TJS1 -- Going on the Pill-age

[tjs282]

Erking at the shield-waste on this turnset as well -- better to build 2-3 Warriors and waste 1-2 shields on each, than build 1 Archer and waste 6? At least that way we get a larger military (until those units die!). Or use Wealth for a turn or 2, to get a town into a neat rhythm: e.g. with the WarHappiness from Arabia, T'heim can easily build zero-waste Settlers from Pop6-7, at 2FPT+6SPT (mine the Tobacco?) -- and build units (with minimal waste, please!) from Pop5 to Pop6.

Also, it's always worth building roads in workable river-tiles-- even if 1 CPT is corrupted, or lost to the Despot-penalty, the next one may not be, especially not in a 1st-ringer -- and we need to get CPT up as quickly as we can.

I'll be on the road for the coming week (back Saturday), with minimal/no Internet access, so Nathiri, you're up. Give Bergen the SPT-tiles from T'heim (work the eastern river-Grasses instead?) to finish the Settler with fewer lost shields. Next town to the east of T'heim, on my/Lanzelot's spot, get it roaded ASAP?

 

[Nathiri]

BTW, if we really want to block the isthmus against Arabia, we need at least a Spearman and 2-3 Archers there. A single Archer will only get himself killed... Better pull him back into safety, until we have more forces.

If nobody likes my idea with prebuilding the FP in Bergen, then we should do a Granary there. With the three BGs, Bergen can easily be turned into a 2-turn worker factory, once we have Republic!

Yes! workers! We need to get some serious terrain improvements done.

I saw that mispost Lanz

I think I'll do my turnset tomorrow then.

 

[Spoonwood]

I disagree with Lanzelot in that I do think you guys can win without wasting precious resources as happened in the previous turnset. That said, a 29 out of 30 shield settler definitely makes for something better missed than seen. It can help to have a hand calculator nearby or use one on your computer's calculators. Don't fret about missing micromanagement possibilities either, as after several years I'm still learning things here and there that I could have done better myself in my games. And remember, micromanagement possibilities don't occur so much later. It gets better! I mean, there's not as much to micromanage when a city takes more turns to grow or when it stays at the same size and swapping worked tiles around won't do much.

 

[Spoonwood]

I especially like that you caught that the "always renegotiate deals" flag was on, and how you kept track of the tech prices.

I can't say I've ever understood this all that well. Does the conventional wisdom indicate that it should have gotten turned off? Why? What happens with it on?

 

[Lanzelot]

When it's turned on, it may happen that a deal with the AI unexpectedly ends during interturn, without you getting a chance to interfere or set up a new deal. So when buying lux resources from an AI, it may happen that all your cities go into riot interturn. (This is also quite annoying in PBEM/multiplayer, as here setting up a deal takes two turns, so you will have to live without that lux resource for two turns, until the deal is re-established.) With that flag enabled, the deal just keeps going, even if the 20 turns are up, until one of the two sides cancels the deal manually. But in that case you get a popup and get the chance to renew the deal, so your cities won't go into riot.

Also, what I sometimes noticed in my games: when you buy a lux early on, the price may still be low. But when you have lots of Marketplaces and it is your 7th lux or so, the AI "knows" that you get much more benefit from that lux, so it charges a higher price. But when you just let the deal "keep running", you can keep importing that resource for the original "cheap price"... (Note: this works only when buying resources for gpt or other resources. If there is some "hard item" (a tech or a lump sum) included in the deal, it always ends after 20 turns.)

 

[Spoonwood]

With that flag enabled, the deal just keeps going, even if the 20 turns are up, until one of the two sides cancels the deal manually.

Wait... is that with it enabled or off? Does the little square look blue or brown?

 

[Speedbird 95]

Some analysis--

Part 1 - military operations:

I did not use the northern exploring warrior's movement point for 1750 BC. I recommend that we DISBAND it, as it currently serves no useful purpose and is costing us 1gpt that can be used for science. In retrospect I should have had this warrior do a suicidal charge up a barbarian-held mountain a few turns earlier (taking 1 1/3 chance at 25g).

