SGOTM 11 - Fifth Element

[Mitchum]

That's my weakness. I don't know how to play that kind of a game. Our team is relatively inexperienced in terms of teching quickly. You're probably the best on our team at that, so we'd need to rely on you for most of our major decisions. Are you confident enough in your skills and comfortable enough in this role? If yes to both questions, then it is an option, but it would certainly not involve a religious-beelining strategy (I just don't know WHAT said fast-teching strategy DOES involve).

I'm not sure that I'm the fast-tech wizard on this team. However, we can all make intelligent decisions on what will or will not slow down our research on the MM line, right? Which techs should we self-research and which can we expect to get via trade? Which techs should we bulb and which great person will be required to do so?

I contend that the religion-grabbing strategy is NOT the most efficient way to get to MM quickly. As I said, having the religion hammer will eliminate a huge element of risk and uncertainty, making the diplo situation easier. However, if we truly want to go for the fastest possible victory that this team can achieve with the skills we do have, we should focus more on development and teching quickly than grabbing early religions. Then, we'll have to push the envelope in our our diplomacy knowledge to use whatever levers we have to get a block of AI to vote for us.

This path is strewn with risk and uncertainty, but it will achieve the fastest victory date possible, IMHO.

 

[Mitchum]

To be honest, I don't expect the overall plan of beelining religeons to cost us all that much in terms of tech time. The only tech that's really out of the way is Theology, otherwise none of the other techs are wasted, and they should provide good trading material.

You may be right. Now I'm outside my realm of experience since I've never done this. The only thing that worries me is that the early game sets up the rest of the game, right? So by following the religion beeline, we get key techs at a later date (e.g. BW, Pottery, Writing, Alphabet, etc.). It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that getting Writing later means a later library, which affects our tech rate. Getting BW later means that we can't chop our settlers/workers as early. Getting Alphabet later means that we may end up self-researching techs that we could have gotten for "free" via trade.

As I said, I'm not the fast tech wizard, but the religion beeline WILL slow us down; I'm just not sure by how much. This is why I recommended the test games, which can be set up to provide insight and value even if our BFC is a bit different than in the real game.

 

[Dhoomstriker]

As far as the warrior move goes, everyone except me has voted SW

Where is my vote? I don't see me voting SW. So that's 4 people voting for something, while they don't all agree on where to settle.

The Warrior move should be used to help us pick between two settling options. Depending upon which settling option is the preferred one, the Warrior will go in a different direction.

For example, if you REALLY want to settle on the Plains Hills square, since we can't get any more info about the squares surrounding where the Plains Hills' fat cross would be, we'd do the next best thing and move the Warrior NE on Turn 0 then E on Turn 1.


If you REALLY want to settle on Turn 0, then we'd move the Warrior to the N or NW, to see if settling 1NW would be better than settling in place.


Those are just two examples, but they'd have us sending the Warrior in totally different directions. I've just been waiting to hear where people prefer to settle knowing what we see, so as to avoid confusing people with reasons for potentially sending the Warrior in just about any direction.


EDIT: Besides, the voting was biased, because it:
1) only listed 2 options for the Warrior's movement (no one is going to vote for the "you come up with your own scenario" in that kind of a situation)
2) did not tie any suggested settling locations together with the Warrior movement

Didn't we learn this stuff from our practice game?

 

[Dhoomstriker]

Anyway, how can we proceed with a PPP when there are still pending issues being discussed? If this kind of behaviour keeps happening, I may just have to sit this SGOTM out.

 

[Dhoomstriker]

I think that many other players or lurkers have noticed this, so it's more appropriate post the issue in that thread than PM to Alan.

That's not what I asked for and the reason is the same that I previously PMed you about: by bringing this fact public, instead of keeping it to a Private Message, you draw more attention to other players about this strategic concept. You also give away the fact that our team is gathering info from other teams' uploaded saved games, which may influence them to either do the same or be trickier, such as delaying their future uploads or uploading at "odd times" to mess with our analysis.


