This is embarrassing.

[Roundman]

What a great start- look at all of those Cows, with an immediately accessible luxury as well! And then there's a cluster of wheat immediately north of London. You could create a hell of a core with that type of terrain. Are there horses and iron nearby?

 

[Buttercup]

No idea, I just tried a few starts out to get a food bonus near a river to provide the screenies to prove a point, I had no intention of playing that game out and didn't play it how I would have played it beyond proving a point.

I find that on Archipelagos, the better the start the more likely you are to have other AIs nagging at your heels. In that one you can see the purples are on top of me from the start. On Archipelago, playing a Seafaring civ, it's normally preferable to start with your own island, from a chilled gaming perspective, so seeing a start like that 9 times out of 10 will result in being crowded by rivals.

I'm not a huge fan of constantly reloading starts in order to find the best location possible and 9 times out of 10 something a bit less exciting at the start results in a better island overall. Difficult to describe properly but you get the gist. That one time when you do get an amazing start on a big nice island though, those are fun games indeed

 

[jkk]

All right. Newest game, year is 1500 BC, Ottomans, huge map, 70% sea, middle climate/topography settings, restless barbs, AI below average aggression, Regent I think. Looked like a good setup area at start, of course at that point I didn't know where the sea was. Launched immediate plans to encircle capital with cities. Then saw a three-cow area further east and figured, if I don't get that I'm an idiot. Have met two neighbors, one trade. Researched CB first since was cheap, traded for Alphabet, then since Writing would take an eon anyway, decided on 9.1.0 for allocation. Cities not growing quite fast enough to pump settlers, so granaried the first two.

I accept that the best way to enable good feedback is to play a little, then upload a save. Done so. Love to know what mistakes I'm currently making that I can correct, and which ones are irreversible but that I should absorb. I realize I won't get fatcrosses until I get Libraries hosing my culture out to the world, but I should think in terms of what each city's fatcross will have.

 

[justanick]

Have met two neighbors, one trade. Researched CB first since was cheap, traded for Alphabet, then since Writing would take an eon anyway, decided on 9.1.0 for allocation.

That may have been a minor mistake. For Writing in 40 turns you need an average of 8 beakers per turn, at 100% and with changing the taxman into scientist you have 17 beakers per turn. Donnot underestimate the growth of commerce. Writing in 50 turns is best left if you start writing at turn zero.

Cities not growing quite fast enough to pump settlers, so granaried the first two.

That was a major mistake. The proper logic is opposite to what you did. If growth is low build settler first, the standard logic does fully apply.

For the standard logic to not apply your food surpluss must be bigger than 2. More precisely it must be higher than the food surpluas of thw town that a settler before granary would found. If that is 3 or higher, than delaying a settler by building granary is still a major mistake.

Also if building a granary you should build enough workers so that the higher city size can be utilized properly. This means that building settlers is delayed by granary and worker, but it will pay of. By building settlers to keep keep size size below 3 one properly improved tile per town does suffice, with granary it should not be less than 4. This greatly increases your need for workers and thus slows down your expansion.

Your capital should have gotten the granary that it did got. That however should have happened by chopping forest on the game and irrigating the tile for +4 food instead of +2.

I realize I won't get fatcrosses until I get Libraries hosing my culture out to the world, but I should think in terms of what each city's fatcross will have.

That is the second major mistake. The best tiles you could have reached are unused because the are outside your culture, still your workers have improved them. I strongly advise to start from the beginning. It is much better to found towns that later will be abandoned than to leave food surpluss effective tiles unused.

 

[jkk]

That may have been a minor mistake. For Writing in 40 turns you need an average of 8 beakers per turn, at 100% and with changing the taxman into scientist you have 17 beakers per turn. Donnot underestimate the growth of commerce. Writing in 50 turns is best left if you start writing at turn zero.

Well, I began without Alphabet, so I couldn't start Writing on turn zero. I experimented with the taxman/scientist and found that nothing I did caused the discovery of Writing to take less turns except research at 90%, which reduced it from about 50 turns to more like 46. That did not seem worth it. What is more, that city would soon be producing settlers as fast as I can do so, so the lone scientist wouldn't last anyway. He would be sent off with a pack on his back with the other pioneers, and expected to farm.