Our western archer should not be attacking Arabs, rather to serve as a sentry and retreat back to Bergen or Trondheim one or two squares ahead of the enemy. If we attack and defeat a lone unit, it will advance and there may be a stronger force behind it

We don't want to fight the Arabs outside our territory, we can concentrate our forces & use our roads for mobility.

We don't need or want more warriors, unless they are veteran and we plan to upgrade them for a sword rush.

We could use 1 spearman and maybe 1 more archer, and then we should think about building a barracks.
​

Part 2: Science and commerce:

It should be obvious that everything I have done was intended to get the maximum amount of beakers towards the CoL/Philosophy/Republic slingshot.

This meant having our only worker focus on building roads on our river grasslands that were being worked or about to be worked, not building mines, and not building roads to future cities.

I thought about roading the tobacco square. It would cost 4 worker-turns plus limit our options where to send the worker on the following turn. (i.e. 4 missed beakers by not roading some other square). We don't get any extra commerce from the tobacco square during despotism. It costs us 1 settler-turn if we settle in the south-east (i.e. 3 missed beakers, minus 1 for corruption, plus 1 or 2 gold in unit support, plus 2 missed food). I wasn't counting on the unit support because I was committed to this decision before the war started. I figured it was OK to make a choice that will cost us something in the long run, but get a more rapid gain toward the slingshot.

I could have swapped the mined bonus grassland from Trondheim to Bergen, which would have alleviated our shield overrun problems in Trondheim, but I deliberately chose not to do so, because it would have wasted one beaker/turn due to corruption.

Yes, I made a mistake with the 1790 BC micromanagement attempt in Trondheim. I didn't know that the governator wasn't going to give me the one extra shield I needed. But my only regret was giving up one beaker in the attempt.
​

Part 3: On temples:

If we don't want to waste 7 shields on a settler, we can switch Trondheim to ... a temple!

If we do that, Trondheim would likely grow to size 7 and empty the granary before we get a settler out, unless we cut back on food & commerce by working the forest(s).

But, which is more important now, building a settler or a temple? The settler is urgently needed & will help us accomplish our objectives faster.

My original plan for the last turn set was to chop the 2nd fur-forest, use the shields for a temple, and get Trondheim on a settler/archers cycle or worker/archers cycle between size 5-7 with minimal use of the lux slider. After hearing the objections I decided to do something else, but I still think a temple would be beneficial for Trondheim before the end of the ancient age. The idea is to get Trondheim up to the maximum possible size and use Trondheim to build a wonder or two. This plan would involve using another city with a granary to build settlers, a third city with a barracks to build archers, a 4th city with a granary to build workers, and a 5th city with a harbor to build galleys.

Yes, the temple does cost 1 gpt every turn, but the extra citizen will produce 2-3 gpt.

I didn't hear objections to the gpt cost of building barracks & more military...

An accountant's definition of an asset is: "An expense waiting to happen"
​

Part 4: Where to settle our next cities:

to be continued...​

 

[Speedbird 95]

This is a succession game. Suppose we plan to attack civilization X as soon as our trade deal expires, but the next player doesn't know the auto-renew feature is on?

 

[Elephantium]

With respect to the northern Warrior, I'm fine with disbanding or with exploring more to the east. I also agree that we don't need more reg. Warriors.

With respect to science, maxing beakers is an admirable goal, but I fear you fell into a "pennywise, pound-foolish" trap. Roading the tobacco would have cut one turn off the Settler's walk to build City #3. Getting one more shield in Trondheim would have given us the Settler one turn earlier -- that's two extra turns that we could have had City #3 contributing to our empire! Tiny things in the early game get magnified many times through the ages

Actually, that reminds me: What happened to the plan to build a second Worker?

Looking at micro in 1750BC, you can swap the two riverside mines to Bergen for no change in beaker output. The next player should do that.

