Should we whip the Temple in Delhi to get the Pyramids two turns sooner (one turn sooner if we choose not to break our binary research rule).
In my opinion, no, we should not whip that Temple, UNLESS we are not going to build a Settler (nor build a Worker) as our next build immediately following the Temple.
We will lose more Hammers and Commerce than we gain since we will be delaying our regrowth. Regrowth only really pays off handsomely if you regrow ASAP after whipping. When we have squares that are worth 5 Basic Inputs (such as a Mined Hills River square), it doesn't take a long period of time of non-regrowth (i.e. Settler- or Worker-building) to turn the whipping from a gain into a loss.
Personally, I don't see too much value in this level of effort.
Don't knock it before you try it.
Even just run scenario a) vs scenario b). Try it. It's about as easy to run as possible--easier than other test games, as you're trying to do nearly identical things twice.
The whole point is that you WANT to ISOLATE the differences between the scenarios does to the Hammers and Commerce values. So, everything else should be as similar as possible. The only difference should be the extra Great Engineer points from The Pyramids.
Why would we want to do so? Well, think about it for a second. It is REALLY, REALLY TOUGH for us to compare the different test games against each other. There are a lot of different factors being weighted against each other and lining them against each other doesn't make them easy to compare.
Earlier Pyramids? Try for an early Great Scientist? Skip Binary Science? Research techs in which orders? All of these questions are questions that we are trying to answer.
But, any one of us can admit that even presented with the numbers from the test games that we saw, IT IS NOT AN EASY TASK to weigh one against the other.
However, what if you could compare one against another?
"Well, what do you mean, Dhoomstriker?"
I mean to run the whip Temple vs no whip Temple scenarios, where you try to play everything else the same (switching to Representation on the same turn, running the same Specialists at the same time, etc).
"Well, that's not fair! That's sub-optimal," you might say.
That's the beauty of it! It's relatively EASY to compare the effects of minor changes when you are comparing two nearly-identical apples to each other, than to compare apples to oranges to peaches.
"What are you talking about, Dhoomstriker?"
Okay, let's think about it. If in one scenario, we delay running Representation for 2 turns, as long as we do not have Happiness issues, the only possible impacts are:
1. Differences in Maintenance Costs
2. Differences in Science output from any Specialists that we run
"Fine, but get to the point already!"
Sure, no problem. It's simple: in a scenario where you chose to work a square like a Grassland River Cottage for 2 extra turns, you simply subtract the Food and Commerce for those 2 turns and add in the value of a Specialist run for two turns in its place. Run another test game to check out if Maintenance costs are different under Representation for those two turns, factor in the extra GPP from having The Pyramids earlier, and you're done! Now, you'll have two apples compared against each other, where we took one of those apples and slightly modified it.
What you SHOULD see is that the whipping scenario, after a number of turns played equally, will come out farther behind in Hammers and Commerce, far more behind than the Hammers that were gained by whipping, mostly because we're planning to spend time on a Settler instead of growing after whipping.
Then, you can factor back in things like 2 turns of having The Pyramids earlier (like I outlined how to do just above) and you'll have your result of the impact of whipping the Temple. Then we'll more accurately be able to compare things on a numerical basis.
For example, your conclusion might be: "Well, we'll get 8 more Great Engineer Great Person Points, and we'll maybe close-to-balance-out the lost Commerce by 2 turns' worth of working 2 Specialists sooner, but we'll still be behind by 18 Hammers."
Run the scenario post-whipping/no whipping long enough (I recommended 20 turns earlier) to see what the impacts on our Hammers and Commerce will be, then we'll have an idea of the cost of whipping the Temple. From there, we can factor into the whipping scenario the extra turns from The Pyramids by adding and subtracting Maintenance values, Basic Inputs, and GPP points.
It allows us to hire two Representation-powered priests sooner, which should help with our science rate.
Try my idea and replace your "should" statements with factual values.
Sure, Irgy's test is one pop behind, but it is the equivalent of one pop worth of hammers ahead.
Huh? His test is 2 population points behind, not 1. If you whip at Size 6 growing to Size 7, you will be at Size 7 on the next turn without whipping or at Size 5 with whipping. 7 - 5 = 2, not 1.
Now, I will GIVE you the fact that growing from Size 4 to 5 takes less Food than growing from Size 6 to 7, and the same with the next level of population growth. So, let's say it's more like 1.8 or 1.9 population points lost. The small difference in Food, along with the difference in Hammers and Commerce can be easily spotted and analyzed when we compare apples to apples.
Hammers?
but Irgy's test should be ahead with respect to the Pyramids date, hammers,
I think that Irgy's test will be far behind in Hammers, if you play it out fairly (20 turns or so) as well as Commerce.
GPP?
Are a couple of extra GREAT ENGINEER GPP really worth chasing after if what they give us is a greater chance of getting a Great Engineer, that we all agree we do not want for a 2nd Great Person???
Flasks?
and science (thanks to two earlier representation priests).
Science Flasks from earlier Representation-based Specialists may or may not make up for the Commerce difference. Let's not make the claim either way until we have someone run the test games to compare apples to apples and then factor in the minor differences for those 2 turns. How much simpler of a comparative-testing-setup can you get? Not much. Yet the info gained will be what we need to see for proper comparison.
Not Sub-optimal at all--we will factor in the differences afterwards by focusing on 2 turns, instead of running scenarios over and over for 15+ turns
I do not buy the "sub-optimal" argument as I have demonstrated how you can easily account for any differences across those 2 turns. What's more important is seeing for yourself that over a span of 20 turns or so, we'll be behind from not regrowing immediately after whipping. If you can get us the exact numbers, we'll see how far behind we really will be and whether the difference can be made up for in those 2 turns' worth of earlier Pyramids.
An easy-to-play-out two-nearly-identical-scenarios test for 20 turns, followed by playing two of those turns a few times extra sounds like a very feasible effort, so why not just do it instead of bellyaching about it and then being forced to use "hand-wavey" statements such as "should be better" or "I think that it's better" in order to make your arguments.
Fair?
