Team Monty - Emperor Training
- Thread starter Nad
- Start date
I think I read somewhere that the Hwacha originally was going to be able to kill units, but testing showed this was too powerful, so when PTW came out (or an early patch?) they couldn't. Some sources of information weren't updated when this changed.
Nad
Known Troublemaker
Right gentlemen, I had been waiting for Yaype to check in but there's still no sign of him and it is time to get the circus running. I don't know what's happened to him. I'm going to send him a PM and give him another 48 hours to check in, but if he doesn't, we'll adjust the roster and call in one of the stand-by players who expressed an interest.
Now there's many different ways to start a training game, and all focus on the fact that the first 50 turns of any game are absolutely crucial. The reason for this is that power in civ 3 is very much a geometric rather than arithmetic progression with relation to the first turns. If you play well in the first few turns, you set your empire up to expand quickly and grow strongly. If you make mistakes early on, the backlash of that is magnified since you have so few cities. As you're no doubt aware, many strategy articles have been written on playing the opening turns, from Bamspeedy's settler factories to Cracker's worker actions, and the essential point of all these is to focus on playing the early turns with more concentration than any other period.
To start this game off, I am going to play 20 turns, and we're going to have a bit of role-reversal
. When I post my report, all I am going to post is what I actually did: what I chose to research, what I built, where I explored etc. I am not going to post any of the reasons for my actions. That is what I want YOU to do! I would like you to analyze my report and outline the possible reasons for what I did, to get inside my mind. Once every-one has contributed, we can discuss the actual reasons and also any amendments, alternative strategies etc.
All clear?
Excellent!
I will post my report shortly.
Now there's many different ways to start a training game, and all focus on the fact that the first 50 turns of any game are absolutely crucial. The reason for this is that power in civ 3 is very much a geometric rather than arithmetic progression with relation to the first turns. If you play well in the first few turns, you set your empire up to expand quickly and grow strongly. If you make mistakes early on, the backlash of that is magnified since you have so few cities. As you're no doubt aware, many strategy articles have been written on playing the opening turns, from Bamspeedy's settler factories to Cracker's worker actions, and the essential point of all these is to focus on playing the early turns with more concentration than any other period.
To start this game off, I am going to play 20 turns, and we're going to have a bit of role-reversal
. When I post my report, all I am going to post is what I actually did: what I chose to research, what I built, where I explored etc. I am not going to post any of the reasons for my actions. That is what I want YOU to do! I would like you to analyze my report and outline the possible reasons for what I did, to get inside my mind. Once every-one has contributed, we can discuss the actual reasons and also any amendments, alternative strategies etc. All clear?
Excellent!
I will post my report shortly.
Nad
Known Troublemaker
The best way to examine my turns would be for you to download the 4000BC save and try to follow what I did:
Team Monty, Emperor
Start, 4000BC: worker moves south-east onto bonus grassland; nothing of interest revealed. Seoul settled on the starting spot, surrounded by jungle but lots of bonus grasslands revealed. There is coast to the north and we are almost bang centre in the mini-map.
Seoul starts to train a warrior, research is set to Pottery at 100%, ETA 15 turns.
Turn 1, 3950BC: worker starts to mine bonus grassland
Turns 2-4: zzz
IT: warrior ----------> warrior
Turn 5, 3750BC: first warrior to explore westward
Turn 6: zzz
Turn 7, 3650BC: worker completes mine, starts to road the bg
Turn 8: zzz
IT: warrior ----------> warrior
Turn 9, 3550BC: second warrior explores eastward
IT: Seoul grows to size 2, borders expand revealing goody hut to east
Turn 10: 3500BC: worker completes road, moves onto another bg
Turn 11, 3450BC: worker starts to mine bg. Spices discovered in jungle to west.
IT: warrior ----------> barracks
Turn 12, 3400BC: warrior pops hut close to capital, but it is deserted. Third warrior heads south.
Science to 60%, pottery still due in 2.
Turn 13, 3350BC: Science to 50%, pottery in 1.
IT: pottery researched, start writing, 10% science, ETA 40 turns.
Turn 14, 3300BC: barracks changed to granary
A Spanish warrior is spotted to the south-west. Contact made with annoyed Isabella, Spain has ceremonial burial and 10g, we have pottery, bronze and 15g. We trade pottery and 9g for burial. Isabella now cautious.
Turn 15, 3250BC: wheat and lake discovered to the south, bonus food appears scarce
Turn 16, 3200BC: incense seen in hill to south.
Turn 17, 3150BC: worker completes mine, starts road. Spanish border discovered to the south, not too far from us.
Turn 18, 3100BC: Spain now has bronze-working
IT: Spanish warrior and settler seen heading north, towards us.
Turn 19: zzz
IT: Seoul grows to size 3.
Turn 20, 3000BC: gems seen in jungle to south-west. Worker completes road, moves to another bg. Luxury expenditure to 10%.
Right guys, it's over to you to critique those turns!
3000BC save
This is a full-page screenshot: http://www.civfanatics.net/uploads5/TGMonty3000BCEmpire.jpg
blue circle: Spanish warrior+ settler
white circle: incense
yellow circles: gems
red circles: spices
Team Monty, Emperor
Start, 4000BC: worker moves south-east onto bonus grassland; nothing of interest revealed. Seoul settled on the starting spot, surrounded by jungle but lots of bonus grasslands revealed. There is coast to the north and we are almost bang centre in the mini-map.
Seoul starts to train a warrior, research is set to Pottery at 100%, ETA 15 turns.
Turn 1, 3950BC: worker starts to mine bonus grassland
Turns 2-4: zzz
IT: warrior ----------> warrior
Turn 5, 3750BC: first warrior to explore westward
Turn 6: zzz
Turn 7, 3650BC: worker completes mine, starts to road the bg
Turn 8: zzz
IT: warrior ----------> warrior
Turn 9, 3550BC: second warrior explores eastward
IT: Seoul grows to size 2, borders expand revealing goody hut to east
Turn 10: 3500BC: worker completes road, moves onto another bg
Turn 11, 3450BC: worker starts to mine bg. Spices discovered in jungle to west.
IT: warrior ----------> barracks
Turn 12, 3400BC: warrior pops hut close to capital, but it is deserted. Third warrior heads south.
Science to 60%, pottery still due in 2.
Turn 13, 3350BC: Science to 50%, pottery in 1.
IT: pottery researched, start writing, 10% science, ETA 40 turns.
Turn 14, 3300BC: barracks changed to granary
A Spanish warrior is spotted to the south-west. Contact made with annoyed Isabella, Spain has ceremonial burial and 10g, we have pottery, bronze and 15g. We trade pottery and 9g for burial. Isabella now cautious.
Turn 15, 3250BC: wheat and lake discovered to the south, bonus food appears scarce
Turn 16, 3200BC: incense seen in hill to south.
