*Spoiler2* - Gotm19-Ottomans - Full Map - Mag+Grav

[ltccone]

Originally posted by Moonsinger


Yes, I think it was very large and closely built. My empire was about 20 tiles from hitting the Domination limit when I switched to Democracy. I was planning for a full milk to 2050AD but I had to end my game early because of unexpected project for work.

I never milk my score anymore. I would just rather play a new game. The score just isn't that important to me. This GOTM was my first Emperor game, I was happy enough just to win it!

I have found in PBEM games that it doesn't even really mean that you are winning (or losing)...

 

[Moonsinger]

Originally posted by ltccone
I never milk my score anymore. I would just rather play a new game. The score just isn't that important to me. This GOTM was my first Emperor game, I was happy enough just to win it!

Since milking doesn't increase the score nowsdays. In fact, I will be losing score if I milk; therefore, I hope you would understand that I do not do it for the score.

PS: I want to milk the GOTM19 just because my prediction is that no one else will be doing it and because I want to show that milking does not increase the score. Unfortunately, I didn't have time to do it this time.

 

[ControlFreak]

I finally made it to this spoiler. At this rate, I'm not going to be able to submit. I've already given up my spaceship plans in favor of the faster diplo win.

Celts eliminated by me just after QSC. They had the GLibrary instead of pyramids. Research was shut off until Education (Got gunpower from it first.)

Hand built GLighthouse and used it to make contact and be the tech broker all the way through Astronomy.

Hand built FP right next to Sogut, planning on getting a leader from Celts or Carthage to move my palace.

Celts fell too quickly, even though I tried to milk it a little, war weariness forced me to end their existance without a palace jumper.

Made a big mistake declaring on Carthage, trying to take the oracle from Carthage. After losing a ton of knights to bad RNG and stupid attack strategies that left exposed knights in the open, I settled with two captured cities nearer my core. Pulling Rome in forced me to wait 20 turns, suffering more losses. But at least the 800lb gorilla didn't declare on me. Still no leaders.

As soon as I connected saltpeter and upgraded my few spears, I traded my only salt to Rome. I think that's why they never attacked me, even with no defenders in my cities. Some rounds, they were paying me >100gpt for saltpeter too.

I've been selling techs to the point that the AI are one tech behind me but can't research fast because I'm taking all their income in gpt payments. I'm not winning any medals for this game!

All in all, it started with a bad QSC, a worse middle age and, although I should win, it won't be a very satisfing victory. (That's if I finish before the 31st.)

 

[Aeson]

I think Anarchy time is dependant on difficulty level. It seems to have a range of 2-4 turns on each difficulty, and that seems random. Empire size might weight it, but there definitely is a random element. If I had to guess, I'd say it looks something like:

Cheiftain: 2-4 turns
Warlord: 2-4 turns
Regent: 3-6 turns
Monarch: 3-6 turns
Emperor: 4-8 turns
Deity: 4-8 turns

 

[DaveMcW]

I always thought anarchy lasted 1-4 turns with additional penalties based on empire size.

1-3 cities: +0
4-7 cities: +1
8-11 cities: +2
12-15 cities: +3
16+ cities: +4

 

[a space oddity]

Dave: are those 1-4 turns random, or do they depend on the difficulty level?

 

[Renata]

I've had 8-turn late-game anarchies on warlord level, so I don't think the difficulty level makes a difference. I haven't really kept track of #turns anarchy vs. #cities, but in SP6 we drew 8 turns with exactly 16 cities, so as far as I know that could be right.

@ Shillen - how many cities did you have when you revolted in 4-4?

Renata

 

[Ribannah]

I've seen 7 turns with less than 12 cities, so maybe map size is an additional factor.
IIRC difficulty level already influences the time the AI is in anarchy, so it would be kinda double if it also has an effect on the human anarchy span.

 

[Aeson]

Just did some quick testing, and it looks like difficulty isn't a factor. The range is at least 1-5 for the random element, as I got 1-5, 2-6, and 3-7 turn anarchy with 0, 5, and 10 cities respectively on Deity. Might even be wider, as I only did each 20 times.