That was a major mistake. The proper logic is opposite to what you did. If growth is low build settler first, the standard logic does fully apply.

For the standard logic to not apply your food surpluss must be bigger than 2. More precisely it must be higher than the food surpluas of thw town that a settler before granary would found. If that is 3 or higher, than delaying a settler by building granary is still a major mistake.

Except that the capital was not going to reach pop 3 in time to build the settler. In fact, it was taking long enough that I figured the granary was a good way to fill the time and that it would improve the settler production situation shortly.

Also if building a granary you should build enough workers so that the higher city size can be utilized properly. This means that building settlers is delayed by granary and worker, but it will pay of. By building settlers to keep keep size size below 3 one properly improved tile per town does suffice, with granary it should not be less than 4. This greatly increases your need for workers and thus slows down your expansion.

Okay. I see the logic on the second city, the one with the three cows (I built the city atop one, two are future fatcross members). On the first, I don't understand. If it wasn't going to reach pop 3 in time to build the first settler, or even very close, what to build? Another warrior or two?

Your capital should have gotten the granary that it did got. That however should have happened by chopping forest on the game and irrigating the tile for +4 food instead of +2.

That would have built the granary sooner, and maybe one chop would have avoided wasted turns. I assume you mean I should have chopped the square that has deer?

That is the second major mistake. The best tiles you could have reached are unused because the are outside your culture, still your workers have improved them. I strongly advise to start from the beginning. It is much better to found towns that later will be abandoned than to leave food surpluss effective tiles unused.

Okay, so the siting of my second city (Threecowville, aka Edrine) is off by one tile; should have parked it where it could use all three cows from the start. Got that.

Do you think I have harmed myself irreparably? Other than the major mistakes, do you think it's a decent start, or is this one where you take one look and say, "No point continuing--the mistakes are so large and so early that they stunt the remainder of the game."?

 

[justanick]

Well, I began without Alphabet, so I couldn't start Writing on turn zero.

Therefore you should not try Writing in 50 turns. 50 turns research really only has this one relevant applycation, at least on regent and probably on emperor aswell. Above emperor the logic may differ as techs become increasingly more expensive.

What is more, that city would soon be producing settlers as fast as I can do so, so the lone scientist wouldn't last anyway. He would be sent off with a pack on his back with the other pioneers, and expected to farm.

This i donnot understand. Did you actually use a scientist expert? You should not. During the settling phase food is everything.

Except that the capital was not going to reach pop 3 in time to build the settler. In fact, it was taking long enough that I figured the granary was a good way to fill the time and that it would improve the settler production situation shortly.

This is what warriors and wealth are for. Untill you have say 4 warriors for exploration you do urgently need warroirs, so this works perfectly together. Wealth can be used for those few turns of production that donnot suffice for a whole warrior without delaying the settler.

As for this concrete capital however a granary first is the obvious choice. Whether a warrior before the granary was sensible in the sense that growth would not be delayed i did no check.

Okay. I see the logic on the second city, the one with the three cows (I built the city atop one, two are future fatcross members).

I had to reload the save because i did not believe that you actually settled on cow. Never do that. The food from the city tile does not vary, therefore (in principle) it is best to settle on tiles with as little food as possible like desert or plains. Also hills can be acceptable.

Had you placed Edrine 8 of its current position you could have had a food surpluss of 8 at size 3 during despotism and 11 once despotism penalty does not apply. This would have been a monster settler factory. Your main problem would have been too much food.

To properily utilize so much food you would have needed to found 2 towns, that together would have had a total food surpluss of 10 and with granaries in both could by alternating the use of the third cow every turn grow each every second turn. Thus 2 towns could produce 2 settlers every 4 turns. This is extreme. This would also have justified to build settler first in the capital, but of course you could not have known that beforehand, thus the recommandation for granary first stands. Everything else is cheating.

I assume you mean I should have chopped the square that has deer?

Yes. Deer has the same effect as wheat. 2 food from grassland + 2 food from deer + 1 food from irrigation makes +5 food prior to despotism penalty and 4 after it. Other forests might have been chopped aswell. You do want to use tiles at river due to the extra commerce generated by rivers. Also under every ~seventh forest on grassland there is actually a bonus grassland with the extra shield. Those are of some value aswell.

