SGOTM 9 - Smurkz

[Niklas]

Looking good!

And yes, spreadsheets are good.
Don't fret too much about the lost turns though, we'll lose a turn or so on the granary, but it's not going to kill us. At least no barbies have razed it, eh?

I'll still try to get that spreadsheet up, although its use will be less valuable after 20 turns (and I will have little time to work with it). Or you can try it out yourselves, I attached the base sheet (courtesy of Offa) to this post.

@CF: Great explanation!

 

[ControlFreak]

I will never ask you "why the hell'd you do that" because I don't want anyone to ask me that.

Reread this this morning and decided that's not what I meant. I do want people to ask me why I did stuff. Just not why the heck I did stuff.

**Kicking self**

No need to kick yourself. I think you're right that without the Bonus worker, you're really not that far off. Playing the turns without Niklas's spreadsheets are a good way to learn how to think about the game.

I might get a chance at the spreadsheet later but I suspect Methos will have played by then.

 

[Niklas]

I might get a chance at the spreadsheet later but I suspect Methos will have played by then.

No, I don't think Methos should play until we've had a chance at a bit more discussion. There's no need to rush ahead, that only benefits the other teams. So give that spreadsheet a thought, and I'll see if I can't get the time do the same.

 

[Methos]

I might get a chance at the spreadsheet later but I suspect Methos will have played by then.

No, I don't think Methos should play until we've had a chance at a bit more discussion. There's no need to rush ahead, that only benefits the other teams.

Don't worry about me rushing, I believe we all learned just how effective taking our time was in SGOTM8. I have no intention of playing until further discussion (or a agreed upon spreadsheet) is had.

I'm not very good with spreadsheets, though I did mess some with our current game. It's difficult enough getting the spreadsheet to reach what our current year looks like (size and production wise). Got tired of it and was hoping some of you more experienced spreadsheet experts would figure it out.

 

[Methos]

I'm not much on the spreadsheet but I messed around with the quickest way to get the granary the turn before growth. Here's my suggestion:

Turn 0 [19]: i cow, i bg, forest; +3 food/+5 shields [3 f/28 s]
Turn 1 [20]: i cow, i bg, forest; +3 f/+5 s [6f/33s]
Turn 2 [21]: i lamb, i bg, forest; +2 f/+5 s [8f/38s]
Turn 3 [22]: i lamb, m bg, forest; +2 f/+6 s [10f/44s]
Turn 4 [23]: i lamb, m bg, forest; +2 f/+6 s [12f/50s]
Turn 5 [24]: i lamb, m bg, forest; +2 f/+6 s [14f/56s]
Turn 6 [25]: i lamb, m bg, lake; +3 f/+4 s [17f/60s]

I may have when the watered bg is converted to mined wrong. According to the above I have it at the end of turn 3. Is that correct? Or does it happen prior to when food/production is calculated?

Turn 0 is WarDance's last turn. I added the actual turn numbers for clarity.

The numbers in quotes would be what was figured during the IT. So the granary would be finished on the IT after turn 6, and then we would have growth on the IT of turn 7.

 

[ControlFreak]

I'm working on a spreadsheet but it's going slowly.

I think we're better off hurrying to size 4 (four turns at 5fpt), then hurrying to finish the granary with the mined BGs it might be a turn or two later but we'll be up a pop.

Like I said, my calcs aren't done so you might have the best solution.

The mine will finish on the interturn before shields are calculated.

 

[Niklas]

Turn 0 [19]: i cow, i bg, forest; +3 food/+5 shields [3 f/28 s]
Turn 1 [20]: i cow, i bg, forest; +3 f/+5 s [6f/33s]
Turn 2 [21]: i lamb, i bg, forest; +2 f/+5 s [8f/38s]
Turn 3 [22]: i lamb, m bg, forest; +2 f/+6 s [10f/44s]
Turn 4 [23]: i lamb, m bg, forest; +2 f/+6 s [12f/50s]
Turn 5 [24]: i lamb, m bg, forest; +2 f/+6 s [14f/56s]
Turn 6 [25]: i lamb, m bg, lake; +3 f/+4 s [17f/60s]

That's very good, Methos, you're getting good at this!
I was going to say that I'd be hard pressed to find a better one, but I actually think I have. Don't be dismayed though, your one is really good. Anyway, here goes:

Turn 0 [19]: i cow, i bg, forest; +3 food/+5 shields [3 f/28 s]
Turn 1 [20]: i cow, m bg, forest; +3 f/+6 s [6f/34s]
Turn 2 [21]: i cow, m bg, forest; +3 f/+6 s [9f/40s]
Turn 3 [22]: i cow, m bg, forest; +3 f/+6 s [12f/46s]
Turn 4 [23]: m bg, m bg, forest; +1 f/+7 s [13f/53s]
Turn 5 [24]: m bg, m bg, forest; +1 f/+7 s [14f/60s]

Same amount of food, but granary one turn earlier. It all depends on that we use the workers in the most efficient way though, otherwise we couldn't do it this way. The one mining to the NW should be woken up and told to join the one mining on the irrigation. That way they will together finish the mine at the end of turn one. After that both can go up to the NW and start a mine at the same turn, to be finished three turns later at the end of turn four.

It might be like CF says, that hurrying to size 4 and delaying the granary a few turns might be better in the long run. But I think not, we'd practically lose 10 food since we wouldn't have a granary when we grow to size 4. And the sequence above should be really hard to beat.

I'll try to continue on a spread-sheet that goes beyond turn 24. I attached the spread-sheet with what I had so far, and set it up to work from turn 19.

 

[Methos]

I was going to say that I'd be hard pressed to find a better one, but I actually think I have. Don't be dismayed though, your one is really good.

Don't worry, in all honesty I was more afraid that after the time I spent doing those few turns either you or CF would have the whole spreadsheet done!

Unless I'm mistaken even with the additional turn saved, growth still falls on turn 26. I don't recall being able to get more than +5 food.

 

[Niklas]

Well, it did take me about 5 minutes or so to come up with the sequence I posted.
But really, take that as a positive thing. I've learned the hard way to master the spread-sheet thinking style, and then it's not so hard and tedious work any more. It's very very useful, and once you know it, it's fast as well.

 

[ControlFreak]

I finished my "simulator" but I don't have anymore time. Play with it if you want. Post more Monday.

Build Plan Simulator

 

[Niklas]

@CF: That's a very nice spreadsheet "simulator", did you build it yourself?
I like the way the resources and the improvements are specified for each terrain type (being a Computer Science guy, I prefer "well-typed" to "untyped", and if you're not into CS you have no idea what I just said ).

I fixed up a sheet that gets the first settler out on turn 29, the second on 36, and then pumps archer-settlers every 5 turns:
View attachment 103543

I'm not really sure if we could manage an archer rush, distances do seem a bit long and the closest target is Carthage with NMs. But if we're aiming for berserkers, then archers is what we want to build in any case. I guess. Or, do we?

We also need to discuss how to settle. RCP is almost impossible, we could squeeze in 5 towns at RCP 3 but it certainly won't be optimal. RCP 4 doesn't look any better really. Any ideas here would be most welcome.
Another question, is this the Indian core we are building? Or is it one we plan on keeping? At this point I think I prefer the latter, but who knows?

I've attached the actual spreadsheet as well. Please comment.

 

[ControlFreak]

Food is most important. Growing without the granary cost 10f. Waiting for the granary cost 16 (5fpt-3, or 1 per turn for 6 turns). I think we should grow first but still haven't worked it out. (5 mins to post before wife gets back.)

Spreadsheet was my construction this morning. I'll improve it to be more user friendly someday.

 

[Niklas]

Food is most important. Growing without the granary cost 10f. Waiting for the granary cost 16 (5fpt-3, or 1 per turn for 6 turns). I think we should grow first but still haven't worked it out.

I think that what's really important is not food itself, but what we can do with it. In other words, what really counts is when we get those settlers out (and what else we get in between). If we want a settler-archer factory we will need a barracks and two MPs, and then go for it like crazy. So, if we could come up with a sequence where we grow faster, and where the settlers are not delayed, then it will clearly be better. But if the settlers come later, I don't really see the point. IMO growing shouldn't be just for the sake of growth.

EDIT: Playing around with the sheet, it seems you are right. It is possible get the granary out on the same turn as with the sequence above, even when going for growth full speed.
I'll see if I can post a new spreadsheet with these ideas.

