SGOTM 06 - Xteam

[ShannonCT]

My question is: What could the warrior move tell us to make us want to settle differently? What could he find out by moving where that would alter the settlement on the dyes?

Good point. If people think that settling on the dyes is the best choice given what we know, then we should probably move the warrior somewhere that would reveal something to change our minds. As Fredericksburg suggested, we could move the warrior NE instead to see if something like pigs or corn is revealed.

Having played leif's test games 2 and 3, I'd like to compare notes with others who have played them. Test 2 was much trickier, because both Izzie and Hanibal attacked London and I had to build extra warriors to defend. I regretted sending my initial warrior exploring so far from home. I'm thinking that warrior exploration beyond potential future city sites might be counterproductive in the beginning, as it introduces us to more AI's sooner. Test 3, on the other hand, only provided Gandhi to deal with (up to 2000BC), and (having decided to keep the initial warrior around) I was able to build second city (and defend it and my improved tiles) in a much more timely manner. The tactic of sending warriors out to keep AI workers from working doesn't seem so well suited to AW games.

I agree it is probably better to keep the second warrior near home for exploration of potential 2nd city sites and for defending the worker. I see your point about the disadvantage of attracting attention in the early game. But I still have been having great success in sending out warriors to park next to AI capitals. The AI pattern after I park two warriors together is usually 1) bring worker back into city, 2) build 3-4 archers and a settler, 3) send out 2 archers and settler to found 2nd city, and 4) never send out workers while enemy is in fat cross. We need to know the optimal window for sending out harrassing warriors: too early, and we can't defend our own borders, too late, and our warriors are staring down axemen.

I produced a warrior and whipped the first worker in both games, then mined the gold and produced a second worker with the aid of a chop (two excess turns were used to begin farming bananas), getting him as AH was researched so I got cows pastured quickly, then I began another warrior as London expanded to size 2. Next, produced settler as soon as I was able, depending on defensive necessities as mentioned above. Like to hear about others' experiences.

My results from Test 2:

(Note: I avoided popping any huts and avoided working the stone as it would give 1 extra GPT that we probably wont really have.)

Turn 0: Settle on dyes. Start BW and warrior, work 2f1h tile
Turn 8: Borders pop, begin working bananas for 3f1c
Turn 14: warrior->worker, Pop2, work additional 3 yield tile. Warrior explores near fat cross.
Turn 19: BW->Agriculture, revolt to slavery
Turn 24: whip worker
Turn 25: worker->worker, move worker to mine gold
Turn 31: Agri->AH
Turn 32: begin working gold mine
Turn 34: begin chopping
Turn 39: worker->warrior, worker spends 1 turn farming bananas
Turn 41: AH->Wheel, both workers building cow pasture
Turn 43: begin working cow pasture

At this point workers can finish bananas and chop warriors. Could then build settler at Pop2, working cows and gold (net yield = 8) or build warriors until Pop3 and then build settler while working cows gold and banana farm (net yield = 10)

I think it's a good idea if ShannonCT starts us off by moving the warrior. I suggest we move him NE and if nothing shows up we settle on the dyes. Maybe the best sequence is to first move the settler 1S and then move the warrior 1NE or 1W depending on what the settler reveals. I agree with leif that the river is widening to the SW indicating that we are near the ocean. I think I see ocean 1W of the northern gold hill as well.

These move suggestions make good sense.

 

[ShannonCT]

CRC has submitted a save from 3640BC. It looks like from their culture and score that they delayed settling for 1 turn and have researched hunting or agriculture. Maybe they found something to the east.

 

[Cactus Pete]

CRC has submitted a save from 3640BC. It looks like from their culture and score that they delayed settling for 1 turn and have researched hunting or agriculture. Maybe they found something to the east.

Or perhaps they've decided to go Hunting>Archery>AH, thinking that even if horses don't show up, they will be in good position to protect themselves as they rapidly expand -- a conservative srategy that I've become less interested in after playing test games, because the AI units often choose not to fight or even capture an available worker (that I offered as a sacrifice to save a city). Is this a Prince level phenomenon?

Turn 39: worker->warrior, worker spends 1 turn farming bananas

Done this three times now, and each time I have two turns to farm the bananas before I move onto the forests and finish chop just as AH comes in. (I presume you're chopping the forest closest to cows.) Either your're losing a turn somewhere, or you're getting to AH a turn sooner than I. If the latter, I'd sure like to know how you're doing it.

