Duckweed
Sep 8, 5:07 pm
If that AI is not too close and also starts with a bare settler, then
worker->worker opening is better since size 2 capital will hit into
unhealth before cleaning of 2 fallouts or connecting a cow. Scouting
is less important in this map as no matter how good is a site, we have
to settle close to capital early on and it's very likely we will
settle the 2nd city to claim the visible fish since it can help to
work 1 gold mine and could be a possible site for GLH. Scout is no
better than warrior for scouting if everywhere is filled with
fallout.
If we can come to an agreement of capital site, then we can start run
tests for 1st 50 turns.
My trial went with
Tech: Agri->AH->TW->Fishing->(BW->Sailing->Writing???)
Capital build:
Worker->2nd Worker->warriors to size 3 ->Settler->finish 3rd warrior-
>3rd worker or settler
2nd city -- Fish/Gold (WB on gold mine->LH)
On Sep 8, 10:10 am, kossin wrote:
Report spam Rate this post:
kossin
Sep 8, 5:33 pm
I agree with SIP. The possibility of hidden resources is great...
furthermore if you look at the forests it makes an X =D (yea, bad excuse!)
As the last game showed, early turns cascade into a lot. Settling 2N1E/1N1E
delays the start by at least 6 turns for the first worker, and then some...
meaning at t30 you're about 10 turns behind on production.
We can try the Flying Camera trick to get an idea of the landmass to our
west before playing... that's the only thing that could theoretically give
information on the possible closeness of said AI.
Worker->worker is the best use of hammers/food but...
worker->warrior to size 2 ->worker adds slightly more commerce and of course
gives over 10 turns of scouting (I forget the exact numbers but the first
warrior is out on t23).
A scout would get slightly better scouting. There can't be fallout on every
tile... that'd be stupid from the mapmaker. Still, a warrior can steal a
worker given the chance (in a test, I was able to get a ceasefire and steal
a worker).
GLH in second/third city should be no problem if we find a decent site.
I think we should play until at least the second city is settled once we've
made up our mind. There should be a decent amount of scouting done by then
so we can update the test game a bit and see how to proceed ahead.
kossin
Sep 8, 8:05 pm
With worker->worker we already end up 3 worker turns short by t39. (gold
mine incomplete by 3 turns, cows hooked up). Furthermore, there is more
missing when we settle the second city, the capital will be working an
unimproved tile for some time (2F1H1C presumably). That is unless the second
city can somehow come up with a good tile to work on from size 0 while
workers catch up.
It looks like:
worker>worker>warrior>warrior>settler>worker (done at t51)
The first warrior comes a t33, exactly 10 turns after worker->warrior to
size 2.
Techwise, I've been doing Ag>AH>TW>Fishing>BW (we can try timing the revolt
on a turn where we get unhealthy or have an unimproved tile).
Duckweed
Sep 8, 10:00 pm
If you start the settler at size 3 (the 3rd citizen can work at the 3H
tile, which in fact produces 5H for the settler), then 2nd city can
work on the improved gold mine from beginning.
Whether to start 3rd worker or 2nd settler depends on what we can find
in the southern ocean. If a seafood tile found, then a 3rd city as
soon as possible is preferred since the site 3S1E is a better site for
GLH. Therefore I think a stop after the 2nd border pop is needed for
possible revision of plan. However I suggest to continue on the play
instead of uploading the save, people can easily found out where you
settled from the culture chart.
The prediction thing rolo1 posted should reveal very little
information in this game. The opponents are known, we starts in the
eastern edge, the only direction to scout is westbound. Whether the
opponents have coastal start has little impact on our strategy, we
will go for GLH and will try our best to grab it regardless.
BTW, are you sure AI will get modern era bonus? One thing I'm sure is
that AI does not get the same bonus for the world wonders as normal
buildings. I don't exactly know the math, but I remember that even
immortal AI only get ~20% discount on wonders in modern era.
Can we set the roster now? I don't have preference.
Where's other members? (-: Let's vote for the capital site 1st and
move on the opening micro.
On Sep 8, 8:05 pm, kossin wrote:
Report spam Rate this post:
kossin
Sep 8, 10:43 pm
> If you start the settler at size 3 (the 3rd citizen can work at the 3H
> tile, which in fact produces 5H for the settler), then 2nd city can
> work on the improved gold mine from beginning.
