The Conquest Training Game

The big Question here is where to put our first settler.
I would without thinking at all throw it onto a river tile next to the LUX. Then quicky roading it to the LUX.
(This would reduce the civil disorder level. Thus helping growth overall.)

(Then I would road a way towards the cows so the next settler can move up to a prepared position.)
 
Mauer said:
I wish I could play it! I know I have been running my mouth in here a bunch, but that's all you'll get from me. I can't find my Civ 3 disc. Just PTW. Gonna have to be Detlef, Berrern, or Friendly. Unless someone knows how to run it with PTW disc.
You can't run it with PTW :(

However, you can pick-up Vanilla civ for around $10 now-adays, especially on online auctions etc. :)
 
Sorry FriendlyFire but i don't agree with your roading to the cows. This city is too far away for our third town.
We should start to build our inner circle in a range of 3-4 tiles. This means one 4 tiles to the NW and one on the small hill NE. Our opponent's didn't wait until we have build our big settler factory far to the N.
I've played a game at the same time and the AI was really fast in building citys. I tried trading techs and it works very fine, all AI's are in a friendly mind. But i had no luck (means no iron, no salpeter, no horses on a landmass with 25 citys). The friendly wikings came out and captured 3 citys on one turn and i defended each town with 1 warrior, 1 spearman and 1 archer.
So what i defnetly want to say is, that if we want to have a chance, we should go on a compromice between a big settler factory and a good infrastructure (means more citys, forces and worker).
I'm not so good playing civ because thats why i'm here. But i think we waste too much time to build a big settler factory.
 
I'll be happy to play the next turns :)

But first, we should discuss our next moves..
Since it'll take ages to set-up a Settler factory in Beijing, I'd reckon we should build a Settler immediately. Then we should build a Barracks (should take about 4-6 turns) and start spitting out a few Defensive units for our cities.

The big question is where to put our next city. Certainly, founding it by the Cows would give good bonuses and cater for a Settler Factory, but it's a bit far away. I normally like to get the second city up and running as soon as possible. I think the western part of the river might be a good city site, but we need to explore it more first - and if we discover a bonus tile there, I think we should go for it.
However, the south also looks interesting, with the Fish tile. Maybe there's another bonus tile hidden down there somewhere. It will waste a lot of turns sending one of our Warriors there though, so maybe we should build 1 more Warrior before the Settler - who can explore the south?

As for city placement, we should definitely go with RCP to minimize corruption in our core. I've tried to do some plotting, and found out that if we don't want to waste the Game tile 2 tiles West of Beijing, we need to to a 3-spaced RCP. I plotted in all 3-tile-distance city locations onto the map (red circles), and also plotted in a second ring (blue circles). The second ring here has 3 spaces aswell, but maybe we should go for more? Just let me know, and I can plot in 3.5-locations, 4-locations etc :)

Anyway, the first ring consists of all available 3-spaced city locations, and is the best way to build our cities imo. Please let me know what you think!

A few notes:
-Tehcnically, founding a city 2 tiles West of Beijing would also give a 3-distance city, but this will waste the Game, so I didn't plot it in.
-The numbers are not the order in which I think we should build cities - I just numbered them for reference.
-It might be possible to build some 2nd-ring cities in the south, but it's impossible to say without exploring the area first.
-I think number 8 should be 1 tile south; it's a bit tricky to see without the Grid. Please put on the grid when taking sshots :)
EDIT: In fact, I'm rather sure it should be 1 tile down, but can't be arsed to re-edit the screenshot, as I have a lot to do at work atm!

b-rcp3.jpg


As for the second city, I think it should be founded on spot 1.
 
Looks good Berrern! Did you use Dianthus' utility for this?

We will definitely be following RCP for this game (its one of the key 'learning objectives' if you like). Does anyone not know what Ring City Placement (RCP) is, or what its done for? For posterity, I'll probably write a summary in a day or so.

A note about popping huts: Sometimes it can be a strategic decision as to whether you should pop a hut or not, because the contents of the hut are affected by your current game status: Military units, the number of cities you have, the difficulty level etc.

Check out This post

smackster said:
Somebody posted this on Apolyton and claimed it came from Firaxis.

On Goody Hut Discoveries
Here are the conditions:

Gold
--The tile must not have any type of resource or luxury on it

Maps
--Always available

Nothing
--Always available

Settler:
--Player must not have a settler (active or in production) or any unit with the Settle AI stategy.
--Player must have less cities than (TotalCities/NumActivePlayers).