With respect to Temples, I can't believe that nobody has posted this yet:

Temples...temples...priests are prevaricating parasites who pillage the body politic.

You want culture, build libraries. You get something back from the investment.

You want content citizens, build marketplaces, trade for luxuries, build towns for luxuries, build colonies for luxuries.

If happiness is a problem in a settler or worker farm, it is a self-limiting problem. Raise the luxury tax, hire an MP, you only need to make the expenditure for a couple of turns. Temples are with you forever and are a permanent drag on the economy.

Understatement...bah!

We don't need a Temple to manage happiness in Trondheim at size 5-7; the lux slider is more efficient for that, especially given our desperate need for more cities.

 

[Speedbird 95]

Here is a dot map with a loosely spaced first ring at distance 4 from the capital.

"LPC" is the location of Lanzelot's purple circle
The green "1" circles are at distance 4.
I typed in some other distance numbers.
The "New Cities" are not numbered in any particular settlement number.

I have a question for discussion: should we settle at "LPC" or further out at "NC1"?

If we settle LPC it will be closer to the capital & have the least corruption, but Bergen will have slightly higher corruption. If we settle at NC1 then Bergen will stay the same and NC1 will have slightly higher corruption because it was founded later.

A secondary question is, how does our choice affect the placement of the other cities in our first ring? Do we want to pack them in tightly at distance 3 to get the most production for our berserker assault, or put them farther apart at distance 4 to get larger cities for the longer term?

Also, note there are 2 city site possibilities on the west coast near the whales, that are close to our road network. There is no river commerce in this area, and we would have to fight the Arabs here, if we are still at war.

P.S.: It was not possible to get a settler in 1750 without delaying growth to size 6. But Elephantium does have the correct plan to swap riverside mines.
I am trying to be objective about temples here. We don't have currency for markets yet, and we don't have easy access to another luxury. (although the Aztecs have spices on their coast...) If we have one big city and a bunch of medium-size towns, a temple in the big city will be cost-effective compared with raising the lux slider for the whole empire.

P.P.S.: The Russians can build the Statue of Zeus...

 

[robbus]

I am trying to keep up!

OFF Topic:

I get tired of civ3 music so I turn it off. Here is some good stuff

 

[Elephantium]

Thanks for posting the dotmap, Speedbird! Here's my version:



We could move Red and Orange each 1 NE, but I like the closer spacing slightly better.
Yellow and Green stay at CxxC with the capital, which is good for defense.
Blue is the all-important double-wheat Worker pump!
Indigo is a logical spot, given Bergen and Blue.
Violet is just a nice CxxC from Green; other than being coastal and on the hill (good for defense), it could easily shift a tile NW.
White dot could move to the other side of the river; I don't feel strongly about that.

Hmm. We'll only get four cities in the second ring (well, 5 if we count the tundra).

I don't really care whether we use ring city placement or not; it doesn't much matter in Conquests.

P.S.: It was not possible to get a settler in 1750 without delaying growth to size 6.

??? Trondheim can get 8 shields at size 5.

I am trying to be objective about temples here. We don't have currency for markets yet, and we don't have easy access to another luxury. (although the Aztecs have spices on their coast...) If we have one big city and a bunch of medium-size towns, a temple in the big city will be cost-effective compared with raising the lux slider for the whole empire.

That's not the plan, though. The plan is to keep building Archers and Settlers out of Trondheim at sizes 4-6 or 5-7 as we grow our empire -- a medium size town. By time the lux slider costs more than Temple upkeep would, we'll be in Republic with towns that need some help from the lux slider.

The only way a Temple build during your turnset would have helped is by keeping us under the unit support cap, IMO.

Debates aside, I appreciate that you held off on the Temple build during your turnset. That's good teamwork!

P.P.S.: The Russians can build the Statue of Zeus...

I don't like the idea of facing a bunch of A-Cavs.

OTOH, I relish the chance to capture the SoZ city

 

[Lanzelot]

Speedbird, you seem to be really fond of Temples...