Turn 17, 3150BC: worker completes mine, starts road. Spanish border discovered to the south, not too far from us.
Turn 18, 3100BC: Spain now has bronze-working
IT: Spanish warrior and settler seen heading north, towards us.
Turn 19: zzz
IT: Seoul grows to size 3.
Turn 20, 3000BC: gems seen in jungle to south-west. Worker completes road, moves to another bg. Luxury expenditure to 10%.
Right guys, it's over to you to critique those turns!
3000BC save
This is a full-page screenshot: http://www.civfanatics.net/uploads5/TGMonty3000BCEmpire.jpg
blue circle: Spanish warrior+ settler
white circle: incense
yellow circles: gems
red circles: spices
4000 BC: The first turn is fairly standard. Granaries generally half the time to get the two food for a settler and are an important tool for rapid growth. A warrior to start allows one to explore right away which allows us to make contacts and find good land to settle. The worker move is to start work on improving our land ASAP. I discussed this in the pregame a bit.
3950 BC: Worker starts a mine. This will get us greater shield production sooner. A road takes half the time but in general I find the importance for me is usually: Food, shields, gold in that order (there are exceptions) for the early game. Certainly with the number of turns to pottery being so short and the fact that we have a river, the mine is better. I do sometimes forget this and build the road first. (If I am not thinking I tend to do this as that is the order I got into the habit of doing).
3900-3800 BC: Getting proper rest is important for one's alertness and good health.
3750 BC: Warrior built and is sent exploring West. West and South seem more likely to not deadend. So West seems a good direction to choose.
3700 BC: Did the warrior climb the mountain this turn? I like the range two sight, so I moved him NW instead of W.
3650 BC: Worker starts road - Making a road on each square as it is improved is more efficient. Otherwise you will later need to waste a worker turn moving onto the square again.
3
600 BC: Lots of jungle. The clearing NE of the deer seems an decent spot for town two...Won't know until we explore more of course.
3550 BC: Warrior finishes a turn early because we mined first. One difference. I spot the goody hut when I move onto the mountain before the expansion. Does this mean the warrior didn't go east? I am not sure why one would want to go NE or SE over E You get to see two squares N an S from the mountain.. If the road had finished before the warrior had moved, then of course you move SE as you get to go 2 squares.
3500 BC: One of the hardest things for me on emporer or higher is to remember to adjust the lux rate. In this case we don't need to, but I did remember to check.
3450 BC: I spot the spices to the east and pop the hut. I get barbarians and the worker flees into town instead of mining the bg. I did this a turn earlier than Nad I notice. Did he wait a turn so the warrior was built first? Or did he move NE the first turn? Since I don't see waiting a turn as worth it so I am guessing the latter. The switch to barracks is a prebuild of the granary. This gets us the granary earlier than if we waited for pottery.
3400 BC: Attack with the hut popping warrior and win vs one barb. Fortify the other in the town. I am not sure this was the best move though. Attacking has the advantage of getting a vet warrior, but risks the loss of the attacking warrior. If the town was size 1 I might just let them have the 10 gold as that is less important than the warrior. Losing a population would be bad though. In Nad's game, adjusting science downward is done so you don't spend extra shields for a tech. Doing it two turns ahead of time I believe is better because it allows one more flexibility. The real problem is that any excess is lost so this means micromanaging beakers (and food and shields) gains a good bit.
3350 BC:Attacking warrior was hurt so he fortifies.
IT: Hurt warrior is attacked and killed. Two angry white barbarian bees circle my capitol angered at my warrior stepping on their nest. Get pottery and start writing. Writing and iron working are the two most expensive and therefore the best for min research. Writing is a good one to choose as there are multiple techs that we can see once we get it. It also allows us to trade communications which is valuable.
3300 BC: Now we have pottery we can switch to a granary. Spain also spotted by my warrior. I did the trade first and then looked at yours, Nad. I like yours better ( I was going to trade both techs for spain's 10 gold and cer burial). Keeping bronze working away from them is useful, and we don't get full price for our two techs if it is done my way. Of course spain may get BW herself, but it seems worth the risk for 19 gold.
Given two barbarians around the city I decide to switch the granary to a warrior that will build next turn. Otherwise, I am going to lose my hard earned town improvements. Not sure if this is the correct decision.
3250 BC: Kill a second warrior bee.
3200 BC: Climb another mountain and spot gems. This is the W warrior. I must be moving my warriors differently.
3100 BC: Kill last barb. Finally start heading S with my 3rd warrior.
3000 BC: Also spot the settler and am just spotting the wheat.
Well my game got off track and shows an alternate reality where we get barbs instead of empty hut. It seriously slowed us down. Nad there wasn't that much to critique on your later turns.
Oh I did forget the fact you sent the last warrior out. We could have kept him on sentry duty in our capitol instead. I am assuming you didn't because it is easy enough to raise lux and exploration is more important than the one gold a turn. The other problem is our town is not defended. This is a risk as I have lost my one and only town (and thus the game) when another civ has taken it. So there is the risk of losing all our granary production because we have to switch to a spearman. I take it the town grab is rare enough to make it worth the risk? Looking at your JPG I see there is a warrior still near the town. I assume the reason for this is to reduce the risk of losing the granary as mentioned above.
I am hoping this is what you were looking for. I am unsure if you wanted me to go into detail on my own game when it differed or not.
The barbarians cost us explored land and 3-4 turns on the granary BTW.
I saved the game and have it in case it is of use (my own 3000 BC). I didn't think putting it here was necessary though.
3950 BC: Worker starts a mine. This will get us greater shield production sooner. A road takes half the time but in general I find the importance for me is usually: Food, shields, gold in that order (there are exceptions) for the early game. Certainly with the number of turns to pottery being so short and the fact that we have a river, the mine is better. I do sometimes forget this and build the road first. (If I am not thinking I tend to do this as that is the order I got into the habit of doing).
3900-3800 BC: Getting proper rest is important for one's alertness and good health.
3750 BC: Warrior built and is sent exploring West. West and South seem more likely to not deadend. So West seems a good direction to choose.
3700 BC: Did the warrior climb the mountain this turn? I like the range two sight, so I moved him NW instead of W.
3650 BC: Worker starts road - Making a road on each square as it is improved is more efficient. Otherwise you will later need to waste a worker turn moving onto the square again.
3
600 BC: Lots of jungle. The clearing NE of the deer seems an decent spot for town two...Won't know until we explore more of course.
3550 BC: Warrior finishes a turn early because we mined first. One difference. I spot the goody hut when I move onto the mountain before the expansion. Does this mean the warrior didn't go east? I am not sure why one would want to go NE or SE over E You get to see two squares N an S from the mountain.. If the road had finished before the warrior had moved, then of course you move SE as you get to go 2 squares.
