LowtherCastle
Deity
- Joined
- May 18, 2005
- Messages
- 23,756
We could settle at horsees-1W and gems-1E and our culture hooks up the gems as soon as they're mined
What makes BW safer, exactly? Didn't someone argue earlier that getting early BW and not finding copper could be problematic? Or was that in the context of not having horses, and BW helps with whipping in any case, and we will have horses.I think BW and GW(T37) is our safe route, both in terms of getting the GW and in terms of not getting overrun with barbs, but I'll go the other way, since that seems to be the consensus. Basically we're going to gamble on the optimal solution. Okay by me.
A little later on tonight, if I don't get caught up watching the Packers thrash the Chiefs.When are you planning to play?
Revised PPPPPP
Tech: Masonry-Mysticism-TW (might as well focus on buildings for REX, if we fail on GW, we can still build the Great Warrior Wall)
MM: Per Pollina's plan
Warriors: be as safe as possible, collect cheap XP, move into sentry position. Forget about farming a slave from Hannibal.
Build: warrior (partial)-GW
Plan to play tomorrow if no major objections.
Darius population
1 2 3 4
Hammers 4 6 7 8 9
Food 7 8 10 9 11
fhpt 12 = settler in 8t
ar p2 rx p4 AH?
Power 17 20 21 24 25 27
Start: archery+hunting+3xarchers?
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Darius p2 p3 p4
Saladin p2 p3 p4 p5 ?>4
Brennus p2 p3 p4
Hannibl p2 ---worker?--- p3 p4
Gilga ---worker?--- p2 p3
Zara ---worker?--- p2 p3
xxx n
xoxxon
xxxxxn
Can't lose Rome because Darius will talk after 4t with the scout capture. The advantage is to hopefully get Darius to not build GW later on. He could build 2 settlers and still beat us to GW if he gets stone.Why? What is the advantage? Could lose Rome to wandering archer...
I thought it ended up undetermined. Doesn't really matter. Just an unexpected opportunity. I guess we could count rather on OBs and TRs.I thought in WT's testing that a DOW didn't affect the AI's builds...
No, that's just data on Zara's T3 expansion.Zara 2nd expansion already? Instead of T25. Means what? Monument
We now have two warriors with 2/2XP. I'm thinking they should be put where there's the most threat of mass invasion: west and north. The third has 1/2XP and goes to the east. The southern chokepoint is less precarious, once we get the fourth there because he'll only be subject to random barb movement.I would probably switch back to building the warrior as soon the AI settles another city. Delay to GW from pillaging barbs could be much more than the 1 turn we lose by finishing the warrior. In the unlikely case that all AIs are still at only one city on t33, I would skip the warrior and go for t41 GW.
My point was that t33 is the very latest I would switch back to the warrior, especially if the AI ends up expanding super slowly. 3 defending warriors are plenty, if human barbs don't spawn until after t33.So on T30 at the latest, I would stop and review the situation. Is your T33 plan based on the assumption we'll be able to run 13h on T41? One pillaged mine screws that. T32 might be a tad safer in that we could still work a 1f2h. Of course, T31 would allow 2@ 1f2h, and so on...
Yes, I understood that part, sorry for not acknowledging it. That's a good strategy, I think. I was carrying your idea forward and looking at how many hammers the GW would have on T41 in that case. We wouldn't want GW completion to leak into T43.My point was that t33 is the very latest I would switch back to the warrior, especially if the AI ends up expanding super slowly. 3 defending warriors are plenty, if human barbs don't spawn until after t33.