But in this game: no Temples... We wasted already enough shields, no need to waste another 60 of them. And you can trust the general wisdom of the Civ3 community: "Temples are completely useless. Never build one unless you are going for a cultural victory." If you want to pay 1gpt for keeping one citizen happy, you can do that already now: just raise lux tax by 10%. No need to spend 60s for this... And later on, when raising the slider would also effect other towns, we have different means of dealing with unhappiness.

In any case: at this early point of the game, I'd rather have 3 Archers than a Temple. You say that no one objected to paying gold for Barracks and military: well, the difference between Barracks and Temples is: Barracks are very useful for winning the game, while Temples are not...

Ok, enough of that. Let's move on. I like LCP better than New City 1, because it covers a few more coastal tiles, which would otherwise never be used by any city, and because it leaves enough room for an additional first ring city (orange in Ele's dotmap). I think we can go by Ele's final version of the dot map for now, adjusting a bit when we find resources etc. (E.g. if we have enough military by the time we are ready to settle pink, we may think about moving it 1NE to get the sugar tile.)

Regarding the conscript warrior: let him keep scouting! Map information is always valuable, e.g. if we want to plan ahead and disconnect the Dutch iron before they can build their Super-Pikemen, or things like that. The more of the map we can see, the better. With the new settler out soon, we should no longer have unit upkeep problems.

 

[Nathiri]

Okay I did my turn set. I made notes from what was said here to try and remember what to do and what not . But there was still a few things I planned for myself because there was not much talk about what to do in reference to that.

Turn 50:
Adjusted capital tiles to be placed on river tiles, and assigned the 2 mine tiles to Bergen.

Turn 51:
Settler completes. Dutch warrior goes northeast. I send 1 archer back to Bergen. An Arab warrior appears on the isthmus. I decide to set capital production on a worker as we need it badly. Set Bergen's production to a granary instead of an archer. I decide to make the archer west retreat a tile. I reduce lux output to 0%. Code of Laws is now in 4 turns, and we are -2 with 7 gold left.

Turn 52:
Arab warrior comes forward again. I decide this time to kill it. No health loss, and archer is promoted to Veteran. Settler continues its journey southeast.

Turn 53:
Worker completes in Trondheim. I set production to an archer. Road completes by the old worker, and I send to chop a forest in Bergen. Settler makes it to its final tile. I fortify the archer that killed the Arab warrior.

Turn 54:
Warrior in the far north dies from a barbarian that came from a goody hut pop. Arab warrior appears on the hill isthmus to the west. Code of Laws completes next turn.

Turn 55:
Because we only had four gold, I decide to find a buyer for Code of Laws so we can continue teching. Carthage is broke. I checked Aztecs and they would pay 20 gold and give Iron Working and Mysticism. Since, we are concerned about winning the slingshot, and it is not Writing or Philosophy, I decide to take it. I then set Philosophy on max research. Copenhagen is on the river commerce tile for the extra GPT in order to get Philosophy done. I had decided previously to keep Bergen on the extra mines for the moment to speed up the granary. A chop is coming in a few turns as well.The capital is still producing archers fine so I thought in order to get the granary done quicker I would do that. I also thought about a pop rush, but I wasnt sure what you guys thought about that, and we dont have much lux, so I figured it probably wasnt the best time for that.

Turn 56:
There is now 2 Arab warriors on the isthmus, so I decide to retreat the archer to the hill.

Turn 57:
I send a 2nd archer west in case the archer there dies. Another archer is produced in Trondheim next turn. Road is completed on the tobacco and I send it across the river. I decide to fortify the archer on the hill instead of attacking the Arab warrior as there is a 2nd warrior right behind it.

