Tactics and Strategy T80-90

Turn 82 Actions
Worker team > Road West
Worker by Aktau > NE,NW,cottage 1 turn (farm FP next turn)
Bushir > heal if attacked, otherwise push north to forested hill (NE,N)
New warrior > continue to Aktau
Scout > F
Warrior 2 > F
Chariots > stay put

These actions for turn 82 are fine with me.

Cow - We can't defend the Cow yet, we should wait on the cow until we have beat back the barbs into the valley. If we found a city in the valley, it will become the new barb target, and the cow pasture will be safe.

Settler - I want a settler next in Pavlodar, so does damnrunner. Jewish missionary can wait until the Confucian temple is built (or at least ALMOST built).
 
We are barely managing to improve tiles for the cities we have and you want to build another already?!

I agree we need a settler soon, but we should have at least another worker after the one we are building. Otherwise we'll just be sitting on unimproved tiles. What would be point of that?
 
I don't recall saying I wanted a settler next in Pav.

My preference is a Jewish missionary for Aktua. But as Sommers pointed out that can wait until the Confu temple in Aktua is finished. However, if delaying the Jewish missionary delays the Jewish temple then I don't think a delay is wise. Our goal is a fast Great Prophet and each turn of delay is significant.

Otherwise, my preference was for a spy or axe. Since we cant build an axe right now I would also be ok with a warrior or chariot. Either way I think we need enough units to fog bust that valley before we can send a settler over to found a city. That said - I think we can found a city in the valley even if we don't really have enough workers to improve it. Its main purpose would be to act as a bottleneck and to keep barbarians from harassing our improvements to the south.
 
I don't recall saying I wanted a settler next in Pav.
Yes sorry about that, :blush: I don't know what I was talking about:confused:

At any rate, I want a settler next, but alternatively, I would like a spy, chariot or an axe as well...

@:king: - Can you please explain why we should not build a city unless we can improve the tiles around it right away? You say this all the time but I have never heard you explain why. I am not saying you are wrong, I just don't really understand it... or why you seem so passionate about it... :confused: Is this just an OCD thing (you just find it irritating to work unimproved tiles) or is there some scientific civ wisdom out there (a link would be nice :)) that says it is harmful to work unimproved tiles?

It seems to me that a city in the Syr Darya valley would produce enough food to grow on it's own for at least a few turns, even without any improvements. Oskemen is currently one of our most useful cities and it has almost no improvements (other than the horse).
 
I don't recall saying I wanted a settler next in Pav.

My preference is a Jewish missionary for Aktua. But as Sommers pointed out that can wait until the Confu temple in Aktua is finished. However, if delaying the Jewish missionary delays the Jewish temple then I don't think a delay is wise. Our goal is a fast Great Prophet and each turn of delay is significant.

Otherwise, my preference was for a spy or axe. Since we cant build an axe right now I would also be ok with a warrior or chariot. Either way I think we need enough units to fog bust that valley before we can send a settler over to found a city. That said - I think we can found a city in the valley even if we don't really have enough workers to improve it. Its main purpose would be to act as a bottleneck and to keep barbarians from harassing our improvements to the south.
I'll check the timings, if it's possible to squeeze in a spy or axe and not delay the GProphet then let's go for a spy (we can't build an axe now obviously...), otherwise I think the consensus is for the JMish.

@:king: - Can you please explain why we should not build a city unless we can improve the tiles around it right away? You say this all the time but I have never heard you explain why. I am not saying you are wrong, I just don't really understand it... or why you seem so passionate about it... :confused: Is this just an OCD thing (you just find it irritating to work unimproved tiles) or is there some scientific civ wisdom out there (a link would be nice :)) that says it is harmful to work unimproved tiles?