Do you think I have harmed myself irreparably?

Yes and by a huge margin.

Other than the major mistakes, do you think it's a decent start, or is this one where you take one look and say, "No point continuing--the mistakes are so large and so early that they stunt the remainder of the game."?

It is far from that. The waste your caused is huge(in fact abandoning Edirne is reasonable), but the starting position is great and it is only regent. If this were Deity instead winning this game with some ease would be possible, too.

I have a bias against continuing games that have serioslyy underperformed so far. Trying the same starting position at emperor might be a good choice. The knowledge of the map and the extremely benefical starting position would outweight the higher difficulty.

 

[jkk]

Therefore you should not try Writing in 50 turns. 50 turns research really only has this one relevant applycation, at least on regent and probably on emperor aswell. Above emperor the logic may differ as techs become increasingly more expensive.

Okay. In my situation, how would you have researched? Ottomans don't start with Alphabet. Would it be as simple as lock onto Alphabet and research it to completion? And do you favor the 9.1.0 approach in that case (90% tax, 10% research)?

This i donnot understand. Did you actually use a scientist expert? You should not. During the settling phase food is everything.

Use, no. Experiment, yes. Edrine (I must go into the city name file and fix that spelling; it is and always has been wrong) had just grown to pop 4, leaving three content, one unhappy. I had not yet roaded to the incense near my capital (which I'm guessing you would consider a poor prioritization), so Edrine would have gone into revolt. Making #4 a scientist did not change the tech completion turn, so I decided tax was better than entertainer. Plus, I knew that I'd soon be building settlers, so it would be a temporary situation.

This is what warriors and wealth are for. Untill you have say 4 warriors for exploration you do urgently need warroirs, so this works perfectly together. Wealth can be used for those few turns of production that donnot suffice for a whole warrior without delaying the settler.

Okay, I get this. In my limited experience, warriors are also necessary for preventing barbs from punking on one's workers.

As for this concrete capital however a granary first is the obvious choice. Whether a warrior before the granary was sensible in the sense that growth would not be delayed i did no check.

A warrior was the first thing I built there, and I sent it out to explore.

I had to reload the save because i did not believe that you actually settled on cow. Never do that. The food from the city tile does not vary, therefore (in principle) it is best to settle on tiles with as little food as possible like desert or plains. Also hills can be acceptable.

I see. Note taken.

Had you placed Edrine 8 of its current position you could have had a food surpluss of 8 at size 3 during despotism and 11 once despotism penalty does not apply. This would have been a monster settler factory. Your main problem would have been too much food.

By 8 do you mean directly north of it? That's what I was thinking in my previous post.

To properily utilize so much food you would have needed to found 2 towns, that together would have had a total food surpluss of 10 and with granaries in both could by alternating the use of the third cow every turn grow each every second turn. Thus 2 towns could produce 2 settlers every 4 turns. This is extreme. This would also have justified to build settler first in the capital, but of course you could not have known that beforehand, thus the recommandation for granary first stands. Everything else is cheating.

True. Some decisions get made not knowing what else is out there, and one repairs them if one can, lives with them if not. But I definitely should have put Edrine where it could use all three cows from the start.

Yes. Deer has the same effect as wheat. 2 food from grassland + 2 food from deer + 1 food from irrigation makes +5 food prior to despotism penalty and 4 after it. Other forests might have been chopped aswell. You do want to use tiles at river due to the extra commerce generated by rivers. Also under every ~seventh forest on grassland there is actually a bonus grassland with the extra shield. Those are of some value aswell.

My normal habit has been to leave 1-2 forests where practical in future fatcross range, unless the city has mineable hills or mountains. Just thinking ahead.

The waste your caused is huge(in fact abandoning Edirne is reasonable), but the starting position is great and it is only regent. If this were Deity instead winning this game with some ease would be possible, too.

I think it's possible to find the game seed and restart. I might do that. Provided I limit the ways in which I take advantage of what I learned before, it might be fair.

I have a bias against continuing games that have serioslyy underperformed so far. Trying the same starting position at emperor might be a good choice. The knowledge of the map and the extremely benefical starting position would outweight the higher difficulty.