Turn 58:
3 Arab Warriors are on their way. The initial warrior avoided my archer and continued forward. Instead of roading the tile after chopping the forest for Bergen, I move the worker NE to the BG tile to prepare a road there. I figured roading the normal grassland under the forest wouldnt do much good at least at this point, since we probably should produce another settler after the next Trondheim growth and we need somewhere to take this settler and roading that would not leave much time to road to the sugar. The sugar tile is getting very close to the AI's expansion so I thought maybe that would be the next best spot, it can also be used to road to the wheat if we decide there is next. It also gives a GPT to a shield tile. I didnt see any discussion on where this next city should be after the Copenagen one, so I went with what was closest to the worker. Philosophy is in 7 turns with a +1 at 90% science (doesnt go faster at 100%). I wasnt sure about our gold situation in case we shrank, but we are doing okay so maybe I didnt need to sell Code of Laws for the gold.

Turn 59:
Nothing much happened here. Just moved the boats, and Arab warriors moved in again. I decide to move 2 archers to the forest for a defense against 1 warrior and defensive bombard.

Turn 60:
Because Philosophy is now at 5 turns left, I can now move a normal grassland to a BG and get the granary done a turn earlier. Arab warriors still have not attacked and the warrior near the forest has stayed and let another warrior from behind join with him. We can probably hit all 3 warriors when you load the save, but not sure if its wise hitting warriors on a forest, but it is on Turn 60 still and you can wake the units before hitting enter. There is also an Arab warrior to our south that appeared back up from exploring the Tundra. Dutch warrior was only in that spot because our borders expanded so he probably wont declare war.

I had been checking the civs in case one of the civs that had Writing got Philosophy, but they did not at the time, so I think we have a good chance unless there is an unmet one that gets it.

These are some massive islands! Are you sure they arn't continents?

 

[Elephantium]

Based on the exploration so far, I'd say we've got a stringy pangaea with a few satellite islands. I noticed this:



Thanks for building the second Worker -- not a moment too soon!

With the military situation, we should consider switching the Theim Archer to a Spear. We can put the Spear on the forest Furs to guarantee a shot at Arabia's Warriors on grassland. Unfortunately, Abu wants us to pay for peace right now, but I think that will change after we deal with some of his forces

For the next set, here's what I'm thinking for production:
T'heim: Change to Spear -> Worker -> Archer
Bergen: Finish Granary -> Settler
Copenhagen: Change to Barracks or maybe a Curragh.

Bergen's Worker should irrigate and road the riverside plains once he's done roading the BG.
Copenhagen's Worker should road its BG and then mine the riverside grass.

Thoughts?

 

[Ray2]

I can't say I've ever understood this all that well. Does the conventional wisdom indicate that it should have gotten turned off? Why? What happens with it on?

You should always turn this off if you are using the peace treaty to negotiate (e.g. rep ruined, better prices). If you have this option on, the AI will come in the inter-turn asking for peace straight up, without possibility to add anything else.

The downside is that you have to be careful if you are importing luxuries – you won’t get notified that the deal is cancelled before the interturn. Also, if you are selling resources/luxuries the AI will keep the ongoing deal even if you could sell them at a higher price.

Also, what I sometimes noticed in my games: when you buy a lux early on, the price may still be low. But when you have lots of Marketplaces and it is your 7th lux or so, the AI "knows" that you get much more benefit from that lux, so it charges a higher price. But when you just let the deal "keep running", you can keep importing that resource for the original "cheap price"... (Note: this works only when buying resources for gpt or other resources. If there is some "hard item" (a tech or a lump sum) included in the deal, it always ends after 20 turns.)

In this case the AI will come in the interturn to renegotiate the deal, asking for a higher price. They will keep the deal running though, if you are selling them luxuries/resources cheaper.

 

[choxorn]

Okay I did my turn set. I made notes from what was said here to try and remember what to do and what not . But there was still a few things I planned for myself because there was not much talk about what to do in reference to that.

If there is something you're unsure of because we hadn't talked about it much, you can always stop and ask, "Hey, guys, this happened, what do you think we should do?"

For instance...