Mercenaries (skilled warrior):
--There must be a unit availlable to the Barbarians as well as the player and that unit must be able to be built (or have been built) by some player in the game

Tech:
--Player must still be in Ancient Times

Barbarians:
--Player must not have Expansionist trait
--There must not be a city within a 1-tile radius
--Player must have at least 1 city
--Player must have at least 1 military unit

Whilst I don't know of anything specific on the probabilities of what you get out of goody huts, it is known that on lower difficulty levels you are more likely to get techs and less likely to get barbs.
There is some empirical evidence of the probabilities (unfortunately I lost the link for this one :blush: )
On Chieften you will get barbarians 5% of the time
On Warlord you will get barbarians 15% of the time
On Regent you will get barbarians 25% of the time
On Monarch you will get barbarians 35% of the time
On Emperor you will get barbarians 45% of the time
And we know that on Diety barbarians occur 55% of the time
On emperor, because everyone starts with the same number of settlers, we would not get a city out of the first hut, and we had a 45% chance (approx.) of getting barbs. :)

Other stuff:
I also liked your analysis of the worker irrigation options. That's exactly the sort of analysis that turns people into very good players! :thumbsup:

What we need to do is decide what we're going to do about producing settlers etc.

We are currently getting 3 shields / turn. We've accumulated 3 shields towards the pyramids, with pottery in 7 turns. Next turn we grow to size 2, and then we'll be producing 5 shields / turn. Therefore, by the time we have pottery, we'll have around 38 shields. Note that pottery might take an extra few turns, because when we grow next turn, the citizen will be unhappy, so we'll have to manage that with luxuries. We will have an extra GPT, so it might balance out though. :)

I actually start a spreadsheet at work with more in-depth analysis, but left it there. :( What I was trying to do was look at options around expanding as quickly as possible.

As I see it, we can either set Beijing up as a settler factory (of some description), or try to set one up elsewhere. In regards to the cows, they are quite a way away. They would need a bonus grassland for a good settler factory, which means a temple first. But how can we speed-up a settler factory in Beijing? Well, if the problem is getting water quickly enough, then to speed-up the process, why not build another worker? We can have one in 2 turns, and that will (roughly) halve the time to get the irrigation back. :) In the interim, we can build some warriors for crowd-control, and pre-build a granary 'just-in-time'. :)

I'll look at my spreadsheet in more detail tomorrow....
 
ainwood said:
Looks good Berrern! Did you use Dianthus' utility for this?
Thanks :)
I didn't use any utilities, only a Paint program.

ainwood said:
As I see it, we can either set Beijing up as a settler factory (of some description), or try to set one up elsewhere. In regards to the cows, they are quite a way away. They would need a bonus grassland for a good settler factory, which means a temple first. But how can we speed-up a settler factory in Beijing? Well, if the problem is getting water quickly enough, then to speed-up the process, why not build another worker? We can have one in 2 turns, and that will (roughly) halve the time to get the irrigation back. :) In the interim, we can build some warriors for crowd-control, and pre-build a granary 'just-in-time'. :)

You've got some good points here.
I guess it depends on how what style we'd like to play in; personally I'm a warmonger so I like to use my capital to build military units because of the low corruption. However, if we don't have any neighbors we can conquer in the early game, we might aswell use Beijing as a Settler Factory.

Now, if you take a close look at spot 1 on my map, it's also a good location for a Settler Factory - especially if the last fogged tile contains a bonus resource. #1 has exclusive access to 2 Forest tiles with Game, plus it shares 3 Game tiles with Beijing. I'm no good at setting up Settler Factories (something I'm hoping to be one of the many things we'll learn from this TDG :)), so I can't say it for sure - but isn't it possible to set-up 2 Settler Factories; in Beijing and city 2 (map location 1)? That would be awesome for expansion! Maybe someone with Factory experience can look into this?

As for the Worker suggestion: I like to get the second city up as soon as possible due to fast AI expansion, so maybe we should build a Settler first, then another Worker in Beijing?
 
Detlef Richter said:
Sorry FriendlyFire but i don't agree with your roading to the cows. This city is too far away for our third town.
We should start to build our inner circle in a range of 3-4 tiles. This means one 4 tiles to the NW and one on the small hill NE. Our opponent's didn't wait until we have build our big settler factory far to the N.
I've played a game at the same time and the AI was really fast in building citys. I tried trading techs and it works very fine, all AI's are in a friendly mind. But i had no luck (means no iron, no salpeter, no horses on a landmass with 25 citys). The friendly wikings came out and captured 3 citys on one turn and i defended each town with 1 warrior, 1 spearman and 1 archer.
So what i defnetly want to say is, that if we want to have a chance, we should go on a compromice between a big settler factory and a good infrastructure (means more citys, forces and worker).
I'm not so good playing civ because thats why i'm here. But i think we waste too much time to build a big settler factory.

