Heathcliff
Tactician
Any Temple of Artemis fans here, if you have marble?
Temple of Artemis viable?
- Thread starter Heathcliff
- Start date
For failgold yes. Finishing it, not so much.
It's sort of like great library, in that it gives a big boost in GPeople generation. But the problem is that it gives you GMerch points, which are OK, and GProphet points, which are abit more problematic.
Oh, and GMerch points might not really be that great, because your early GMerchants you usually want to send to the city where temple of aritmetis is built... And you can't send them there because you have built it.
So, haven't really figured out some way to get decent use out of it, but I'm sure there are some rare occasion where one could build a unusual and possibly good strategy around it.
Traderoutes are abit obscure in any way. It was only quite recently that I connected the dots between a large capital and yield from GMerchant missions.
When and how I would get 1900, 2100 or 2900 was quite a mystery to me, and I haven't still figured out really how it works, but it seems to be that a larger capital does give you a significant boost to trademissions.
Perhaps really large cities benefit more from ToAr too..?
It's sort of like great library, in that it gives a big boost in GPeople generation. But the problem is that it gives you GMerch points, which are OK, and GProphet points, which are abit more problematic.
Oh, and GMerch points might not really be that great, because your early GMerchants you usually want to send to the city where temple of aritmetis is built... And you can't send them there because you have built it.
So, haven't really figured out some way to get decent use out of it, but I'm sure there are some rare occasion where one could build a unusual and possibly good strategy around it.
Traderoutes are abit obscure in any way. It was only quite recently that I connected the dots between a large capital and yield from GMerchant missions.
When and how I would get 1900, 2100 or 2900 was quite a mystery to me, and I haven't still figured out really how it works, but it seems to be that a larger capital does give you a significant boost to trademissions.
Perhaps really large cities benefit more from ToAr too..?
AcaMetis
Deity
- Joined
- May 21, 2018
- Messages
- 2,131
IIRC the value of trade missions are based on how much a (theoretical) trade route between the city your Great Merchant is in and your capitol is/would be worth. So anything that boosts trade route income will boost the value of the trade mission, though exactly how all those modifiers work I couldn't say.
Ok, so capital size might not be a thing to boost ToAr then.
Best city for ToAr is a coastal city, when one has GLH and playing the Carthagians and building that unique building for an extra trade route, while in free market and also having built a castle.
Best city for ToAr is a coastal city, when one has GLH and playing the Carthagians and building that unique building for an extra trade route, while in free market and also having built a castle.
shakabrade
Praise Vivec!
Can't really think of a situation when I'd rather take ToA than failgold. Maybe on a big map, preferably with MoM so you can put the-pollution to a good use.
Or in OCC game.
Lennier
Emperor
Except that Economics (for FM) obsoletes castles.Ok, so capital size might not be a thing to boost ToAr then.
Best city for ToAr is a coastal city, when one has GLH and playing the Carthagians and building that unique building for an extra trade route, while in free market and also having built a castle.
Fippy
Mycro Junkie
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2013
- Messages
- 15,018
Giving the wrong GP points, i never built TOA in occ tbh.
shakabrade
Praise Vivec!
I am totally not an expert for OCC and played maybe less than 5 of them, but I can't say that settling a Great Prophet felt bad. I always played space race and gpt was nice to pay for resources and hammers were an issue. One can also bulb CS with a Great Prophet. What makes you not love ToA? You go Cuirs in OCC Conquest?
drewisfat
King
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2011
- Messages
- 995
Settling merchants and priests gives you gold per turn, but that's much less useful in OCC because you won't run negative keeping slider at 100%. You mention paying gpt for resources, which is probably the best choice, but OCC is also the realm of globe theatre and national park meaning eventually happy/health won't matter. And early game you can make it minimally matter by pumping warriors + HR, trading any happy/strat resources for health and topping it off with an aqueduct.
Also in an OCC we really really want that first great person to build an academy (or maybe SY in AW). And generally when you get a GP you don't want, you think, ok I'll save it for a GA. But GAs are much weaker when you have only one city.
Plus ToA looks most appealing when you have marble and have/are going early religious techs. But Oracle is going to look *much* more appealing in those conditions, especially in an OCC where rushing CS for early bureau is king. 2 GP points are still not ideal, but not nearly the dealbreaker as 5 bad gpp.
