SGOTM 19 - The Shawshank Redemption

Dhoom raised an interesting point re: Lurker Thread. I suppose this is a point no matter what. Lurkers can take strategies and/or game mechanisms from our thread and post them anywhere in CFC, thus giving them to other teams. Maybe we should post top secret info only in our forum. By the way, Dhoom has posted a couple new items of interest there...
 
I thought about that, but really it's no different than before. Lurkers could look at any/all team threads and post anywhere on CFC. With the lurker thread the info is a little more accessable/easy to find the good stuff.
 
cottage. I (almost ;) never farm floodplains.

If we're in agreement on a Pyramid-driven SE, then FP farms can certainly be better than cottages, especially for a non-financial civ. However, cottaging a FP in the capital ofen makes sense due to the Bureacracy bonus on the commerce.

So, if we settle a future FP city and have secured the 'Mids, I'd like to pre-VETO WT's VETO to farm the FPs... :mischief:

Is it even possible to have too much Tang? I'd be tempted to just snort the stuff if I didn't have any water handy!!

Regarding SIP and trying to sling Calendar, I agree with LC that it's too risky with the AI starting with PH. We'll still settle the "Calendar Site" later and we'll still benefit from that commerce in a future city. As has been mentioned earlier, this is a prime game to potentially move the capital away from the edge of the map. Like WT, I can't recall ever doing it but I can see it happening this game.

To me, the #1 priority right now is REX and 2S >> SIP for that purpose.

@ Dhoom

Regarding chopping/culling forests, we should chop intelligently and cull as you said. However, we need to decide when chopping makes sense. Right now, our worker will likely be tied up for the next 25+ turns improving all of the juicy resources around our capital (especially if we settle 2S), so there won't be too much of an opportunity to chop before then anyway. Can we re-visit this then?

Of course, if you want to run tests where you chop your three forests pre-Math to acheive some goal, go for it and show us the benefit of your ideas.
 
The PPP looks good. I've finished up my games for that gauntlet, so I have more time/interest for testing.

In particular, I agree with settling 2S, and the decision to send the scout south and the warrior north.

In terms of micromanagement, the 1-pop pig-copper route seems fairly simple to optimize. At size 2, it's one turn of floodplains, and one turn of unimproved copper. Then at size 3, work the pig, copper and plains hill forest, to whip after two turns.

I've tried pig-corn->2whip out to turn 15 as well - it just seems to fall a little behind in food terms (the particular micro I tried ran max food, whipped on turn 13, and comes out 6 food, 1 hammer and 2 beakers behind the copper start).
 
Here's a rules question for the team:

Can we trigger victory, and on the same turn but before uploading, make peace with the an AI in exchange for their last corporate resource?
 
In terms of micromanagement, the 1-pop pig-copper route seems fairly simple to optimize. At size 2, it's one turn of floodplains, and one turn of unimproved copper. Then at size 3, work the pig, copper and plains hill forest, to whip after two turns.

This was my micro too (1 turn on the FP). However I debated using the silk tile instead of the PHF to get the extra coin. But that does delay the granary 1 turn and causes us to overfill the food bin a bit.
 
Here's a rules question for the team:

Can we trigger victory, and on the same turn but before uploading, make peace with the an AI in exchange for their last corporate resource?

Yes, you can make peace, trade for resources, etc. on the victory turn.

However, I think you are suggesting that we actually can get the last single resource the AI has in a peace deal? I have not seen that. Can it be done?
 
Yes, you can make peace, trade for resources, etc. on the victory turn.

However, I think you are suggesting that we actually can get the last single resource the AI has in a peace deal? I have not seen that. Can it be done?

Oh. Duhh. You don't get trade routes when you're at war, so no resource trades. :crazyeye:
edit: I'll do a little digging to see if there's a way to do it though.
 
Pre-Math Forest-culling
Regardless of where we settle, I still think that it can be a very strong play to improve a Food Resource -> Copper -> At Size 2 build a Worker -> Chop into that Worker -> have one Worker keep Chopping while the other Worker improves Resources -> only need to 1-pop-whip or 0-pop-whip the Granary.

What bugs me about 2-pop-whipping the Granary is that we:
i. Inefficiently grow without a Granary to Size 4
ii. Must continue to build a non-Settler build item in order to make use of the early Granary
iii. Aren't working improved Resource squares after whipping

If we're looking more at a 1-pop-whipping approach now, then we could alternatively try to make it a 0-pop-whipping action or we could just be happy about getting the extra Worker turns. There's no doubt that stealing Workers helps your empire... that's partly because of the extra Worker turns... if we don't expect our neighbours to be nearby, then building our own Workers early is a good alternative.