3500 BC: One of the hardest things for me on emporer or higher is to remember to adjust the lux rate. In this case we don't need to, but I did remember to check.
3450 BC: I spot the spices to the east and pop the hut. I get barbarians and the worker flees into town instead of mining the bg. I did this a turn earlier than Nad I notice. Did he wait a turn so the warrior was built first? Or did he move NE the first turn? Since I don't see waiting a turn as worth it so I am guessing the latter. The switch to barracks is a prebuild of the granary. This gets us the granary earlier than if we waited for pottery.
3400 BC: Attack with the hut popping warrior and win vs one barb. Fortify the other in the town. I am not sure this was the best move though. Attacking has the advantage of getting a vet warrior, but risks the loss of the attacking warrior. If the town was size 1 I might just let them have the 10 gold as that is less important than the warrior. Losing a population would be bad though. In Nad's game, adjusting science downward is done so you don't spend extra shields for a tech. Doing it two turns ahead of time I believe is better because it allows one more flexibility. The real problem is that any excess is lost so this means micromanaging beakers (and food and shields) gains a good bit.
3350 BC:Attacking warrior was hurt so he fortifies.
IT: Hurt warrior is attacked and killed. Two angry white barbarian bees circle my capitol angered at my warrior stepping on their nest. Get pottery and start writing. Writing and iron working are the two most expensive and therefore the best for min research. Writing is a good one to choose as there are multiple techs that we can see once we get it. It also allows us to trade communications which is valuable.
3300 BC: Now we have pottery we can switch to a granary. Spain also spotted by my warrior. I did the trade first and then looked at yours, Nad. I like yours better ( I was going to trade both techs for spain's 10 gold and cer burial). Keeping bronze working away from them is useful, and we don't get full price for our two techs if it is done my way. Of course spain may get BW herself, but it seems worth the risk for 19 gold.
Given two barbarians around the city I decide to switch the granary to a warrior that will build next turn. Otherwise, I am going to lose my hard earned town improvements. Not sure if this is the correct decision.
3250 BC: Kill a second warrior bee.
3200 BC: Climb another mountain and spot gems. This is the W warrior. I must be moving my warriors differently.
3100 BC: Kill last barb. Finally start heading S with my 3rd warrior.
3000 BC: Also spot the settler and am just spotting the wheat.
Well my game got off track and shows an alternate reality where we get barbs instead of empty hut. It seriously slowed us down. Nad there wasn't that much to critique on your later turns.
Oh I did forget the fact you sent the last warrior out. We could have kept him on sentry duty in our capitol instead. I am assuming you didn't because it is easy enough to raise lux and exploration is more important than the one gold a turn. The other problem is our town is not defended. This is a risk as I have lost my one and only town (and thus the game) when another civ has taken it. So there is the risk of losing all our granary production because we have to switch to a spearman. I take it the town grab is rare enough to make it worth the risk? Looking at your JPG I see there is a warrior still near the town. I assume the reason for this is to reduce the risk of losing the granary as mentioned above.
I am hoping this is what you were looking for. I am unsure if you wanted me to go into detail on my own game when it differed or not.
The barbarians cost us explored land and 3-4 turns on the granary BTW.
I saved the game and have it in case it is of use (my own 3000 BC). I didn't think putting it here was necessary though.
SinisterDeath
Pure Quality
How can I join in? I played the Barbarian Stronghold 2, which is set up weird, and started getting smoked after a while with 7 civs declaring war on me.
I'd love to join in if possible, if not, when is the next one I can join?
EDIT: I can win easily on Monarch, maybe it was the scenario, or maybe it is the increase in AI bonuses. I just couldn't handle EMP though...
I'd love to join in if possible, if not, when is the next one I can join?
EDIT: I can win easily on Monarch, maybe it was the scenario, or maybe it is the increase in AI bonuses. I just couldn't handle EMP though...
Nad
Known Troublemaker
Greebley: excellent 
You don't have to post your own report of this turn, I was only asking you to follow to give you a better idea of what I did, but the full report is a bonus I would like Mad-Bax and OFW to follow the turn also, and then we will discuss it.
Sinister Death: Thank you for your interest. However, if Yaype does not check in, there are already two people who have expressed an interest as stand-by players and I will be PM'ing them first. If they choose not to join, then I will PM you. In the meantime you can certainly follow the game, and I'm sure there'll be more emperor training games starting soon.
You don't have to post your own report of this turn, I was only asking you to follow to give you a better idea of what I did, but the full report is a bonus I would like Mad-Bax and OFW to follow the turn also, and then we will discuss it.Sinister Death: Thank you for your interest. However, if Yaype does not check in, there are already two people who have expressed an interest as stand-by players and I will be PM'ing them first. If they choose not to join, then I will PM you
. In the meantime you can certainly follow the game, and I'm sure there'll be more emperor training games starting soon.
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2003
- Messages
- 5,242
4000BC:
The worker move is to improve the most powerful tile. Personally I would have started with the western BG as I would have thought expansion Northwards would yield better terrain.
The settler founds a city on the spot as none of the conditions for moving the settler are present. E.G. one tile from the coast, or a food bonus.
Researching Pottery at 100% is interesting. Since we start with alphabet I would have researched writing in 40 turns. Also the first city without food bonuses is more likely to be a good unit pump and will not be a good settler factory. I would have got 3 warriors and then a settler on turn 20 instead expecting to be able to trade for or buy pottery within 30 turns. Researching pottery first means that writing will be late, with a smaller chance of monopoly.
3750:
The first warrior exploring west is surprising too. I can't think of a reason to do this. To the East are two mountains and the warrior will reveal much more from here.
Adjusting science rate in the last two turns of research is good. It wastes fewer beakers than waiting for the last turn. Setting research to writing is good. Getting an early second tier tech will allow us to trade for all the first tier techs and others too. It may even be possible to bankrupt some civs with this. I do worry that we will not be first to it though.
The trade is also interesting. When you know only one other civ it is not possible to make a trade killing. So do you hold off and wait for another contact or trade immediately? Again, I think I would have waited for another contact, hoping for a more profitable trading round.
The granary will allow us to produce a settler and two or three units every 10 turns. There are enough sields to do this. But we need another city to help with settler production too. The units will be regulars, so at some point a rax will be needed which will interrupt settler production.
Because we are not expansionist, we have gold, and no defence in our city, popping the hut on emperor level is risky. Barbs could have left us with one fewer warrior and the granary build destroyed. I wouldn't have done it. I might have misread the turnlog, and I am not sure which warrior popped the hut. We may have had a warrior in Seoul in which case I would have risked it.
In general. We have lots of opportunities to grab luxes quite early. This will help our commerce greatly, but we will be lucky to get the gems, unless we decide to prioritise it. The lack of food bonuses is not the end of the world. I would try to grab the wheat to the south b4 the spanish, and this would give us a good chance of getting the incense too. Iff we had built a settler on turn 20 we could be on our way there now. It will take around 20 turns from now to get there with a settler. I doubt we'll make it.