Yea, that's what I'd been doing for the settler.
> Whether to start 3rd worker or 2nd settler depends on what we can find
> in the southern ocean. If a seafood tile found, then a 3rd city as
> soon as possible is preferred since the site 3S1E is a better site for
> GLH. Therefore I think a stop after the 2nd border pop is needed for
> possible revision of plan. However I suggest to continue on the play
> instead of uploading the save, people can easily found out where you
> settled from the culture chart.
Good points on all.
Do like OSS did in the last SGOTM and upload in the thread but not on the
server. The save shouldn't be uploaded until several turns after the second
city is settled so it becomes hard to tell.
> The prediction thing rolo1 posted should reveal very little
> information in this game. The opponents are known, we starts in the
> eastern edge, the only direction to scout is westbound. Whether the
> opponents have coastal start has little impact on our strategy, we
> will go for GLH and will try our best to grab it regardless.
It could help to see if there are some land ranges to the east (islands) and
maybe get a small idea about the land shape but that's about it... anyway we
shouldn't spend more than an hour or two analyzing the start.
> BTW, are you sure AI will get modern era bonus? One thing I'm sure is
> that AI does not get the same bonus for the world wonders as normal
> buildings. I don't exactly know the math, but I remember that even
> immortal AI only get ~20% discount on wonders in modern era.
For units/buildings it is as I said, I infiltrated the test game with Great
Spies and the discounts are as I said earlier, ~70% of the cost. (21H for a
wb, 35H for a barracks, 17H for Archer, 43H worker)
For settlers, the cost appears to be 95H instead of 100H, but that isn't
surprising as the cost is tied to the food bar.
For Wonders, I was wrong, the discount is 85% apparently. (102H for
Stonehenge instead of 120H), basically 1%+2%+3%+4%+5% from each era,
ignoring the difficulty bonus.
> Can we set the roster now? I don't have preference.
Sure. *Does anyone have a roster preference?* Make it known now so we can
decide this ASAP.
Arbitrarily I'd put:
Bugg123
hydraculas
nishant1911
dingding
BornInCantaloup
Duckweed
kossin - This gives me more time early on to work on the test game =D
The first set (25 turns then another ~30) should be rather quick so if
someone doesn't have a lot of time in the coming 2 weeks it might be a good
idea to take that one.
I would like to follow a stricter schedule than last time, this game will
have more turns overall, maybe 100 extra, more or less... about 300 to be
conservative. (gets us to 1800s)
24 hours for drawing the big lines (what are the goals -> techs, cities,
units).
24 hours for plans
24 hours for revisions then play
If we can keep 1 round/96 hours we should do fine.
*To hasten the process, I suggest the person playing the set proposes the
big lines for the next set. This way there's no delay and everyone can start
voting/voicing different ideas.*
For set length, I think we can do 7 rounds/month or so so if we plan for 250
turns after the first quick set and 3 months that gives just over 10
turns/set. Therefore I suggest we do 15 turns for the first pass through the
roster and then move to 10 turns... we can move to 10 earlier if it begins
to be too much or split the set in 2 as we did before.
> Where's other members? (-: Let's vote for the capital site 1st and
> move on the opening micro.
Busy, most likely
They'll post eventually, I have no doubt.
hydraculas
Sep 9, 3:21 am
After a few simulations about the opening, I'm quite sure that I will
stand for SIP. Due to the fewer turns of starting worker and the other
health factors, SIP will develop much faster than N2E1 at the
beginning, and this is vital.
Through my simulations, I found that the rhythm of the game may be
much slower than we could imagine. A worker will take 6 turns to clear
the fallout and at least another turn to overcome the additional
movement cost ( fallout movement cost 2). For example, a worker will
take 6+1+4=11turns to complete a single pasture or gold mine, which is
nearly triple as the normal turns, even more.(Considering the other
inconvenience of moving caused by the fallout) This fact will lead to
the decline of a single worker's work efficiency. If we still wanna
maintain a city's level of development, to make each of the population
working on the improvement, we may need double workers or even more
just to catch up the growing speed of population.
That is the main reason that I think we should make a slower
expansion, which I mentioned before. Not to mention the other factors
such as the unknown world to the west, rich resources from the birth
place which should be taken use of early and the AIs AT WAR with us. I
suppose we should not make settler until we have 3 workers and 5
population, even more.