I'll think about that. It looked like a really good starting position, especially as it unfolded that I would not have bordering enemies to the north. Sparse resources, but cities could be placed to use them for some good.

 

[Buttercup]

That screenshot has really exposed how little you know about the game and just how much information you need to get yourself going to justanick's level of discussion. I think the eternal phrase "You can't learn to run before you've learnt how to walk" is bang on the money here.

Sometimes, or usually, people start asking questions as they struggle to convert from Warlord to Regent or from Emperor to Diety, and they'll already have played enough games to know some basic do's and don'ts. It appears that you haven't really played that much at all and want instant gratification on every little aspect of the game from talking to people on-line. There's simply too much happening in every game for that to make sense.

You're at the level where you're just roading what looks nice, regardless of it's location or actual use, wondering why you're not getting Techs in a timely fashion. You're at the level where you don't even know the difference between a Forest/Game square and a Grassland/Game square. And then you're asking for help from people who think they're advising you on how to move to Emperor/Diety level, when that's not what you need, what you need is, firstly, just lots more playtime and, secondly, lots and lots of "Quick Answers to N00bie Questions".

Cheiftan difficulty is the learner's difficulty level. On that level there's little point playing to win, as it's so easy it's silly, but there you can have plenty of time to just experiment with how to build cities up and see the difference all the different squares have and test yourself with different starting locations.

I'm sure justanick and others don't mind teaching you everything from scratch, but I suspect it wont be the highlight of their week

 

[jkk]

It appears that you haven't really played that much at all and want instant gratification on every little aspect of the game from talking to people on-line. There's simply too much happening in every game for that to make sense.

And if that is how you view me, then I respect your choice not to offer me any insight.

You happen to be wrong. In fact, I'm examining my weaknesses and errors, and appreciating whatever help anyone shares. No one is obligated to do so, but what I am doing is taking seriously the guidance I do receive. Attention to instruction is a form of respect; you have never yet seen me debate. Rather than bungle ahead this time, and make compounded errors, I am responding to guidance that said I should post early saves so that early flaws could be identified and corrected. It was wise and I heeded it. However, if you don't buy my self-perception, no problem. You owe me nothing and I ask nothing of you. Anyone who offers guidance is a volunteer and has my thanks.

 

[Buttercup]

What a great start- look at all of those Cows, with an immediately accessible luxury as well! And then there's a cluster of wheat immediately north of London. You could create a hell of a core with that type of terrain. Are there horses and iron nearby?

Just to go on from what I was saying before, don't get too distracted by all the rivers and cows and luxuries you saw in the previous screenies. In my current game I, again, replicated the same start - Bronze Working to Writing in 49 turns, got the Colossus just after (instead of before) and secured Code of Laws and Philosophy in just 24 more turns (didn't get sidetracked by Masonry as my Capital has a very low Shield output) with a much more normal/average start position:





I wouldn't go for the 20k with this start and there's no Horses. But, as per usual, a slightly less interesting start at least gave me my own island (but at the cost of slower Tech as the two rivals I met only supplied 3 minor Techs on my journey to the Medieval era, interestingly, neither went the Mysticism route).

 

[Buttercup]

And if that is how you view me, then I respect your choice not to offer me any insight.

You happen to be wrong. In fact, I'm examining my weaknesses and errors, and appreciating whatever help anyone shares. No one is obligated to do so, but what I am doing is taking seriously the guidance I do receive. Attention to instruction is a form of respect; you have never yet seen me debate. Rather than bungle ahead this time, and make compounded errors, I am responding to guidance that said I should post early saves so that early flaws could be identified and corrected. It was wise and I heeded it. However, if you don't buy my self-perception, no problem. You owe me nothing and I ask nothing of you. Anyone who offers guidance is a volunteer and has my thanks.

My post contained plenty of advice, you're just choosing not to listen because you consider it a slight that you're at a seriously inept level of play. You can indeed ask whatever questions you like, my post didn't say otherwise, it just offered advice on how best to proceed before wasting people's time on stuff you're nowhere near ready for.

 

[jkk]

My post contained plenty of advice, you're just choosing not to listen because you consider it a slight that you're at a seriously inept level of play. You can indeed ask whatever questions you like, my post didn't say otherwise, it just offered advice on how best to proceed before wasting people's time on stuff you're nowhere near ready for.

