SGOTM 16 - Kakumeika

Kaitzilla · Nov 29, 2012

LowtherCastle said:
Will Brennus DoW us?

I studied DanF's post on AI DoW and if I understand it correctly, as long as we are not a land target of Brennus (>7 anywhere adjacent tiles), the chances of him DoWing us are:

If Dagger or not in financial trouble, then 1% per turn.
If not Dagger, but in financial trouble, then 0%.

The chances that Brennus is in Dagger strategy are 3/11, depending on the coordinates of his capital city. We don't know whether he is or not.

Shortly after we settle Clams/Sugar, we'll become Brennus' land target and the odds of a DoW for each turn will go up to (3 rolls of the dice):

1%, 1,67%, 4%.

This may explain why Brennus hasn't declared on us yet. We're not a land target yet, so the odds were 1% for a while and if Brennus is not in the sagger strategy, recently have been 0%. Thiss might be a reason to not settle clams/suger before clams/FPs, even if we risk Brennus settling it. Of course, if we're ready to go to war with him, then it doesn't matter.

Ya, that's why I didn't want to settle Clams/Jungle pigs

Didn't know clam/sugar would trip that threshold thanks! I still think we should settle it anyway. I might completely change my mind if we don't have iron though T120! :lol:

Lot's more happy problems cropping up with earlier HG and less garrison units available.

Kaitzilla · Nov 30, 2012

bcool said:
Yes we have to pick up the pace... hopefully the way forward is clear. I'm having a bit of trouble following all the issues. Sorry if my 2 cents just made things worse.

I'm happy with a 1 turn earlier HG. It is already at risk, since it has been built in the test game before this turnset even started.

If there is no risk for a -4 diplo hit with Ramesses then I'm fine with finishing the granary in TH.

However, I think a friendly Ramesses and a calendar steal is better than keeping TH personally. So I'm happy to give it back to him with the peace deal, so we can steal calendar later.

We can always settle another cottage spam city. I don't think losing TH is that big of a deal.

Well, Calendar IS like 50 turns away currently, so I'm gonna yield to "we want Trojan Horse back" argument.

Gonna play the first 4 turns in 9 hours in the morning and do the gpt thing and gift Trojan Horse to Brennus T120 and steal Iron Working if there are no Worst Enemy issues, then upload. Unless there are any objections, in which case I'll play tomorrow night.

Everyone who has spoken likes the early Hanging Gardens and stealing Iron Working sooner rather than later.

Not gonna do the war dec part. Mainly want to see where iron is so the team can chew over it. Hopefully the 1st spy gets lucky with the 80% steal chance.

The gpt thing worked in testing a few times so I am confident Brennus will take Trojan Horse after enough 1gpt gifts.

Gonna re-polish the PPP tonight

shulec · Nov 30, 2012

xpost with Kaitzilla

I recommend a stopping point being after we give away TH to see how much gold we had to use to give it up and then decided if we declare war, instead of pre-determining war.

Kaitzilla said:
The peaceful route with Brennus leads to crappy trade routes, unreliable gems, superior scouting, and letting Brennus get back on his feet. The only big tech we plan on letting Brennus have is Code of Laws so he will use Organized Religion to fix his economy a little by whipping courthouses.

I wasn't able to understand from the previous discussion how you came to determine the above. I am sorry to ask you to explain.
How will trade routes be crappy? Do you mean they will be worse than status quo, or simply no better?
What do you mean by unreliable gems? There is no detriment to getting them, correct?
I assume superior scouting is a pro for peaceful relations and OB with Brennus.
How does our declaring war on Brennus and making peace quickly prevent him from getting his economy straightened out where as a peaceful route doesn't? Is this based on an assumption that we have to gift 20-30 gpt?

I suggest if we can get him to accept TH at 1-10 gpt (or some other predetermined amount), that our position may be improved by getting him to give up the city via AP resolution or if he defies, use the city to steal Calender.

If we can't get Brennus to accept peace, then we could have to dump a truckload of hammers into defensive units and worker turns into rebuilding pillaged improvements. I see this as the biggest reason to not declare war. If you guys can assure me that Brennus will take peace in 4-5 turns, then I am OK with war. If not, I think war is a bad option if we are giving away a low GPT for 10 turns.

Kaitzilla · Nov 30, 2012

shulec said:
xpost with Kaitzilla

I recommend a stopping point being after we give away TH to see how much gold we had to use to give it up and then decided if we declare war, instead of pre-determining war.