I would explore north now. There may be more bonuses there on grassland and plains, and may provide us with a good FP site.
I would also like to do something about the settler pair but this would probably not be good long term as a war with spain this early would be counter productive. My guess is that they will settle on the jungle south of the lake, by the wheat.
So, I guess I would have done a lot of things differently. I would have explored north, built an early settler, witheld trading for a while and researched writing in 40 turns from the beginning.
Before Seoul got to size 3 (after the settler), I would have timed a worker so the lux slider didn't move.
The way things are going at the moment will make the capital a very powerful city once it has a rax and a couple more luxuries, since it will grow quickly, but this is at the expense of early expansion and units. If we stay out of trouble for another 40 turns or so then it will pay off.
This is why I wanted to play this training game. I just knew you would have a completely different approach to the game from me, and that I would learn a lot.
The worker move is to improve the most powerful tile. Personally I would have started with the western BG as I would have thought expansion Northwards would yield better terrain.
The settler founds a city on the spot as none of the conditions for moving the settler are present. E.G. one tile from the coast, or a food bonus.
Researching Pottery at 100% is interesting. Since we start with alphabet I would have researched writing in 40 turns. Also the first city without food bonuses is more likely to be a good unit pump and will not be a good settler factory. I would have got 3 warriors and then a settler on turn 20 instead expecting to be able to trade for or buy pottery within 30 turns. Researching pottery first means that writing will be late, with a smaller chance of monopoly.
3750:
The first warrior exploring west is surprising too. I can't think of a reason to do this. To the East are two mountains and the warrior will reveal much more from here.
Adjusting science rate in the last two turns of research is good. It wastes fewer beakers than waiting for the last turn. Setting research to writing is good. Getting an early second tier tech will allow us to trade for all the first tier techs and others too. It may even be possible to bankrupt some civs with this. I do worry that we will not be first to it though.
The trade is also interesting. When you know only one other civ it is not possible to make a trade killing. So do you hold off and wait for another contact or trade immediately? Again, I think I would have waited for another contact, hoping for a more profitable trading round.
The granary will allow us to produce a settler and two or three units every 10 turns. There are enough sields to do this. But we need another city to help with settler production too. The units will be regulars, so at some point a rax will be needed which will interrupt settler production.
Because we are not expansionist, we have gold, and no defence in our city, popping the hut on emperor level is risky. Barbs could have left us with one fewer warrior and the granary build destroyed. I wouldn't have done it. I might have misread the turnlog, and I am not sure which warrior popped the hut. We may have had a warrior in Seoul in which case I would have risked it.
In general. We have lots of opportunities to grab luxes quite early. This will help our commerce greatly, but we will be lucky to get the gems, unless we decide to prioritise it. The lack of food bonuses is not the end of the world. I would try to grab the wheat to the south b4 the spanish, and this would give us a good chance of getting the incense too. Iff we had built a settler on turn 20 we could be on our way there now. It will take around 20 turns from now to get there with a settler. I doubt we'll make it.
I would explore north now. There may be more bonuses there on grassland and plains, and may provide us with a good FP site.
I would also like to do something about the settler pair but this would probably not be good long term as a war with spain this early would be counter productive. My guess is that they will settle on the jungle south of the lake, by the wheat.
So, I guess I would have done a lot of things differently. I would have explored north, built an early settler, witheld trading for a while and researched writing in 40 turns from the beginning.
Before Seoul got to size 3 (after the settler), I would have timed a worker so the lux slider didn't move.
The way things are going at the moment will make the capital a very powerful city once it has a rax and a couple more luxuries, since it will grow quickly, but this is at the expense of early expansion and units. If we stay out of trouble for another 40 turns or so then it will pay off.
This is why I wanted to play this training game. I just knew you would have a completely different approach to the game from me, and that I would learn a lot.
ControlFreak
Not An Addict, Really
Interesting...I would have played the turns as Mad-Bax would have. Tell us oh wise Nad, what were you thinking.
I think this is a case where neither way has a clear advantage over the other in terms of growth. The granary first and settler first are very close here.
I sat down and tried to analyse how the two would work out. Its really hard to tell, but I think the granary wins. I haven't really tried before in detail and since this is a training game it is probably useful for me. Here is my thoughts:
One reason I would choose the granary first is that there really isn't a really good second town location. There is no location yet revealed that provides 3 food without a worker working the land.
The wheat only gives 3 food (irrigated) so you require 8 turns instead of 10 to grow. The deer is probably best as it can grow in 6 turns, but that requires 10 worker turns to remove the forest.
So for the immediate settler to be effective your best bet may be sending the worker away from your capitol on turn 11 so the chop will come right after the town is built. Now the new town will get a single shield at size 1 and 3->2 shields(corruption) for size 2 which means it will be slow making settlers or a granary itself. The forest chop gets a settler about the same time as it grows to size 3, but then you are back to one shield for 6 turns and 2 for the next six so unless your lone worker is spending all its time chopping forests, you will have to wait. Better would be to build the granary first, but that means 28 turns as a rough guess before your second town produces a settler.
With the granary on the other hand you get the settler on turn 29. (4 more turns on the granary + 5 to make the settler). You are 9 turns "behind" with your first settler, but are now outputting settlers every 10 turns instead of every 20.
So if the second town is 9 turns behind and you can produce a settler every 6 turns (this assumes you take the time to build a granary in the second town which takes a while). Then the second town "wins" by 1 1/2 settlers. But by the time your second town gets going, your capitol has been producing settlers on turn 29, 35, 45, 55,... (assuming you always build as soon as possible). This compares to 20, 40, 60. I think the number of towns you get out of all this is going to be pretty similar either way you do it. One advantage of the granary method is you had more time to improve the land around the capitol (we didn't need to rip the worker away from the capitol to cut the forest) and the capitol is growing faster. So we can wait until the capitol is bigger (slowing immediate settler production), but get a lot of use out of its high shields so it has barracks, temple, and veteran units.
If we had found a nice site for a second city, say with a cow or wheat or two in grassland, then I would be very tempted to immediately produce the settler on turn 20 like you suggest. Without that I would do as Nad did.
Edit: Changed the wrong 30 to 20 in the last sentence.
I sat down and tried to analyse how the two would work out. Its really hard to tell, but I think the granary wins. I haven't really tried before in detail and since this is a training game it is probably useful for me. Here is my thoughts:
One reason I would choose the granary first is that there really isn't a really good second town location. There is no location yet revealed that provides 3 food without a worker working the land.
The wheat only gives 3 food (irrigated) so you require 8 turns instead of 10 to grow. The deer is probably best as it can grow in 6 turns, but that requires 10 worker turns to remove the forest.