Whatever projections comfort you. If anyone thinks it a waste of time, I assume that person will choose not to waste time. I have never pretended that I was at even a medium level of play.

 

[justanick]

Okay. In my situation, how would you have researched? Ottomans don't start with Alphabet. Would it be as simple as lock onto Alphabet and research it to completion? And do you favor the 9.1.0 approach in that case (90% tax, 10% research)?

I would have go with 100% or possibly zero research if that seemed convenient for trade, but that really is too exotic, so for now stay with 100% research. What project i would have chosen i donnot know. With the knowledge that i have from your savegame iron working seems like a good choice. There are 2 civs nearby that need to be eliminated and carthage with its numidian mercenaries is a tough nut to crack. It might be sensible to prioritise warfare at the expense of getting republic early. The sensible degree depends on circumstances.

I had not yet roaded to the incense near my capital (which I'm guessing you would consider a poor prioritization), so Edrine would have gone into revolt.

Before having say 10 towns connecting luxuries has (near) no priority. Revolts can be avoided by low city size, military police or luxury rate if necessary. But during despotism warriors for military police are the key ingredient. They are very cheap and chances are they save you more than 10 gold each so you get faster to republic which then makes them somewhat obsolete. Disbanding them to get 2 shields each for builing workers during anarchy can be convenient, but some warriors may still be needed as deterrence.

Okay, I get this. In my limited experience, warriors are also necessary for preventing barbs from punking on one's workers.

At higher settings barbs may overpower your warriors. At regent you have a 200% bonus against barbs, at emperor it will be 50%, at deity zero.

By 8 do you mean directly north of it? That's what I was thinking in my previous post.

Yes, 8 etc. refer to the numblock, a convenient method of moving units. But 7 is really the better choice. It can be reached 1 turn earlier and makes a convenient position for the double settler factory i mentioned. Being able to use all 3 cows from the start is the wrong priority because anything between 5 and 10 food surpluss does not really fit well with 10 food per growth with granary. The third cow gets into culture with the second town of the settler factory anyway.

My normal habit has been to leave 1-2 forests where practical in future fatcross range, unless the city has mineable hills or mountains. Just thinking ahead.

Having one unused tile with 2+ shields to use during growth(production is calculated after growth) is convenient. But until you have reached city size forests are not very convenient for regular use unless you lack shields for aqueducts. Also keep in mind that once you have engineering you can plant forests. Usually that will be soon enough.

That screenshot has really exposed how little you know about the game and just how much information you need to get yourself going to justanick's level of discussion. I think the eternal phrase "You can't learn to run before you've learnt how to walk" is bang on the money here.

That may be true to some degree, but i disagree on your conclusion to try chieftain. jkk has won some regent games and in my opinion lifting him to emperor is very doable. Emperor is the level to learn the basics. On chieftain and regent AI is so weak that one gets used to too many bad habits. Emperor is easy enough to learn but challenging enought not to learn too much wrong.

I vaguely recall we had a similar argument before.

 

[tjs282]

At regent AI cost factor is 10, therefore the tech costs only 320 beakers. 3200 beakers would be the costs for AI cost factor 1 at Beyond Sid. There getting below 50 turns per tech is sort of an exception. Maybe we should rather limit us to cases of the normal degree of insanity.

Yeah, I realised the next morning that I'd forgotten to divide by the CF, so my beaker-costs were all out by a factor of 10. Seriously embarrassed about that. but by that point the text had been up long enough for everyone to see it...

So I've left it in place as a testament to my incompetence, but struck it all out. Good thing I don't design bridges for a living, isn't it...?

Buttercup, I apologise for my patronising tone. If Writing costs 320 beakers, at 13 BPT you should indeed get it in well under 50T, so now I've no clue what's happening in your game(s).

 

[Lanzelot]

Buttercup, I apologise for my patronising tone. If Writing costs 320 beakers, at 13 BPT you should indeed get it in well under 50T, so now I've no clue what's happening in your game(s).

Well, even though you got the numbers wrong by a factor of 10, I think you were not too far from the truth?! If we assume that research went with like 5 beakers per turn for the first 30 turns, there are still 170 beakers left. So with 13bpt, we would still need 14 turns to finish it, giving a total of 44 turns.

