SGOTM 07 - The Real Ms. Beyond

[Swiss Pauli]

I think the tech trading went quite well; it was pretty likely that Asoka would tech Lit quickly, but seeing as he wouldn't trade Maths then I assume he's working on HG (hopefully at Bombay *cross fingers*).

I don't think OBs with Caeser was very smart: Capac has a city to the SW of Berlin, so we could have poked around there.

We should have discussed the build a bit more: it would have been better to get the worker out before GLib and leave the archer in the queue (as we haven't adopted Slavery).

As to the worker, I'd have him improve the deer (to trade to Asoka for his Incense in 4 turns and allow us to work a forest hill instaed of crabs w-o starving) then chop the river forest: we're going to run SE, so we want to farm this tile. We currently have 8 forests, so we can consider another chop later, but there's no time for a second one to make any difference to GLib completion.

Tech-wise, dial down ot 90% and go Medi-Priest-CoL-CS. I'd expect to trade CoL for Monarchy.

 

[Jabah]

I think we should not take too many risks and therefore would not finish the worker right now, and start GLib asap. (he is not going to help us lots if we intend not to chop wildly)
We have 9 forrests now (GW cut down 2 to cottage), if we can chop one in time (probably) I would choose either the grass-river 1E or the plain-hill-river 1NE

 

[Jabah]

One more think for the medium term.

Since we have copper, I would build at some point soon an axe for defensive purpose (staying in Malabar). Obviously after Glib, but maybe before the worker/archer queued (if we have some massive overflow from GLib, I would put it for 1t into National Epic before going back to units building.
If/when our warrior is useless (either trapped or not needed), I would disband it. The best time to do it would be during a round where we didn't increase our power, just to have (some) other teams wondering if we have been declared on by an AI.

If we finish the worker AND the archer, keep the warrior and build an axe, our units maintenance will go quite high.

To be honnest, I am quite tempted to say forget the archer and possibly the worker as well (we will have work for him, but not for very long).

If we keep archer and worker in building queue, my suggested building order would be GLib asap, 1t NE, axe, finish worker, finish archer (if not decaying, otherwise maybe move this up in the list) then finish NE.

We also need to build at some point, in no order : walls (stone connected before of course), lighthouse, monastry, temple, granary.

I think we should build GLib, axe and NE at absolute max hammer (food stable : marble, stone, deer, crab, hill).
After that, probably temple trying to time it with growth (2crabs+ deer and a mix of marble, scientist, stone ?).
Then at size6 we could work 2xcrabs, deer (or sheep when pastured), marble and 2 scientist for almost max research and still growing slowly

 

[Jabah]

Also, what about GIVING mysticism (or another very cheap tech) to the AIs that are missing it to gain some '+' (Are "gifts" consider trading with WE?, I know selling tech for monney is not, so gifting could also be free of risk)

 

[chmoosi]

NE's only drawback is the beginning of GA pollution. I think getting those sure GS would be better for a while, and we should focus on building those basic buildings first. Also I'm not sure if an archer is needed right now. I would start by building those buildings (maybe monastery first then lighthouse and have granary at the point when we know we'll be having monarchy)

Giving mysticism away doesn't give but fractional trade + and I doubt that we'd get any whole number bonuses that way now.

Also we should move the citizen working on a deer to working on a hill tile with hammers

Next we should chop with worker. I think the river grassland forest is a good choice as later on a lumbermill on a hill forest will produce the same amount of hammers than a mine.

Also maybe we should use binary science rate (either 100% or 0%) because that way we can save some beakers. So next turn 0% science then turn science back to 100%

We should close borders with Fred yes?

 

[Jabah]

I would take the risk on the GA pollution, if we have (most of the time) 2scientists+Glib, the GA probability will be reduced.
And if we ever get a GA, settling one will not be too bad : money for 100% research and culture to finish the GW menace. (we don't want many GA on the other end).

Mysticism 'giving' : I didn't know the value (fractional), so better wait for them to ask it and accept, that way we are sure to get '+'.

 

[ruff_hi]

I don't think OBs with Caeser was very smart

Why? What is the downside? Some AI dials us up and asks us to stop trading with JC and we get dinged either way? Any other reason?

 

[LKendter]

I noticed the team is doing much better on the game speed this time.
This game seems to have plenty of discussion and we are still in the middle of the pack for keeping the game moving along.
While the score is a bit low a few tech trades will change everything. I notice the big spike just from the most recent trading.

OTOH I've been quiet even though I am an "advisor" (Alan latest term IIRC). To be honest I am not sure what can add to the conversation.