I wasn't able to understand from the previous discussion how you came to determine the above. I am sorry to ask you to explain.
How will trade routes be crappy? Do you mean they will be worse than status quo, or simply no better?
What do you mean by unreliable gems? There is no detriment to getting them, correct?
I assume superior scouting is a pro for peaceful relations and OB with Brennus.
How does our declaring war on Brennus and making peace quickly prevent him from getting his economy straightened out where as a peaceful route doesn't? Is this based on an assumption that we have to gift 20-30 gpt?

I suggest if we can get him to accept TH at 1-10 gpt (or some other predetermined amount), that our position may be improved by getting him to give up the city via AP resolution or if he defies, use the city to steal Calender.

If we can't get Brennus to accept peace, then we could have to dump a truckload of hammers into defensive units and worker turns into rebuilding pillaged improvements. I see this as the biggest reason to not declare war. If you guys can assure me that Brennus will take peace in 4-5 turns, then I am OK with war. If not, I think war is a bad option if we are giving away a low GPT for 10 turns.

Sure.

Mainly the idea is that we want Trojan City back after we steal Iron Working. We've put a chop into a granary for it already and it can be Size 2 from the Hanging Gardens if it is back in our hands on T122.

Since Brennus is in an economic crisis, it is predicted that 10-20gpt will be needed to be gifted to him T120.

Open borders can be established with Brennus on T117 when the "Worst Enemy" wears off from two big tech gifts if we desire. The trade routes were called "crappy" because according to the test game we don't actually see any benefits until T120 for some mysterious reason.

Also, the gems are called unreliable because the war will sever them also. If we instead stay peaceful with Brennus, then the gems are ours so long as Brennus never attacks us. It sucks building an empire around forges and gems and then lose gems

We might try open borders and a small amount of gpt to get Trojan to Brennus and then an AP resolution on T122 as a peaceful solution, but we need a Confuscian spread to Trojan City by T121 or the resolution will not come up. Even if it does come up, Brennus has decent odds of defying the resolution.

With those 2 unlikely events in mind as the only peaceful route, war becomes the obvious choice T120 to ensure we get Trojan City back.

Testing agrees that it takes 3 turns for Brennus to talk peace if we take back Trojan City forcefully, and 18 turns if we don't.

If you want to use the Conf. Missionary from Horse City to spread to Trojan City and gift techs to Brennus for open borders T117, by all means speak up! I don't mind the peaceful AP route either so long as we get Iron Working. I'm melting under the competing goals that the team wants and could use opinions. I'm pretty sure Mabraham was firmly against Confuscian Missionary spreading to Trojan Horse directly.

If the AP resolution fails, then we need war to get Trojan City back. The 2 big techs gifts to Brennus for +4 relations that seem stomachable are Theocracy and Code of Laws (Chichen Itza)

Manco Capac · Nov 30, 2012

It's kind of funny. My simulated AP resolution to return Trojan was defied by Brennus, but in Walter_Wolf's test the resolution worked.

We might try open borders and a small amount of gpt to get Trojan to Brennus and then an AP resolution on T122 as a peaceful solution, but we need a Confuscian spread to Trojan City by T121 or the resolution will not come up. Even if it does come up, Brennus has decent odds of defying the resolution.

There's a problem with Brennus defying the resolution if we have OBs with him: He can fill that city with units. I think he's actually coded to do that to fight against cultural flipping.

Spoiler :

Sadly, a bad RNG component tainted this mechanics.
We've got 33% chance the affected AI defies the city assignment resolution.

We cannot work on this information and that resolution is gonna be total gamble without possibility to force the balance towards us.

If we are gonna do the war, might as well take the 3gpt and 40g for Priesthood deal with Brennus on t116.

When gifting GPT, taking GPT will immediately take back partly our gift, thus bringing back nearer to financial troubles again.

Now it's someone else's turn to post something...

I beg time, mister. :bowdown:

Walter_Wolf · Nov 30, 2012

good luck Kaitzilla

Kaitzilla · Nov 30, 2012

Since my Civ4 soul is tortured, I decided to play past T126 in the test game to see what happens. It seems like not having gems does hurt pretty badly

Also, I was able to whip catapults to calm my military sweet tooth T125 thanks to a Friendly Egypt. So maybe we don't need fastest possible Iron Working. We can have loads of Catapults roaming around before we need killers.

