SGOTM 22 - Xteam

[Htadus]

If we are not going to settle a city to the southeast or immediate east, then our next tech should be IW.

Here is my argument for it.

If we are going to settle anywhere up north, then first, we should hope to explore more of the area before making a selection and if Iron is available for us to settle, then we should claim it. As of right now and with current settlement plan, we are going to have to wait until we know Construction and HBR before we get any kind of a strong units. Well I guess I am making an assumption that BSP chose not to give us any Iron in our current boundary.

The purple dot is not bad at all however, with 17 jungles, it is likely going to starve at pop 1. So even for that, having IW on hand will be very helpful. We can road to the site and start chopping the banana for the city. Also Myst should only take 3-4 turns to learn and if we want to settle the purple dot without any further information about iron then we can start on a granary until Myst is learned. Then switch to a monument.

You already know where I would settle our next city and why.

As for choosing Sal as our victim of kindness, It was based on his charts for gpt, bpt and fpt. Since there is no guarantee that he will be a good techer since he is a religious nut.

Spoiler :

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=11931797&postcount=44

I suppose Darius may also be a suitable candidate since he has gold flavor.

Spoiler :

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=11931704&postcount=14

Hanibal is another gold flavor choice.

Spoiler :

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=11931720&postcount=22

Anyways, I had issues with my computer for 3 days and will likely again. So in the interim, if you need my input, here are my choices.

Next tech is IW followed by Alpha if we can not wait to steal Myst.
New second city site is on the east side of Rome to function as a science city.
3rd city site to claim Iron if available.
Gift Rome now.

One more thing, if we are going to go the tech stealing route, lets not use our limited bulbs on techs we know that the AI will learn. What is the purpose of a tech stealing plan if you are going to learn the same thing the AI we are stealing from is also learning. Of course, this excludes IW and Alphabet to an extent since Monarch AI do not learn Alpha that soon. Funny thing is that this is so dependent on getting a GSpy.

BTW, who is the next player?

 

[Jersey Joe]

I did 3 fast tests (sloppy MM) to 50bc. In all 3 tests I did the following:
Got OB with Sal this turn. Waited 1 turn for archer and gifted Rome to Sal.
Built city at purple dot site in 850bc, built monument and camped the elephant. Second city built to get gems and deer around 550bc (depends on barb activity) mined hill then camped deer.

Test 1: Tech Myst->IW->Alpha->Math(still learning). Learned IW in 675bc & Alpha in 200bc by 50bc had spy at Rome but had not yet attempted a steal and had a settler with archer escort going to settle city 4 by silk in the west (I think we will find Iron in the west)

Test 2 happens 81%: Tech: Myst->Alpha->Math->Calendar(still learning). Great Spy mission (225bc) to Rome for 3000+ EP.
Using 2 spies: Stole IW (200bc), Poly (150bc), Monotheism (100bc), Monarchy (50bc)
Settler (delayed to build spies) getting ready to leave Caput

Test 3 happens 19%: Tech: Myst->Alpha->Math->Calendar(still learning). Great Merchant mission (725bc) to Rome 900 Gold. Research 80% Espionage 20% (all at Saladin)
Using 2 spies stole IW (200bc), Poly (50bc) did not have enough EPs for another steal.
Settler (delayed to build spies) getting ready to leave Caput

Alpha before IW looks good, except Htadus makes a valid point about what happens if we lose a chance to build an iron city (replaces gems deer).

With the 2 above cities it was easy to get pop 8 in Caput (8 health & 7 happy) and be ready to send a settle out by 50bc.

Do spies count as military units for the purpose of meeting the number of units we need in the capital to build a city after we know BW?

 

[Folket]

I pretty certain a spy is not a military units. Otherwise we could garrison our city with workers and work boats.

 

[BSPollux]

A spy is not a military unit

 

[Ronnie1]

How concerned should we be about Rome flipping back to us? If it flips back, and we don't have the appropriate population or garrison, I believe we will be disqualified. I was reading back through some earlier posts, and I am sure that is what was being discussed.

 

[Htadus]

We do not have to accept the city. It goes back to the AI and repeats. But eventually it stops. I remember this from my culture game days.

 

[BSPollux]

How concerned should we be about Rome flipping back to us? If it flips back, and we don't have the appropriate population or garrison, I believe we will be disqualified. I was reading back through some earlier posts, and I am sure that is what was being discussed.

We do not have to accept the city. It goes back to the AI and repeats. But eventually it stops. I remember this from my culture game days.

I personally don't know the exact mechanics. I don't want to question your knowledge Htadus, I just want to make sure you understand that I/we need to be strict about this. DQs are the worst thing imo, so anti-climatic.

 

[Jersey Joe]

How concerned should we be about Rome flipping back to us? If it flips back, and we don't have the appropriate population or garrison, I believe we will be disqualified. I was reading back through some earlier posts, and I am sure that is what was being discussed.

In all the test games I have play (out to around 50bc) it has never flipped. Closest it came was when barbarians killed Sal's Archer and left only our warrior in the city and the city rioted. I ran an archer into Rome and gifted the archer to Sal, end of riot. Also, had barbarians conquer Rome once.

 

[Jersey Joe]

I personally don't know the exact mechanics. I don't want to question your knowledge Htadus, I just want to make sure you understand that I/we need to be strict about this. DQs are the worst thing imo, so anti-climatic.

Sot of a follow-up question:
We gift Rome to Saladin. Rome is then captured by barbarians or another AI. We then capture Rome, install a governor making it our fifth city and immediately gift it back to Saladin would that disqualify us if we did not meet all the requirement necessary for us to have a fifth city? I just did a quick test and did not get a choice when I conquered Rome to liberate it to Saladin, so I am viewing install governor and gift as the choice to liberate.