So for the immediate settler to be effective your best bet may be sending the worker away from your capitol on turn 11 so the chop will come right after the town is built. Now the new town will get a single shield at size 1 and 3->2 shields(corruption) for size 2 which means it will be slow making settlers or a granary itself. The forest chop gets a settler about the same time as it grows to size 3, but then you are back to one shield for 6 turns and 2 for the next six so unless your lone worker is spending all its time chopping forests, you will have to wait. Better would be to build the granary first, but that means 28 turns as a rough guess before your second town produces a settler.
With the granary on the other hand you get the settler on turn 29. (4 more turns on the granary + 5 to make the settler). You are 9 turns "behind" with your first settler, but are now outputting settlers every 10 turns instead of every 20.
So if the second town is 9 turns behind and you can produce a settler every 6 turns (this assumes you take the time to build a granary in the second town which takes a while). Then the second town "wins" by 1 1/2 settlers. But by the time your second town gets going, your capitol has been producing settlers on turn 29, 35, 45, 55,... (assuming you always build as soon as possible). This compares to 20, 40, 60. I think the number of towns you get out of all this is going to be pretty similar either way you do it. One advantage of the granary method is you had more time to improve the land around the capitol (we didn't need to rip the worker away from the capitol to cut the forest) and the capitol is growing faster. So we can wait until the capitol is bigger (slowing immediate settler production), but get a lot of use out of its high shields so it has barracks, temple, and veteran units.
If we had found a nice site for a second city, say with a cow or wheat or two in grassland, then I would be very tempted to immediately produce the settler on turn 20 like you suggest. Without that I would do as Nad did.
Edit: Changed the wrong 30 to 20 in the last sentence.
OneFastWarrior
Asthma Hound Chihuahua
Sorry guys, I have read everything here, but I have not had time or will have time to download and check it out until this afternoon, or tonight(pst).
just quick though. On the 1st warrior going west, yes From the starting spot, I also would have thought of sending the 1st Warrior East to mountain top, but upon settling the city We see Jungle that way, better to scout to the west ( I could be wrong as I have not loaded the save and followed along).
I'll write more laater today or tonight, Unless you don't wanna wait for me. Alot of what mad-bax said I kind of agreed with, so I also need to know why you did what you did.
I'll check back around 3:330pst.
just quick though. On the 1st warrior going west, yes From the starting spot, I also would have thought of sending the 1st Warrior East to mountain top, but upon settling the city We see Jungle that way, better to scout to the west ( I could be wrong as I have not loaded the save and followed along).
I'll write more laater today or tonight, Unless you don't wanna wait for me. Alot of what mad-bax said I kind of agreed with, so I also need to know why you did what you did.
I'll check back around 3:330pst.
OneFastWarrior
Asthma Hound Chihuahua
okay, so(I still have a lot to learn, so if I say wrong things then I am sorry). 1st you move the worker to the BG SE and nothing better revealed so you settle on the start spot. good spot next to a river, won't have to build an aqueduct ever, and plenty of forest and BG's Nice spot to settle. Science at pottery at 100% so we can build a granary to let our Capitol grow faster.
Mine the BG 1st to get 1 more shield per turn asap.
Like I said before, you send the warrior west, because 1. You can see coast and jungle to the East, so, therefore not a whole lot there. Being in the middle of the map with coast to the East, west is the most logical way to go.
2nd warrior to east(moutaintop) reveals more land. checking out coastline(I probably would have went South)
open hut to hopefully get something nice.(I think I may have learned something, not sure though. at 1st I did not follow your turns here, I checked the goody hut coming out of our borders and got barbs. I then realized that you did not do this and went back to the turn where I messed up and got the goody hut from East of it and nothing was there.?)
The barracks was obviously a prebuild for granary
Reduce science to 60%, pottery still in 2. (Question, in the science at 60% it says 4, at 100% it says 6. when you started researching it still would have been 15 turns at 90% but science said 5(IIRC) and at 90% it said 4, can ya tell me why you did not start at 90% or why you switched at 2 turns? I don't mean to ask any questions that seem stupid, but I still consider myself learning this game forever!! I usually research the techs at the lowest percentage at the same # of turns.)
the trade for CB allows us to build Temples, making our people happy. and we still have a tech lead over her(however short that may be )
and finnally Lux to 10% because we can never have more unhappy than happy people and we need them to keep working.
well not much from me. Good start. Hope all goes well!!
Mine the BG 1st to get 1 more shield per turn asap.
Like I said before, you send the warrior west, because 1. You can see coast and jungle to the East, so, therefore not a whole lot there. Being in the middle of the map with coast to the East, west is the most logical way to go.
2nd warrior to east(moutaintop) reveals more land. checking out coastline(I probably would have went South)
open hut to hopefully get something nice.(I think I may have learned something, not sure though. at 1st I did not follow your turns here, I checked the goody hut coming out of our borders and got barbs. I then realized that you did not do this and went back to the turn where I messed up and got the goody hut from East of it and nothing was there.?)
The barracks was obviously a prebuild for granary
Reduce science to 60%, pottery still in 2. (Question, in the science at 60% it says 4, at 100% it says 6. when you started researching it still would have been 15 turns at 90% but science said 5(IIRC) and at 90% it said 4, can ya tell me why you did not start at 90% or why you switched at 2 turns? I don't mean to ask any questions that seem stupid, but I still consider myself learning this game forever!! I usually research the techs at the lowest percentage at the same # of turns.)
the trade for CB allows us to build Temples, making our people happy. and we still have a tech lead over her(however short that may be
)and finnally Lux to 10% because we can never have more unhappy than happy people and we need them to keep working.
well not much from me. Good start. Hope all goes well!!
I wouldn't worry about saying the wrong thing or getting something wrong, OneFastWarrior.
For me, the difference between a training game and a regular game (other than having an expert help us through it) is that the emphasis is on learning rather than winning. If we lose horribly, but learn a lot in the process then the game is a success.
Any one of us might potentially do something that turns out bad. Even experts make mistakes. One of the more useful succession games that I have read is this one:
An Error is made
On turn 9, BamBam (who can win at deity) decides to not pay tribute from a far away civ. If you read several of the posts following it you can see the result is disaster which makes the game an excellent example on why when you are weak militarily on the higher levels, it is better to give in to demands for tribute even to far away civs.
Also from my reading of some of the succession games, I think learning how to recover from mistakes or just bad luck seems to be an important skill that the expert players have. I know I have the habit of giving up too easily. I believe they go on to win the above game in spite their difficulties.
One mistake I know I am likely to make is to somehow ruin our rep. It is ridiculously easy to do it happens in maybe 1/2 my games in some form or other. I know some of the ways, like declaring war when you are ordered to leave by a civ or even having a single boat in their waters will ruin your ability to make Right of Passage deals. The rest I am learning slowly and sometimes painfully. Just last game I paid a huge price for iron to fight a war with a second civ, declared war and immediately lost my iron because the war cut off my supply. I was stuck fighting Roman Legionaires with spatulas and egg beaters. I was crushed horribly.