Turn 55:
Because we only had four gold, I decide to find a buyer for Code of Laws so we can continue teching. Carthage is broke. I checked Aztecs and they would pay 20 gold and give Iron Working and Mysticism. Since, we are concerned about winning the slingshot, and it is not Writing or Philosophy, I decide to take it. I then set Philosophy on max research. Copenhagen is on the river commerce tile for the extra GPT in order to get Philosophy done. I had decided previously to keep Bergen on the extra mines for the moment to speed up the granary. A chop is coming in a few turns as well.The capital is still producing archers fine so I thought in order to get the granary done quicker I would do that. I also thought about a pop rush, but I wasnt sure what you guys thought about that, and we dont have much lux, so I figured it probably wasnt the best time for that.

I don't think trading CoL in this case was a bad idea, but you probably should have discussed trading CoL after researching it before you started the turnset. And just generally, it's wise to before you start, talk to the other players about what your plans are, especially this early in the game.

On another note, I were there any other civs that had Writing but not CoL, or that you could trade Iron Working or Mysticism to? If so, you should have tried talking to them and seeing what they'd offer.

 

[Nathiri]

If there is something you're unsure of because we hadn't talked about it much, you can always stop and ask, "Hey, guys, this happened, what do you think we should do?"

For instance...



I don't think trading CoL in this case was a bad idea, but you probably should have discussed trading CoL after researching it before you started the turnset. And just generally, it's wise to before you start, talk to the other players about what your plans are, especially this early in the game.

On another note, I were there any other civs that had Writing but not CoL, or that you could trade Iron Working or Mysticism to? If so, you should have tried talking to them and seeing what they'd offer.

Only Carthage and Aztecs had Writing. Only other tech Aztecs could of offered would of been Masonry. I did think about posting something during my turn set, but decided to keep going. I wasnt sure if I would receive any reply fast enough, and it wasnt too major of a decision.

 

[Lanzelot]

Philosophy is in 7 turns with a +1 at 90% science (doesnt go faster at 100%).

It may go faster, once a couple of towns grow. Therefore you should always go 100% (or as high as treasury/happiness allows), and only go down in the last turn. Perhaps we might have gotten it in 6?! (Perhaps with 1-2 scientists in the last turn.) CivAssist tells you, how many beakers are left, so one can easily make these calculations.

Regarding the tech trades I have to agree with choxorn: selling only CoL and then not following up, was a bad mistake: if you sell to one, you better sell to everyone for whatever you can get, because if the AIs trade amongst themselves, many good opportunities for us may be lost! Fortunately it looks like in this case no damage has been done: we can still sell CoL to Carthage and to the Netherlands. Carthage has 50g, Masonry and the Wheel, the Netherlands also have Masonry and the Wheel. I don't know, at which point these deals became possible, but the next player should take advantage of them and secure these two techs and the 50g for us right away, before the window of opportunity is gone.

@Elephantium: remember: we don't want peace, as long as we are enjoying war happiness... (Only in case of an emergency...)

I agree with your proposed production changes. A Spearman would indeed be good to give our Archers some cover. An Archer attacked by one of those Warriors, is a 50% chance of a loss (I wonder, why the AI didn't do that already?! It's the best chance to get something out of the Warriors... A human player would long ago have attacked our Archers...)

This also means that we should attack with our Archers and not defend. What I would do now: move the Warrior in Copenhagen as protection for our two Archers in the forest. (Better to lose a Warrior than an Archer.) The Archer on the hill can attack one of the two forest Warriors: that way he will remain on the hill. (If we don't use him now, the Warriors will walk out of his range, and then we have one unit less to defend our capital...! I would not attack the one on grassland, as then the Archer will remain on the grassland himself, probably damaged and threatened by the two forest Warriors.) The remaining Archers wait, until the Arabs move onto grassland. (They will certainly move towards Trondheim.) Then next turn, we can attack with 4 Archers (we need to keep Bergen unprotected for the moment -- I knew that Bergen was founded on "the wrong side of the river"!! Who did that again...? ), kill the remaining two Warriors and then prepare for the last one in the south.

