The Emperor Masters' Challenge 3 (on Warlords)

[aelf]

Just to clarify, when I meant this might become like the first Emperor Challenge, I was referring to the situation on our own continent. I'm aware that with agressive AI on, the likelihood of war on the other continent is higher so they might not be able to out-tech us that much.

I guess what gets me down right now is the fact that we can't get open borders because our neighbours start off annoyed. I don't care so much that the land is barren or that Monty is Monty. I want open borders at least with one neighbour until we get Astronomy, and that might not be possible as it is.

And when we do establish contact with the other continent, we might indeed find one torn by war. In that case, we might still not be able to get many people to trade with as we might be forced to choose whose side to be on. Just another scary thought.

 

[Zophos]

If it helps make the decision any easier, the aggressive AI option seems (from inspection of the code in the Warlords SDK) to have three effects:

1. Causes the AI to designate more areas as 'massing' areas (as opposed to 'offensive', 'defensive', etc. - not sure what effect this actually has).
2. Increases the likelihood that the AI will declare war (technically, reduces the chance that a randomized 'no war' decision will be taken when the AI thinks a war is advantageous).
3. Adds a silent -2 modifier to AI relations with human players only.

So, yeah, you might want to restart with that option turned off - it's going to make your experiment extremely difficult to pull off under the best of circumstances.

 

[aelf]

3. Adds a silent -2 modifier to AI relations with human players only.

Wow. That really defeats the purported reason for playing with aggressive AI on. I guess I should've checked out the SDK before deciding, or at least waited for somebody to do so

I just did a test to try and understand how it works in relation to our current neighbours. I started a fast-track game with Monty and Caesar as neighbours. In that game, Caesar's attitude becomes cautious after a while and open borders is possible. Once you have a certain score, it seems (no other apparent reason because there was no peace bonus or anything yet). The score I have at that point is not very high, though, and only about half of his. Monty, expectedly, remains annoyed.

I really don't know what to decide right now. Knowing that aggressive AI does not mean they start disapproving of each other throws the decision into some (more) serious doubt. What's the point, other than making our lives unnecessarily difficult?

On the other hand, it's probably good training for Immortal.

 

[voek]

I already didn't understand why you changed the settings this much: ice age, normal speed!, agressive AI and mission once again (Trade game).

Tough map indeed. If you want to continue is your own choise.

When thinking of settling I would settle the far location first since it secures land and the gems will help against the higher upkeep. About city location A, why don't you move it 3 tiles East on the hill capturing the fish leaving room for another city more west from the original A location. Well it's gonna be war for sure. The only good thing is the other AI also have lesser starting loactions and will fight each other more often. We know this seriously hampers their development. This is also the reason why I consider agressive AI more easier in a lot of settings. I seem to always be in a fight anaway, so there is no difference. The only good thing is they fight some more, right?

 

[aelf]

Well, I don't feel that any of those different settings are potentially game-stopping, except aggressive AI. And since three of you have expressed confidence that aggressive AI might even be a good thing, my opinion on that may be wrong.

Anyway, my test game had an encouraging result so Caesar might just agree to trade. If that happens in our game we should be alright.

 

[Winston Hughes]

Hey, aelf, stop all that negative talk. Sure this is tough, and the aggressive AI may prove to be your undoing, but glory awaits for one who can take on a challenge like this and win.

I for one have confidence that with your experience and tactical nous, as well as the expert advice of your loyal followers here on civfanatics, this bastard of a start can be overcome.

And if the conditions aren't right for trading? Well then let's make them right!

ps. This was a response to your previous post, not the "we should be alright" one. Damn it takes me a long time to write a post!

 

[DrJambo]

Wow, interesting stuff from the SDK! Whilst the silent -2 modifier for humans only is a bit of a blow the second change:

Increases the likelihood that the AI will declare war (technically, reduces the chance that a randomized 'no war' decision will be taken when the AI thinks a war is advantageous).

...would seem to make up for that a little, particularly as this appears to be generic to all civs, AI included.

As aelf has already found, it is possible for relations to improve and trades to be brokered, so I would stick with it for a while before throwing in the towel so to speak. If it does nothing else, at least this game will serve as a good demonstration of how Aggressive AI operates.

I imagine that founding and/or joining the appropriate religious sects will be paramount given the -2 modifier and aelf's mission to pursue a trade route based strategy. In the other Emperor challenges, warring with the nearest civs was always the order of the day. However, you might find with this game that in order to maintain good relations for trading you have to pay even more attention to how each of the civs relates to another on the foreign advisor screen.

 

[patagonia]

Thinking diplomatically, whilst having two neighbours to trade with will clearly be better financially than one, it's probably worth considering which look more attractive out of the Aztec and Roman lands and playing at triangle-diplomacy with the other one (although any religious spread may end up being what prompts you to take sides).

If "years of peace" is likely to thaw Caesar's frosty facade after a while, you're right that trade with him should be possible, and given how much Monty likes to demand tribute, ceding to his demands should buy you some positive relation modifiers with the Aztecs assuming they stay off your back until currency/alphabet (which, admittedly, may be a bit much to hope for).

 

[lilnev]

I used to turn Agressive AI on all the time. At least Caesar will trade with you, Monty probably only after some tribute. If it's just the three of you, I don't think you can keep them both happy for long, so I agree with patagonia -- choose one friend and one victim.
And I'm changing my vote to location B. Get them gems.

peace,
lilnev

 

[Lucky Charms]

Well, if you are to choose one friend, make sure it is Julius Caesar, he is far more trustworthy if you befriend him than Montezuma. Also, as I said before, I recommend site B.