In a regular game I would try to build ToA if and only if:
I was playing as Inca.
I settled on the coastline.
I was alone on the island.
My immediate vicinity was dry garbage or jungle/calendar.
I saw that I had pre-astro TRs with AIs.
I had marble.
I had some kind of extra commerce in BFC.
By way of explanation, I'd want early overseas TRs immediately for it to be preferable to failgold. I'd always build GLh first, as it's inherently better. Going for two early wonders really slows down expansion, so expansion would have to be a more inefficient option than normal and yet secure from getting claimed early by AI. The biggest hang-up with going for ToA, which is always a risk, is justifying teching myst and poly. Failgold is fine, but the beakers on otherwise useless techs is lost. I'd want IND to keep overall costs of both wonders down, and boost reward potential with failgold. And if I started with myst, I'd only be gambling on Poly instead of Poly + myst, which is more reasonable. Inca is the only one with IND + myst. Do need a little commerce because Poly + sailing + masonry adds up and doesn't include whatever worker techs are justified.
Also in an OCC we really really want that first great person to build an academy (or maybe SY in AW). And generally when you get a GP you don't want, you think, ok I'll save it for a GA. But GAs are much weaker when you have only one city.
Plus ToA looks most appealing when you have marble and have/are going early religious techs. But Oracle is going to look *much* more appealing in those conditions, especially in an OCC where rushing CS for early bureau is king. 2 GP points are still not ideal, but not nearly the dealbreaker as 5 bad gpp.
In a regular game I would try to build ToA if and only if:
I was playing as Inca.
I settled on the coastline.
I was alone on the island.
My immediate vicinity was dry garbage or jungle/calendar.
I saw that I had pre-astro TRs with AIs.
I had marble.
I had some kind of extra commerce in BFC.
By way of explanation, I'd want early overseas TRs immediately for it to be preferable to failgold. I'd always build GLh first, as it's inherently better. Going for two early wonders really slows down expansion, so expansion would have to be a more inefficient option than normal and yet secure from getting claimed early by AI. The biggest hang-up with going for ToA, which is always a risk, is justifying teching myst and poly. Failgold is fine, but the beakers on otherwise useless techs is lost. I'd want IND to keep overall costs of both wonders down, and boost reward potential with failgold. And if I started with myst, I'd only be gambling on Poly instead of Poly + myst, which is more reasonable. Inca is the only one with IND + myst. Do need a little commerce because Poly + sailing + masonry adds up and doesn't include whatever worker techs are justified.
I found gold to be extremely useful for tech trading in OCC. No idea how else to keep up with research. The only alternative I'm aware of is espiomage with GW for early GSpy, but I'm by no means an expert on OCC. May be, I play it very inefficiently and there is a way to reliably tech faster than AI.
@drewisfat Very nice of you to sketch out a plausable scenario where it might be viable!
Any thoughts about cases where it's inexplicable not built way later in the game (like T80+)?
That is where I would imagine I would get it. I was starting with the aim to failgold it than started to think: "Hey.. perhaps I should just finish it?"
Any thoughts about cases where it's inexplicable not built way later in the game (like T80+)?
That is where I would imagine I would get it. I was starting with the aim to failgold it than started to think: "Hey.. perhaps I should just finish it?"
Great Merchant missions give 500 gold, and an extra 200 gold per 1 commerce of a hypothetical trade route for the other player from that city, to your capital. There's also a game speed scaling factor on that.
Temple of Artemis in that city will generally mean 200-400 additional gold; temple of Artemis in your capital will do nothing. That's a real hidden cost to building ToA in a game where you expect that you will generate at least one Great Merchant, and expect that if you didn't build Temple of Artemis someone you can reach likely would: not only have you missed out on a potential 350 failgold, you've also lost 200-400 gold from your great merchant.
drewisfat
King
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2011
- Messages
- 995
@krikav .The only thing that really changes later is that Poly stops being garbage if you were going for GLib, and you might get it in a tech trade. That means you don't need myst starter anymore. I still think you want IND and marble. This is because the ToA is so expensive that you can get more failgold than you can use in a short timeframe. If we start pushing like T90 where it seems incredibly likely that the AI finishes it any turn, well it's really hard to justify more than half building the wonder. If I was both IND and had marble though, the ratio of hammers invested for gold would be strong enough that I wouldn't cry about getting 349 failgold. We'd still want early overseas TRs though, to outperform the failgold. So really we've traded Inca for any IND leader, but with the extra condition that the AI is astronomically late in building the wonder.