Having a Settler factory or designating a city for settler making is well worth the effect. But must be made ASAP in order for the best advantage. It dosnt have to be PERFECT like ainwood suggested. You something cant set it up perfectly.

Go ahead and play out the RPS stratergy I wanna see it. As I play Outside in Strategy in almost every game. (I almost never find myself lacking a vital resource. Since carving out a large land mass early on is vital.)

My Plan is set up a chain of cities North as fast as possible then quickly build a wall of cities to deny the AI access to the interior
 
Cities don't stop the ai. If they want to take territory behind your 'wall of cities' they'll just march past your cities. The only way to stop them is to declare war and kill them. But the ai doesn't start encroaching, or threatening your territory, until they've used up their own space. Also, it can be beneficial to have the ai build cities that encroach on your space, because they'll be your cities in due course. That's fewer settlers you have to build, so you can build more units to take over their cities ....

Complex game, isn't it :eek: There's no right and wrong way to do some of these things :hmm:
 
FriendlyFire said:
My Plan is set up a chain of cities North as fast as possible then quickly build a wall of cities to deny the AI access to the interior

That's definitely not a bad plan, however, personally I'd prefer to build the 2 rings (well, at least the first ring) of cities as soon as possible, to get a fast-producing core up and running. Again, this decision depends much on what we discover in the north (and south).
 
One thing to note is that Beijing doesn't have to be the center of the ring. In fact, its almost looking like it is a silly place for a ring center, because there is not much to the south. It may be better for us to identify another location at distance 3 or 4 from beijing, and use that as the ring center, and later FP location. :)
 
Rings are not important round the FP. If you are going to move your palace then that's where the rings need to be.
 
AlanH said:
Cities don't stop the ai. If they want to take territory behind your 'wall of cities' they'll just march past your cities. The only way to stop them is to declare war and kill them. But the ai doesn't start encroaching, or threatening your territory, until they've used up their own space. Also, it can be beneficial to have the ai build cities that encroach on your space, because they'll be your cities in due course. That's fewer settlers you have to build, so you can build more units to take over their cities ....

Complex game, isn't it :eek: There's no right and wrong way to do some of these things :hmm:

Q how early do you begin your wars of conquest?
I feel unprepared to fight any wars short of Knights. Movement of Swordsman is just to slow. Not to mention the fact I havent finnish building up a strong base before launching a war.
 
I'm only just gettting to grips with this aspect myself. Horses are my early attacker of choice because of their speed and retreat capability. Swordsmen are stronger but slower. Either will do for an early war, and in GOTM 28 I went after the Persians with archers as I had no iron or horses.

It's really critical to get your core cities running fast and pumping out vet units. Produce 15 or 20 vet warriors or chariots and then upgrade them when you hook up your iron ot get HBR, and you can roll over a complete AI civ, maybe two. Early war is more difficult to set up at Emperor or Deity level though, just because the AI develops so fast.

There are advantages to warring in the early era. You are still in despotism, so war weariness is not a problem, and remember that the ai will typically be defending with regular spears (don't try this with Greeks BTW - they have hoplite defenders which are bad news). Units are cheap to build and replace. As you progress to knights you are up against pikes. Check out the combat calculator Sword vs spear has a slightly better chance of a kill than knight vs pike but both are around 75%.

A possible disadvantage of going to war early is that you may find you are auto razing a lot of AI cities because they haven't grown past pop 1 and they have not built any cultural improvements.
 
AlanH said:
Rings are not important round the FP. If you are going to move your palace then that's where the rings need to be.

:confused: Distance corruption is calculated based on the distance to the FP or Palace, whichever is closer. Rank corruption is a bit different, but unless the palace is miles from the rest of theempire, it doesn't matter. You can set up rings around the FP, then jump the palace away!
 
Rings are not about distance corruption, they are about rank corruption - making each city in the ring think none of the other ones in that ring are closer to the Palace (NOT the FP) than it is.