 

[asabahi]

I believe the saying is that every battle plan, no matter how perfect it is, is scraped as soon as boots hit the ground. So the situation has changed and it seems that going the trading route might not be way to go, at least not for the moment. What benefits you will get by having extra trade routes without astronemy will be insigninficant probably. So conquer the continent and then run a trade economy later.

 

[illram]

Long term, I would try to either
1) eradicate Julius and Monty as quickly as possible or
2) try get to the other continent before they do; adopt the dominant religion over there and make friends so we dont have negative points for beating up Julius and Monty. -2 is easy to overcome with religious positives.

Dont give up! We're going for domination anyways, which isnt exactly the greatest for making friends.

 

[Admiral Kutzov]

I'm sticking with the gems.

Thinking diplomatically, whilst having two neighbours to trade with will clearly be better financially than one, it's probably worth considering which look more attractive out of the Aztec and Roman lands and playing at triangle-diplomacy with the other one (although any religious spread may end up being what prompts you to take sides).

The religious spread probably should determine whether jules or monty is the first target; that brothers and sisters of the faith is a strong + given enough time.

With regard to the tech, maybe iron before horses - isn't knowing if and where jules has iron going to go a long away in the diplomatic decision making?

 

[aelf]

I believe the saying is that every battle plan, no matter how perfect it is, is scraped as soon as boots hit the ground. So the situation has changed and it seems that going the trading route might not be way to go, at least not for the moment. What benefits you will get by having extra trade routes without astronemy will be insigninficant probably. So conquer the continent and then run a trade economy later.

That can only mean not building the ToA or the Great Lighthouse. I disagree, as always, with abandoning our mission. We can fail, but we will never know whether we can succeed if we stop. I've reasoned that Civ is only a game. If we lose, so what? We can always play another game. Now, if only life was like that too

I'm in favour of befriending Caesar as I agree he's far more trustworthy. And the AI doesn't exploit praets very well, so I don't think we should be too worried about that.

The vote seems to be overwhelmingly for settling site B. However, this time, I have to disagree. Two of our warriors are still out exploring, and there's only one warrior defending our empire right now. Settling site B so early with Monty and barbs around might prove scuicidal. We should at least wait until we have the Great Wall and our two explorers return to help with defense (if they can). We may have to get Archery before IW as the latter takes time to research, and we may not have the luxury of time. I think what I'll do is settle 1W of site A for now. That way, we can also get started on the Great Lighthouse in our production city sooner.

Anyway, I see quite a number of new faces in this Emperor Challenge. Welcome, all of you Let's just keep the spirit of discussion open, okay? Sometimes I may sound a bit curt or I may disagree with your opinions, but don't take it badly. I want to listen to you. And sometimes I'm just typing after a long and hard day. So bear with me and let's keep enjoying ourselves, alright?

 

[DrJambo]

Yeah, don't deviate from the original mission and I agree that going for plot B could be a little far from your capital. One can always live in hope that the AI won't have settled on it by the time you have another settler available. Failing that just take it form the AI by force!

Maybe go for plot A, but 2 tiles to the left to encompass the fish resource too. Looking forward to the next update.

 

[asabahi]

Well aelf I did not mean to abandon your strategy, merely saying that the benefits of a trade route economy are not going to be significant until later. Therefore perhaps concentrate the build order for your next city or 2 to get ready for monty. You also said that this is a game that if we lose the game it is not that big of a deal. I agree, but why than not settle in site B when you said that an overwhelming majority are voting for that to be the site of the second city? If you are asking for input and you recieve input, are you going to ignore the input given. And using your reasoning, which I agree with, if it does not work out and we lose, so what. I guess its your thread, we are just living in it.

 

[tuckerthecat]

Hmm I didnt know the goal of this challenge was domination, I think you either need to change win goals or change the trade route gambit to something else because they really dont work well together. Trade routes get better with time ( think of them as cottages ), the longer the peace lasts the better the trade routes get. If you are going domination you will be pissing off most of the AI's eventually & your trade routes will be meager.

 

[aelf]

Maybe go for plot A, but 2 tiles to the left to encompass the fish resource too. Looking forward to the next update.

Someone mentioned saving the fish for another city on the west coast. With this kind of map, I'm inclined to agree with that idea.

asabahi, what I said was in the context of a grand strategy. On that level, things are harder to predict and there's no saying that we will certainly fail. However, we are talking about an immediate decision, where things are clearer and conclusions can be more easily drawn. And, even though it doesn't matter if we fail trying, that doesn't mean we should jeopardize our game in any way. My take on the matter is settling site B right now is imprudent considering the situation.

I'm not ignoring the input given to me. I come to any decision only after weighing all that has been said. But ultimately, I have to do what is best for the game. As much as I dislike going my own way, on rare occassions, I may feel that it's in the interest of the game not to follow the consensus on a certain thing. I'm sorry. Please understand

 

[aelf]

Hmm I didnt know the goal of this challenge was domination, I think you either need to change win goals or change the trade route gambit to something else because they really dont work well together. Trade routes get better with time ( think of them as cottages ), the longer the peace lasts the better the trade routes get. If you are going domination you will be pissing off most of the AI's eventually & your trade routes will be meager.

You do have a point. This occurred to me too. However, after thinking a little more, I thought that domination does not necessarily mean we have to fight the whole world. It just means we have to take sides, which we probably have to do anyway. Let's say the other continent is split into 2 factions of 2 civs each. We turn on our friend Caesar after Monty is dead, ally ourselves with the faction on the other continent that hates him, and invade the other faction to get domination.

Well, at worst we can fall back on space victory. Domination is an aim, not our mission.

 

[dutchfire]

Well, at worst we can fall back on space victory.

And get a diplomatic victory out of nowwhere