@Anysense I don't have much OCC experience either, but I'd still value beakers over gold. You can use gold to even out a tech trade where you're selling a cheaper tech to get a more expensive tech. But you're also at times going to be selling a more expensive tech for a cheaper tech + gold. Additional gpt may be over the top. It puts a burden on you to slant your trades such that you're giving away gold on average while still being efficient. This logic would also apply to uneven resource trades. Generally we have the opposite bias because when you give a tech away (or a duplicate resource) you're not losing anything, as opposed to handing gold over. Ultimately, I'd rather have beakers and none of that complication. I'd rather settle a GS than a GM, and I'd rather academy and then bulb with a GS than settle a GS, so to me this has to be rly inefficient great person usage.
@Anysense I don't have much OCC experience either, but I'd still value beakers over gold. You can use gold to even out a tech trade where you're selling a cheaper tech to get a more expensive tech. But you're also at times going to be selling a more expensive tech for a cheaper tech + gold. Additional gpt may be over the top. It puts a burden on you to slant your trades such that you're giving away gold on average while still being efficient. This logic would also apply to uneven resource trades. Generally we have the opposite bias because when you give a tech away (or a duplicate resource) you're not losing anything, as opposed to handing gold over. Ultimately, I'd rather have beakers and none of that complication. I'd rather settle a GS than a GM, and I'd rather academy and then bulb with a GS than settle a GS, so to me this has to be rly inefficient great person usage.
@drewisfat Overseas traderoutes doesn't change anything with ToAr, does it? Or is it some rounding thing I'm missing?
You got the base commerce then you get +100% on that.
For forreign you get +100% and for offshore you get another +100%.
You got the base commerce then you get +100% on that.
For forreign you get +100% and for offshore you get another +100%.
@drewisfat , you must have misread me somehow. Obviously 
>
and GS>GM when you have every multiplier for and none for. Nor am I arguing that building ToA is good. It has a bad mix of GP useful only when you need a random GP, say, for your first Golden Age, if you can't have Music artist for that purpose. Pretty bad for OCC because you want your first GP to be a GS for Academy.
Only saying that gold is useful too. I'm failing to see how extra gpt can be a burden, though, I mean you just use when you need it. Anyway, gpt is usually negligible compared to what one can get in tech trades. Also, the question of convenience and efficiency is very different for me. For example, it is a hell of an inconvenience when I have to put some into a tech to trade it, and it costs me thousands of when next turn the trading opportunity is gone and I missed it because I had no gold to pay the difference. Then I have to get to tech parity one way or another, because everyone has the same techs which I have + something else; not very efficient.
> and GS>GM when you have every multiplier for and none for. Nor am I arguing that building ToA is good. It has a bad mix of GP useful only when you need a random GP, say, for your first Golden Age, if you can't have Music artist for that purpose. Pretty bad for OCC because you want your first GP to be a GS for Academy. Only saying that gold is useful too. I'm failing to see how extra gpt can be a burden, though, I mean you just use
when you need it. Anyway, gpt is usually negligible compared to what one can get in tech trades. Also, the question of convenience and efficiency is very different for me. For example, it is a hell of an inconvenience when I have to put some into a tech to trade it, and it costs me thousands of when next turn the trading opportunity is gone and I missed it because I had no gold to pay the difference. Then I have to get to tech parity one way or another, because everyone has the same techs which I have + something else; not very efficient.Welcome back @BornInCantaloup, we have missed you!
Yeah, in theory bulbing is really bad. You spend alot of long term potential and sustained momentum for a short burst.
Why it's really good in practice is because that burst can at a critical moment get you an edge that you can leverage. (Most common, conquer alot of cities for cheap).
Yeah, in theory bulbing is really bad. You spend alot of long term potential and sustained momentum for a short burst.
Why it's really good in practice is because that burst can at a critical moment get you an edge that you can leverage. (Most common, conquer alot of cities for cheap).
