Turn 1-50

[RegentMan]

Re-reading your banana-settling arguments, I am inclined to agree with settling on the bananas. Civ is a snowball game and from testing it looks like a banana start will make the biggest snowball.

As far as religion-founding goes, I don't think we need to worry about an early one. Will we need the happiness this early?

For wonders, do we have a shot at the Oracle or the Pyramids? The others I think we can pass on.

 

[whb]

Hmm, I'm starting to think it looks nice now for a PH (2E1S) start. Oh dear. Thought being that the arrangement you end up with is cities:

PH,
1W
3S
5E4S (or thereabouts to use whatever resources turn up on the second river)

and most cities can shuffle resources between them as they need to refocus on food/production/whatever.

SIP is fine. 1W was one I liked -- roughly equivalent to PH but first and second cities swapped -- but someone demonstrated that losing the city-tile hammer bonus by settling 1W first cost too much early.

I really don't like settling on the bananas. Despite the short term "we get a worker out X turns earlier" results, I worry it could make a pig's breakfast of city placement for the rest of the game. The flood plain in the NW corner gets traded for a desert, the resources in the middle cannot be switched between cities to accelerate the second and third cities, settling the east river is going to leave a gap just the wrong size to fill with another city, and I have a nasty suspicion we'll find only half a city's worth of usable land to the W (if, say just W of the picture the tiles go flood-plain then desert).

 

[vranasm]

for me it was on bananas right at the time of seeing starting location and never changed.

nice that I have at least 1 convert even if a bit latecoming (bcool )


The warrior scouting pattern next should be

SW, SW so we see the area around wheat and then west, north west to go back towards flood plains

the area east will most probably not be settled soon

we are definitely in southern area (the tundra around wheat)

 

[YossarianLives]

fwiw, I also agree that Bananas is better than SIP, and that PH is the best of all. Maybe it would be best to run an official poll on this before we make our decision, after all. We have plenty of time left on the clock (61 hours) and two teams haven't even logged into the game yet (WPC and UCiv), so no one can complain about us holding up the turn.

 

[cav scout]

I was thinking of moving the warrior SE, NE, NE and move along that ridge line to explore to the East and Northeast. We will have time to explore around the wheat later.

 

[bcool]

In every way? What about defensibility? SIP gives a hill defense bonus and a river crossing penalty from 6 of 9 directions.

I know you feel passionate about the banana start and you have made a compelling argument for settling there. But it looks like that majority of the team feels like SIP is the way to go.

Okay you got me. It is less defensible. However, if we are depending on the defense of our capital things have gone very very poorly.

A bigger empire earlier is going to be much better defense than having a hill and several rivers to protect our capital.

Hmm, I'm starting to think it looks nice now for a PH (2E1S) start. Oh dear. Thought being that the arrangement you end up with is cities:

PH,
1W
3S
5E4S (or thereabouts to use whatever resources turn up on the second river)

and most cities can shuffle resources between them as they need to refocus on food/production/whatever.

SIP is fine. 1W was one I liked -- roughly equivalent to PH but first and second cities swapped -- but someone demonstrated that losing the city-tile hammer bonus by settling 1W first cost too much early.

I really don't like settling on the bananas. Despite the short term "we get a worker out X turns earlier" results, I worry it could make a pig's breakfast of city placement for the rest of the game. The flood plain in the NW corner gets traded for a desert, the resources in the middle cannot be switched between cities to accelerate the second and third cities, settling the east river is going to leave a gap just the wrong size to fill with another city, and I have a nasty suspicion we'll find only half a city's worth of usable land to the W (if, say just W of the picture the tiles go flood-plain then desert).

I certainly like the warrior's PH (2E1S) better than SIP. (of course after bananas)

However, we can share resources by settling on the bananas in a similar fashion that you explain for the PH start.
If we settle on the bananas we can settle 3S of the settler's start as well (on the river next to the wheat and eventually the cows which shares the corn with the banana capital and can be used to develop a few cottages for the capital)

It looks like there might be a decent city to the north to pick up the floodplains we lose settling on the bananas. In the fog there is a forest and more grass land to the north.

I'm happy that at least my arguments swayed a few people. And I'm glad vranasm pointed out the promise of the settling on the bananas to me.

 

[socralynnek]

Actually, I think, you showed that banana is better up to a certain turn. I do think that in the long run PH (or SIP) are stronger.