While some teams will surely look at the standings for this info, but not all will think to do so... at least before... now they will all have the idea to do so. Every time that you bring up something in the rules thread or elsewhere publically that relates to how the game is played, you stand the chance of giving away strategic info to other teams that reduces our chances of having unique info. Surely, the other teams have info that they are keeping to themselves, so the more that we share publically, the less of an advantage we will have over them.


I asked you to send the Private Message only because you are supposed to act as the conduit of communication between us and the Game Admins for Private Messages, so as to reduce the workload of the Game Admins. I could have written the message publically in a forum if I felt it wasn't suitable for a Private Message; had that been the method of communication that I'd preferred, I would have done so publically myself.

 

[Dhoomstriker]

Those are just two examples, but they'd have us sending the Warrior in totally different directions. I've just been waiting to hear where people prefer to settle knowing what we see, so as to avoid confusing people with reasons for potentially sending the Warrior in just about any direction.

If you REALLY want to settle 1E, but might like to settle on the PH as a backup plan if something awesome appears, then you'd probably move the Warrior SE on Turn 0 and SE on Turn 1.


What is moving the Warrior 1SW supposed to do for us, anyway? It reveals only 1 square that is only in 1 of the fat crosses of settling either:
a) in place
b) 1E
c) 1SE
and does only a little for helping us to decide about:
d) 1NW

Does someone actually believe that by moving the Warrior 1SW, we will be motivated to move to the Plains Hills square? As I said in my previous message, I think there is a better Warrior move for someone motivated to settle on the Plains Hills square. Are we truly thinking that there will be a possibility of revealing a Resource to the SW + W of the Settler? If we do not reveal a Resource there, would you then try and use that fact to justify moving to the Plains Hills square? I would argue you down from here to kingdom come, because you picked the wrong way to move the Warrior. Is it perhaps to help us decide whether to settle in place or 1E? That I might actually buy, as there is a chance of a Grassland Forest Silk (although Silk will likely appear in Deciduous Forests, not Coniferous ones, but what the heck).


What it might do is show us where the Coast lies, but no Coastal capital will give us both awesome Grassland Corn River squares, so would you honestly settle on the Coast?


SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO... if we have already moved the Warrior 1SW, then I contend that we only have two settling options remaining to us: in place or 1E, based on how you voted without possibly understanding why you voted that way or possibly because you voted for different reasons than each other but someone else decided to add up the bits and pieces of different reasons why you voted for something and to turn it into a belief that it was some sort of consensus-based decision, instead of the truth of it being votes for different reasons that all just happened to point in a direction that was mostly dictated by a very limited-scope voting mechanism ("a or b?").

 

[Dhoomstriker]

The biggest benefit of the plains hill as a location (other than of course the 4-turns earlier worker) is that we trade 7 basically mediocre tiles, known to contain no resources, for 7 completely unknown tiles. We lose 2 forest-grass-hills, two forest-grass, two forest-plains and a grassland, and we get 7 rolls of the dice to replace them.

And of those 7 squares, only 2 are visible once we move to the Plains Hills square--the Tundra Hills square and the Grassland River square to the S+S+S of the Settler's initial location. It's a total gamble when you settle on the Plains Hills square as to what you will get in those other 5 squares.

All the talk so far seems to be implicitly assuming we'll get absolutely nothing on those tiles that we would gain but can't currently see.

And still mostly won't see (Resource-wise) even by moving to the Plains Hills square.

As much fun as chasing religions is, we still have a plan to REX and peacefully claim as much land as possible don't we? How much of one are we willing to sacrifice for the other? I'm all for beelining Monotheism, but I'm not convinced that every sacrifice we might make for a few beakers here and there is automatically worthwhile because of it.

EDIT: And the goal is not to keep making too many tradeoffs for extra Research. But, since Monotheism can be beelined by the AI, to the point that going for Priesthood first on an Emperor-level game will quite possibly miss Judaism from Monotheism, that early tradeoff is one that gets us that much of a greater chance of reaching our goal. Confucianism won't be as close of a race, so we can afford to sacrifice a bit of Commerce later for faster REXing after we've grabbed Monotheism.