Who all wants to say screw the whole Trojan thing/war/ap/buhahaha and just send spies down to Brennus' gem city for a late T120's Iron Working steal? (Like Sun Tzu Wu said)

We've put in countless hours studying the problem from every angle and the options involving Trojan City still seem to all suck.

With open borders the detection chance goes way down. I wouldn't mind sending a Confuscian missionary from Paris after the Hanging Gardens to lower the steal price 40%. 130 Espionage might count for a lot later if it turns out the open borders economy-boost allows Brennus' Calendar to be researched eventually. Failing that, the backup spy could afford to steal right away instead of waiting 5 turns if there was time pressure.

I'm putting off playing the 4 turns until tomorrow night. The 9 hour thing is cancelled.

shulec · Nov 30, 2012

Kaitzilla said:
Sure.

Mainly the idea is that we want Trojan City back after we steal Iron Working. We've put a chop into a granary for it already and it can be Size 2 from the Hanging Gardens if it is back in our hands on T122.

I see the benefit to that.

Kaitzilla said:
Since Brennus is in an economic crisis, it is predicted that 10-20gpt will be needed to be gifted to him T120.

100 to 150 :gold:

is not a small amount, but not a large amount.

Kaitzilla said:
Open borders can be established with Brennus on T117 when the "Worst Enemy" wears off from two big tech gifts if we desire. The trade routes were called "crappy" because according to the test game we don't actually see any benefits until T120 for some mysterious reason.

If we are going to war, we will not open borders, correct?

Kaitzilla said:
Testing agrees that it takes 3 turns for Brennus to talk peace if we take back Trojan City forcefully, and 18 turns if we don't.

If this is true, then I am all for war!

Kaitzilla said:
If you want to use the Conf. Missionary from Horse City to spread to Trojan City and gift techs to Brennus for open borders T117, by all means speak up! I don't mind the peaceful AP route either so long as we get Iron Working. I'm melting under the competing goals that the team wants and could use opinions. I'm pretty sure Mabraham was firmly against Confuscian Missionary spreading to Trojan Horse directly.

He objected to a backup missionary for TH

Kaitzilla said:
If the AP resolution fails, then we need war to get Trojan City back. The 2 big techs gifts to Brennus for +4 relations that seem stomachable are Theocracy and Code of Laws (Chichen Itza)

To summarize the arguments for war with Brennus on to take TH back:

This will get back our gpt
There is next to no risk since we will be able to get peace for a tech or TH.
We may be able to steal a worker on the turn we get peace.
Poss Granary recovery and HG benefit go TH.
Ability to work Paris's NE cottages in a few turns.
Techs do not need to be given up for OB.

If the above is all true, war looks like the obvious choice to me.

xpost with previous post.

EDIT: I would like to see you decide on TH and play in 9 hours. We are on the clock and your instincts are great. Go for it.

Manco Capac · Nov 30, 2012

I looked for that forced peace resolution to see how defying works.

Brennus will not defy forced peace; 100% odd.

Here goes the logics in our case...more or less:

Spoiler :

Kaitzilla · Nov 30, 2012

shulec said:
...

EDIT: I would like to see you decide on TH and play in 9 hours. We are on the clock and your instincts are great. Go for it.

My instincts are all geared towards annihilating Brennus, so I favor war for its own sake of course. Can't be in danger with permanent back to back peace treaties. :lol:

Right now I seriously want to take a 2nd look at infecting Comulodunum T127 and attempting to steal Iron Working there T127 and T130 with 30% and 10% waiting bonus respectively (and 80% odds). Might get lucky with 20% trade route bonus. Keep Trojan City, abuse the gems, see what T125 Construction does for us.

The steal from Brennus' lands were mainly pushed out of thought and mind because it was thought Trojan provided an easy solution. With the granary and economic problems for Brennus and possible AP Defy, it no longer does. Closed borders also made it dangerous to steal from Brennus' lands, but now we can have open borders and even infect a Brennus city to reduce the cost 40%. Finally, it was thought that we needed Iron Working as fast as possible, but with Forge/AP buildings/Courthose/REX/Wonders/Catapults available the next 15 turns, it isn't strictly true.

The main downside was both spies failing and then we'd have no Iron Working till T140, which would be intolerable. The other is that peace with Brennus won't last. But if it can last 20 more turns it would be so nice ...