Here is a simulation for the early 42 turns, whether the PH south to
SIP have copper or not will decide the next move.
turn1 SIP build city, make worker, tech AGR->AH -> TW -> BW ( I put TW
foword the BW in order to obtain the health resources, if not, the
city will get a unhealthy penalty since pop2 )
t15 worker1 finished, then worker2. worker1 move to the right pasture
( After finished the 2nd pasture, it's closer to the gold mine)
t26 1st pasture finished, worker1 move to the north pasture, pop1 work
on pasture
t29worker2 finished, then scout/worrier ->worrier -> worrier , worker2
move to the pasture
t34 2nd pasture finished, 1 worker move to south->GM, then both of the
worker take 2 turns to build road(the road will get cow and let a
worker go to the gold mine without waste of movement)
t35 pop2
t39 pop3, change worrier to worker
t41 gold mine finished
t42 BW finished and 2 workers will decide where to go, 2 turns to the
3rd worker
One thing need to discuss: shall we start the 3rd worker at t35? it
will makes the 3rd worker 3 turns early, but pop3 comes later and use
the gold mine later.
On Sep 8, 9:43 pm, kossin wrote:
...
read more »
Report spam Rate this post:
dingding
Sep 9, 4:19 am
Hi I'm here
I change my mind to accept SIP cause I prefer early production to
early food due to low happiness cap. ( based on the assumption that
game designer won't let us give up a food for nothing)
When SIP is decided, the macro for the first 42t is easy, basically
like hydraculas suggested.
2-workers first strategy is OK for me, as well as tech path: Agri =>
AH => TW => Fishing/BW and 3 pop settler.
I feel obligation to mention that GLH is not yet justified: it
depends
on the landmass we have.
The choice of Oracling is basically among MC, Currency and CS. This
can be discussed later.
About Tech path in the later game:
I made a mistake in my previous posts in kossin's thread, the beeline
to UB is even shorter than that:
Physics => Electricity, Biology => Refrigeration, Superconductors
I hope for libering Superconductors, which is the most expensive tech
at this path, and one of the most expensive tech we can get from
Liber.
Duck's path (AL ->Medicine -> Railroad) seems very production-
prioritized (and corporation-oriented, if I understand correctly) to
me. Nevertherless as I see it, this SGOTM 12 is quite similar to
SGOTM
11, a race for beakers instead of production. A beaker-prioritized
choice seems better.
About roster:
I'm Ok to be put there.
On 9 sep, 04:00, Duckweed wrote:
Report spam Rate this post:
BIC
Sep 9, 5:46 am
The roster is ok with me ; I don't have any preference.
No complaints about SIP.
I didn't consider unhealthiness at first... We gain 6 turns which is a
lot and your argument about a better lategame capital is fair (10
water tiles is a waste, right).
I won't have time to run a test before next week. As a matter of fact,
I'll be away until sunday at least.
Anyways...
Do you plan to farm the rice early on ?
I'm wondering whether researching Agriculture first is truly needed.
Maybe it is better, since it's a tech we can't skip forever, but maybe
it isn't :
If we skip Agriculture, we can start researching Sailing/Masonry or
Priesthood earlier. Sailing may be key here. Besides the GLH, there's
also the instant connexion between cities. Not having to clear fallout
+road to cities before settling would save a lot of worker turns
(altough we'd want to road at some point, anyways).
About workers...
3 workers allow to build 1 improvement every 5 turns (1 turn for
moving, 2 turns for clearing, 2 turns for improving&roading).
That seems pretty crucial to get early but I don't see the problem if
the 2nd city is settled before the gold mine is done. It can work a 2H
tile for 3 turns... we wouldn't lose a lot and that would still be the
fastest way to get a workboat.
About capital city...
If we want to grow it to size 5+... We may want an early Pottery. We
don't have super food resources, which makes a Granary more attractive
than normal.
I'd be happy at first with a size 4 capital (maximum) but between size
3 and size 4, what do we gain ? A non irrigated rice, probably. So I
can see the advantages of a settler @ size 3. Especially with 2 cows
and being imperialistic.
Good fun discussing the opening,
See you next week,
BIC.
On Sep 9, 10:19 am, dingding wrote:
...
read more »
Report spam Rate this post:
Bugg123
Sep 9, 7:42 am
Hi!