But I don't have any number to back it up though.

 

[grant2004]

I don't see things turning around for the SIP start sometime after bcool's analysis ends.

The comparison shouldn't be on a city to city basis it must be on an empire to empire basis. Yes a full grown SIP city will produce more commerce than a full grown banana city. However the contributions that the banana city has made to the empire in the meantime will be of greater importance. Settlers, workers, and units produced by the capital impact the development of other cities, those cities then contribute to the empire and impact the development of more cities, in a rapidly growing snowball effect. If this snowball effect means that we grab just one more city spot before our enemies, the difference between these two capital locations will be completely drowned out by the effect of having additional territory.

 

[slaze]

bananas

SIP, settler t34

bananas, settler t31

bananas

 

[DaveShack]

I never really voted, preferring to see more information. Maybe things like not settling on bananas contribute to the reasons I don't do as well.

The people wanting bananas are very convincing on the early benefits. I'll vote to settle there instead of in place.

 

[Arkipeller]

bananas

SIP, settler t34

bananas, settler t31

bananas

I suggest to actually use the current position. I just ran a simulation and this is at turn 35:

What I did: Built a city (1turn) - Prod.Order: Warrior-Settler-Worker
By the time the warrior is done, the city is at pop.2 and building settlers and workers takes even less time.

At the same time we got an opportunity to SECURE a religion. If we build warrior as first project, the city goes to pop2 and a second flood plain goes into activity. This triggers more food (hence faster building settlers/workers), but also at turn 8 (pop2) we get one more commerce (totalt of 11). I doubt any other civ will do it this way, so we could secure Polytheism that way.

The casue of producing the settler before a worker is because we may have 2 cities with pop 2 at turn 35 at that point. ( In this save my second city already popped a third warrior for exploring)

 

[vranasm]

I suggest to actually use the current position. I just ran a simulation and this is at turn 35:

What I did: Built a city (1turn) - Prod.Order: Warrior-Settler-Worker
By the time the warrior is done, the city is at pop.2 and building settlers and workers takes even less time.

At the same time we got an opportunity to SECURE a religion. If we build warrior as first project, the city goes to pop2 and a second flood plain goes into activity. This triggers more food (hence faster building settlers/workers), but also at turn 8 (pop2) we get one more commerce (totalt of 11). I doubt any other civ will do it this way, so we could secure Polytheism that way.

The casue of producing the settler before a worker is because we may have 2 cities with pop 2 at turn 35 at that point. ( In this save my second city already popped a third warrior for exploring)

did you see this post of mine? T40 on bananas

only 5 turns later then your save, city 2 size 2, capital size 3 and 3rd city settled on a hill close by.
starting on cottaging...

sorry the gameplay you propose is very suboptimal

 

[Arkipeller]

did you see this post of mine? T40 on bananas

only 5 turns later then your save, city 2 size 2, capital size 3 and 3rd city settled on a hill close by.
starting on cottaging...

sorry the gameplay you propose is very suboptimal

I actually read that right after I posted and felt slightly stupid. Thou: I do agree that your approach is great IF we avoid religion at start. Over time I don't either agree that the capitol should be placed there IF we want to have a commerce-effective city, that you seem to prefer. Right now you got a superdominant capitol that you struggle towards cottaging, but is more suited for production. It's borders overshadow most of the resources nearby, but avoid the flood plains that would make it the great capitol with commerce (which we both agree we could have and need).
Another point is that the banana-argument only hold water until plantations/calendar. After that we loose commerce by placing the city over the bananas instead on current starting position.

Caledorn and I did discuss the possibilities of getting Poly and our current conclution is:
There are 4 nations that could acquire: Us, Inca, Maya og Holy roman. According to earlier playing style we know Maya won't go for poly and Inca is behind us in line and won't get it. this means that we got a quick religion if HolyRoman don't build their city this turn, but we do.

So my suggestion is still: Poly and then agriculture. City at current spot and build it towards a commercial center.

 

[Arkipeller]

Another point is that the banana-argument only hold water until plantations/calendar. After that we loose commerce by placing the city over the bananas instead on current starting position.

If you start counting the tiles you will also notice that current position is better by far when it comes to food-income. The approach is maybe effective the first rounds, but will stagger the city afterwards. In this calculation I did not add the improvements.