 

[Htadus]

I personally don't know the exact mechanics. I don't want to question your knowledge Htadus, I just want to make sure you understand that I/we need to be strict about this. DQs are the worst thing imo, so anti-climatic.

It not just my knowledge. Here is some old proof that we do get the option to accept the city or disband it.http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=346270

In all the test games I have play (out to around 50bc) it has never flipped. Closest it came was when barbarians killed Sal's Archer and left only our warrior in the city and the city rioted. I ran an archer into Rome and gifted the archer to Sal, end of riot. Also, had barbarians conquer Rome once.

That is what we have to do, gift 1-2 archers to the AI we give the city to.
If another AI capture Rome, then they become our victims but the esp points would be the problem. I believe that if we capture the city and accept it even for a moment, we are disqualified.

 

[BSPollux]

Sot of a follow-up question:
We gift Rome to Saladin. Rome is then captured by barbarians or another AI. We then capture Rome, install a governor making it our fifth city and immediately gift it back to Saladin would that disqualify us if we did not meet all the requirement necessary for us to have a fifth city? I just did a quick test and did not get a choice when I conquered Rome to liberate it to Saladin, so I am viewing install governor and gift as the choice to liberate.

It's as Htadus says:

I believe that if we capture the city and accept it even for a moment, we are disqualified.

Gifting it away "quickly" after breaking the rules for accepting cities doesn't un-disqualify you.

So just be careful. Better save than sorry.

 

[Cactus Pete]

Joe, in your testing, when is the second and third settler coming out?

 

[leif erikson]

It's as Htadus says:

Gifting it away "quickly" after breaking the rules for accepting cities doesn't un-disqualify you.

So just be careful. Better save than sorry.

This doesn't really address the issue because there is no choice to accept or not? If it flips back to us, it is ours whether we want it or not, there is no way to predict when it will happen and it cannot be razed.

Essentially, the fear of a flip back negates the whole strategy.

 

[Ronnie1]

Who exactly is up for us at this point?

I'm not sure it negates the whole strategy if we are prepared. Some day we will want Rome back anyway and have to plan for it.

 

[Cactus Pete]

Not sure it isn't a very low risk worth taking.

 

[Jersey Joe]

Essentially, the fear of a flip back negates the whole strategy.

As Htadus has shown, the choice is to accept the city or raze it. So worst case is we destroy and rebuild it when we meet the requirements to.

That is what we have to do, gift 1-2 archers to the AI we give the city to.

At the time of gifting we do not have 1-2 archers to spare. What I do is leave an archer and warrior in Rome when I gifted it to Sal. When Sal builds an archer I have ours leave but the warrior remains. If Sal's archer gets killed and Rome riots I then gift an archer.

Joe, in your testing, when is the second and third settler coming out?

We have a settler in Rome right now. That one settles the purple dot around 875bc. I settle the next town (gems & deer) around 575bc.
When I tech Apha and steal IW I have another settler ready to go by 50bc. This one could be ready earlier, but I build some infrastructure in Caput and 2 spies before working on getting a settler. This settler is ready a little sooner when I go IW->Alpha. Also, I could finish that last settler much quicker if I did another chop in Caput. All of the above is with sloppy MM and my concentrating on spying not settling.

 

[leif erikson]

Not sure it isn't a very low risk worth taking.

To be competitive, think we have to take the risk.

As Htadus has shown, the choice is to accept the city or raze it. So worst case is we destroy and rebuild it when we meet the requirements to.

It is a different situation. That example is culture pressure versus a city founded and owned by another civ.

In this case, we owned the city and gifted it, when it comes back to us I do not think we get a choice.

 

[Jersey Joe]

It is a different situation. That example is culture pressure versus a city founded and owned by another civ.
In this case, we owned the city and gifted it, when it comes back to us I do not think we get a choice.

I will try to test this to see what happens.

 

[Jersey Joe]

I tried to get Rome to revolt back to us. I used world builder and built 2 cities in 100BC to surround Rome. Both Arretium and Ravenna have culture >500 and Rome has 1 culture no buildings and no Saladin troops. I could not get it to revolt to us.
I even was running spy missions to cause revolts and supporting revolts at most it would riot and be out of riot in between turns. The culture in Rome was 48% Saladin and 52% us when the picture was taken. Maybe it was because Rome was a "Holy City".

If anyone has a suggestion on how to get Rome to revolt I will run a test.

Here is what it looks like at 640AD when I stopped.

Spoiler :

Side note: The culture from Ravenna surrounded a barbarian city. The Great Wall did not expel the barbarians. Though a few turns after that happened the barbs asked to join us and I razed their city.

 

[Jersey Joe]

Before I tried to get Rome to revolt, I had run a test out to 100bc (which I used to test Rome revolting).
Tech path: IW->Myst->Alpha
I waited to settle the second city until we got IW and had put iron far to the west out by the silk. Settler stayed in Caput until IW discovered. I did send an Archer out to that area when I started the test game. I did this based on iron being as far west from our starting location as copper is east. Caput concentrated on getting settlers out. I settled next to iron in 675bc (not an ideal spot but AI had a settler close by). Next city built in 525 on purple dot. Another city was built in 100bc for gems & deer (had to wait for Caput to grow to 8 to build).

Also, in this test I settled the GS when I got him instead of doing an infiltrate mission for 3000 ep. I was able to steal my way to Monarchy by 225ad and still have over 300 ep left to steal more techs. If I was going to play more I would switch the eps to Gil since he has built close to our iron city.