I'm here, but totally swamped with work atm, so I don't feel I have
much to add. The SIP plan seems good to me.
As for roster, it's probably ok for me to do the first set when the
time comes (I probably can't lose us the game those turns anyways, I
hope
).
Report spam Rate this post:
BIC
Sep 9, 8:03 am
A few additions before leaving :
1- Delaying Agriculture.
I'm confident you'll dismiss that idea easily enough.
Agriculture is a prereq to both Pottery and AH...
2- Settling the 2nd city asap.
If it is connected to our trade network, the 2nd city is a net gain in
production, sure, but also in beakers, provided it works a 1C tile. If
we have fishing and a road, I can't see a reason to delay it.
3- AIs start at war with us.
They also start without a military force. I don't think we need to be
overly cautious.
Because we start at war, it is likely that strategic resources will be
easily accessible.
What would be really nice is to have horses in the 2nd/3rd city to
send 1-2 chariots out. Stealing workers won't get us any diplomatic
minus and the no barbs setting means we won't need to escort stolen
workers back to our territory.
BIC.
Report spam Rate this post:
kossin
Sep 9, 9:26 am
So far we have 6 in favor of SIP, awaiting a vote from nishant1911.
Therefore it is a no brainer to decide that we will SIP.
Now as for the testing, there are 2 suggested approaches:
1) worker>worker>warriors to 3>settler>worker/settler
2) worker>worker>warriors to 3>worker>warriors/something else to 5>settler
Each having its own advantages.
The merits of 1) compared to 2) are mainly that we will have a second/third
city up sooner.
The merits of 2) compared to 1) are mainly that we will have a better
capital in the short run and that worker micro will be easier.
Just looking at it on paper is hard for me to tell which is better, but I
suspect that pushing back the settling of the second city is bad as it
leaves the capital with too much to do in the expansion phase. Anyway, I
personally need to run tests with both approaches to see where they land us
but anyone putting up the math being the approaches could easily convince me
and probably everyone else.
So far everyone agrees with the roster - don't hesitate to ask for swaps if
you find that you are unavailable in the coming days/week. Remember,
*communication
is the most important part of a team.*
The other thing I want to mention is Research path, mainly skipping
Agriculture. In my tests, I didn't improve the Rice for a long time as it is
too cumbersome for little added benefit.
Skipping Agriculture would give us AH on t12, compared to t19... meaning 7
turns earlier. What I mean is that it gives us Bronze Working 7 turns
earlier as well, with the possibility of 7 more turns of working a copper
mine early on. As early commerce isn't a trouble here with 2 gold mines, I
think it might be worth it. It is a gamble though as with 7 resources in the
BFC it might be asking for too much
This would mean that growing the capital to size 5 would be out of the
question most likely as it would take too much time.
On Liberalism:
It is still early to tell. Maybe it will be decided by the GPs we get and
the resources available on the map, we will have a clearer picture after 100
turns.
Duckweed
Sep 9, 9:30 am
On Sep 9, 8:03 am, BIC wrote:
> A few additions before leaving :
> 1- Delaying Agriculture.
> I'm confident you'll dismiss that idea easily enough.
> Agriculture is a prereq to both Pottery and AH...
Adding more, we definitely need to farm the rice after 2cows and 2
mines.
> 2- Settling the 2nd city asap.
> If it is connected to our trade network, the 2nd city is a net gain in
> production, sure, but also in beakers, provided it works a 1C tile. If
> we have fishing and a road, I can't see a reason to delay it.
Yes, I have been think of whether to start the settler at size 2 or 3.
I think size 3 is slightly better, although it delays the settler by 3
turns, the capital produce more hammers and the 2nd city can work on
the improved gold mine from the turn it settled.
> 3- AIs start at war with us.
> They also start without a military force. I don't think we need to be
> overly cautious.
> Because we start at war, it is likely that strategic resources will be
> easily accessible.
> What would be really nice is to have horses in the 2nd/3rd city to
> send 1-2 chariots out. Stealing workers won't get us any diplomatic
> minus and the no barbs setting means we won't need to escort stolen
> workers back to our territory.
I guess either horse and/or Copper in capital culture border.