If I get time tonight, I'll run a test game settling on the plains hill, to compare to Mitchum's games.

Did you manage to get a chance to complete this exercise?

 

[Mitchum]

So, I think the next step to get this game moving is to decide who wants to SIP on T0 and who wants to climb the plains hill. I think we've heard everyone's arguments on both sides multiple times, right? Is there another option that someone wants to argue? If not, cast your vote.

My vote is to settle in place on T0.

Or do we want to run more tests first?

 

[Dhoomstriker]

So, I think the next step to get this game moving is to decide who wants to SIP on T0 and who wants to climb the plains hill.
My vote is to settle in place on T0.

My vote is to settle in place on T0, regardless of what the Warrior reveals, as I am convinced that the PH location is inferior and I do not see many people pushing for the 1E location, which is the only other location that I will consider if we moved the Warrior 1SW. If there was anyone else interested in settling 1E, I would consider it, and would be willing to switch my vote to 1E based on what we see with the Warrior, but if no one else likes 1E at all, then I'm going with in place.

I still expect us to follow our team's rules and thus expect to see a detailed PPP that gets a minimum of 24 hours of time for people to look it over after it is posted (not 6 to 7 minutes after it is posted) before we proceed with it... and that includes waiting to settle the Settler, which should be part of that PPP and thus should not be done until after that 24 hour period. That's a minimum period, with us taking longer if there are issues that are still outstanding that are being discussed.

 

[Dhoomstriker]

Or do we want to run more tests first?

BLubmuz indicated that he would run more tests once we've agreed upon where to settle, so we can expect some from him after that decision is made.

As to whether anyone else will pitch in, all they need to do is load up a saved game and play some Civ... isn't that enticing enough?

 

[unclethrill]

I still expect us to follow our team's rules and thus expect to see a detailed PPP that gets a minimum of 24 hours of time for people to look it over after it is posted (not 6 to 7 minutes after it is posted) before we proceed with it... and that includes waiting to settle the Settler, which should be part of that PPP and thus should not be done until after that 24 hour period. That's a minimum period, with us taking longer if there are issues that are still outstanding that are being discussed.

So the first step is to settle and move the warrior. If we go with your recommendation of settling in place and moving the warrior 1SW, how much detail do you want in that PPP. SIP and move Warrior 1SW then save and post screenshot seems to sum up the details of the PPP pretty well.

 

[unclethrill]

Okay here is my 2cents:

We currently have 230+ posts, 12 pages and what we agree on is that at some point in the future we might play but even that is questionable if BLubmuz pushes the idea of meeting any timeline whatsoever.

I guess we can agree that we need to eventually settle the first settler and probably should move the warrior at some point. We agree that we should shoot for a diplo or culture VC. We agree that we should either research Poly or agri. We agree that we should either chase a bunch of the religions or maybe we shouldn't.

I vote for whatever Dhoom wants to do since it appears that he has the best arguments or at least the most detailed and longest by far. So who's with me?

I apologize for sounding like a smarta$$ here but I would really like to do more that just talk about the game. No matter where we settle, the decision may be wrong. No matter what VC we choose to chase, the decision may be wrong. No matter the stance on religion we take, we may be wrong.

Unfortunately, after 230+ posts, 12 pages and a week of reading, I have no idea where anyone stands on pretty much any of the topics. Dhoom seems to post arguments for one direction to go, Mitchum verifies the plan, then the rest of us come around just about to an agreement. Then just about that time Dhoom post another equally long and detail post explaining why we are all wrong and this other path is the key to success. and the process starts all over again.

I suggest that Dhoom make a post that states what his wishes are in the game: settler placement, warrior move, first tech, chase for religions or not and VC choice. No detailed explanations just a clear and concise post about what he wants for this game. He seems to be the most experienced player in this game situation so I will defer to his judgment at this point but I honestly don't know what that is anymore.

