TSG27 After Action Report

[Mazer Rackham]

Game: Civ5 GOTM 27
Date submitted: 2012-01-08
Reference number: 25476
Your name: Mazer Rackham
Game status: Science Loss
Game date: 1872AD
Turns played: 307
Base score: 463
Final score: 463
Renamed file: Mazer_Rackham_C502701.Civ5Save

Disappointing loss. After a promising start, getting wonders in 4 cities, Hermitage, and l popping Museums, I still find it was going to take 10+ turns for the later polices. Looked like I would finish policies around 300. Then Sully declared war, swallowed Harun, nuked a couple of my cities, took one and I had to give another for peace.

After that it was 20 turns per policy. In the end, I finished 3 policies short. I need to read some strategies on cultural victories.

 

[Hammer Rabbi]

any chance you can remember what yer culture/turn was? i generally need 550-600/turn to get the 5th tree completed. if im getting a bunch from cs allies its a little different.

 

[TyfoonTurk]

got conquered on turn 200. constant war with germany and china. nukes flying everywhere, while i was still toying with my swordsmen and crossbows.

 

[Tabarnak]

I saw games where the AI launch a spaceship before turn 250...some games(tries) are just impossible to win. Unless you decide the fate of some of them...but this way is another risky shot.

 

[leif erikson]

Given the variation in some of these games, the question is whether we should run Deity again?

 

[Maxym]

Given the variation in some of these games, the question is whether we should run Deity again?

I think so there is plenty of variation on other levels but with most ppl actually winning. Here it seems differences get magnified since final results are so different. Occasional deities are fun reminder how much better we need to get.

 

[Arnold_T]

I don't think we should rule out Diety entirely. This game might have been more fun (i.e. some chance for mere mortals to win it) if we had India as a nieghbour instead of Germany.

 

[JungleIII]

Just my two cents... but the CIV5 Deity A.I. cheats and freebies is just unrealistic and unsupportable... The A.I. isn't 'smarter' ... it just gets overwhelming and silly support and cheats.

I think Deity is just broken and shouldn't be included - bottom line.

I haven't played CIV5 in these competitions for quite some time now because we don't choose our own destiny/VC condition, and Deity just takes more of the enjoyment out. I play Civ5 a lot under my own 'direction' and still find the Civ4 Gotm's interesting since we choose our destiny.

 

[Monthar]

I haven't played CIV5 in these competitions for quite some time now because we don't choose our own destiny/VC condition

Unfortunately, every time we've had a GOTM where we could choose what VC we want, only those who chose Domination were in the top of the list, because it is by far the fastest VC there is. Therefore, not designating a VC is the same as designating Domination as the VC.

 

[JungleIII]

Unfortunately, every time we've had a GOTM where we could choose what VC we want, only those who chose Domination were in the top of the list, because it is by far the fastest VC there is. Therefore, not designating a VC is the same as designating Domination as the VC.

However... using highest points for a victory in each victory category, instead of earliest victory (in just one VC), changes that mix - although it opens up other issues with points easier to stack up the later/longer played in Civ5 unlike in Civ4. Forcing a VC on a map begging for a different VC is uninteresting now that we have all played our fair share of different maps and conditions with all VC's.

 

[Tabarnak]

Cultural games on pangea maps at Deity are probably the hardest settings around. Maybe try some other deity games with different VC conditions and maps?

 

[leif erikson]

However... using highest points for a victory in each victory category, instead of earliest victory (in just one VC), changes that mix - although it opens up other issues with points easier to stack up the later/longer played in Civ5 unlike in Civ4. Forcing a VC on a map begging for a different VC is uninteresting now that we have all played our fair share of different maps and conditions with all VC's.

I have heard this argument before and we have, as a community of players, discussed this fully.

The goal of the TSG's is to learn how to play Civ5 and how the VC's play out. The majority of players have chosen to support the designated VC because the games are more comparable.

I have also said before, and it seems will likely need to say again, that you are free to chose the VC that you wish to play for. There is nothing which precludes you from doing so as all VC's are enabled in every game. Therefore, I do not understand the basis for this argument. Please play for whatever destiny you wish to choose.

 

[trueblue]

one of the main things for me is that the VC is fixed. i like it that way. and even though these games are for fun, and perhaps training, there cant be a competitve edge to it without a set VC, really.

and without set VC's it would just be science versus domination games, map dependant.