True, it wouldn't explain it on Regent, but perhaps on Monarch: on Huge, Writing is so expensive, that right from the start it can't be done in less than 50 turns. (Only later, when more towns are up and running.)

BTW jkk, regarding the question "when to build" settlers: this is one of the very few points where justanick and me have a different opinion. (You may find other threads where we have already discussed this in detail... ) I think that it is usually better to first let towns grow, before spitting out a settler, at least the fully productive first-ring towns. Of course there are exceptions, e.g. if a nearby food- or lux-resource needs to be utilized asap. Or when playing on a small map on Sid level (where all available town spots may already be taken by the time you finish a granary... )

 

[jkk]

BTW jkk, regarding the question "when to build" settlers: this is one of the very few points where justanick and me have a different opinion. (You may find other threads where we have already discussed this in detail... ) I think that it is usually better to first let towns grow, before spitting out a settler, at least the fully productive first-ring towns. Of course there are exceptions, e.g. if a nearby food- or lux-resource needs to be utilized asap. Or when playing on a small map on Sid level (where all available town spots may already be taken by the time you finish a granary... )

Given that you both agree on most other things, though, what that tells me is that the difference in advantage between your method and justanick's is likely to be pretty slight, and like you say, could vary with map size/properties, difficulty, and the many other situational factors that make the game new ever time. Probably the skill lies in knowing what is best for the given situation, and doing the right thing. At Sid level, I imagine it could be the difference between a win and a loss.

 

[Buttercup]

Buttercup, I apologise for my patronising tone. If Writing costs 320 beakers, at 13 BPT you should indeed get it in well under 50T, so now I've no clue what's happening in your game(s).

&

Well, even though you got the numbers wrong by a factor of 10, I think you were not too far from the truth?! If we assume that research went with like 5 beakers per turn for the first 30 turns, there are still 170 beakers left. So with 13bpt, we would still need 14 turns to finish it, giving a total of 44 turns.

True, it wouldn't explain it on Regent, but perhaps on Monarch: on Huge, Writing is so expensive, that right from the start it can't be done in less than 50 turns. (Only later, when more towns are up and running.)

BTW jkk, regarding the question "when to build" settlers: this is one of the very few points where justanick and me have a different opinion. (You may find other threads where we have already discussed this in detail... ) I think that it is usually better to first let towns grow, before spitting out a settler, at least the fully productive first-ring towns. Of course there are exceptions, e.g. if a nearby food- or lux-resource needs to be utilized asap. Or when playing on a small map on Sid level (where all available town spots may already be taken by the time you finish a granary... )

Hey, no problem, I'll reply with an apology in return. It seems my game has stopped whatever glitch it used to do (maybe I did just imagine it anyway, quite possible either way, I mean, I must have noticed it in the first place for a reason, right??? Lol) as I just re-ran a more optimised start on a river and got Writing in 35/6 turns:

0-5 .... 13-6 .... 26-13
1-5 .... 14-6 .... 27-13
2-5 .... 15-8 .... 28-13
3-5 .... 16-8 .... 29-13
4-5 .... 17-8 .... 30-13
5-5 .... 18-8 .... 31-15
6-5 .... 19-8 .... 32-15
7-5 .... 20-11 ... 33-15
8-7 .... 21-11 ... 34-15
9-7 .... 22-11 ... 35-3
10-7 ... 23-11
11-6 ... 24-11
12-6 ... 25-11

To leave 1 turn left at the end of turn 35 with just 3 more beakers, which is spot on the 320 (give or take 1 beaker). I believe this could be optimised even better with Corn on Grassland next to a River as you might not need a second Worker (that's where I dropped from 7 to 6 bpt at turn 10/11), as it was I was slightly delayed by my bonus food on the River being a Game in a Forest. I was, however, benefited by having an Ivory in Forest for the extra 1 Gold that gives.

So when talking about optimised starts there's certainly options available at Huge Regent to warrant starting with Writing and going 100%, but, in terms of keeping you're Victory Condition options as open as possible, I still find it preferable to take either Bronze Working or Masonry first as going Writing first, with a civ that starts with no Wonder capability, spending so many early turns in just Writing leaves you fairly devoid of stuff to build and feels like a waste of shields, especially as money is quite abundant in the Ancient Age, what with everyone picking up 25/50G huts and 25G Barbs and not needing to spend much on Units with 4 free per town. Just building Settlers would negate you're optimisation of beakers and you'd be back to 50 turns.