It is about 1AD and we still have 0 happy resources. The mapmaker has worked a number on us.

Every 10 turns we can shut down war with Brennus with the AP if we infect that gems city if needed.

From an earlier LTC post:

LowtherCastle said:
My Response

0. Bcool suggests infrastructure rather than warring. Con: We delay our War Economy and possibly delay grabbing some awesome Brennus cities. Pro: Brennus won't have lbms any time soon. I agree with bcool. SG16 has double the distance maintenance costs of SG15 (horizontal wrap). We should improve and grow our hammer cities asap so they can build wealth and fund our research centers.

1. Sun Tzu Wu proposes to put spies in Tolosa and Camulodunum. Cons: delays IW by ~10 turns, higher risk of failure, double ep cost. Pros: Trojan Horse grows unhindered, spamming cottages for Paris; our spies warn us of an SoD build-up in Tolosa or Camulo, plus they tell us if either city is underdefended. The ep cost no longer really matters, as we're not likely to steal any other techs from Dead-End Brennus. Delaying IW probably costs us hammers in one or more cities. Spamming cottages for Paris is very high priority for our end-game result. If Confu spreads to Trojan Horse, then we can get it back using the AP without losing the granary. The question is, how much gpt would that cost us? I'd like to propose a conditional solution here, but I'm not sure what it is.

2. In general our cities should build granary-forge asap from now on. Also, build wealth, not research, if at all.
Paris -- beeline aque-HG in 10 turns by growing to pop9 in 4 turns and improving 2 more mines, working all 3 mines and adding 1 chop. Not sure if forge helps before HG is done.
Orleans -- library-worker-forge? Orleans deperately needs its own worker for a turnset or so and is about to hit its happy cap for a while.
HC -- spy(2whip)-? raxs/units/ConfuMisses/galley for NE ?
CornPF -- settlers + wb + library
DrunkPigs -- lh? I think it needs a lh so it can grow to p7 asap. But it should interrupt whatever to whip the forge asap.
Trojan Horse -- wealth-granary-wealth-library
Barb Island (name?) -- granary-forge-lh?-library
DPF -- granary-forge

...

We can research HBR in 2 turns any time we have enough cash, so we can have that in our back pocket in case Brennus goes WHEOORN or if a Dagger SoD appears at our borders. Or, if Camulo is underdefneded, we could decide to take it down.

Is Missionary in Paris T123-T124 and infection of Brennus' Gem city T127 with an IW steal attempt T127 @30% wait bonus an acceptable trade-off for gems, open borders, and keeping Trojan City+Granary intact?

Fritz can have a road completed to that Gems city T132 from Paris after completing the last Pmine T125. We know Brennus roaded the gems.

**Edit**

Brennus' gems city on our borders almost certainly has Buddism according to Lowthercastle, so our Conf. missionary sent there would only have an 83% chance to succeed.

If it did, it would lower our steal costs -40% and enable faster stealing. It would also give us AP options to halt war, albeit with a 10turn peace treaty. If the first steal succeeded, there might be enough espionage points left over to steal Calendar later from that gems city if Brennus can research it fast enough.

Here are the odds from LTC

LowtherCastle said:
WIth open borders, our spies are much less likely to be detected:

Code:

Spy detection odds ========================== OBs no OBs ------ ------ sitting 1.54% 3.87% just moved 3.04% 7.62% mission 80.65% 80.65%

Here are some possible steal Iron Working costs at the current spending ratio (1.17%):

Code:

Steal IW in Camulodunum (spy @ 50%) ============ Eps --- No OBs 299 OBs 239 OB+Confu 143

If we move the spy from TH, we can steal IW @50% on T129.

If our 1st spy steals after waiting 3 turns, then his odds of being caught are 3.04x2 + 1.54x3=10.7% roughly

Once we are Friendly with Ramesses T123, we can start thinking about bribing him to attack Brennus. By then the odds will be higher than Brennus has settled close to Egypt and Egypt will be willing to do a war for the right price. With shared religion ticking again T125 and shared civic ticking again T130, we can refuse to join the war or sever our trades without hurting our friend status. Longer-term, the shared religion will just keep building and building.

5 turns after settling clam/jungle pigs, we could ensure a nearly continuous gems flow when we capture Camulodunum. Just need a road 1S of clams/jungle pigs and a border pop and the gems should only be cut off in our empire 1 turn if Camulodunum isn't heavily defended.

