could also be whipping the smaller cities more. I also might not need barracks and stables everywhere. I can whip an unpromoted war elephant for two population and it will be out a lot sooner. I think if I focus on getting key military techs as soon as possible and getting the war started without delay, my game will be a lot stronger. Using wonders right can support rather than hinder that.

I can't say much about that, would probably need to see many more saves. In general, I'd say for elepult you need 0-1 stables. Try to play without wonders and you'll get a good feel on whether they support you or slow you down.

 

[Gumbolt]

Oh i copied you on purpose at start on Oracle slingshot fo CS. Albeit my execution was very different. i expanded to 5 cities and used Marble chops for Oracle. Which I don't think you had.
I settled the gold /corn city that you avoided. I skiped GLH which didn't seem great here. It would of taken a lot of chops/buildings to do that. I skipped AH too for quite a bit at start. Didn't see the horses till I had settled on them.

By 100ad I had built 13 elephants, 7 catapults, 1 axe and 2 spears. Mayan 2 main cities were taken down too. I think you were still attacking Incans at this point. By time you reached Mayans they had longbows.
Same is true for Toku. He had Samurai/Longbow when you declared on him. I faced axes/swords and spears. So much easier to take down. Protective LB would be very annoying!

I think I declared on Incans around 525bc with 7 pults and 3 WE. Albeit I had 8 WE built overall. 25 turns earlier? Incans only had 3-4 units in their capital. Your stack of 14 may have been a tad too much but in your game he expanded much as you dudn't worker steal..

Your issue is grand strategy and micro too. I was much cleaner in my clearing up the ai and started a lot sooner. I left no vassals. I had workers ready for new cities in early game so resources improved as settler reached the sites.

The other wonders I built because i could. I had so many cities to chop out wonders from. Where you were always a few cities behind. I had Pascal/Incans/and Toku wiped out before 1000ad. 40 cities or so to your 21.

It's a snowball effect when you make the right choices in the early game so my advantage in city numbers grew as game went on.

This is far from my usual play style. If I had skipped Oracle I think I could of done HA or Phants/pult rush much quicker. You don't need PH techs or CS for a phant rush. Saves 2 forest too.

 

[LincolnOfRome]

I checked my saves. I did have construction by 725 BC and was using my war elephants to take a barb city. My capital (because of CS) alone was producing a war elephant every two turns. I had enough of a force to attack at least by 325 BC. I probably did before then. It looks like I just didn't choose to attack at the optimal time.

I think I just need to prioritize attacking with recent military technology sooner. Too often I am building universities instead of cavalry or just not attacking when my military techs are hot. I'll start another game at immortal and see if I can do better.

The Oracle slingshot was fine and maybe the Pyramids because these were built before I had construction. The 200 hammers I put into the Great Lighthouse would have been better spent on four catapults.

I could have also have waited until later to war and expanded up north and to the islands. Either way, starting the war at 100 AD with old technology was a mistake.

As far as worker stealing, I do that quite often.

Spoiler :

 

[LincolnOfRome]

I'm answering your question on what do I mean by strategy. There is nothing critical or unfair about that.

I don't mean only the victory condition, but also a very concrete "how?". Once you know how, then you should try to find the fastest, most reliable way to achieve it.

It isn't a question of not having a clear idea of how to achieve it. I knew from the beginning I would have an elepult and cuir/cav attack. Both attacks were too late.

I can't say much about that, would probably need to see many more saves. In general, I'd say for elepult you need 0-1 stables. Try to play without wonders and you'll get a good feel on whether they support you or slow you down.

I've played with and without wonders and I am very aware of how much they cost. I think I'm very aware that at 500BC, 200 hammers would have been better spent on catapults than the great lighthouse. It was at least partially responsible for delaying my attack on HC. OTOH, I did eventually build 10 island cities, so it may have helped me tech faster and expand to more islands. The 75 hammers spent on the Oracle was very well spent. It would have taken 30 turns to study CS at that time. 75 hammers will buy you two axemen. I had an additional 10 hammers and 20 research per turn for a thousand years or so in my capital city.

As I analyze this game, I realize an attack on HC was possible 500 years earlier even with the wonders I built. The main problem was just delaying my first attack. I would rather correct things a little each time I play, rather than go back to basics.

 

[sampsa]

I would rather correct things a little each time I play, rather than go back to basics.

What exactly do you mean by this?

It isn't a question of not having a clear idea of how to achieve it. I knew from the beginning I would have an elepult and cuir/cav attack. Both attacks were too late.

And they were late why?

 

[LincolnOfRome]

What exactly do you mean by this?

I am aware of the cost of wonders and have played games with only granaries or no wonders, etc. I have learned from those games, but I don't want to revisit them.

 

[sampsa]

I am aware of the cost of wonders and have played games with only granaries or no wonders, etc. I have learned from those games, but I don't want to revisit them.

Well, I wasn't suggesting you to do that. I also wouldn't call that basics at all. Basics are things like remembering to use the units you've built i.e. actually executing your strategy.

 

[LincolnOfRome]

i.e. actually executing your strategy.

That doesn't sound quite as bad as lacking "any real strategic focus," because one must have a strategy first to even attempt to execute it. I think you've implied that you believe I'm not even at the basic level yet.

 

[Gumbolt]

I think take it on the chin. Sampsa is a seasoned Civ 4 player here. His micro and gameplay will be well above yours and mine. I suspect with proper advice your game play could be much improved too. I don't think you deny this. The first 50-100 turns will in effect define your game.

Look at the Mansa 18 thread on earth map to see how a better early start can be a huge difference on game play. Even deciding which AI to attack first. Albeit with Incans and Mayans it's not hard to decide on this map. Mayans always tech super fast.

I don't think Incans on this map had metal so in theory a HA rush here should of been good. Target start date circa 1000bc or earlier?

 

[Gumbolt]

Did a reload from a previous save albeit I was 120 or so beakers through writing.

Incans capital taken down 1200bc. 1 archer and 2xquechua defending.Used 6HA lost 1.
2nd city 1080bc, 2 archers defending it. Grabbed 2 workers.
1080bc Incas dead and 6 cities. Maths and pretty sure Oracle is still on. 8 HA left and Mayan could be next.

I settled on horse to save time and grab both fish. Pretty sure you could shave a few turns off this date skipping writing. Simple wins really. Why use a stack of 14 units when a stack of 6 will do was enough for his capital 1200 years earlier. Built 10 HA overall. Enough to kill off barb city too.

Of course I have not touched mids or Oracle and no CS. Not to say I can't still do CS slingshot. This is one of the issues with such a strong start you want to do everything but you should just focus on key goals. So maybe ignoring Oracle is better and focusing mids. It's such an easy map to get Oracle.

 

[Fippy]

I think you can play just for fun on Emperor, what Sampsa means with basics is things like not paying huge upkeep costs for stuff not worth it