 

[Brigg]

T304
Gave up with 4 policies remaining.
India, Germany and China out. Arabia has one city. Game has turned into a buyout cs nukefest. Someone is bound to finish sometime in the next 1000 turns and my poor little comp can not handle it at a speed to keep me sane.

Proper policy order might have ended the game by now.
Much appreciation to lief for the game. I would have never tried this otherwise.
Edit: I only built 1 world wonder, Sydney Opera House.

Building lots of national wonders gave me extra culture.

 

[trueblue]

Sulieman. Turn 308. Science.

fail. the fact it went to turn 308 is remarkable.



Game: Civ5 GOTM 27
Date submitted: 2012-01-09
Reference number: 25486
Game status: Science Loss
Game date: 1874AD
Turns played: 308
Base score: 548
Final score: 548
Time played: 3:42:00
Submitted save: GOTM27Save.Civ5Save
Renamed file: trueblue_C502701.Civ5Save

 

[Maxym]

Sulieman. Turn 308. Science.

fail. the fact it went to turn 308

Congrats on surviving till the end. If only Tommy And Dave win like last time, would that count for 3rd place?

 

[clint0601]

Game: Civ5 GOTM 27
Date submitted: 2012-01-09
Game status: Conquest Loss
Game date: 1450AD
Turns played: 205
Base score: 200
Final score: 200

Well I lasted 205 turns..not bad for never trying...I just fell way too far behind in tech, Germany had infantry and artillery against pikeman and musketeers...Not getting GL or PT really hurt. I have to be more aggressive too, I went with 3 cities and i was only making about 100 science/turn...obviously on deity you need to do some conquering or everyone runs away.

 

[Half Nelson]

Mon Dieu, this is hard!!!!!!...... and despite best efforts my culture doesn't seem to stack up anywhere close to a sub-300 win. I have therefore decided to use the map as a testbed for sharpening up my military skills in defense. My 3-city empire has no real potential to grow to a size where I can support lots of Landmarks and Artists and I really don't want to see it torn to bits by the AI. At the point of surrender:-

Good news for France:- had completed (hard-build) Sistine Chapel and Opera Houses. Archaeology due in 10 turns (assuming RAs hold) and Legalism/GE available for Museums / Louvre. Still had DoF with key neighbours but Suleiman is on the verge of breaking though Arabia and then I will be toast.

Bad news for France:- a very long list. Notably, no city growth (won't be able to fill Museum Artist slots), money very tight (can't really afford Museums!), still at war with Germany! Furthermore, the German hordes are now armed with more than pointy-sticks. Harun is on the verge of war with Germany (they are competing for the City-States in my back yard) but has not yet sent in the Camel Corps (and I have nothing for a war-bribe).

A useful learning exercise, but still beyond my abilities at present.

 

[formivore]

I think it is a mistake to build too few cities. I would say four cities is the minimum for this game. More is probably better. To stay competitive with the deity AI, you need the extra units, commerce, beakers that extra cities can provide. In my 2nd game, I was lucky to get a free puppet that let me buy maritimes, but without that I would have run in to big food and commerce problems in the mid game.

I think people may have an over-inflated idea of how much additional cities add to policy cost. In fact, a good rule of thumb is that an additional city is akin to adding just one extra policy to get in total. Consider that you need something like 70K culture total to get all the policy trees (not sure of the exact number, estimated this from MadDjin's charts). So an additional city adds an additional 7000 culture to get; that is roughly the cost of the last policy. At the end of the game with all the monuments running I was getting a policy in something like ten turns. So an additional city adds 10 turns to a victory, and that is if it is pure dead weight. It is always going to be a dice roll whether you can win before the AI nukes you or launches a spaceship. 10 turns is not going to make much difference there, but it can make a huge difference in whether you can even make it to the 200's. Quite likely by letting you tech to Hermitage, broadcast towers etc. faster it will actually reduce your VC date.

Of course in some games you would not be able to fit that many decent cities in without a war offensive, but that is not the case here where you have lots of room to expand to the south.

Anyway after considering this game a bit more those are my thoughts .

 

[vixafox]

Obviously not ready for Deity yet.

Held out for a long time against the Germans. Held out for a shorter time against the combined forces of Germany and Siam. Finally succumbed to the triple whammy of Germany, Siam and the Iroquois.