Played leif's Test1, and AI's (all 4 of them) were not at all agressive (stopped at 1930BC after I'd founded a second city and gotten chariot protection). I'd really like to know if others have been able to get a second city founded and an advanced unit produced successfully with only warriors as defenders on all three tests.

 

[ShannonCT]

Turn 39: worker->warrior, worker spends 1 turn farming bananas

Done this three times now, and each time I have two turns to farm the bananas before I move onto the forests and finish chop just as AH comes in. (I presume you're chopping the forest closest to cows.) Either your're losing a turn somewhere, or you're getting to AH a turn sooner than I. If the latter, I'd sure like to know how you're doing it.

I'd have to know what turn you're getting AH to know why we're off by one. I did start working the gold the turn it was finished, rather than the turn it was announced as being finished. And I only work on a banana farm for one turn because it takes both of the worker's moves to get over to the cows. My second worker actually comes 1 turn earlier than it needs to be, and wastes one turn sitting on the cows. Does yours as well?

Played leif's Test1, and AI's (all 4 of them) were not at all agressive (stopped at 1930BC after I'd founded a second city and gotten chariot protection). I'd really like to know if others have been able to get a second city founded and an advanced unit produced successfully with only warriors as defenders on all three tests.

I have been getting 2nd cities up with only warrior defenders. Usually 3 warriors does the trick: One for the capital, one stakes out a place for a second city, one sits near the improved tiles or near the worker. If a single AI warrior wanders in, I'll usually converge on it with two warriors. Best case, you kill it without a loss. Worst case, you trade one warrior for his.

 

[Frederiksberg]

I believe that whoever will lead us off should be the one to move the Warrior. As I understand the upload system, we cannot upload another 4000 BC save. Therefore, whoever moves the Warrior should also play the first turn set.

I was thinking about asking you if you wished the first turn set Frederiksberg?

Well, thanks leif. I guess that means that you trust my abilities as a micro manager . Anyway I know that CP and Shannon are also very competent in this department and since they have already started the investigation of the options I suggest that one of them plays the first turn set. CP suggested that Shannon plays and I'm happy with that. Maybe I could play 2nd set? MM'ing is very important in the opening of the game and then it's effect gradually decreases.

 

[leif erikson]

MM'ing is very important in the opening of the game and then it's effect gradually decreases.

Good, I fit right in playing last!

Not sure of people's schedules, so I want to propose a roster order.

Roster:
ShannonCT
Frederiksberg
rrau
Cactus Pete
Jimmy Thunder
Leif
Gator - Temporarily on hold.

If anyone wishes to shift in the order, please post and it can be easily changed.

Now the question of where to move the Warrior.
My view is that I think I hear that settling on the Dyes is a good opening. The only advantage, at this point, to settling east one tile is that we would be on a hill, for defense of our capital. But that requires two turns and we would lose some early commerce that will help speed research a bit. So, I'm not sure what our purpose in moving the Warrior NE would be?

The next consideration is then how do we want to break the fog. A SW move will reveal the most tiles, I think. Might help us to decide where to go from there?

Once this question is resolved, then ShannonCT should open the game, make the move, take a screenie, save the game and post for us all to see.

 

[Cactus Pete]

I'd have to know what turn you're getting AH to know why we're off by one. I did start working the gold the turn it was finished, rather than the turn it was announced as being finished. So did I. And I only work on a banana farm for one turn because it takes both of the worker's moves to get over to the cows. Possibly this is the difference. I work the bananas for two turns immediately after I mine the gold, and only then do I move onto the forest near the cow. I finish chop, which completes second worker, just in time for both to move onto cow as soon as AH is available. My second worker actually comes 1 turn earlier than it needs to be, and wastes one turn sitting on the cows. Does yours as well?No (see above), my chopped worker moves onto the cow the first turn AH is available but is not able to aid the first worker in pasturing until the next turn.

I did not have a turn counter operating, but it was on 2770BC that AH is finished, and I am able to move both workers onto the cow. Do you know what turn number 2770 is?


I have been getting 2nd cities up with only warrior defenders. Usually 3 warriors does the trick: One for the capital, one stakes out a place for a second city, one sits near the improved tiles or near the worker. If a single AI warrior wanders in, I'll usually converge on it with two warriors. Best case, you kill it without a loss. Worst case, you trade one warrior for his.

That's been my basic approach as well. By returning original warrior to London, I have been able to protect workers and eventually pasture and delay production of the third warrior until the cow is pastured. Then I immediately move off the gold mine and onto the pasture for the eight turns (not counting turns interrupted to allow chops to go for a settler) it takes to both produce the third warrior and expand London back to size two.


