SGOTM 11 - Fifth Element

I start suspecting all of us, me first are stupid. :confused:

We clearly see each other on line, we can chat in MSN in real time and we're pestering this thread with 30 posts in 1 hour. And with the risk of xposts and so on.

While i was writing my previous post, 4 or 5 were posted.

The problem with IM is that the discussions that happen outside this thread are not helpful for post mortem analysis, lurkers, etc. Plus, not everyone is on the same IM client. If we choose to use this method, we must do so at a time that all can participate and the entire conversation (at least the important parts) should be posted back in this thread inside a spoiler tag.

So, back to the game. Now that you have seen Dhoom's analysis, are you still on the fence still? Or are you in the warrior first camp? Does anyone else want to change his vote?
 
It's not a loss of 8 Hammers. It is a PERMANENT loss of 1 Food + 9 Hammers + 4 Commerce and a TEMPORARY loss of 8 ADDITIONAL Hammers. That's big.


AND CLEARLY, IF THE SPOT THAT IRGY WANTED WAS SO GOOD (Trade Route point included) AND IF GETTING THAT FOG BUSTER OUT TO THE WEST IS SO IMPORTANT, WE CAN JUST build:
Worker 1 -> Warrior 2 and then GO STRAIGHT WEST WITH Warrior 2, getting there WELL AHEAD OF When Barb Archers appear.


LIKE HONESTLY, THIS "EXTRA EXPLORATION" stuff is easily mitigated in ways like that. The permanent loss of Food + Hammers + Commerce won't be mitigated at all.
I can be wrong (but i think i'm not), but food converted in hammers for settlers/workers do NOT overflow. Thus we don't lose those 8 additional hammers.

I wanna be absolutely sure the site Irgy identified for city 2 is the best possible.
And i wanna be absolutely sure the warrior is in place before turn 50. I've seen a bit too many barb archers in my test and there were 3 foreign scouts and a Zulu archer around.
 
Why would tomorrow be any different from today?

There will always be more discussions, more points to think about, and more ideas... etc.

Call me unexperienced, but I fail to see how this small decision can be so substantial. Your tests even confirmed that the difference is not big in any case...

At the end we might found ourselves later on very tight in terms of time and with bigger decisions to make...

I agree!!!

I WILL play tomorrow and unless BLubmuz tells me differently (since he was swing vote) I will complete the warrior and then finish the rest of the PPP. Look at my previous "Not So-final" PPP for details.

I understand all the arguments either way but at this point the swing vote is BLubmuz and he said Warrior first. The only reason I am not playing tonight is that it is past my bedtime.

As far as the 24 hours thing goes, my original PPP was posted well over 24 hours ago and BLubmuz confirmed that I should play that one. So the 24 hours are met but in fairness to the heated discussion, I am waiting another 20 or so hours.
 
Did you give a thought that the current TSs are pretty boring, and that it will be more FUN to get to more interesting TSs?

I just fail to see what is fun in discussing 2H+1F, or was it 2F+1H? I lost track with all the endless words...
 
Why would tomorrow be any different from today?

There will always be more discussions, more points to think about, and more ideas... etc.

Call me unexperienced, but I fail to see how this small decision can be so substantial. Your tests even confirmed that the difference is not big in any case...

The biggest reason not to play today is because of the team rules. If a substantially different PPP is proposed, everyone on the team should get at least 24 hours to review it. Irgy is probably still in bed and unaware of what has traspired. He has 40 some posts to read soon...

These small decision early in the game compound exponentially. The top players in GOTM games have the game won or lost in the first 50 to 100 turns. In fact, if you compared their save at T100 with your save or mine , you'd be amazed at the difference. All of this due to seemingly inconsequential decisions like this one that happen every turn of the game.
 
Did you give a thought that the current TSs are pretty boring, and that it will be more FUN to get to more interesting TSs?

I just fail to see what is fun in discussing 2H+1F, or was it 2F+1H? I lost track with all the endless words...

Here, here!
 
The biggest reason not to play today is because of the team rules. If a substantially different PPP is proposed, everyone on the team should get at least 24 hours to review it. Irgy is probably still in bed and unaware of what has traspired. He has 40 some posts to read soon...