On Sep 9, 4:19 am, dingding wrote:
> Hi I'm here
> I change my mind to accept SIP cause I prefer early production to
> early food due to low happiness cap. ( based on the assumption that
> game designer won't let us give up a food for nothing)
> When SIP is decided, the macro for the first 42t is easy, basically
> like hydraculas suggested.
It seems that hydraculas advocated 3 worker start.
> 2-workers first strategy is OK for me, as well as tech path: Agri =>
> AH => TW => Fishing/BW and 3 pop settler.
> I feel obligation to mention that GLH is not yet justified: it
> depends
> on the landmass we have.
> The choice of Oracling is basically among MC, Currency and CS. This
> can be discussed later.
Either CoL or CS since Buero is huge in this game.
Right, production, especially production in capital is extremely
important because there's no doubt we will do wonder spam in capital
again. Levee + factory + power doubt the production. We will probably
start continuous GAs at that time, the production will be huge across
entire empire at that time. Think about this way, how many hammers can
you gain from early AL? plus earlier access to wonders. My play in
BOTM33 gave me a deep impression how an empire with 10% sustainable
science slider turned to 100% sustainable science slider with building
wealth and GA.
BTW, I think my performance in BOTM 29 was one with less mistakes, I
achieved a 1650AD space victory. There should be no problem of
achieving pre-1600AD victory if not pursuing gold at the same.
Report spam Rate this post:
dingding
Sep 9, 10:42 am
@ Duckweed:
On 9 sep, 15:56, Duckweed wrote:
> On Sep 9, 4:19 am, dingding wrote:
> Right, production, especially production in capital is extremely
> important because there's no doubt we will do wonder spam in capital
> again. Levee + factory + power doubt the production. We will probably
> start continuous GAs at that time, the production will be huge across
> entire empire at that time. Think about this way, how many hammers can
> you gain from early AL? plus earlier access to wonders. My play in
> BOTM33 gave me a deep impression how an empire with 10% sustainable
> science slider turned to 100% sustainable science slider with building
> wealth and GA.
> BTW, I think my performance in BOTM 29 was one with less mistakes, I
> achieved a 1650AD space victory. There should be no problem of
> achieving pre-1600AD victory if not pursuing gold at the same.
Yes Factory+Coal Plant+GA's bonus is huge. It also ignores SM which is
quite annoying.
Beeline to Superconductors afterwards works well as well to me.
Medicine is likely to be unnecessary since Recycle centre is already
available.
Don't think we'll have all the resources to wonder-spam this time.
Report spam Rate this post:
kossin
Sep 9, 10:45 am
On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 10:42 AM, dingding wrote:
> Yes Factory+Coal Plant+GA's bonus is huge. It also ignores SM which is
> quite annoying.
> Beeline to Superconductors afterwards works well as well to me.
> Medicine is likely to be unnecessary since Recycle centre is already
> available.
> Don't think we'll have all the resources to wonder-spam this time.
Medicine would be for Sid's Sushi, provided enough seafood/rice.
kossin
Sep 9, 11:02 am
Some tests:
3-workers approach
t35 start 3rd worker
Improve cow-cow-rice-gold-gold
t48 totals: 72F (size 4), 244H
City #2 comes in at t55
2-worker approach
t40 start settler (the overflow from the 3rd warrior makes the settler take
1 turn less so it comes out on the same turn as starting on t39)
Improve cow-cow-gold-gold
t48 totals: 52F(size 3 with 6 stored), 267H (counting settler as 75H as 1/4
of the cost is made from food conversion)
City #2 comes in at t48
Without a granary, 3-worker option seems to come out behind about 10 hammers
worth. It will only catapult from there as the earlier second city will add
to commerce, food and hammers.
hydraculas
Sep 9, 12:49 pm
About 2-worker approach(3 pop settler) and 3-worker approach(settler
later), we can see like this:
As u said, the earlier second city will add to commerce, food and
hammers, that's true. However, it will make no production benefits to
the capital, which is the only settler factory at beginning. 7 turns
ahead of City#2 , for example, will gain 7 turns of production from
gold mine in city#2 , while lose 4 turns of the production from pop4(a
very powerful pop4, maybe copper/gold/rice) and numerous turns of
worker3. Although it can gain city2 faster, it will delay city3(unless
u wanna make city3 at pop3 either) and 3rd, 4th, 5th ... worker.
Without the support of enough workers, a fast expansion is not so
efficient. Just like I said before, u need double workers or more to
clear the fallout and catch up the speed of growing speed of
population.