Trondheim should build another Archer in 3 after that Spearman, because we will want to revolt immediately when Republic comes in, so we should have a few defenders at hand in case we get a longer anarchy period... (Nothing would be worse than being attacked by another 3-4 Arabian units, losing some of ours and then not being able to build replacements because of anarchy... )

BTW: we need more Workers...

 

[Nathiri]

It may go faster, once a couple of towns grow. Therefore you should always go 100% (or as high as treasury/happiness allows), and only go down in the last turn. Perhaps we might have gotten it in 6?! (Perhaps with 1-2 scientists in the last turn.) CivAssist tells you, how many beakers are left, so one can easily make these calculations.

Regarding the tech trades I have to agree with choxorn: selling only CoL and then not following up, was a bad mistake: if you sell to one, you better sell to everyone for whatever you can get, because if the AIs trade amongst themselves, many good opportunities for us may be lost! Fortunately it looks like in this case no damage has been done: we can still sell CoL to Carthage and to the Netherlands. Carthage has 50g, Masonry and the Wheel, the Netherlands also have Masonry and the Wheel. I don't know, at which point these deals became possible, but the next player should take advantage of them and secure these two techs and the 50g for us right away, before the window of opportunity is gone.

@Elephantium: remember: we don't want peace, as long as we are enjoying war happiness... (Only in case of an emergency...)

I agree with your proposed production changes. A Spearman would indeed be good to give our Archers some cover. An Archer attacked by one of those Warriors, is a 50% chance of a loss (I wonder, why the AI didn't do that already?! It's the best chance to get something out of the Warriors... A human player would long ago have attacked our Archers...)

This also means that we should attack with our Archers and not defend. What I would do now: move the Warrior in Copenhagen as protection for our two Archers in the forest. (Better to lose a Warrior than an Archer.) The Archer on the hill can attack one of the two forest Warriors: that way he will remain on the hill. (If we don't use him now, the Warriors will walk out of his range, and then we have one unit less to defend our capital...! I would not attack the one on grassland, as then the Archer will remain on the grassland himself, probably damaged and threatened by the two forest Warriors.) The remaining Archers wait, until the Arabs move onto grassland. (They will certainly move towards Trondheim.) Then next turn, we can attack with 4 Archers (we need to keep Bergen unprotected for the moment -- I knew that Bergen was founded on "the wrong side of the river"!! Who did that again...? ), kill the remaining two Warriors and then prepare for the last one in the south.

Trondheim should build another Archer in 3 after that Spearman, because we will want to revolt immediately when Republic comes in, so we should have a few defenders at hand in case we get a longer anarchy period... (Nothing would be worse than being attacked by another 3-4 Arabian units, losing some of ours and then not being able to build replacements because of anarchy... )

BTW: we need more Workers...

I tried moving some tiles in the cities to try and get extra commerce and checked every turn even when we were +1 suddenly, but nothing moved the research. I havent gotten CivAssist to work, so I dont see its information.

I started Philosophy when it was 10 turns, immediately after Code of Laws. Carthage was broke that turn, so I couldnt trade it to them, at least not super profitably (they only had like 1 tech IIRC, maybe it was Masonry). I didnt check in the later turns, but I was already nearly at the end of my turnset. So they have only had gold for a few turns. I did everything I could so to not let it fall back a turn as well, which is why I had to work a less productive tile at Copenhagen and Bergen. I did not look into using scientists however. I have never used specialists that much so I dont think of setting them.

By the way, if this was an MP Internet game, defensive bombardment would be magnified depending on how many human players. So 2 archers on a forest would easily survive. You eventually learn to only attack such stacked units after you hit it with a few lesser units to get rid of the defensive bombard, or have a lot of units in order to secure the tile.

Yes, Granary will be done in Bergen shortly so we can get a couple workers from there.

We should still pre-road a 4th city, but up to next person if they want to improve a tile around Bergen or another place instead, unless you think only 1 turn saved for the settler is enough. So I personally disagree with irrigating a plains/improving a tile around Bergen at this stage, until another worker, or the worker nearby is freed up. Yes, Bergen needs terrain improvements, but I think we need a pre-road ready to go.