For cities around the FP the rank is the number of cities closer to the Palace than it is to the FP. So if you have rings around the Palace each city round the FP will have a rank equal to that of the Palace ring with a radius bigger than its distance from the FP. It doesn't have to be on a ring to achieve a particular rank, it only has to be in an annulus. There, that ought to confuse you sufficiently to give me time to sneak off to my coffin for a quick pint of O Rh+ and a bit of kip :p
 
FriendlyFire said:
Q how early do you begin your wars of conquest?

If I find neighbors before (or around) the time my first Settler is built, I always go for early wars. I then build Barracks in my capital - and start spitting out units. After having gathered about 8-12 Swordsmen, a few Archers, and some Catapults, I launch my attack :)

The easiest time to wage war is in the AA, as you have the Swordsman with an attack value of 3, while the AI defenders' defense value is 2. Even thought moving the bastards is slow, it's definitely worth it!

By the way, we need to agree on what to do next, so please shout out any opinions!

My suggestion is to keep exploring the north with our two Warriors, and build a Settler in Beijing. Then build a Warrior for exploring the south, as there might be a lot of land there. At this point we should know where we want our Settler Factory, and we can then decide the build order based on that.
As for the Settler, I suggest building a city in spot #1.

What to research next? If we discover rival civs before Pottery is finished, I reckon we should go for Bronze Working -> Iron Working. Otherwise I'd beeline towards Literacy, to get the Great Library, which will enable us to set science to 0% for a long time, resulting in a lot of income - which can be used to buy more techs after the discovery of Education :)
 
I also think the #1 city marked is the best place for our second city but I don't agree we should build the great library! Think of all those shields that could be used for swordsmen to conquer the AI! Even better if a nearby civ builds the GL, we can steal it and get all those techs in one turn.
If we commit to a great wonder so early on, we will be shooting ourselves in the foot as our military will be weaker and the AI is more likely to demand tribute and declare war on us before we are ready.
I have almost beaten my wonder addiction after reading that great strategy article (can't remember the link!). I suggest we all read it and digest it before we play too far into this game.
Just my 2p

Mabellino

PS Sorry I've been a bit quiet recently, SGOTM2 has been very demanding on my time!
 
AlanH said:
Rings are not about distance corruption, they are about rank corruption - making each city in the ring think none of the other ones in that ring are closer to the Palace (NOT the FP) than it is.

For cities around the FP the rank is the number of cities closer to the Palace than it is to the FP. So if you have rings around the Palace each city round the FP will have a rank equal to that of the Palace ring with a radius bigger than its distance from the FP. It doesn't have to be on a ring to achieve a particular rank, it only has to be in an annulus. There, that ought to confuse you sufficiently to give me time to sneak off to my coffin for a quick pint of O Rh+ and a bit of kip :p
You're right of course!

This is in reference to Qitai's discovery that distance to the nearest capital / FP is used for distance corruption, but for ranking, cities closer to the FP than to the capital are ranked not against other cities nearby, but against cities that are closer to the capital.

Generating a ring around another city is not a bad idea, but its used as a site for a prospective palace jump. And I do think second-teir rings around an FP do have their place, if your capital is still in the general vicinity.

At others:

There is some good discussion here, but I don't think we have reached a consensus. A couple of points: The map is 80% water, so there is less land than normal for everyone. It is likely that the AI isn't too far away -> another 5 or so tiles into the fog with the northern warrior, and we <might> run into the AI, and if there are expansionist civs, we may see scouts soon (at least).

We really need to know how much room we have to expand before we get too wound-up about building wonders and early wars. Whilst its good to plan ahead and keep options open, our initial priority is getting early expansion. We can exploit the fact that the AI doesn't really go hard-out to war until it has run out of room to our advantage: we can note this and decide when to stop expanding and when to start attacking based on what resources we have available, the proximity of the AI and who the AI actually is.

As for tech, its also worthwhile knowing who your neighbours are. We can choose to go the shared research option, where we guess what the AI is researching, and do something different, either fast or slow (40 turn gambits). We can save money for upgrades, or go for fast techs.

Our only real question at the moment should be: Do we build a settler now, or a worker or granary for a settler factory?
 
I agree with berrern and mabellino but i would go one tile more to NW for the first settler. This gonna be a 4 RCP placement and both towns had more chances for growing (specially over size 6).

@ FriendlyFire: I didn't tested this strategy but i think if you go too fast away from your main lands (around your capitol) it's a hard way to protect such far away citys. And small landmass means that the AI's go early on war to cover more lands. Without enough roads and horses you have no chance to protect this citys.
 
Back
Top Bottom