These small decision early in the game compound exponentially. The top players in GOTM games have the game won or lost in the first 50 to 100 turns. In fact, if you compared their save at T100 with your save or mine , you'd be amazed at the difference. All of this due to seemingly inconsequential decisions like this one that happen every turn of the game.


Well, if that is true then there is some fundamental flow in the game. At the first 50-100 turns there are just too many random factors. A bear can spawn instead of a lion, the AI might be a square to left or right, etc.

I would want that a game is won by consistently making good decisions (even if some might be sub-optimal), not by making perfect decisions in the first 100 turns and good decisions during the rest...
 
I posted about Unclethrill's TS 3 and a half hours ago.
The post was #512.
I can't believe that we posted all this stuff.

If it's still not clear:

warrior first!

he will go unfog south to verify the Silver city location, possibly starting from Dehli in a SE path to unveil a possible BFC in case we decide to move the city E of silver. (it must be a GREAT location to do this)
Then what is now looking like a small tundra peninsula, then finally West to fogbust and protect our investments.
 
These small decision early in the game compound exponentially. The top players in GOTM games have the game won or lost in the first 50 to 100 turns. In fact, if you compared their save at T100 with your save or mine , you'd be amazed at the difference. All of this due to seemingly inconsequential decisions like this one that happen every turn of the game.


Also, I would really like to play a very good game, and win, and learn etc. but most of all I want to have fun. Hey, I have a day-job, and this is supposed to leisure, not hard work.

(Although I shamefully admit that most of the hard work is done by others...)
 
Well, if that is true then there is some fundamental flow in the game. At the first 50-100 turns there are just too many random factors. A bear can spawn instead of a lion, the AI might be a square to left or right, etc.

I would want that a game is won by consistently making good decisions (even if some might be sub-optimal), not by making perfect decisions in the first 100 turns and good decisions during the rest...
The last SG was won by MW with 50 turns on the 2nd and 100 on 3rd probably with decisions took in the early 5 turns.
I know for sure their startegy was perfected around turn 20.

A minimal approach, with a great execution.
The big difference between us and them is that that one was the 10th game they played together. There're many others, but let's forget them.
 
I can be wrong (but i think i'm not), but food converted in hammers for settlers/workers do NOT overflow. Thus we don't lose those 8 additional hammers.

No, they definately overflow, I've seen it happen many times. Back before I used the whip so heavily I would use this a lot in high food poor production cities to get a whole lot of overflow hammers to build warriors in between workers and settlers.

he will go unfog south to verify the Silver city location, possibly starting from Dehli in a SE path to unveil a possible BFC in case we decide to move the city E of silver. (it must be a GREAT location to do this)
Then what is now looking like a small tundra peninsula, then finally West to fogbust and protect our investments.

And there I was voting warrior first so that he could go east, to scout the land in between us and Zara. Zara can't possibly be more than 8 tiles away, and the benefit of going warrior first is that we have another 15 turns to scout the land in between before heading back and checking for better silver city spots. Which is easily enough time to head there and back.

My biggest concern is missing some crazy double gold + pigs city to the east that we simply don't even unfog before Zara settles it himself instead. That's the only reason I'm saying warrior first.


As for all the discussion, I don't mind what we do as long as we do it soon, but my vote is still warrior first for the reasons above. Although if we're not planning to send the warrior east to look at that land anyway then I'm not so sure.
 
The last SG was won by MW with 50 turns on the 2nd and 100 on 3rd probably with decisions took in the early 5 turns.
I know for sure their startegy was perfected around turn 20.

A minimal approach, with a great execution.
The big difference between us and them is that that one was the 10th game they played together. There're many others, but let's forget them.

Well, turn 5 has passed already. We made a decision (to be a religion collectors), but we have still to prefect our strategy (to figure out why exactly we are doing that :lol:). Probably we are the only team that decided this. Maybe it will give us a win, maybe not... time will tell.

OK, 1:40 am is the time to go to sleep.
 
No, they definately overflow, I've seen it happen many times. Back before I used the whip so heavily I would use this a lot in high food poor production cities to get a whole lot of overflow hammers to build warriors in between workers and settlers.
Wrong. When you whip you generate hammers, and they will overflow.
I meant PURE food converted in hammers, not excess food used to regrow after whipping.
Just test it, i'm 99% sure.
And there I was voting warrior first so that he could go east, to scout the land in between us and Zara. Zara can't possibly be more than 8 tiles away, and the benefit of going warrior first is that we have another 15 turns to scout the land in between before heading back and checking for better silver city spots. Which is easily enough time to head there and back.