 

[Mitchum]

I suggest that Dhoom make a post that states what his wishes are in the game: settler placement, warrior move, first tech, chase for religions or not and VC choice. No detailed explanations just a clear and concise post about what he wants for this game. He seems to be the most experienced player in this game situation so I will defer to his judgment at this point but I honestly don't know what that is anymore.

I agree that we need to get moving or we'll never finish on time. As we discussed in our other attempted succession game, the definition of the high-level strategy may take some time. Then, once we're all on board, the rest of the time will be focused on carrying out said strategy, which should go much quicker. It is important that we all agree with this strategy, otherwise some will lose interest and drop out (if they haven't already).

Personally, I don't mind the discussion since it provides more clarity on where people stand and what the potential holes are in my own thinking.

Based on my reading of Dhoomstriker's post, I would bet that he would say:

Settle in place
Warrior 1N or 1NW
Polytheism -> Agriculture -> religion beeline
Diplomatic victory

but I'll let him answer for himself.

I think this is an acceptable plan with an acceptable level of risk, but I'm fairly sure that by doing this, we're already playing for second or third place, which is fine if that's our goal.

 

[Mitchum]

I also vote 1b and 2a.

The warrior move will make little difference in the direction he goes but SW will at least make the first move reveal something.
Spending 1 turn to move the settler to the PH will give us the needed information to make an informed decision where to settle. If we SIP and are just out of reach of a resource or maybe can't see a choke point then the loss of 1 (or 2) turn(s) is worth it. I don't understand how there can be a solid following for SIP and have no idea what is available to be in the BFC when in 1 turn we can have a clear picture of what we are looking at.

I also don't think we should chase one of the first two religions. I think that Judaism or Confucianism or both is the better choice. We need to move to the PH and then decide whether to settle there or not. We need to build a worker and research agri and hook up the corn ASAP. The city will grow fast and we will be able to REX faster. If we are on a smaller landmass with an AI or two then we will need to crankout the settlers fast and the corn will make it possible.

I sense some frustration, Unclethrill. Earlier today, you wanted to move to the plains hill and avoid chasing early religions. Now you want to put the whole game in Dhoomstriker's hands? I would agree that he is probably the best on this team, especially related to cultural victories (and possibly diplo as well) . However, 7 heads are better than 1. And 14 eyes watching multiple test games are better than 2 eyes doing it.

Are you thinking that this discussion is dragging on too long with little to no valued being added? Are you worried about finishing on time? Or are you just anxious to get the game going? All are valid concerns, but I would contend that we're not wasting time right now.

With that said, I am willing to go with the team on settling location, tech path and warrior movement, but I think more testing would help solidify our choice (at least for me).

 

[Irgy]

So, as Dhoomstriker has demonstrated, moving to the plains hill won't reveal most of the tiles that have the potential to justify settling there. I was always of the view that if we move to the PH, we settle there, regardless of what we see. There a lot of arguments for or against settling in place, but the biggest factor to me anyway is that we can do it on turn 0.

I think if we're not happy to settle on the PH regardless of what we see, we really shouldn't move there in the first place.

As for the warrior move PPP, I could see absolutely nothing the warrior could tell us about where to settle, other than potentially NW (which no-one seems to be interested in, including me who suggested it). No-one at that stage had given any indication that they could think of anything helpful the warrior could do to answer the settling question. I could also sense (and feel myself) a need to start actually doing something. We are going to need time mid-game to make some fairly important decisions. The warrior move is seemingly particularly irrelevant this game and the only good options for settling are basically a gamble both ways. So there's only so much time that it's worth spending on these issues.

In any case, I had no plans to play out the PPP until tonight (and indeed I can't from here at work anyway) and certainly not without consensus. I've actually just thought of another option anyway - if we're going to settle in place anyway, I suggest we settle first and move the warrior second. Although once we've settled, we don't really need a PPP for every separate warrior move anyway.

So it's really the settling and first tech issues that need to be sorted out. Currently it's fairly close between settle in place and the plains hill. It may have to come to a vote because being basically a lot of guesswork it's just a judgement call and there's only so far we can get with debate on that.