Actually, Nad, if you ever have time for guidelines on how to maintain your rep, I would be very interested. This seems a very difficult part of the game (at least for me).
Another neat thing about succession games that I have seen is that if you do get to a point where you don't know what to do then you can simply stop mid-turn and ask.
PS: If you have the time, reading succession games is a lot of fun and you learn stuff too. There are some epic struggles there.
For me, the difference between a training game and a regular game (other than having an expert help us through it) is that the emphasis is on learning rather than winning. If we lose horribly, but learn a lot in the process then the game is a success.
Any one of us might potentially do something that turns out bad. Even experts make mistakes. One of the more useful succession games that I have read is this one:
An Error is made
On turn 9, BamBam (who can win at deity) decides to not pay tribute from a far away civ. If you read several of the posts following it you can see the result is disaster which makes the game an excellent example on why when you are weak militarily on the higher levels, it is better to give in to demands for tribute even to far away civs.
Also from my reading of some of the succession games, I think learning how to recover from mistakes or just bad luck seems to be an important skill that the expert players have. I know I have the habit of giving up too easily. I believe they go on to win the above game in spite their difficulties.
One mistake I know I am likely to make is to somehow ruin our rep. It is ridiculously easy to do it happens in maybe 1/2 my games in some form or other. I know some of the ways, like declaring war when you are ordered to leave by a civ or even having a single boat in their waters will ruin your ability to make Right of Passage deals. The rest I am learning slowly and sometimes painfully. Just last game I paid a huge price for iron to fight a war with a second civ, declared war and immediately lost my iron because the war cut off my supply. I was stuck fighting Roman Legionaires with spatulas and egg beaters. I was crushed horribly.
Actually, Nad, if you ever have time for guidelines on how to maintain your rep, I would be very interested. This seems a very difficult part of the game (at least for me).
Another neat thing about succession games that I have seen is that if you do get to a point where you don't know what to do then you can simply stop mid-turn and ask.
PS: If you have the time, reading succession games is a lot of fun and you learn stuff too. There are some epic struggles there.
OneFastWarrior
Asthma Hound Chihuahua
I have constantly tried to keep my rep good in games, Except last month in gotm when I was Peaceful and everyone in the world was at war with the Celts and Romans, but they were paying me large amounts of cash, so I would not sign any Trade embargos, and well If I was going for a diplo win, I would have lost. Good thing I was going for Spaceship.
I always try to keep an eye on the deals, so that I never break any and also I try to declare war before I enter anothers territory.
I love to trade, which sometimes I make pretty stupid deals which end up costing me my game. I really am careful with mpp's now after a debacle in gotm20 where I did not check who a civ was at war with before signing an mpp.
Anyway, Since finding this site in February, I have improved my game and understanding of the game by so much that I have to laugh at the way I use to play.
I do read and follow some sg's but with so much going on I can't keep up. But I think the weakest part of my game is doing the right things at the begginning. so, I try to read begginings to games and also QSC reports of the better players(at least 2 or 3)
anyway, I did not mean to get off track here.
I always try to keep an eye on the deals, so that I never break any and also I try to declare war before I enter anothers territory.
I love to trade, which sometimes I make pretty stupid deals which end up costing me my game. I really am careful with mpp's now after a debacle in gotm20 where I did not check who a civ was at war with before signing an mpp.
Anyway, Since finding this site in February, I have improved my game and understanding of the game by so much that I have to laugh at the way I use to play.
I do read and follow some sg's but with so much going on I can't keep up. But I think the weakest part of my game is doing the right things at the begginning. so, I try to read begginings to games and also QSC reports of the better players(at least 2 or 3)
anyway, I did not mean to get off track here.
Nad
Known Troublemaker
Well done everyone on those critiques 
Lots of good ideas coming through and we've already got some discussion going on. There are a lot of questions to address so excuse me if this post is a bit long
Firstly, this was my actual thinking in those turns:
Start: worker moves on the off-chance we see some bonus food; he moves onto one of the 3 most powerful tiles, the bgs next to a river. There is nothing to encourage moving the settler so we found: it is always useful to have a city on top of a luxury too to prevent it from being pillaged.
We select warrior first to begin exploring, which is the single most important thing we need to do early on: gather information about what lands are available to us and who we might be sharing those lands with.
Why pottery and not writing? Pottery is more important to us and not something we should take a risk on. What if we have no expansionist neighbours to trade pottery from? What if we have no neighbours period? A granary (on which more later) is the single most important building in the early game; we need pottery to bring it into play. It is also quick to research.
Mad-Bax is correct to suggest this diminishes our chances of getting writing first, but the biggest danger is from huts rather than another civ researching it. The only civs that can research writing from the start are commercial civs. But as Bamspeedy's research has shown, most civs tend to prioritize bronze working from the start. If not bronze, they go after other first rank techs ...the chances of another civ starting with writing are very slim. If we get beaten to it, it will most likely be by an expansionist civ scoring a tremendous run on huts.
Turn 1: worker mines the tile before roading. The simple reason for this is that in the early game, shields are more important than gold.
To address Greebley's point, later in the game (say, Middle Ages onwards), roading before mining is also my preferred option. The reason for this is that if you have a lot of workers close together, roading a tile first will allow other workers to join in the mining without wasting turns on movement, thus speeding up the rate at which improvements can be laid.
Turn 5: first warrior explores west.
There were 3 possible directions I could have sent the warrior: west, east or south. Since there was coast to the north, that would suggest there may not be much land in that direction. Because we are almost dead center in the mini-map, it is very difficult to make predictions on what shape our landmass is. Moving the warrior west wa sbased on the fact that I could see grasslands in that direction whereas south and east wa sall jungle. And in any case, the exploring warriors are fourish turns apart in being produced, so exploring in one direction before another will not make a massive difference.
Turn 7: worker roads the tile. Moving without roading is inefficient, as it means that later you have to waste another worker turn to get back to the tile to road it.
Turn 9: second warrior east. There was not a lot to choose between east and south, either would have been fine.
Turn 12: this is when I popped the hut, for it to be deserted.
I am glad to see that you have all spotted that there seems to have been a delay in popping the hut. There was! Entirely deliberately.
The hut could have been popped the turn previously, but I chose not to. The reason for this is that if I had got barbs, they would have spawned next to the worker, which would have meant I would have had to interrupt the worker to keep him safe. The capital was safe becuase a warrior would have been produced by the time any barbs could have got there, but the worker was not safe. Thus, I deliberately delayed the pop for 1 turn until the next warrior was completed, thus allowing me to protect the wroker and capital if I got barbs [if i had got barbs, I might have interrupted the worker anyway, since a barb warrior could kill our warrior covering the worker, but delaying nevertheless gives me more flexibility and options]. As Greebley's experience shows, early barbs can hinder your growth!