It seems to me that a city in the Syr Darya valley would produce enough food to grow on it's own for at least a few turns, even without any improvements. Oskemen is currently one of our most useful cities and it has almost no improvements (other than the horse).
Ha! OCD :crazyeye:

Ha! OCD :crazyeye:

Ha! OCD :crazyeye:

Ha! OCD :crazyeye:

No, this is just general "civ wisdom" as you put it.

No, this is just general "civ wisdom" as you put it.

No, this is just general "civ wisdom" as you put it.

Ok, I'll stop now.

You have to pay maintenance for a city and for it's population as it grows. If your city grows and works, for example, a forested grassland then you gain only +1:hammers: but also have increased maintenance. So you don't really gain much.

As for building a new city a reasonable distance away you are paying quite a bit more maintenance so it's even more important to try and get some real benefit back from building the city. Building City 6 will cause our maintenance to jump up around +9:gold: per turn (I can't remember exactly). That's quite a lot!

But obviously city 6 is going to get us Iron and 1 turn after it's built it will already be a 3:food: 6:hammers: 2:commerce: which ain't bad. But that's because we have 2 workers right there to build an improvement. And we did the same when Oskemen was built.

In short, all the best civ players generally live by the following principle: don't build a city if you can't improve it's tiles (unless you have another very good reason!). And never work unimproved tiles. If I have unimproved tiles that I don't have a worker to improve then normally it's time to get the whip out!! :whipped:

EDIT: And p.s. flood plains are a bit of an exception as they are as good as a grassland farm on a river. 3:food: 1:commerce: is about as good as you get for an unimproved tile!
 
OK great... not sure if I agree (I will have to think about it a little) but I do at least understand your reasoning.:)

Anyhoo... when / where do we build a Galley? We need to sail to Cavalieros border to get the trade route... right? Or do we get it from them sailing to us? Also, it might be handy to at least have a Galley in case pirate ships show up. Lastly... but not leastly(Ha Ha Im soooo funny:))... If WE already have a Galley in the vicinity of Cavalieros, it might make our request for some free workers/settlers more convincing. Not from a bullying standpoint mind you (ie ooh scary Galley:mad:), but from a convenience standpoint (ie you don't even need to call a cab, your ride is already here!:D)
 
Yeah, I think we should build a galley soon, we have 3 cities that could be used to do it.

I've not had as much time to test things as I would have liked but ETA on Lit is actually a turn longer than I thought (sim game had too much gold and 6 extra :science: slipped in somewhere). I think we should still get GL on T103 though, but will have to check this some more.

I've not been able to check every variation on the temples in Aktau so to be on safe side I'm going for the Jewish Missionary now.
 
Hey :king: can you explain why we have to get the Prophet before the GLib? Will getting non-scientist Great People just be impossible after GLib is built? :confused:

Also, when/where do you think we can build the Galley? You said you wanted it, but you did not say when/where...:) My thought is that if we are using a missionary instead of a monument to pop the Iron city border, then maybe we can build a Galley before the workboat (or build the workboat somewhere else). The Iron mine should make the Galley construction less painful.

Also... what about the trade route? Do we have it already or do we need to set sail to get it?
 
We need to sail to get it. My preference is for Iron city to build granary and then galley, so it has granary before pop 2, wb can come from Haz perhaps
 
A small detail for future reference...we lost one worker turn by roading with both workers and then moving both on the iron hill. Correct order was road with 1 worker move 1 on the hill so second worker does not lose one turn by moving on the hill (road would be ready).
 
doing it this way around we get the mine completed quicker. I'd rather get the extra hammers for a turn than have a 1 worker turn :)
 
doing it this way around we get the mine completed quicker. I'd rather get the extra hammers for a turn than have a 1 worker turn :)

Well if you wanted iron sooner then why did you road last turn and did not move workers straight to the hill? That would have given you mine even one turn earlier ;)

In any case you messed up so don't play smart with me :lol:
 
No, you can't start a mine unless it's within your borders! Mine will be ready to use by city 6 turn after next. That's as quick as it can be done.