That may be true to some degree, but i disagree on your conclusion to try chieftain. jkk has won some regent games and in my opinion lifting him to emperor is very doable. Emperor is the level to learn the basics. On chieftain and regent AI is so weak that one gets used to too many bad habits. Emperor is easy enough to learn but challenging enought not to learn too much wrong.

I vaguely recall we had a similar argument before.

Well you're whole shtick is that you want people to play only Diety and above and, therefore, playing differently on lower levels is learning bad habits when the reality is that they're simply different games that have different specialisations to optimise their conditions. For example, the lower the level the slower the AI expands, the lower the level the less need for money you have, how beakers are more OP at lower levels but almost useless at higher levels. If someone only learnt how to play on a very high level and then went into a Regent game then they'd be as clueless as someone who just learnt Regent and then jumped to Diety.

Once you're fully familiar with how both systems work then they are both equally easy (depending on start position). That's why most people's idea of a 'chilled game' is whichever one they learn to the best perfection. And, in terms of this whole idea of learning bad habits, it goes without saying that the higher level you go, the more you reduce the power of the AI by pre-game systems, such as taking Barbs out the game and giving yourself the weakest AI aggression option, which, to me, is developing bad habits, because anything less than Raging Barbarians and Normal AI aggression is just wrong, so wrong, akin to cheating/modding in my mind. When you move the Difficulty Slider along it's axis, this makes you feel superior, but reducing other axises doesn't effect this mindset for some reason...

 

[justanick]

Well you're whole shtick is that you want people to play only Diety and above

If it is only emperor that is fine aswell. The bad thing about DG+ and especially Sid is that one needs to induce a constant state of war for AIs to wear each other down. That i donnot like either.

For example, the lower the level the slower the AI expands, the lower the level the less need for money you have, how beakers are more OP at lower levels but almost useless at higher levels.

I find beakers to be quite valueable at Sid and i like to optimize for them. My issue is that below Sid tech costs are too low.

If i had to edit the difficulty settings i would reduce AI cost factors from monarchy to Deity by one each, but delete all additional starting units including those on Sid. Sid would then still be a challenge, but one would have more of chance to expand with settlers and the early era would be less of gamble in the sense that chances of survival are too random.

If someone only learnt how to play on a very high level and then went into a Regent game then they'd be as clueless as someone who just learnt Regent and then jumped to Diety.

I highly doubt that. I am not sure whether it is apparent to others, but my focus is to optimize the utilization of the resources the human player has, the focus is building up a strong empire and that works at all levels very similar. What i do like about the higher levels is that it more clearly exposes flaws in building up that empire. Weed out the weaklings.

 

[Buttercup]

I can agree with most of that and I wouldn't bother quibbling with that that I probably disagree with.

I guess my gaming sensibilities are more that if someone is going to go to higher difficulties then they should be doing it properly. Surely the hardest setting is Sid but also with Raging Barbarians and the AI on maximum aggressiveness. My natural sense of curiosity is permanently metaphorically outraged that no-one actually knows how far you can get on the difficulty slider with both these other axises (axi?) maxed out. I was particularly disappointed to see the Hall of Fame does not qualify by these axi and only on the main Difficulty Slider axis. I feel sure that if you analysed every game on the HoF then perhaps zero of them use the max AI aggressiveness setting and only a small percentage use Raging Barbarians.

Surely from even just a bragging rights angle someone would feel pumped enough to go to the effort to find out the 'real' max difficulty of, firstly, maxing the two secondary axi before moving up the main axi, just so we could all know what is the 'real' max limit of the game (baring in mind just using the main axi and minimising the other two results in almost limitless barriers).

 

[justanick]

The risk about AI aggression is that it may be more aggresive than is smart. AI may start wars it better may not have started. Generally i think that the impact of AI aggression and Barbarians level on the "absolute difficulty level" is rather limited. The impact of starting position is a lot lot stronger.

other axises (axi?)

The plural appears to be axes.

http://www.dict.cc/?s=axis