My biggest concern is missing some crazy double gold + pigs city to the east that we simply don't even unfog before Zara settles it himself instead. That's the only reason I'm saying warrior first.

As for all the discussion, I don't mind what we do as long as we do it soon, but my vote is still warrior first for the reasons above. Although if we're not planning to send the warrior east to look at that land anyway then I'm not so sure.
I'm fine with any path wich will bring that warrior 3W of our soon expanded borders by turn 50.

Unless we bet on a so crazy spot and decide to send the warrior full E to be back S in time for the settler and we send warrior 3 straight W.

If you or Mitch can perform some test(s), the better. It's too late for me to test now.

Well, turn 5 has passed already. We made a decision (to be a religion collectors), but we have still to prefect our strategy (to figure out why exactly we are doing that :lol:). Probably we are the only team that decided this. Maybe it will give us a win, maybe not... time will tell.

OK, 1:40 am is the time to go to sleep.
We perfectly know why we choose this:
if we go for Culture 5 religions will greatly improve our date
if we go for Diplo, we're denying religions to the AIs and unless they are all in another single continent forming a Buddhist block, we have far more chances to convert many of them to one of those religions, making our victory possible and easier.

Sure, you're +1 hour compared to me and UT.
 
As for all the discussion, I don't mind what we do as long as we do it soon, but my vote is still warrior first for the reasons above. Although if we're not planning to send the warrior east to look at that land anyway then I'm not so sure.

Play a test game until T100 or so (I've played 4 or 5). It should only take you 10 or 15 minutes. See what the barb situation looks like. If I had my warrior there by T50, life was good. If not, barbs were a serious concern. It may just change your mind...

Regarding scouting east, I agree that it would be a shame if there were gold and pigs just outside of our current vision. But, we would grab that city just 15 to 20 turns after settling Silver. I agree that we could be too late, but it's a risk I'm willing to make.

Warrior movement is not something that has been widely discussed by everyone. Since it looks like we're going warrior first, everyone should weigh in on this issue before Unclethrill plays his turn set. It's not too late to change the plan...
 
I'm fine with any path wich will bring that warrior 3W of our soon expanded borders by turn 50.

Unless we bet on a so crazy spot and decide to send the warrior full E to be back S in time for the settler and we send warrior 3 straight W.

If you or Mitch can perform some test(s), the better. It's too late for me to test now.

I did run this test. The results were not pretty. A barb city pumping archers was right where my fog-busting warrior should have been had I not sent him east. If we don't have copper in our BFC, we could be in BIG trouble... I really don't want to self-research Archery if we can help it.

Of course in the test game, no Garden of Eden exists to the east. Had there been one, I would have gladly contended with the barb issue... :mischief:

With that said, we have to play controlling the things that we can control. We can control the barb situation. We can't control whether or not a great city location can be found N or E.
 
With that said, we have to play controlling the things that we can control. We can control the barb situation. We can't control whether or not a great city location can be found N or E.
Holy words.
Since i know Zara and we know the land to the west (poor enough) i would settle E just to block him, provided we do not settle an horrible spot.
Usually i like to have my capital surrounded by pillow-cities. Just in case.

What i surely want is that marble North. But until we know the map i wouldn't say nothing more.
 
Clarification on where to defend from a Lion--in a Forest, if at all possible--and more tips for avoiding them while being able to fight "on our terms" as much as possible
T18 – Hit space bar with warrior until lion appears.
...
T22 – Warrior kills lion. I checked the combat log and the warrior did in fact get a fortify bonus (I never knew that).
While my tip about using the Spacebar (similar to clicking on the unit's Skip Turn icon) will give you a 5% Fortification bonus per turn, it was not my suggestion to stand out in the open and fight the Lion.

A Forest will give you 50% Defensive bonus, while Fortification in the open will only give you 25% at maximum.

My suggestion was to wait in place for a few turns in order to allow the Lions to live for longer and to fog-bust for us. My suggestion was also to allow us to "react" to the Lions--you can't react if you move first. But since the Lions move only 1 turn at a time, you can let them move first and then be able to get away.