BTW, I normally go for jungle/forest defense warrior promotion(s) if I can get animals to attack me on a defensive-bonus tile (very reluctant to risk loss of warrior at less than 85% odds), but because I'm going to use my original warrior to protect improvements against roving AI warriors -- who (in my experience with the test games) will not attack him if he is on a forest or jungle tile but go around him to attempt their mischief -- I prefer promoting to star and then fist.

 

[ShannonCT]

Good, I fit right in playing last!

Not sure of people's schedules, so I want to propose a roster order.

Roster:
ShannonCT
Frederiksberg
rrau
Cactus Pete
Jimmy Thunder
Leif
Gator - Temporarily on hold.

I'm fine with taking the first turn. Just remember that I will be away from the game from evening of the 19th-31st, so I need to finish in the next few days or delay until the new year.

Now the question of where to move the Warrior.
My view is that I think I hear that settling on the Dyes is a good opening. The only advantage, at this point, to settling east one tile is that we would be on a hill, for defense of our capital. But that requires two turns and we would lose some early commerce that will help speed research a bit. So, I'm not sure what our purpose in moving the Warrior NE would be?

The next consideration is then how do we want to break the fog. A SW move will reveal the most tiles, I think. Might help us to decide where to go from there?

Once this question is resolved, then ShannonCT should open the game, make the move, take a screenie, save the game and post for us all to see.

I agree that settling east is inferior to settling on the dyes based on what we know now. If moving the warrior 1NE revealed corn and pigs ... then we might change our minds. Unless moving the warrior SW would reveal something that would discourage us from settling on the dyes (I dont know what this could be), then I think we can just let London's border pop to bust the fog that would be busted by the warrior moving SW. So my vote is to move the warrior 1NE and the settler 1S, save, and discuss.

BTW, I normally go for jungle/forest defense warrior promotion(s) if I can get animals to attack me on a defensive-bonus tile (very reluctant to risk loss of warrior at less than 85% odds), but because I'm going to use my original warrior to protect improvements against roving AI warriors -- who (in my experience with the test games) will not attack him if he is on a forest or jungle tile but go around him to attempt their mischief -- I prefer promoting to star and then fist.

Agree here. Combat and Shock promos for warriors staying home. WoodsmanI/II promos for warriors who are going to fortify in forests near AI capitals.

As far as the discrepancy in our opening turns, I'll try again and try to replicate your results.

For now, what says everyone about our opening warrior move? 1SW or 1NE?

 

[Cactus Pete]

I say 1SW because it could reveal tiles that might lead us to settle 1W of the dyes: a resource tile 2SW of the dyes and/or multiple forests to chop revealed in the western fog.

Also, how about ShannonCT [need to shorten that, like CP] playing to AH, with a pause and screen shot if copper shows up with BW.

 

[DJMGator13]

I think the warrior SW is the stronger direction. If he goes NE he only exposes the tile NE of the bananas. If he goes SW he exposes the 5 tiles around the hill, but more importantly this will give us a view of 19 of the 21 Fat Cross tiles for a city founded on the dyes prior to moving the settler (only the 2 tiles due south of the northern gold hill will be covered by fog).

 

[leif erikson]

I'm fine with taking the first turn. Just remember that I will be away from the game from evening of the 19th-31st, so I need to finish in the next few days or delay until the new year.

Also, how about ShannonCT [need to shorten that, like CP] playing to AH, with a pause and screen shot if copper shows up with BW.

We had talked about waiting to start until after the holidays. However, you have been diligent and played several versions of test games faster than I thought. ShannonCT (is there something you would prefer us to use that is a bit shorter to type? btw, same question for Jimmy Thunder, like JT?) needs to play by Monday. I do not want to rush anyone, so I'll ask, "Are we ready to start?" If so, do we need Shannon to move the warrior and post a screenie or can he play through Animal Husbandry (which is about 40 turns, btw)?

Just to note, what we have done on this team is that, during your turn set, if you run into something you wish to ask the team about, you may save the game, post a screenie and questions, and then resume when your questions has been answered. Please don't feel that you must play through something that gives you pause to ponder...

If the Warrior move is SW, I am ready to unleash ShannonCT. If the Warrior finds something that substantially changes where we settle or there is a source a Copper, then I would like to see those things so we can rethink what we want to do.

 

[DJMGator13]

I think the warrior move and screenie post for today, then only a slight pause for our overseas friends to comment also. Then I'd say game on.