The last road enables the missionary to get to the city 1 turn earlier than without that road. So the city will get +1 hammer from OR a turn earlier but more importantly the borders will pop a turn earlier.

So we get a total of 5:hammers: and 1:culture: in exchange for 1 lost worker turn by doing things in this order.
 
You are right about the city I thought it was founded last turn.

But I don't know where you got the hammers and culture?

All you exchange is 4 hammers for 1 worker turn

So basically by not moving one worker to the hill and roading with one you will gain 3 hammers + 1 from organized 4..but you will get farm 1 turn later (3 food loss) cottage 1 turn later (2 commerce lost) possible chop 1 turn later etc...so all your later improvements are delayed by 1 turn.

Do 4 hammers make up for that? I don't think so, needs to be calculated though.. do we get fish one turn earlier? Do we get granary 1 turn earlier/ And if we do how much food wil be stored and what is the gain from that..it is not straight forward...but generally my understanding is that workers finishing improvements 1 turn earlier is more valuable since they can move on to other things
 
Yes, sorry it's 4H and 1 Culture. Mining the iron gets you from 2:hammers: to 5:hammers:, so with OR it's 4:hammers: extra.

Having the culture 1 turn earlier alone means we can use the (improved) fish a turn earlier.

Normally I would do exactly as you suggested but in the tests I tried to run this just seemed the best way to get the most and I think on balance losing 1 turn of worker action is worth while.

Once they've finished the mine they should road it together. This will mean Oskemen can start building an Axe as soon as the warrior is done. And that will be our last warrior btw.

And it's good we're having this discussion. Little details can win you a game!

For next turn we should go 0% again. It will delay us getting Aest and hide our plans from SANCTA that little bit longer.

With 0% should we move Pavlodar's plains forest to the shared cottage and then Haz uses the mine?
 
We are not losing 1 culture (same turn if it was 1 worker would finish the road so missionary would get in city in time....so same turn finish road move misionary after)..it is just the 4 hammers...same for iron, it would be connected same turn as it will be now, no difference...just the missed worker turn vs 4 hammers.

What is Haz building next turn? No point to build workboat IMO...better lighthouse for 3 turns. Iron city will build workboat fast...not to mention the hammers we lose in capital by building workboat instead of lighthouse (organized).
 
you will get farm 1 turn later (3 food loss) cottage 1 turn later (2 commerce lost) possible chop 1 turn later etc...so all your later improvements are delayed by 1 turn.
btw the farm won't be delayed. the workers can road the mine and then move straight to the farm and finish it as it is only 2wts short of completion (IIRC).

We are not losing 1 culture (same turn if it was 1 worker would finish the road so missionary would get in city in time....so same turn finish road move misionary after)..it is just the 4 hammers...same for iron, it would be connected same turn as it will be now, no difference...just the missed worker turn vs 4 hammers.

the missionary is in Shymkent now. With the road he can reach City 6 in 1 turn, and found the next turn. Without the road he will take 2 turns to get there and found the turn after that.
 
btw the farm won't be delayed. the workers can road the mine and then move straight to the farm and finish it as it is only 2wts short of completion (IIRC).



the missionary is in Shymkent now. With the road he can reach City 6 in 1 turn, and found the next turn. Without the road he will take 2 turns to get there and found the turn after that.

What farm? I mean the farm on the corn. That will be delayed by 1 turn now. That is the one that gives +3 food, the other gives +1 food. (surely we are completing this first!)

Regarding missionary let me explain it again. If last turn you roaded with 1 worker and moved the other to the hill, then this turn road would be ready, so no delay to missionary.
 
Yes, you're right about the missionary if it's done in that order. Sorry, I can't see screenshots when I'm on my bbery I couldn't remember exactly how it worked, just that the road needed to be done before the missionary got there.

I am talking about the corn farm btw. It has an even number of turns remaining so it won't be delayed in getting completed.
 
Back
Top Bottom