Spreadsheet was my construction this morning. I'll improve it to be more user friendly someday.

Cool. I'm not that good at spread-sheets in general. I can use a template that someone else has built, but I have no experience with actually building it. I had no idea that you could even do enumerations in drop-down lists like that, I think I'm going to try to reverse engineer your sheet to see if I can learn something. When time permits, that is.

 

[Niklas]

Alright, new start plan, and one that really is much better. Thanks CF, this is a clear example that discussion and diverging ideas is all for the better.

Da sheet:
View attachment 103605
This sequence should not be taken by the letter. We have the option of running as a 4-turn settler factory for as long as we see fit, and switch to a 5-turn archer-settler factory when we feel it's time, by building a barracks and then just go. We'd rely on our other towns to build those MPs, which we can do since we'll be running the 4-turner at smaller size.

Spread sheet attached.

 

[WarDance]

I'm not really sure if we could manage an archer rush, distances do seem a bit long and the closest target is Carthage with NMs. But if we're aiming for berserkers, then archers is what we want to build in any case. I guess. Or, do we?

Another question, is this the Indian core we are building? Or is it one we plan on keeping? At this point I think I prefer the latter, but who knows?

Marching a bunch of archers through the jungle to fall upon the spears of Numidian mercenaries doesn't sound like much fun to me, especially as that will put Carthage in their Golden Age. Although we did a nice job on Greece last game with archers. The yellow border is probably the Mongols but who knows? It's a long trek for an archer rush, regardless. I'm not really answering your question am I? I think that unless we don't have iron or horses available the only thing we would really need berserks for is jumping Ghandi's palace.

Looking at the visible terrain I'd say the core we are building we should probably keep. There's an awful lot of jungle and desert north of us. Maybe better land further north but that remains to be seen. I think we should build up our core and then work on making some room for India up north someplace later on.

 

[Methos]

So does everyone agree upon this? The only thing I wonder about is going so long without any MP. We'll definitely have to run with our lux up for a while. If there's nothing south of us we should be okay defense wise until we finally pop the archer. It just seems risky to wait until 1950 BC before having any sort of MP.

By the looks of it our settlers are going to have to plop down north of us, which would slow down any sort of advance...

I'll wait until around noon my time (GMT -5) before I start playing. That way we can make sure everyone agrees with the above.

Edit: @Niklas: How did you do the "Whose posted" back in SGOTM8? I've been looking and can't see how to bring that page up for this thread.

 

[Niklas]

http://forums.civfanatics.com/misc.php?do=whoposted&t=139063
Looks like I will have some fierce competition this time. Wonderful!

Bring up the pop-up window, right-click and choose "Copy Address". Works in Opera at least. I guess in IE you'd have to select "Properties" and copy the address listed there.

 

[WarDance]

So does everyone agree upon this? The only thing I wonder about is going so long without any MP. We'll definitely have to run with our lux up for a while. If there's nothing south of us we should be okay defense wise until we finally pop the archer. It just seems risky to wait until 1950 BC before having any sort of MP.

This makes me a little nervous, too. In monarch games I've played with similar barb settings I could usually count on seeing barbies show up near my towns sometime between 2400BC and 2200BC, right around the time of our second settler.

 

[Niklas]

We won't have to wait that long, and I told you not to take the sequence by the letter. First archer would come in 1950 BC only if we choose to switch to the 5-turner after 3 settlers.
Our first settler is ready in 2590 BC, if we go for RCP 3 we'll have a second town in 2550 BC that can start building warriors, first MP should be done in 2350 BC, could be even in 2390 BC if we need it fast.

I think RCP 3 might be the way to go after all. Because of how the land lies in the SW, it's either RCP 3 or no RCP at all. We should probably settle for 4 towns at ring 3, we could get one more but at the expence of the deer. I'd rather keep that and plan for the longer run. Second ring probably at distance 5. What do you think?

 

[ControlFreak]

Food for the sake of food was not my intent. I'm glad you calculated the way to get the granary at the same time with 1 more citizen.

I think we should have an archer built at least before the second settler if not before the first.

RCP3 is good for me. With all the jungle we may want to get a worker pump going up near the cow also.

Good luck Methos, don't forget to wake the worker and set Smurkzheim to 5fpt! Check ya tomorrow.