I have no idea what the current split between agriculture-first and polytheism-first is? I'm pro-agriculture myself.

I'll move the warrior tonight if and only if Dhoomstriker states he is not veto-ing the decision to move SW. If we can at least agree that the only two options are to settle in place or move to the plains hill and settle there pretty much regardless of what we see (I'm certainly strongly against any other option), then we can in turn agree that it doesn't matter where we move the warrior, at which point it should be clear that there's no point holding up the game with a veto.

In either case, we need to resolve the settling location. I think it's been worth having the discussion we've had, but I think we should set a time limit after which we just take the majority vote.

The one thing we seem to be lacking as a team is a path to actually making a decision on anything. We're good at coming up with detailed arguments about it, but there's no natural tendancy for these to lead to any sort of consensus, or even when it does lead to consensus it's not always clear that it has. There's no easy solution to that though that I know of.

 

[Irgy]

And of those 7 squares, only 2 are visible once we move to the Plains Hills square--the Tundra Hills square and the Grassland River square to the S+S+S of the Settler's initial location. It's a total gamble when you settle on the Plains Hills square as to what you will get in those other 5 squares.

Which is exactly why I think it's a gamble either way, and that if we move there we settle there regardless.

What is moving the Warrior 1SW supposed to do for us, anyway? It reveals only 1 square that is only in 1 of the fat crosses of settling either:
a) in place
b) 1E
c) 1SE
and does only a little for helping us to decide about:
d) 1NW

I think everyone just wants to start exploring towards the coast with the warrior. Which I'm fine with. In a sense though if we can't find out anything uesful with the warrior for settling, we might as well just settle first, and let the turn player handle the details of exploring efficiently (something I think I can handle well enough for my part but am happy to take advice on).

What it might do is show us where the Coast lies, but no Coastal capital will give us both awesome Grassland Corn River squares, so would you honestly settle on the Coast?

... if we have already moved the Warrior 1SW

We haven't yet. I don't know why people keep thinking I'm going to shoot off and move without giving people a chance to respond. I'm trying to make posts that can lead towards some action, but that doesn't mean I haven't read the team rules and want to jump the gun.

Where is my vote? I don't see me voting SW. So that's 4 people voting for something, while they don't all agree on where to settle.

My apologies, I genuinely meant to say "Everyone who has voted (except me) voted for SW". As I've said I'm still going to wait until everyone's had their chance to confirm.

 

[Dhoomstriker]

With that said, I am willing to go with the team on settling location, tech path and warrior movement, but I think more testing would help solidify our choice (at least for me).

I am hoping to see Irgy's test game results, as well.


The reason why I appear to be all over the map is because of flexibility. I don't want to completely control the game, but if the majority of the team thinks that having me control a lot of the overall strategy and short-term goals throughout the game is the way to go, then I'll stop cautiously trying not to stomp on other people's ideas and I'll just push my way as "the best way" from day 1.

However, I thought that you guys wanted to learn. To me, learning is about understanding WHY someone makes the decisions. I can feed you a fish, but that won't help you to go fishing in your own games. If you see all of the reasons behind the decisions and all of the detailed thoughts that I am honestly putting into each suggestion that is made, then I am hoping you'll understand why I come to the decisions that I do and that I do so without ignoring others' suggestions.

If we settle 1E, we reduce the chance of getting Hinduism, so it's questionable whether we should still pursue Polytheism first. Still, because of AI seed randomness, settling anywhere different could get us the religion if we have a case where settling in place fails to give it to us. That's the stupidity of the randomness of the game, so I thought that it was fair to present this knowledge.

If we settle on the PH square, the biggest benefit from the extra Hammer is to get a Worker first. We throw away the early Commerce from Turn 0 and from being able to work a River Corn, so going here, in my mind, gives a clear indication that Agriculture first is the way to go, both because we can potentially get a Worker faster (while having that extra Hammer won't help us grow faster by building a Warrior) and because the slower tech rate won't help us to beeline for Hinduism.