LowtherCastle · Nov 30, 2012

Never mind....

LowtherCastle · Nov 30, 2012

Is Brennus on AI_STRATEGY_MISSIONARY?

DanF5771 said:
Every AI player chooses a set of strategies according to its personality and the current situation in the game. There are 20 different strategies, iiuc they mainly determine what the AI chooses to build in its cities, how it adjusts its sliders and how it behaves when it comes to starting wars:

...

AI_STRATEGY_MISSIONARY

...

Here's what I figured out from bcool's saves:

Code:

                    Popped  Autospread 
City        Settled borders chances
----------  ------- ------- ----------
Verlamium     T94     T105    10%
Durnovaria   T101     T110    10% 
Isca         T107     T116    10%

All three of those cities got Buddhism almost instantly. Durnovaria(ironmine) could have built a monument quickly to speed up the border pop slightly. Isca could have worked a farm from the start and 1whipped the monument after 7t to speed up its border pop slightly. BOth seem to get border pops after 9 turns.

Brennus has military flavor = 5 (medium) and religious flavor = 2 (low), so there appears to be some likelihood that he would choose that strategy, though I don't know the code on it.

If Brennus is on a missionary strategy, what does that tell us about his city builds?

==============
WHY DO WE CARE?
==============

1. If we have OBs with Brennus, he'll flood our cities with Buddhism...
2. If he's on Missionary, then no DAGGER, so FinancialTrouble means he won't DoW us (iiuc). Of course, I suppose he could switch to DAGGER any turn, but meanwhile...
3.

.

LowtherCastle · Nov 30, 2012

I wasn't here at the beginning. On what turns did we meet Brennus and Ramesses? We need that to calculate the FairTrade value for getting FairTrade plusmods.

mabraham said:
T19 made contact with Buddhist Brennus via his C1 scout near Alpha.

Tachywaxon said:
meeting Brennus' scout (T19) and the one to Ramesses (T22)

Good search term: contact.

.

Manco Capac · Nov 30, 2012

LowtherCastle said:
==============
WHY DO WE CARE?
==============

1. If we have OBs with Brennus, he'll flood our cities with Buddhism...
2. If he's on Missionary, then no DAGGER, so FinancialTrouble means he won't DoW us (iiuc). Of course, I suppose he could switch to DAGGER any turn, but meanwhile...
3.

.

I don't think he'll flood buddism to us per experience as we have our religion.
What unnerve in this situation of giving GPT is allowing Brennus to potentially return in WHEOOH.

Interesting how such AI strategy disables possible war like dagger (which is the only possible without 8 or more adjacent tiles).

And I just found it in the code:

Code:

//dagger
    if (!(m_iStrategyHash & AI_STRATEGY_MISSIONARY)
     && ((iCurrentEra <= (2+(iNonsense%2)) && (iMetCount > 0)) && (iParanoia > 0)))

I wonder what is third reason of caring.

Manco Capac · Nov 30, 2012

AI_STRATEGY_MISSIONARY : How to determine if the AI is under that strategy?

Re: AI_getStrategyHash()

iMissionary local variable is all: if iMissionary>100 ==> AI_STRATEGY_MISSIONARY triggered.

Actual situation:

iMissionary=0 (initialization)
iMissionary+=2*6 (Flavour)
iMissionary+=20 (He has religion and religious civic)
iMissionary+= 0 (He only has 1 holy city)
iMissionary+=14 (He has met 2 players)
iMissionary+=0 (this condition needs OB and Brennus has none)
iMissionary+= 10 ( I need to check this one)
iMissionary += (iNonsense % 7) * 3 (About capital location)

He seems Brennus is around 70-80, so no AI_STRATEGY_MISSIONARY.
I have to go; real life is shouting at me again. :mad:

Spoiler :

Code:

//missionary
	{
	    if (getStateReligion() != NO_RELIGION)
	    {
            int iHolyCityCount = countHolyCities();
            if ((iHolyCityCount > 0) && hasHolyCity(getStateReligion()))
            {
                int iMissionary = 0;
                //Missionary
                iMissionary += AI_getFlavorValue(AI_FLAVOR_GROWTH) * 2; // up to 10
                iMissionary += AI_getFlavorValue(AI_FLAVOR_CULTURE) * 4; // up to 40
                iMissionary += AI_getFlavorValue(AI_FLAVOR_RELIGION) * 6; // up to 60
                