What I would suggest is:
If a Lion appears next to Warrior 1 within the first 3 turns of play, then retreat NW. Be sure to put a sign on the map where the Lion was last spotted, as well as the turn he was spotted. Why retreat? Because the other Lion is likely still nearby. It's the rapid attacks of 2 Lions that are really concerning.

If a Lion appears on the 4th turn of play (T22) or later, we can take a chance that the other Lion has moved away. There is still a risk but it is a much smaller risk than when two Lions were spotted next to each other the turn prior, as would be the case on T18 when Unclethrill starts to play. At this point, you could move onto the Plains Forest River square.

If the Lion is on that square, then I would again suggest retreating NW.


Why is NW so good, though? Can't the Bear come up? Well, the Bear can come up, but we will see him from across the River and will have 1 turn to move away from him if he does appear. So, no, the Bear can't be up there, because our current position would allow us to see the Bear and he wouldn't be able to sneak by to the north past our current position.


The eventual goal is to get Warrior 1 onto EITHER Forest--the one to 1E which is the Plains Forest River square OR the one located 1E of the Marble, which is where we want him to be on or around Turn 50.


However, there is no rush to get into a Forest if doing so gives us a big chance (as is the current case) of being ambushed by 2 Lions within 1-3 turns of each other.


So, the best spot to fight from is defending from a Forest. Better still would be defending from a Forest against only 1 Barb unit within a few turns of the next battle. Even better would be to walk on the Forest when no Barb units are there, so that each time pressing the Spacebar would increase our defensive bonus by 5% more, on top of the Forest's bonus, up to a maximum of 25% Fortification bonus.


So, the idea is not to fight in the open. Far from it. The idea is that:
a) Let's try to help Warrior 1 to survive. Warrior 1's best chances are when he doesn't have to fight a battle when he is wounded. Thus, we will hope that after a few turns, the Lions will move away from each other.
b) If we keep the Lions alive for a while longer, then they will act as fog-busters. For example, even if we will a Lion, a more dangerous Panther (2 Strength + 2 Movement, so it will almost certainly attack once it spots us) or a Bear (3 Strength, ouch!) could spawn in its place (that's what happened to me in BLubmuz' game where he'd moved into the Forest on Turn 18 and gave us the saved game for Turn 19--a Panther appeared and killed my Warrior).


Lion 1 had to have moved somewhere since Irgy's last turn. It could have gone 1NW (there is a 33% chance of this having happened), which is why I don't feel safe immediately moving 1N. Moving 1N would put the Warrior in position beside both Forests, but we might die immediately from fighting Lion 1 in open terrain without any Fortification bonus. That's an unacceptable risk.


Moving west right now doesn't help us, as we would simply be giving up terrain and map intelligence.


No, what we want to do is get to a Forest, but we don't want to do so when 2 of the Lions are close to it, only when 1 of the Lions is close to it.


So, if a Lion comes after us immediately, moving to the Forest won't help, as we'll likely die the next turn from dual Lion attacks. If we don't get dual-attacked immediately, we'll still very likely die within a turn of two from the other Lion coming to eat us.


Think of it a bit like playing chess, where each Warrior or Animal is a Pawn, but each Pawn has the movement type of a King (1 square in any direction--horizontal, vertical, or diagonal). The difference is that the Barbs are FORCED to move every unit once per turn. Our only advantage, besides terrain bonuses and fortification bonuses, is that we DO NOT HAVE TO MOVE on a particular turn--we can choose when to move.


After a few turns, the Lions will likely be farther apart from each other, so moving to the Forest will be less risky once they've spread themselves out. We can't know for certain how the Barb units will move, as it's randomly done by the game's seed, but what we can do is INCREASE OUR CHANCES of them not both attacking us at once on the turn that we move into a Forest.


What if the Bear comes from the south? Well, then we can take the risk of moving to the Forest and hoping to get Forest defensive bonus plus the Defending-across-the-River bonus, or better yet, having the Bear wander away again. In this case, it is riskier to move 1NW, because there are TWO Lions that we don't know the location of. At least with 1 Lion being visible, going 1NW has the smallest chance of all of our moves of encountering Lion 2 while still being 100% certain of not encountering the Bear. 1W would be an even safer move purely in terms of us being able to avoid the second Lion, but it would put us in the risky situation of encountering the even more dangerous Bear.