Since the hut was empty, I sent the newly produced warrior south to explore.
I also, as you all noticed, reduced the science rate 2 turns before the end: this is simply more efficient than waiting until the last turn, when you may still have beakers overrunning. At this stage in the game, it makes a tiny bit of difference, but later in the game it can save you 100s of gold. It's a good habit to get into: wait until 2 turns are left on research, increase the science rate to see if you can get the tech in 1 turn (here we were already at 100% so we couldn't increase the rate), if you can't, reduce it to the minimum still showing 2 turns. Adjust again when there is only 1 turn left to see if you can save any more.
And the barracks was, of course, a granary prebuild.
Turn 14: contact with Spain.
As Greebley discerned, we could also have thrown in bronze-working and gained Spain's 10 gold rather than pay 9g. The reason I did not do this was it does not represent fair value on bronze working. The AI very rarely build granaries early in the game, but it does build spearmen, so the tech to withhold is bronze, not pottery. As it happens, Spain got bronze soon after, but the trade made was still the best one at the time.
Mad-Bax: the trade was made because it was a fair trade. How do I know this? Maybe you could think it through...think in terms of what contacts does to tech prices and what different techs are worth....I know the point you're making, but I know that Spain did not have any other contacts when we made that trade, so we got full value for it...see if you can figure out how i know that! Then we can discuss that point in more detail.
Turn 20: lux to 10% is to avoid a riot since Seoul is now size 3.
Now to address some of the issues that have been raised!
Lots of good ideas coming through and we've already got some discussion going on. There are a lot of questions to address so excuse me if this post is a bit long Firstly, this was my actual thinking in those turns:
Start: worker moves on the off-chance we see some bonus food; he moves onto one of the 3 most powerful tiles, the bgs next to a river. There is nothing to encourage moving the settler so we found: it is always useful to have a city on top of a luxury too to prevent it from being pillaged.
We select warrior first to begin exploring, which is the single most important thing we need to do early on: gather information about what lands are available to us and who we might be sharing those lands with.
Why pottery and not writing? Pottery is more important to us and not something we should take a risk on. What if we have no expansionist neighbours to trade pottery from? What if we have no neighbours period? A granary (on which more later) is the single most important building in the early game; we need pottery to bring it into play. It is also quick to research.
Mad-Bax is correct to suggest this diminishes our chances of getting writing first, but the biggest danger is from huts rather than another civ researching it. The only civs that can research writing from the start are commercial civs. But as Bamspeedy's research has shown, most civs tend to prioritize bronze working from the start. If not bronze, they go after other first rank techs ...the chances of another civ starting with writing are very slim. If we get beaten to it, it will most likely be by an expansionist civ scoring a tremendous run on huts.
Turn 1: worker mines the tile before roading. The simple reason for this is that in the early game, shields are more important than gold.
To address Greebley's point, later in the game (say, Middle Ages onwards), roading before mining is also my preferred option. The reason for this is that if you have a lot of workers close together, roading a tile first will allow other workers to join in the mining without wasting turns on movement, thus speeding up the rate at which improvements can be laid.
Turn 5: first warrior explores west.
There were 3 possible directions I could have sent the warrior: west, east or south. Since there was coast to the north, that would suggest there may not be much land in that direction. Because we are almost dead center in the mini-map, it is very difficult to make predictions on what shape our landmass is. Moving the warrior west wa sbased on the fact that I could see grasslands in that direction whereas south and east wa sall jungle. And in any case, the exploring warriors are fourish turns apart in being produced, so exploring in one direction before another will not make a massive difference.
Turn 7: worker roads the tile. Moving without roading is inefficient, as it means that later you have to waste another worker turn to get back to the tile to road it.
Turn 9: second warrior east. There was not a lot to choose between east and south, either would have been fine.
Turn 12: this is when I popped the hut, for it to be deserted.
I am glad to see that you have all spotted that there seems to have been a delay in popping the hut. There was! Entirely deliberately.
The hut could have been popped the turn previously, but I chose not to. The reason for this is that if I had got barbs, they would have spawned next to the worker, which would have meant I would have had to interrupt the worker to keep him safe. The capital was safe becuase a warrior would have been produced by the time any barbs could have got there, but the worker was not safe. Thus, I deliberately delayed the pop for 1 turn until the next warrior was completed, thus allowing me to protect the wroker and capital if I got barbs [if i had got barbs, I might have interrupted the worker anyway, since a barb warrior could kill our warrior covering the worker, but delaying nevertheless gives me more flexibility and options]. As Greebley's experience shows, early barbs can hinder your growth!
Since the hut was empty, I sent the newly produced warrior south to explore.
I also, as you all noticed, reduced the science rate 2 turns before the end: this is simply more efficient than waiting until the last turn, when you may still have beakers overrunning. At this stage in the game, it makes a tiny bit of difference, but later in the game it can save you 100s of gold. It's a good habit to get into: wait until 2 turns are left on research, increase the science rate to see if you can get the tech in 1 turn (here we were already at 100% so we couldn't increase the rate), if you can't, reduce it to the minimum still showing 2 turns. Adjust again when there is only 1 turn left to see if you can save any more.
And the barracks was, of course, a granary prebuild.
Turn 14: contact with Spain.
As Greebley discerned, we could also have thrown in bronze-working and gained Spain's 10 gold rather than pay 9g. The reason I did not do this was it does not represent fair value on bronze working. The AI very rarely build granaries early in the game, but it does build spearmen, so the tech to withhold is bronze, not pottery. As it happens, Spain got bronze soon after, but the trade made was still the best one at the time.
Mad-Bax: the trade was made because it was a fair trade. How do I know this? Maybe you could think it through...think in terms of what contacts does to tech prices and what different techs are worth....I know the point you're making, but I know that Spain did not have any other contacts when we made that trade, so we got full value for it...see if you can figure out how i know that!
Then we can discuss that point in more detail.Turn 20: lux to 10% is to avoid a riot since Seoul is now size 3.
Now to address some of the issues that have been raised!
Nad
Known Troublemaker
1) Greebley: the warrior near the capital is coincidence! Protecting the capital was not my concern there. The reason for this is that I know where the Spanish are, becasue I have recently explored those southern tiles. It is very unlikely that Spain would declare war on us this early, it is more likely we would get a demand, but even if they did, it would take Spain 10+ turns to get to Seoul, giving us plenty of time to get some defence. Your point, however, is a good one: it never hurts to err on the side of caution.
2) Mad-Bax raises the very interesting question about the granary. Should we have built a settler first, on turn 20, to get some sort of settler factory running while our capital was on units?