 

[chmoosi]

Well all the test games I played I seemed to get an unlikely large amount of GA even if the percentages were something like 20/80 in favour of GS. Maybe it's just my bias but it seemed weird then and given that we have the other buildings to do also I would postpone NE.

 

[Jabah]

I had a look at the last save and have a few suggestion :

Research
I would go
Meditation (3t)-Priest(2t)-CoL
(instead of currency -13t)
Since:
1. it is faster to CoL
2. We want to build a temple and monastry soon.
3. it will open the possibility to trade for Monarchy
4. we don't really need currency right now anyway.
(And we could trade for Currency at some point, while trading for Meditation+Priest is not wise regarding WFYABTA)

Relations with AIs
We are at cautious level with all (including Khan) except Asoka who is pleased.
Also we have no 'trade with WE' penalties anymore (except Khan)
Also, Toku is behind us (in score, not yet in power, but has only archers, so we should feel free to refuse any of his 'arrogant' demand')

German settler
We could cancel border with Fred, his settler should be sent to america as he has Open Border and it is closer, but it seems difficult to prevent anyone to settle the peninsula before we gain cultural control (at less 20t)

Troops
Someone said that promoting troops in Civ4 basic remove the fortification bonus : we should promote (to City Defender or Guerilla at least 2 of the 3 unpromoted archers in Malabar).
We should build an axe and a spear at some point, but for maintenance we have far too many archer.

GP
i would build NE asap as the bonus for GP generation is huge. I guess we want to settle most of the GPs (with some lightbulb on occasion if efficient), so a few GA point won't be the end of the world

 

[TheArchduke]

You are looking good guys.
Without a game handy I can't add to much to the discussion, so I was and will stay rather quiet for at least another two weeks.

 

[sooooo]

What's the roster situation? Does Ruff have more turns to play or am I up?

 

[sooooo]

OK sorry I reread Compromise's post and see that I am up. Unfortunately I don't have time to play before the weekend so would appreciate a swap.

 

[Compromise]

Swiss Pauli, can you swap with sooooo and play the next turnset? Primary goal is to see if we can get the Great Library.

Let us know what input you'd like before you play. I thought Jabah's suggestions were very good. I'm willing to risk the Artist pollution, especially with our competition with New York.

 

[Swiss Pauli]

I can play tonight, so 'got it'. My plan:

Build: GLib in 10 minus river forest chop (and tile re-assigments based on camp completion). End set when GLib completed by us or Asoka. We have 8 forests under our control, plus the forest furs that GW stole.

Worker: camp deer, chop forest, quarry stone.

Explorer: check out Capac's second city.

Archers: promote some, guard the worker.

Research: Medi-Priest-CoL.

Trading: deer for incense (when allowed).

Diplo: maintain status quo with OBs as I don't see the value in expelling Fred and trapping our warrior. Judge AI demands on long-term potential as PArtner vs cost of demand vs WoE.

 

[Compromise]

Looks like a good plan to me.

I like this proposal, play, report format for these (very!) small empire competitive SGs

 

[chmoosi]

Imo, if Fred gets a city in the coast it could jeopardize our iron. Not to mention those two health resources we'll be getting after the next border pop.

Also after the deer is camped you could move one citizen from the fishies to a hill to boost production.

 

[Jabah]

If we don't need stone right now (except for walls, I don't think we need it asap), we should first "mined and road" the chopped hill (while still there) and then pasturised the sheep (or mine-road the Iron ?).

 

[Swiss Pauli]

I'm not planning on chopping the hill forest, but rather chopping the forest grass tile: we're planning SE so I'd put a farm on the grassland later. From my Malabar front test game we need 4 Scientists (as well as two from GLib) to stop NE increasing Artist probability, and for that we'd need as much (long term) food as possible.

Working the Stone-quarry would give one more hammer than the current mine (and two more than the river plains mine), and it's a resource we can trade until we need it. We don't need Iron yet, and I don't think we'll work the Sheep (4-1-1) rather than the Deer (4-2-0). Let's see what th rest of the team has to say...

 

[Jabah]

stone quary = 5 hammers (same as stone mined) if I am not wrong.

Sheep : I don't see it as an alternative to deer, but as an additive (work sheep, deer, crabs x2 + whatever) when we will want to grow. Ok that is not for right now, but I think we might want that earlier than stone. And we could always trade the sheep (since we were talking about trading the stone.

Also, we will work the sheep probably more than a farm river grassland . (But I am not against cutting this forrest, we might want to have as much food as possible as you said).