Flood Plains squares
1. Here is one basic principle:
If you have infinite Worker turns and a fixed Happiness cap, it makes sense to have 100% Farms, grow to your Happiness cap (or perhaps 1 Size below there if, while working Cottages, you still have some net growth), then convert all Farms to Cottages.

2. Here is another basic principle:
Focus your improvements. A simple example. You have 1 FP and 1 G Riv square. One will get a Cottage and one will get a Farm. Which should get which?

Well, if you are in the whipping game (and we certainly will be), it makes sense to focus the Food one one square. That way, when your City is small in Size after having whipped, you can regrow the City quickly by working only a few squares. If all of your "extra Food" (more than 2 Food per square) is spread out across multiple squares and you don't have enough population points to work all of those squares, you'll regrow more slowly.

So, Farm the FP and regrow faster, then Cottage the G Riv square and you will, when your City is large enough to work both squares, still get a Town, but during your whipping cycles, you'll regrow faster, meaning working more squares overall as time passes.


People often Cottage a large swath of FPs because Happiness and Healthiness tend to be limiting factors. Take away the Happiness limit and it still makes sense (given infinite Worker turns) to Farm the FPs and grow on them, then Cottage them later.

We don't have infinite Worker turns, and it usually takes longer to expand our Happiness cap than it takes to grow into a Happiness cap of FP Cottages, which is why Cottaging a stack of FPs usually works out well.

However, for a one-off FP, it's going to be better to Farm it... and, if we really want a Cottage, we Cottage a G Riv square.


Fog-gazing
Sorry, I wasn't clear... do we think that the 3 hidden squares that settling 2S would give us contain Hills? If yes, are they G Hills or P Hills?

I'd like to list out another comparison between two settling locations (SIP And 2S), since I don't seem to have made that comparison yet, but it would be nice to incorporate info on whatever fog-gazing has told us about those hidden squares.
 
If we didn't already have Pig/corn + 1 fp food (11 excess food after irrigation!) then I might buy your argument to farm the FP. I'm still for cottaging both the FP and grass, it's not a one or the other choice. I will agree, that if we were going to farm one of those two squares it would be the FP, but it never would have crossed my mind to even think about a FP farm there.

Even our SugarCity will have plenty of food without the shared FPfarm.
-----
I'm not the best fog-gazer, so I don't know if they're grass or plains, but there are two hills.
 
Quick note in case anyone forgot: Food going into settler build does not get multiplied by our IMP trait. Only hammers and whips.

I'm expecting to do more 5->3, or 6->4 whips, or 7->4. I don't want to spend much time below 4 pop. SugarCity can whip 4->2. So try delaying that first settler 2 or 4 turns to grow to 5 or 6 in your testing. Keeps us working the marble/corn.
 
Excess of Food?
If we didn't already have Pig/corn + 1 fp food (11 excess food after irrigation!)
That is assuming that we don't have a second City sharing one of those Food Resources (and is also assuming a capital that is settled to grab both of those Resources, which SIP will not do, should we choose to SIP).


Sugar City?
Even our SugarCity will have plenty of food without the shared FPfarm.
Where do you envision this City being? I think that you said on a Sugar, so do you mean the western Sugar out of the 2 Sugars? If yes, it should be noted that this location "steals" the Rice in order to be a viable City, Food-wise, which may mean messing up another City that could have otherwise gone by the Rice?


Hills in the south--Good for 2S and SIP
I'm not the best fog-gazer, so I don't know if they're grass or plains, but there are two hills.
While that's good for a 2S capital, in that we'd get more production squares, it also makes SIP more viable, as both of those Hills squares would be available for a City settled 1E or 1SE of the Marble. In other words, a 2nd City by the Marble would be a pretty good location for a second City if we go with SIP.


Food + Hills
When possible, I like to balance my land to be able to work as many Hills squares as possible, which often means pay close attention to which Cities get the Food Resources.

Here, we have a lot of Hills squares, and I don't think that we'll be able to use every one of them, but we'll want to make sure that we consider partnering-up most of them with Food.


Lakes + Lighthouses
Of note is that a Lake can turn into an Oasis-equivalent square (or better than, with The Colossus) if a City is able to build a Lighthouse. I'm not sure that it's worth it to settle a City with the Lake that is 1N of our Settler in the big fat cross and the City on the sea, but it is one way to get +1 Food out of a Lake square. This point may come up again on this map type, so it's worth keeping in the backs of our minds when we consider our settling options.
 
Building Settlers
Quick note in case anyone forgot: Food going into settler build does not get multiplied by our IMP trait. Only hammers and whips.
Good point. That's another reason why I'm not a major fan of whipping the Granary, as then we'll take even longer to grow before whipping our Settler.