                CivicTypes eCivic = (CivicTypes)GC.getLeaderHeadInfo(getPersonalityType()).getFavoriteCivic();
                if ((eCivic != NO_CIVIC) && (GC.getCivicInfo(eCivic).isNoNonStateReligionSpread()))
                {
                	iMissionary += 20;
                }
                
                iMissionary += (iHolyCityCount - 1) * 5;
                
                iMissionary += iMetCount * 7;
                
                for (iI = 0; iI < MAX_PLAYERS; iI++)
                {
                    if (GET_PLAYER((PlayerTypes)iI).isAlive())
                    {
                        if (iI != getID())
                        {
                            if (GET_TEAM(getTeam()).isOpenBorders(GET_PLAYER((PlayerTypes)iI).getTeam()))
                            {
                                iMissionary += (GET_PLAYER((PlayerTypes)iI).countHolyCities() == 0) ? 12 : 4;
                            }
                            if ((GET_PLAYER((PlayerTypes)iI).getStateReligion() == getStateReligion()))
                            {
                                iMissionary += 10;
                            }
                        }
                    }
                }
                
                iMissionary += (iNonsense % 7) * 3;
                
                if (iMissionary > 100)
                {
                    m_iStrategyHash |= AI_STRATEGY_MISSIONARY;
                }
            }
	    }
	}

Kaitzilla · Nov 30, 2012

What a great game. In the test game, simulated Priesthood for 40g T116.

Then on T117 gifted simulated Brennus Theocracy and Code of Laws. Only gave +3 relations. No problemo I thought, shared civic T120 will get us to Cautious and Open borders T121.

Then he demanded fish T118 :lol:

If refused, it would sink the peaceful method without another painful tech gift. If accepted, nothing to trade for gems(except 15 gpt :mad:

) and no war for 10 turns. A canceled Ramesses trade wouldn't get it done. Man this game is fun.

Oddly, the gift of Theocracy and Code of Laws gave +4 on T116, but that isn't possible in the real game to attempt T116 because Brennus doesn't have Priesthood yet.

Brennus is highly unlikely to demand tribute according to his info sheet.

mabraham · Nov 30, 2012

Again sorry for going AWOL. Work has been crazy again :mad:

I agree with the sentiment that if stealing in TH is too hard then we should go back to stealing in Camulodulum. The increased EP cost of the missions is not really something to worry about - particularly if getting into position to gift TH will cost us a pile of gold. The inconvenience of failed missions is real, but the cost to our strategic thinking and planning of managing all the crap associated with stealing from TH is also real. We also might not have iron in non-Arctic land, and now the rush to get IW stolen is more or less in vain. We're also undecided about whether we want to go to war if we have iron. Yes, cats, crossbows and maces are just around the corner, and that can do a good job on Brennus and we have good land to get there - but we're not really doing much with the land we already do have! If there's a decent chance we can keep Brennus off the war path for 10-20 turns then our tech position should make us unassailable.

Our tendency as a team is to over-micro (definitely guilty here!). We've made good strategic decisions so far, and have set up a great midgame position and we are mostly only talking about moving the deckchairs on our "Titanic". Whether we build missionaries for our cities is really not important to our overall game

Of course, DOWing Brennus might be steering for the iceberg, but we have our AP lifeboats!

That said, gift stuff->gift TH->steal->DOW->capture->gift tech for peace (or gift TH for peace and then wait for AP reassignment) seems fairly cheap and easy. I don't care about Brennus trade routes or diplo.

Also, bestest-buddy Ramesses might come through with a spare iron for us?

LowtherCastle · Nov 30, 2012

@Kaitzilla

I've been playing around with the formula for the FairTrade plusmods and I've noticed that getting +4 from Brennus is iffy with only two of the three big techs we have. I'm a bit hung up on it now, though, because my testing is not giving exactly the same results as the formula, as written by Silu here:

Silu said:
Okay, the value of techs for an AI in a trade:

((COST - RESEARCH_DONE) * 1.5) + ( COST/2 * ((CIVS_KNOWN - CIVS_WHO_KNOW_IT) / CIVS_KNOWN)) * AI_TRADE_MODIFIER

Sooo.... PH and Medi cost 210*1.3 = 273 beakers to him. No extra AI trade modifiers, very few techs have those - so assuming he doesn't have any beakers in PH/Medi everyone else knows them, fair trade value is 273 * 1.5 ~~ 409. So in order for us to get +4 from the formula with this, we'd get it if we have known him for 10 turns or less (so 409 / (TURNS*10) is over 4). If the other Civs he knows don't have it that might buy us a turn or two more.