On Cheiftain the ranges I got were 1-5, 2-5, and 3-6 at the same city levels with the same number of tests. Probably the lower top limit just because of the small number of trials.

 

[tao]

There was a post about this some time ago. Someone at Firaxis gave THE answer and IIRC it was something like "anarchy turns are the sum of two components, one being difficulty related, the other random". He gave min and max numbers for both values (sum being at most 8), but I can't recall them.

 

[mad-bax]

Well, I'm not having fun any more

Since the last spoiler, things have gone from bad to worse. I think I took the Emperor level too lightly as I've only played part of one other game at that level before.

I took out the Celts and then Carthage except for one city. I didn't get a leader so I had no FP. I then just camped outside the last city for getting on for twenty turns just trying to generate a leader. Eventually he came, and then I took the last remaining city which generated another leader in the same turn. So I got the FP and Leo's, but far too late.

For a long time then I built libraries and marketplaces to try to get science at a respectable rate, and enough happiness to support the growing population. I did OK trading, but stopped when researching Metallurgy and MT, to make the AI do this themselves and hopefully give my Sipahi a head start. Spain declared war at about this time and took Nora on the little island near the Roman landmass. This was fine, but it took a few turns to get to Spain and my Sipahi were facing Muskets. Taking the Spanish towns was fairly straightforward and nearly all of them had a wonder in them. Unfortunately they were all size 12 and they kept flipping back whilst still in resistance. I have no idea how to handle that. Also once flipped they were defended by 3 muskets. I was pretty sure that cities didn't flip until resistance had ended and were given only one defender. I must be wrong about that as it happened twice.

I'm still determined to win by conquest, but I can clearly forsee MA swanning around the map in the twentieth century.

I hope I finish by the cut-off date, but I doubt I will

Some great games being played this month guys, mine isn't one of them.

 

[CdB]

Originally posted by mad-bax
... Unfortunately they were all size 12 and they kept flipping back whilst still in resistance. I have no idea how to handle that.

One solution to keep the city from flipping is :
- Starve city to 1 . It can take time but if you are in communism you rush improvment and that speed the process.
- Use military police to keep them in peace. The number of MP you need depends on the size & culture ... My rule of thumbs is approx the same number as size of city (I remember of seing a thread on this topic)

 

[zagnut]

Originally posted by mad-bax
I was pretty sure that cities didn't flip until resistance had ended and were given only one defender. I must be wrong about that as it happened twice.

There are a lot of misconceptions about flipping. Another popular one that is false is that the city will not flip for 3 turns after it is captured. There was earlier discussion (I believe in this thread)about that issue.

To see what causes a city to flip go here:
http://www.civfanatics.com/civ3infocenter.shtml#culture

There is also a city flip calculator which I believe was developed by Ambiorix. However, I do not have the link. Perhaps someone else can help out here.

 

[Ambiorix]

Originally posted by zagnut
...
There is also a city flip calculator which I believe was developed by Ambiorix. However, I do not have the link. Perhaps someone else can help out here.

You do me too much honor.
I think you're referring to this tool by Anarres.

 

[ltcoljt]

The best way to keep a city from flippin is to capture all the cities that encroach on its radius. Never garrison. Garrisons are for sissies.

 

[vanatteveldt]

the best thing is, once you pillage/capture all the enemies resources (which is a high priority in any case) a flipped city gets a spearman to defend (until nationalism). Thus, my strategy would usually be to not garrison it (or only with one defender against an unexpected attack by the enemy) and keep one strong attacker hanging around to recapture any flipped cities. Ideally, I would only start quelling resistance once he enemy is defeated so there is no chance of expensive flips in terms of vanished garrison

BTW: I hear a lot of people rushing culture improvements to prevent flipping. Except for the new frontier towns (who have enemy tiles in their 21-radius) this does *not* reduce the chance of flipping until you have more culture than the other had, which usually takes longer than simply defeating him/her...