Since my preference is to beeline Polytheism and take the 50% chance (as per Irgy's analysis) of getting Hinduism, then I will suggest settling in place.

BUT, if I'm going to be argued down and people are going to go after Agriculture first, despite what I say, then I don't mind as much where we settle, as I can see the synergy of settling on the PH for Worker + Agriculture + Diplo game.

YET, many of you may still try and push for a cultural game, no matter how well we position ourselves for a diplo game. So, I'm not pushing hard on the PH location, as it would suck relatively for a cultural game.


So, you can see that all of these other minor decisions are pulling at me and influencing me.


Okay, so I'll try to write one more message that summarizes a lot of what I'd like to see us doing. If you disagree with some of it, then it all falls apart, and that's where I will start to be more all over the map again.

 

[Irgy]

Sorry for the triple post, but I left something off again and it's better not to edit in substantially new content.

Did you manage to get a chance to complete this exercise?

(Where the above was referring to my plains hill test). No, I didn't have a lot of time and lost motivation to when I switched to the view that in place was better.


I've had one idea on how to improve the path to consensus. Once an issue gets confusing enough, someone creates a single post containing all of the arguments for both sides. People take a note of what post number it is, and when new arguments appear they are editted in. That way rather than re-reading 12 pages of posts every time we want to think about the issue, we can refer to a single location. It can contain references if people want more details.

I'm quite keen to volunteer to try it out, I might give it a go on the settling issue.

 

[Dhoomstriker]

I think everyone just wants to start exploring towards the coast with the warrior.

Fine, let's do it then. To be honest, the Warrior really can't tell us much about the game, anyway. Perhaps we'll be lucky and spot a Dye or Spice or something on the Grassland Forest that we reveal (even though those Resources probably won't appear in a Coniferous Forest), so that everyone will be happy with settling in place.

If we don't find such a thing, then we threw away, in my mind, any thought of settling 1NW. We also reduced the info that we can get for settling 1E or on the Plains Hills square, but admittedly, the Warrior can only reveal one more Forested square on the east side on Turn 1 anyway, so really, the Warrior hardly serves any purpose anyway. Our team effort on the fog-gazing was sufficient to convince me of the validity of settling in place for a Diplo game and that in place is likely the best spot for a Cultural game.

So yes, you have my vote for moving the Warrior 1SW, just to help get the show on the road and because Unclethrill, who seems to be the biggest proponent for settling on the Plains Hills square, didn't seem to want to change his mind to move the Warrior towards the east.

As I've said I'm still going to wait until everyone's had their chance to confirm.

Probably wise, even if it is a minor detail, as a huge amount of info has been posted since some people made their decisions.

So, I guess we have to vote again (sigh). Here are the voting options as I see them:
1. Warrior goes SW. This move best supports those who want to settle one of 1E or in place.
2. Warrior goes N. This move best supports those who want to settle 1NW, as it reveals the most non-Forested squares that would appear in our new fat cross, thus showing us the greatest chance of finding Resources. Now that we know about all of the Hills we'd miss in the east, hardly anyone probably wants to settle 1NW anyway.
3. Warrior goes NE. This movement best supports those who are deadset on playing a Diplo game and settling on the Plains Hills square.
4. Warrior goes SE. This movement best supports someone who doesn't like the in place settling idea at all and would probably like to settle 1E for a bit more production at the cost of a couple of Grassland Cottages. We'd move the Warrior to the Plains Hills square on the next turn, just to see a bit more of what we'd be missing by not settling on the Plains Hills square. Note that the Warrior moving here would be useless for settling in place.
5. Come up with a new idea and force a re-vote.

 

[Dhoomstriker]

I've had one idea on how to improve the path to consensus. Once an issue gets confusing enough, someone creates a single post containing all of the arguments for both sides. People take a note of what post number it is, and when new arguments appear they are editted in. That way rather than re-reading 12 pages of posts every time we want to think about the issue, we can refer to a single location. It can contain references if people want more details.

I'm quite keen to volunteer to try it out, I might give it a go on the settling issue.

Oops, looks like I beat you to it in a cross-post.