There is no right or wrong answer here, it is simply a case of thinking long-term/short-term. Short-term, building a settler first would be more powerful, as it means we get a second city sooner and we may have beaten the Spanish to the choice city site near the wheat. But long-term, building a settler when our capital has no bonus food would hurt the capital. Building a settler on turn 20 would send our capital back to size 1, no food in the box. It would take another 20 turns just to get the capital back to size 3. Think also of the shields we'd be missing out on in that period. Once the 3rd bg has been mined, Seould at size 3 does 7spt where it does 3spt at size 1. Ideally, we want to be building settlers from Seoul between sizes 3 and 5, so we need to let it grow.
Also bear in mind that a granary is not just needed for settler pumps! A granary is the most powerful building in the early game, as it halves the time to grow to the next size. When you also consider that the capital is the most important city in any game, even if we were to use Seoul for units, we would still want a granary for it to grow quicker and to get as large as possible! Not only does a granary increase food by storage, it also increases the shields (since quicker growth means more citizens working the land bringing home more shields)! Long-term, building the granary before any settlers are produced is the more powerful move.
Well done, Mad-Bax, for raising this point It allows us to discuss short-term/long-term priorities. If it turns out that we are very cramped for land, then building a settler first could well have been the better move. That is something that we shall see as the game develops.
3) Waiting before trading. (Mad-Bax mentioned this, about waiting for contacts in the hope of making a much larger profit). Just bear in mind that we are not expansionist and that on emperor, the AIs start with plenty of free units It is more likely the Spanish will make another contact before we do. So the opportunity of getting a fair trade was a good one.
4) About the luxuries (and city planning in general). We are indeed very fortunate to have so many luxuries readily available. We will come to this in more detail when we discuss dotmapping, but after bonus food, luxes and strategic resources are the next most desirable thing to try to claim with settlers. If we can claim 4 luxuries, that would do wonders for later happiness issues as well as trade.
5) About OneFastWarrior's point about researching at the minimum rather than the maximum rate: the danger is that if you research at the minimum rate that shows the same number of turns as higher rate, you may get the tech slower than otherwise if your income increased, especially in the early game where even 1gpt can make a difference in how fast you research a tech. If you lowered the science rate to the minimum amount that showed the same number of turns, then, for example, your city grows another size, because you reduced your science rate, the extra gold from the extra tile may be going to your treasury rather than to research. To get a tech as quickly as possible, therefore, it is better to research at the higher rate so any extra beakers also go to science if your income increases. then, when there are only a couple of turns left to completion, reduce the science rate (as I explained above) to avoid wasting beakers.
6) About avoiding damaging your rep: I will happily provide some guidelines on this when we reach trading in our game.
Since Yaype has not checked in, I am going to PM one of the stand-by players to take his place. I will then issue the revised roster.
2) Mad-Bax raises the very interesting question about the granary. Should we have built a settler first, on turn 20, to get some sort of settler factory running while our capital was on units?
There is no right or wrong answer here, it is simply a case of thinking long-term/short-term. Short-term, building a settler first would be more powerful, as it means we get a second city sooner and we may have beaten the Spanish to the choice city site near the wheat. But long-term, building a settler when our capital has no bonus food would hurt the capital. Building a settler on turn 20 would send our capital back to size 1, no food in the box. It would take another 20 turns just to get the capital back to size 3. Think also of the shields we'd be missing out on in that period. Once the 3rd bg has been mined, Seould at size 3 does 7spt where it does 3spt at size 1. Ideally, we want to be building settlers from Seoul between sizes 3 and 5, so we need to let it grow.
Also bear in mind that a granary is not just needed for settler pumps! A granary is the most powerful building in the early game, as it halves the time to grow to the next size. When you also consider that the capital is the most important city in any game, even if we were to use Seoul for units, we would still want a granary for it to grow quicker and to get as large as possible! Not only does a granary increase food by storage, it also increases the shields (since quicker growth means more citizens working the land bringing home more shields)! Long-term, building the granary before any settlers are produced is the more powerful move.
Well done, Mad-Bax, for raising this point
It allows us to discuss short-term/long-term priorities. If it turns out that we are very cramped for land, then building a settler first could well have been the better move. That is something that we shall see as the game develops.3) Waiting before trading. (Mad-Bax mentioned this, about waiting for contacts in the hope of making a much larger profit). Just bear in mind that we are not expansionist and that on emperor, the AIs start with plenty of free units
It is more likely the Spanish will make another contact before we do. So the opportunity of getting a fair trade was a good one.4) About the luxuries (and city planning in general). We are indeed very fortunate to have so many luxuries readily available. We will come to this in more detail when we discuss dotmapping, but after bonus food, luxes and strategic resources are the next most desirable thing to try to claim with settlers. If we can claim 4 luxuries, that would do wonders for later happiness issues as well as trade.
5) About OneFastWarrior's point about researching at the minimum rather than the maximum rate: the danger is that if you research at the minimum rate that shows the same number of turns as higher rate, you may get the tech slower than otherwise if your income increased, especially in the early game where even 1gpt can make a difference in how fast you research a tech. If you lowered the science rate to the minimum amount that showed the same number of turns, then, for example, your city grows another size, because you reduced your science rate, the extra gold from the extra tile may be going to your treasury rather than to research. To get a tech as quickly as possible, therefore, it is better to research at the higher rate so any extra beakers also go to science if your income increases. then, when there are only a couple of turns left to completion, reduce the science rate (as I explained above) to avoid wasting beakers.
6) About avoiding damaging your rep: I will happily provide some guidelines on this when we reach trading in our game.
Since Yaype has not checked in, I am going to PM one of the stand-by players to take his place. I will then issue the revised roster.
Yaype
Me
Hey, I am here. Sorry about the period of silence. I went on a trip out of town on rather short notice, but now I am back. Just give me a day or two to catch up, as I have to do a few things to get settled back in and read up on everything that has happened. I hope my spot is still there.
For point 3, one thing I have found is that barbarian level makes a difference too. The rougher the barbs, the sooner the AI meet as they all zero in on them. I think I would have done the 1 for 1 tech trade even if we were expansionist. It seems every time I wait, I end up with nothing.
Oh one trivial point. If you only have 1 town that is making less than 10 commerce a turn, then it doesn't matter if you adjust on the 2nd to last or last turn. You will always spend exactly the right number of shields for the tech since you can always adjust the science by a single gold piece. So your first tech is the one tech that it doesn't matter if you adjust 2 turns before or wait until the last turn.
Oh one trivial point. If you only have 1 town that is making less than 10 commerce a turn, then it doesn't matter if you adjust on the 2nd to last or last turn. You will always spend exactly the right number of shields for the tech since you can always adjust the science by a single gold piece. So your first tech is the one tech that it doesn't matter if you adjust 2 turns before or wait until the last turn.
Similar threads