In fact, a very key concept to keep in mind is that any Food-based Hammers earned in excess of the 100? Hammers required to build the Settler will actually count as LESS than 1:1. I.e. The game gives you 6 Hammers for working, say, a G Pig while building the Settler, but then when calculating overflow Hammers, it subtracts 50%, so your 6 Food turns into 3 Hammers. :eek: (EDIT: I'm not 100% sure about the math here... I guess it depends upon the exact bonus to Settler production... is it +100% or +50%?)

Ideally, we'll therefore have overlap on our Food Resources. I'm not sure what Kakumeika did last game, but we settled our capital (not counting Swinger's Pad) on the PH square, then shared the Wheat between two Cities. Whenever one was building a Settler (or a Worker), the other City would steal the Wheat and grow. We saw great efficiency gains in that way, but we'll see even greater efficiency gains in this game... I mean, 6 Food can be roughly worth 12 Hammers if the Food is used to grow, versus being worth 3 Hammers (if the math above is right) when used to build a Settler on the last turn of completing the Settler... it's not hard to see why giving the Food Resource to another City for that turn is by far, preferable.
 
If we didn't already have Pig/corn + 1 fp food (11 excess food after irrigation!) then I might buy your argument to farm the FP. I'm still for cottaging both the FP and grass, it's not a one or the other choice. I will agree, that if we were going to farm one of those two squares it would be the FP, but it never would have crossed my mind to even think about a FP farm there.

I'm not the best fog-gazer, so I don't know if they're grass or plains, but there are two hills.

Anywhere but the capital, and with a little less production, I would probably farm it (and any grassland I could reach) and turn the site into an old-fashioned GP farm.

With this site and the hammers we can see, I'd instead turn it into a Great Library-boosted GP farm, and then build the Globe later and use it as a whipping post.

However, since this is the capital, I do have some sympathy for your desire to build cottages on the river tiles, but I'm undecided on which improvement I prefer.
 
Observations from the real save:

Of the three foggy hills to the south, I think:
the one south of the marble is a plains hill
the other two are grass hills.

Unit health bars show that there is something scarier than Archers out there. It looks like a strength 5 unit; probably an axeman. How does this affect our view of the power charts?
 
Observations from the real save:
Unit health bars show that there is something scarier than Archers out there. It looks like a strength 5 unit; probably an axeman. How does this affect our view of the power charts?
Let's wait till next turn to see if there's a barb city.

In any case, it might be a barb somewhere.

The AI power graphs look right without having any axes.

I still think the 200g is in case a team needs to upgrade a warrior to an axe. That means that we can give ourselves a leg up against such teams by not needing such an upgrade.
 
Okay, I tested pigs-chop-corn-copper. I ran the tests to T25, building granary-worker (plus warrior and library filler hammers). Compared to the ZPV/WT variant:

Turn food ham coin

T23 192 204 231
T23 224 181 218 LC

T25 220 220 257
T25 256 201 246 LC

Improvements are equal. LC is missing one chop.

In other words, LC provides +32f in exchange for 23h+chop and 13c. The significance of the 32f is that LC can produce a settler 2 turns sooner along with everything else that comes 2 turns sooner in the ensuing turns. This is mainly relevant to the oracle city #2. I didn't look at building a settler before a worker.

Food for thought.


Edit: The LC worker is done on T17, three turns sooner and also three turns before barbs might begin spawning, in case we need to connect copper.
 
Hills in the south--Good for 2S and SIP

While that's good for a 2S capital, in that we'd get more production squares, it also makes SIP more viable, as both of those Hills squares would be available for a City settled 1E or 1SE of the Marble. In other words, a 2nd City by the Marble would be a pretty good location for a second City if we go with SIP.

But if we just let the capital work the marble (settle 2S), then we have more freedom to put city 2 anywhere than can share the Pigs and grass hills. I'd rather have marble worked in the bureaucratic capital.

sugar city, yea, the West Sugar. It uses (or shares) the rice. I wouldn't call it stealing. That city will need something better than Sugar for food anyway. We'll have lots of options for a Rice-sharing 4th or 5th city.
 
Spoiler :
Okay, I tested pigs-chop-corn-copper. I ran the tests to T25, building granary-worker (plus warrior and library filler hammers). Compared to the ZPV/WT variant:

Turn food ham coin

T23 192 204 231
T23 224 181 218 LC

T25 220 220 257
T25 256 201 246 LC

Improvements are equal. LC is missing one chop.

In other words, LC provides +32f in exchange for 23h+chop and 13c. The significance of the 32f is that LC can produce a settler 2 turns sooner along with everything else that comes 2 turns sooner in the ensuing turns. This is mainly relevant to the oracle city #2. I didn't look at building a settler before a worker.


Food for thought.

Food for thought indeed. So much thought, that I now want to try Worker-Granary (with the pig->chop->stuff improvement order) and see how it compares.
 
Back
Top Bottom