First, thanks to Ondskan for a very generous comment.
Second, thanks Sun Tzu Wu for elegantly and accurately defending the strategy in my absence. He is a better player than I.
Third, I have always appreciated skeptical comments that have been cordial and well-articulated, for instance those made by Duckweed and Jack Funk, both of whom are also better players than I.
Fourth, I stopped playing Civ 4 (aside from weekly multiplayer sessions) for the better part of a year in order to finish my dissertation, which was submitted and accepted in the spring (like previously, some will hate on me for even mentioning that, but I don't care at this point). Does being an academic make me a better player? Absolutely not. What it does, however, is make me have relatively high standards about how a discussion and debate should unfold (as do some others on here). A discussion should be (and indeed, I am used to it being) thoughtful and respectful.
Fifth, the nastiness and denseness of many of the negative posts got old a long time ago. They are still old. If there's not a productive, accurate, respectful conversation taking place, then it's hard to build up the motivation to continue my side of it.
Sixth, the detractors have had 10 months to beat a
Deity map I beat twice as an Immortal-level player not even as good as I am today. They have not done so. That says something.
(Note, I dealt with the bad events and turned down positive events to avoid the above, false accusation that I relied on RNG luck). No matter what the map would have been, some people would say, "Oh, it's just that one map." Absolute nonsense. That map has certain conditions that are replicable on other maps.
Seventh, I have started playing a bit again and have stepped up to Deity regularly. The AI does move fast, but I am enjoying the challenge. I have, however, started playing with a custom setting that has made me reluctant to post on these forums as people will merely attack the custom setting. Basically, I read that for Gods and Kings religions are now limited to half the amount of civilizations. I therefore decided that I would try a 14-civ, low sea level map, and had an absolute blast playing it (fractal, random leader usually, random terrain, huts and events on). Much more fun. The game feels more balanced too (from my perspective). So I have just been playing that custom setting lately. I understand that it changes the strategy and dynamics in some ways. I don't need to be lectured on it. Yes, I have continued to use the bulbs in this article from time to time, and yes, I have found them to be beneficial. But the fact that I have been playing on 14-civ, low-sea level maps has led me to just keep quiet and not share. I've been happy playing and developing my approach in silence.
Eighth, I have had time to experiment with and think about each of the main delayed-BW bulbs that are mentioned in the article. I can now therefore answer
Jack Funk's fine question about conditions with a little more specificity. For the Liberalism bulb, the entire beeline (Mysticism, Meditation, Priesthood, Writing, Code of Laws, Philosophy, Mathematics, Civil Service, Paper, Education, and Liberalism) is full of great techs, but they are all peaceful in nature. If you do a hardcore beeline like that, you will most likely have a pacifist warrior army. This bulb strategy is therefore best utilized in peaceful settings. Indeed, isolation might be optimal for it. No loss on early trading (the other bulbs are first bulbs). No threat of an attack. It is also ideal when Liberalism itself is a goal, not just the free tech that getting there first provides. So that means that this bulb is ideal for isolated cultural wins via Free Speech
(as I demonstrated with map #2) and isolated diplomatic wins via late entry into diplomacy with Free Religion and a better sense of who your opponent on the ballot will be before you start lining up friends and enemies (you'll want to trade Liberalism and your free tech and whatever else you can for the Astronomy, Printing Press, Scientific Method route up towards the UN. Note that the first civ you meet is guaranteed to have up to Optics already, and likely Astronomy soon).
Ninth, the delayed-BW GM Civil Service bulb is ideal for heavy fur starts. This bulb strategy requires you to get to Code of Laws (and then Civil Service) via Currency, not Priesthood (those who try to dismiss the strategy by showing that they can get to Civil Service earlier do so via the cheaper Priesthood route). A beeline towards Civil Service via Currency and Code of Laws makes sense with a fur heavy start. Lots of commerce in capital immediately from fur camps, no desire to chop the forests of fur camps (in fact you want the forests to spread), markets will provide extra happiness and can be a multiplier on that commerce, Code of Laws will allow you to run Caste System and generate that merchant quickly without a wonder, and Civil Service will allow you to multiply that capital commerce even more. Your defense, if you need it, is archers, as you will be going through hunting anyway. Best starting tech: the much maligned Hunting.
Tenth, the delayed-BW GE Feudalism bulb is ideal for heavy winery starts with stone. You tech up to monarchy, grabbing a religion if you can (Judaism the most likely on higher levels, which requires masonry anyway) and you build the Pyramids and generate that GE. Bulb Feudalism and you'll easily be the first to it. You'll have Serfdom at a time when there are a lot of terrain improvements to make, no happy cap issues forcing you to want to slave off your citizens instead, a legal civic adding promotions to your new and emerging (and guaranteed) defensive army of Longbows, monopoly on a very valuable and tradable tech, and two tech directions to head (Guilds or Civil Service). Best starting tech: the much maligned Mysticism.
Eleventh, my approach to Bronze Working now is this. I will almost never dead end self-tech it. In other words, if I tech it, I am going Bronze Working to Metal Casting to Machinery, or Bronze Working to Iron to Compass. On the majority of my games, I will trade for it as it is always readily available early on. On a very decent fraction of my games, I will purposefully not trade for it in order to utilize one of the above bulb strategies.
Twelfth, I will add some of these thoughts to the article.
Thirteenth, I am once again open to feedback and debate, both positive and negative. I am not, however, really interested in engaging with individuals who are rude, dismissive, or intentionally mischaracterize the strategy. If you want to do any of those three things, then how about this: go beat
map #2 anyway, anyhow you can, post your victory screenshot, and then come be rude and dismissive. Good times.
)
There's hardly a conspiracy of close-minded Civ players so obsessed with tradition as to overlook useful strategies, and in the... what, 50 pages of text generated by this approach over the course of a year, two individuals have emerged to defend it, the OP and STW (who is yet to use it).