 

[rrau]

I like warrior SW.

 

[Cactus Pete]

I think the warrior move and screenie post for today, then only a slight pause for our overseas friends to comment also. Then I'd say game on.

YES, we need to establish that protocol.

 

[Frederiksberg]

I say 1SW because it could reveal tiles that might lead us to settle 1W of the dyes: a resource tile 2SW of the dyes and/or multiple forests to chop revealed in the western fog.

Moving the warrior SW will reveal 3 or more land tiles depending on how close the ocean is while moving NE will reveal only two land tiles. Settling SW does, however, mean that we loose the bananas while settling E or SE means that we keep 4 of the visible resources in the fat cross plus anything we might see to the east. So anything we see to the SW must be better than bananas and also compensate for not settling on the dyes in order to justify moving SW with the settler. What could that be?

 

[leif erikson]

Moving the warrior SW will reveal 3 or more land tiles depending on how close the ocean is while moving NE will reveal only two land tiles. Settling SW does, however, mean that we loose the bananas while settling E or SE means that we keep 4 of the visible resources in the fat cross plus anything we might see to the east. So anything we see to the SW must be better than bananas and also compensate for not settling on the dyes in order to justify moving SW with the settler. What could that be?

A Gem resource tile on grass? That would be mighty generous!

I think we are all asking the same question, in which direction is the Warrior move most likely to reveal something that would make us alter the plan to settle on the Dyes tile? I can't think of many things that would change that...

@ShannonCT - Looks to me like you are cleared to move the Warrior SW, save the game, take a screen shot and post it for discussion. The only other question I have is whether you would have time to play through to Animal Husbandry prior to you departure on the 17th? If not, please post because it looks like the horses want out of the corral...

EDIT - Just thought that maybe the Warrior move isn't settled yet?

 

[Frederiksberg]

A Gem resource tile on grass? That would be mighty generous!

I think we are all asking the same question, in which direction is the Warrior move most likely to reveal something that would make us alter the plan to settle on the Dyes tile? I can't think of many things that would change that...

Any resource to the east would make moving 1E or 1SE the better option because we only loose 1 forest and 1 gold from not settling on dyes. In order to move SW we would need a resource that compensates for both the 1 gold and the lost bananas. Thus my vote is still for warrior NE. Also note that the gold hill next to the river gives 1 more gold than the gold hill to the north. So we loose yet another gold by moving SW. I strongly doubt that settling SW is a good option and thus it seem more relevant to clarify if there is some hidden resource to the east.

 

[leif erikson]

Any resource to the east would make moving 1E or 1SE the better option because we only loose 1 forest and 1 gold from not settling on dyes. In order to move SW we would need a resource that compensates for both the 1 gold and the lost bananas. Thus my vote is still for warrior NE. Also note that the gold hill next to the river gives 1 more gold than the gold hill to the north. So we loose yet another gold by moving SW. I strongly doubt that settling SW is a good option and thus it seem more relevant to clarify if there is some hidden resource to the east.

If I understand you, what you are saying is that there is no resource that would compensate for a move to the SW. So, a move to the NE may reveal something that would cause us to move east?

That would have to be a pretty sweet resource as well as settling east would consume a forest and cost us a turn? Don't know that that would be any better.

 

[Cactus Pete]

Moving the warrior SW will reveal 3 or more land tiles depending on how close the ocean is while moving NE will reveal only two land tiles. Settling SW does, however, mean that we loose the bananas while settling E or SE means that we keep 4 of the visible resources in the fat cross plus anything we might see to the east. So anything we see to the SW must be better than bananas and also compensate for not settling on the dyes in order to justify moving SW with the settler. What could that be?

It could be that there is a food resource tile 2SW of the dyes and a couple of forests (very helpful) that could appear at the edge of the fog to the west after moving the warrior. Highly unlikely, but I think it would argue for settling W of the dyes. Still, you may be able to argue that moving the warrior NE could reveal something that we would be more pained to miss out on (without losing the bananas but losing a turn perhaps?). What could that be?

 

[Frederiksberg]

If I understand you, what you are saying is that there is no resource that would compensate for a move to the SW. So, a move to the NE may reveal something that would cause us to move east?

That would have to be a pretty sweet resource as well as settling east would consume a forest and cost us a turn? Don't know that that would be any better.

Yes, you understand me correctly. Moving SW will cost us 2 gpt and the bananas. Maybe gems would be worth moving for but hardly anything else.

I would move east if any food resource or gems/ivory is there. A resource that needs Calendar may not be worth the trouble.