SGOTM7 - Team Grumpy

A very clever demonstration! :goodjob:
 
Hi guys. Well done, better luck next time ;) .

Re random luck, in our game the Americans built the Great Library in 975BC. How would that have gone along with your game plan?

In Klarius' clever barb camp demo, I think our screenshot was from an earlier save than yours. Edrine got sacked by barbs shortly after its foundation while undefended. I think by having settlers out faster we helped ourselves by having a buffer of small towns, and we still had a pretty tough time with barbs.

I think the main luck comes in how things go with the early AI invasions. A bit of bad luck and Immortals can rip the heart out of your empire. I think team Bede didn't do too much wrong, but had a bad run of PRNG.

Our early leader was very important for us, but I think you guys had more leaders overall. We actually got a bit bogged down later on, at least in part due to a paucity of armies.
 
I made a little worksheet that listed 1st leader dates as well as some other info taken from the last save available from the table, so it does not include the last turnset. I only included teams that were done or about to be done.

PRNG played a major role in our (Xteam) game as we had no leaders throughout the whole game.
 
Offa said:
Re random luck, in our game the Americans built the Great Library in 975BC. How would that have gone along with your game plan?
Maybe it would have helped overall :crazyeye: :lol: .
AI research was so lousy that the FP we would have got instead may have been of more benefit.

Offa said:
In Klarius' clever barb camp demo, I think our screenshot was from an earlier save than yours. Edrine got sacked by barbs shortly after its foundation while undefended. I think by having settlers out faster we helped ourselves by having a buffer of small towns, and we still had a pretty tough time with barbs.
It's the earliest screenshot I found in the thread showing the camp the barbs came from.
But the point is, that if we had a settler in 3000, we would have had trouble to move it at all, because barbs were already threatening our worker on the southern sheep. The little picture shows 3000, but at that time there was no unit to show the location of the camp.
 
DJMGator13 said:
I made a little worksheet that listed 1st leader dates as well as some other info taken from the last save available from the table, so it does not include the last turnset. I only included teams that were done or about to be done.

PRNG played a major role in our (Xteam) game as we had no leaders throughout the whole game.

Ouch! And I thought our leader luck was bad.

Luck is always going to play a role in these games. This is actually a good thing in my mind in that it makes no single strategy ideal.

I think the GLib helped us a good bit. No way would we have been attacking with knights and a knight army vs India without it.

I think the best part is that you get to see how other strategies worked and perhaps give you a better idea how to choose in the future.

One thing I am curious about is what years people got their UU. I think our strategy gives it to us pretty quickly, but was curious if this is really true.

We were a bit smaller so maybe others did get it quicker.
 
Greebley said:
One thing I am curious about is what years people got their UU. I think our strategy gives it to us pretty quickly, but was curious if this is really true.
Well, not many teams are further in time then we were, but nobody reached MT up to now (if I didn't overlook somebody).
The teams that finished did it with knights.
 
Thanks for taking care of that. :goodjob:
 
Top Bottom