Whether we have copper may differ a lot. I lean to a 5 pop settler/
worker booming with the copper(2 pastures,1 copper,1 gold,1 rice/mine)
and a 4 pop booming without the copper.(2 pastures,1 rice/mine, 1gold)
With a 3-worker start, we can even chop 2 forest to speed up the
settler/worker later when healthy.
On Sep 9, 10:02 am, kossin wrote:
Report spam Rate this post:
kossin
Sep 9, 3:17 pm
4th pop on Rice is kinda weak, it only adds 2H towards settlers/workers per
turn. However you need it to have a reasonable growth time to 4 pop.
With the possibility of Horses or Copper, growth to size 4 is more
interesting, that's certain.
If there is a good site for city #3 (as Duckweed mentioned, 3S1E if seafood
is present) then again yes the earlier it is made the better but it does
start to stretch workers quite a bit by then.
Presumably we'd have city #2 build a wb for the Fish, grow to 2 and then
build a worker to help.
If we all agree on Ag>AH>TW then there is no problem making tests from t27
when research is done.
I like the 3 worker approach, it feels more in control - but I'll trust the
math more than my instinct.
I will try comparing the numbers from t48 and on with and without copper
(I'll pick the worse tile to be conservative) in a few hours.
On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 12:49 PM, hydraculas wrote:
Duckweed
Sep 9, 8:54 pm
It's good that kossin is willing to run tests to see the difference
with math.
2nd city as soon as possible is a rule of thumb in most situations,
that's why I have thought about whether to start settler at size 2 to
gain 3 turns. Settling of good city (i.e more than 1 good tile) has
the snowball effect on hammer and commerce gain since you can start to
work on more good tiles earlier). The fish city also could be the site
for GLH, 7 turns could be critical.
To get a good chance of CS sling from Oracle, we can only settle no
more than 4 cities (possibly 3 cities) before that. Therefore commerce
is still a limited factor before the oracle gamble. There also the
schedule of 1st GS -- either from capital or or fish city. I'm still
wondering about the tech path -- do we want to try both oracling CS
and GLH (extra techs of sailing and masonry) or focus on oracling CS.
It will be good to find out the possible completion date.
@dingding
I agree that GLH won't contribute that much as last game, but it's
still a good gain as I can see the possibility of quite a few number
of coastal cities.
On Sep 9, 3:17 pm, kossin wrote:
Report spam Rate this post:
dingding
Sep 10, 5:28 am
My first idea is also to settle the first city ASAP, especially it can
use the gold immediately upon settlement. There seems to be no doubt
that it’s the best beaker-prioritized solution, which is crucial for
oracling CS.
Opening requires Agriculture, AH, TW, BW, Fishing, Pottery(712B)
Oracling CS requires Mysticism, Meditation(or Poly), PH, Writing,
Maths and CoL (1417B)
In addition to GLH, two more techs required: Sailing and Masonry
(280B).
Considering our economy can be 24-28gpt with 2 cities , so around
26bpt (before Library) and 32bpt (after Library). GLH will costs about
8 turns of our Oracling to our CS.
Options are:
1. Oracling CS and build GLH at the same time. (ideal one, but the
most risky one)
2. Oracling CS and build GLH afterwards (second optimum option)
3. Oracling CoL and build GLH.
4. Oracling CS and don’t build GLH.
For the 1st and 2nd ones: need tests and AI information to justify the
feasibility.
To compare the 3rd option to the 4th one:
- GLH: suppose that GLH is built at t80, we have 6 coastal cities (3
built after t80: at 90t, 100t and 110t). GLH gives each city 2cpt at
average. And GLH is obsolete at t200 and I suppose 1 beaker in t N =
1.018 beaker in t N+1. GLh gives a “discounted beaker flow” = 805
beakers.
- CS: Gains 702 beakers by oracling CS instead of CoL. Accelerate CS
at least by 20 turns. Gains from CS: 15cpt = 23 bpt. So “discounted
beaker flow” = 702 + NPV(1.8%; 23 during 20turns) = 1085 beakers.
Not to mention the cost of GLH and the production bonus of Bureau in
the cap. Clearly Oracling CS is superior to GLH. (GLH needs double
coastal cities or more foreign traderoad to beat oracling CS.)
-related
(t55) Fish +1