What if by moving 1NW, the Lion still follows us? Well, if the Lion is now to the SE of us, move 1W (to give us a good chance of being able to run away if he keeps following, while still having played long enough for other units to be far away and for new ones not to have spawned due to our 5x5 radius and the Chasing Lion's 5x5 radius) or possibly 1N (in the hopes that the other Lion is not up there--which is why I didn't say 1NE as 1NE has a much greater chance of us encoutering the other Lion). If the other Lion is somewhere to the north, and it isn't in the one square that could attack us if we moved 1N, then it should appear on the next turn, as Barb units are FORCED TO MOVE. If it's not there, then we can probably keep "running" 1NE and then 1E onto the Grassland Forest that we want to fog-bust from.


Summary
Avoiding Barb units is not an exact science. All that I can do is try and pass on my probability-related tips, my suggestion that you try your best to only get into combat when in a Forest, you try to keep the Lions alive for a bit longer, and you try to avoid fighting multiple fights right after each other. The rest, I'm afraid, is up to luck.
 
[While my tip about using the Spacebar (similar to clicking on the unit's Skip Turn icon) will give you a 5% Fortification bonus per turn, it was not my suggestion to stand out in the open and fight the Lion.

A Forest will give you 50% Defensive bonus, while Fortification in the open will only give you 25% at maximum.

My suggestion was to wait in place for a few turns in order to allow the Lions to live for longer and to fog-bust for us. My suggestion was also to allow us to "react" to the Lions--you can't react if you move first. But since the Lions move only 1 turn at a time, you can let them move first and then be able to get away.

Agreed. I did keep warrior 1 in place while defending in one of my test games to verify that the space bar was equivalent to fortifying a unit; something I never knew before. In the real game, I would retreat as you suggested, although not with so much thought put into it.

Thanks for the clarification and your insights. Keeping warrior 1 alive is critical to keeping the barbs under control. No pressure, unclethrill... :p
 
I can be wrong (but i think i'm not), but food converted in hammers for settlers/workers do NOT overflow. Thus we don't lose those 8 additional hammers.
The Food converted to Hammers for a Worker or a Settler will overflow as Hammers.

Spoiler The Proof :
Just to prove it, I ran a test game where I had 148/149 Hammers invested in the Settler. The Foodbox was emtpy.

I then worked 2 Corn and a 1 Food + 2 Hammer square. Before ending the turn, "Base Production" was listed as 9 Food + 3 Hammers.

1 of those 12 Hammers completed the Settler. The next turn, I had 11 Hammers of overflow.

I have the saved game, and if you ask to see it, I can upload it.
 
Cultural or Diplo: When must we decide?
I also would like to know when is the latest moment in game where we can/must make a choice. The more knowledge we have, the more success we can have.

Great People
If we aim to make our Great People be:
Great Prophet (Theology) -> Great Scientist (Philosophy) -> Great Engineer or Great Scientist -> Great Scientist if we got a Great Engineer already

then the Great People won't affect our game for quite a while.

The Great Engineer would be for The United Nations. It's tough to get a Great Engineer in the late game, so it's best to get one out as soon as we can. The first 2 Great People are already "committed" to supporting our religious-beeline while still allowing us to manually research the techs that we want to research (Alphabet, for one).

The 2nd Great Scientist would be for an Academy, because it really will help either game to get one, even if it comes out a bit later. Any later than 3rd Great Person for non-Philosophical or 4th for Philosophical, and the Academy comes too late for Cultural, but not too late for Diplo.


City Locations
What about city locations? Well, we need City 2 to have the Silver, in order to support our beeline strategy. But City 3 should be settled with either a Legendary City Site in mind or else at the point of settling it, we will give up on a Cultural game.


City Builds
What about city builds? Well, if we plan to build Temples (Happiness) and Monastaries (Science) for either path, then we're okay. If the Diplo game has us focusing more on expansion instead of building these buildings because there happens to be a lot of land available, then the paths diverge again and we must make a decision.


Other Factors
There are a ton of other factors. I don't want to write a novel on the subject, as one of the above points will probably force our decision. I don't honestly enjoy writing novels for you guys, it's just that this game is so complex and not all of you have the same levels of experience in each area, so there is a lot to learn in a short period of time. I enjoy teaching and I appreciate it when people ask questions, however, so keep asking away!
 
Back
Top Bottom