 

[Shillen]

Originally posted by vanatteveldt
BTW: I hear a lot of people rushing culture improvements to prevent flipping. Except for the new frontier towns (who have enemy tiles in their 21-radius) this does *not* reduce the chance of flipping until you have more culture than the other had, which usually takes longer than simply defeating him/her...

The point of rushing culture is not to build culture in the city, but to get that first expansion. This pushes the enemy civ's borders back and gives you control of all your available tiles, which does reduce the chance of flipping. But it's only useful if you aren't able to capture the surrounding enemy cities within a few turns.

 

[Gen. Maximus]

@Shillen
Quote:
"The point of rushing culture is not to build culture in the city, but to get that first expansion."

To add to this, it also help the cut down foreign headcount in the city, to be replenished by yours when the city grow!

 

[vanatteveldt]

@maxium

If and only if you're a pop-rushing government, which I generally avoid

 

[Snaga]

This is my first submission to GOTM, but I have been visiting the site for a while and played many of the previous GOTMs without submitting.

Like many I used Sogut as a settler factory to start, but only got the game bonus within radius, so after initial granary cranked out a settler "only" every 6 turns

Was surprised at how weak Celts were and how strong Rome was in early development. In my game Celts and Carthage fought keeping them both relatively weak, neither built any wonders.

My goal was a conquest win using the horsemen - knight - sipahi upgrade path. Almost changed tack when no horses were visible near Sogut, but quickly reverted to plan, when they were eventually spotted on W coast.

At 1000BC I had 12 cities and 28 citizens, well behind some of the better QSC games discussed. After going to the trouble of keeping a log I was too late for QSC submission. At this stage I was already ahead of Carthage and Celts though.

I had bad luck with galleys getting squided, so didn't make contact with Rome till my 4th galley met Rome in 750BC. They were slightly behind in tech but almost twice the points. I guessed from the shape of the early power graph that they must have got at least 2 bonus settlers from the start.

Entered middle ages in 690BC and got monotheism free.

Met other civs in 670BC with same galley that found Romans. They were behind in tech, apart from literature.

630-330BC Take out Celts with horsemen for little gain apart from more territory. Celts had no culture so I played chase the capital to make sure not to auto-raze. Roped in Carthage as an ally.

Converted straight to Republic in 350BC after just 4 years of anarchy. The easy access to luxuries on this map made early republic desirable. Kept in republic till end of game. Didn't bother building more than a handful of temples. Built a library in pretty much every vaguely productive city.

In 150BC finished hand building forbidden palace in Iznik just S of Sogut. Weak Celts provided just about no opportunities for leaders. Didn't end up moving the fp or the palace, but I don't think the poor placement ended up costing me much.

Discovered chivalry in 170AD and started tormenting Carthage with knights in 50BC, they are left with a single city in 170AD.

Settled a city on the E edge of the Roman island in 130AD which they sneak attacked the next turn. They were strong, but I wore down their numbers by using superior mobility to dodge their infantry, and eventually took a city in 310AD, getting my first leader and sueing for peace. Used the leader to rush Sun Tzu's back on Ottoman island.

Having bee-lined for military tradition, and built up or upgraded to about 25 sipahi, I began the Ottoman golden age in 440AD with capture of the only remaining Carthage city.

460AD - 540AD Capture Roman island with about 20 sipahi. 560AD Capture island to E of Rome. 550-600AD capture all Spanish cities. 600-690 Capture all but 3 of Egyptian, Indian and Chinese cities. Sipahis rock. Ended up getting around 6 leaders. The final 2 I used to rush sipahi. Didn't bother with armies. Had about 50 sipahi at peak. Ended up with about 30 sipahi, as I was quite prepared to sacrifice them towards the end to speed up the conquest. Stopped researching after military tradition and used the extra cash to rush about 1-2 sipahi a year. Also built up 13 galleys/muslim caravels to ferry them quickly into battle. Maintained 100% gold for duration of war, war weariness only had the effect of requiring entertainers in captured cities that weren't productive anyway.

Was aiming for conquest, but ended up triggering domination in 690AD, with 3 enemy cities left. Playing time - 37 hours. Firaxis score 8749.