EDIT: Humm... I now double-checked the fair trade diplo code (functionality of previously given to me/us by bestsss) and actually the turns are only multiplied by five for fair trade and ten for WE hate. So that doubles the turn limit above, giving us +4 diplo if we've known him for 20 turns or less.

Silu said:

IIRC it's FAIRTRADE_VALUE / (TURNS_KNOWN*10)

Click to expand...

Still working on it. Just thought I'd report in, especially in case anyone else already has it all figured out.

EDIT: I'm fairly certain my equations in my spreadsheet correspond to the above, so I think there's something missing from the above equation. I've also noticed an oddity in the game: There's a slight difference in FAIR_TRADE_VALUE depending on whether we met Brennus during our turn or he met us during his. :eek:

It appears that the counter for turns known starts a turn earlier when he meets us. But that doesn't explain the problems I have with the equation above. I'm not sure how far off the equation above is, when we're talking about knowing an AI for more than a 100 turns, so hopefully Tachy can look it up... :begging politely:

.

Kaitzilla · Nov 30, 2012

I'm looking at an alternate Trojan Horse city that maybe we can take back with 66% AP chance resolution.

Have both workers mining the Paris' hill T118. Have one road 1SE of Paris T119 for spy.

Whip a Confuscian Missionary in Horse City as soon as possible and spread it to Clams/Jungle Pigs on T121.

Settle JungPigs/Clams T120 with a whip T116 in Corn/Pigs/Fish

We get culture in it T121 and spread Conf. and gift it to Brennus at size 1 on T121 and a good spy steal attempt on T122.

We give Code of Laws earlier to counter -1 border tensions and -2 voted against us and we can sign open borders T122.

Then if we win the AP vote we get the city back on T123 just in time for Hanging Gardens to maybe give it Pop 2 and we had a good 80% steal attempt.

If the resolution is defied, we can keep trying to steal from the close by Clams/Jungle Pigs.

If we fail to steal and we get the city back, then we'd have delayed Iron Working steal by a large amount. We might have to give the city back again right away, but if it was size 2 we could whip it first and then it would be ok to declare war and take it without razing it but i still like the peaceful method/gems.

Sooooo Trojan Horse #2 with one good steal chance? :lol:

Spoiler :

Manco Capac · Nov 30, 2012

LowtherCastle said:
EDIT: I'm fairly certain my equations in my spreadsheet correspond to the above, so I think there's something missing from the above equation. I've also noticed an oddity in the game: There's a slight difference in FAIR_TRADE_VALUE depending on whether we met Brennus during our turn or he met us during his. It appears that the counter for turns known starts a turn earlier when he meets us. But that doesn't explain the problems I have with the equation above. I'm not sure how far off the equation above is, when we're talking about knowing an AI for more than a 100 turns, so hopefully Tachy can look it up... :begging politely:

.

I looked Silu's explanations to see if I don't miss something you would have read but not reported in that quote.

My first hunch before reading that post was you maybe wrongly reported the tech cost as what we see in the tech tree is calculated/inflated of what an AI sees. AI sees what a noble human player would see. Therefrom the difficulty of tech trading on deity and the need of partially tech the wanted tech to be traded to us (like Alpha).

But Silu said about handicap multiplier, so I'm not sure anymore.

Do I need to reformat his works? He is way better C++ juggler than I am. He's prolly right in his C++ translation.

It's a shame other code divers don't report the code in spoilers like I do; when I'm doing that, I know I can be corrected or refuted later if I happened to mistaken.

Can someone give me the iNonsense? I don't have the game right now, so I can't know Brennus' capital position.

SGOTM 16 - Kakumeika

Lord Croissant

Lord Croissant

Grrrrr... I AM the force!

Lord Croissant

Friday,13 June,I Collapse

King

Lord Croissant

Grrrrr... I AM the force!

Friday,13 June,I Collapse

Lord Croissant

Deity

Deity

Deity

Friday,13 June,I Collapse

Friday,13 June,I Collapse

Lord Croissant

Deity

Deity

Lord Croissant

Friday,13 June,I Collapse

Similar threads