After counting both positions:

Current start: 37 food, 14 Commerce, 14 hammers. Pro's: Plantation will increase commerce greatly later, Defense bonus by river and hill, fair commerce, all tiles usable, 4 flood plains. Con's: Bad health

Fair spots for cottages: 4 flood plains+ 4 grassland

Bananas: 34 food, 10 commerce, 15 hammers. Pro's: Early bananas, fair production. Con's: Desert Tile.

Fair spots for cottages: 2 flood plains+ 5 grassland

 

[bcool]

I actually read that right after I posted and felt slightly stupid. Thou: I do agree that your approach is great IF we avoid religion at start. Over time I don't either agree that the capitol should be placed there IF we want to have a commerce-effective city, that you seem to prefer. Right now you got a superdominant capitol that you struggle towards cottaging, but is more suited for production. It's borders overshadow most of the resources nearby, but avoid the flood plains that would make it the great capitol with commerce (which we both agree we could have and need).
Another point is that the banana-argument only hold water until plantations/calendar. After that we loose commerce by placing the city over the bananas instead on current starting position.

Caledorn and I did discuss the possibilities of getting Poly and our current conclution is:
There are 4 nations that could acquire: Us, Inca, Maya og Holy roman. According to earlier playing style we know Maya won't go for poly and Inca is behind us in line and won't get it. this means that we got a quick religion if HolyRoman don't build their city this turn, but we do.

So my suggestion is still: Poly and then agriculture. City at current spot and build it towards a commercial center.

I can't imagine that the advantage of an early religion is going to be better than a strong early expansion and tech. Polytheism sets back pottery for what? the happiness and border pops won't help us for quite some time. A bigger and stronger empire will likely be able to grab a midterm religion (monotheism, theology, or code of laws) when we might want that happiness and "free" border pops.

I also believe you are mistaken that the SIP capital is better as a cottaged capital than the banana capital. The banana capital can easily outproduce the SIP over course of the game and researching calender doesn't change the argument.

The banana capital can easily match the total commerce production over the entire game of the SIP capital.
Early on
The banana capital has a large food surplus (primarily because it can work the deer) early on. This means it grows faster than the SIP, so it can work more cottages faster. Or regrow faster if we whip a library for example. It can use its extra food surplus to work river plains cottages. Even though these "eat" food the banana capital can work them and maintain the same food surplus as the SIP capital and work the same number of riverside cottages.
Mid game
As I suggested we can choose to work riverside plains cottages or in the mid game we can switch to grass cottages that will allow the banana capital to grow faster than the SIP capital. So while the non-river grass cottages are not as great as riverside tiles, the banana capital will grow into them faster.
Plus the 2 advantage of the banana capital from the extra forests and no from floodplains will come into play at some point.
Late game
Even after calender is researched, the banana capital will have the same food production as the SIP capital if it stops working one of the river plains tiles. (and assuming the SIP capital doesn't have health issues)
Calendar only gives the SIP capital one more food (since a plantation gives 5 and a farmed banana gives 4 before biology)

Since the banana capital grows faster its total commerce production over the course of the game will be greater. Add to that the fact that the banana capital can produce workers and settlers faster early on and you get a larger empire as well.
(and the banana capital saves a forest )

 

[YossarianLives]

In a competitive game like this, opening with a religion instead of a worker (and corresponding techs) is usually not the most efficient start. Getting a second population to work a FP only adds one yield to a worker or settler (as the second pop will eat up 2 of the 3 food). Improving the wet corn ASAP adds 3 yield to a worker or settler (going from 3 food to 6 food). We wouldn't get the one extra coin, but I think 1 coin for 3 food is a pretty good trade-off. Plus, all our subsequent pop growths will come that much faster. Finally, we won't need the culture or happiness from the religion right at the start. The benefits don't really kick in until we have a couple cities that need border pops, or we start hitting up against our happy cap.

I think we need to establish an Official Polling Method and conduct a new vote for starting location. Based on the amount of great input and discussion everyone on this team contributes, I do think it's important for us to have a clear way to call a vote and finalize our decision. Not just for this decision, but also future ones that we might not have as much time to discuss.

Edit: Crosspost with Arkipeller and bcool

 

[bcool]

If you start counting the tiles you will also notice that current position is better by far when it comes to food-income. The approach is maybe effective the first rounds, but will stagger the city afterwards. In this calculation I did not add the improvements.

After counting both positions:

Current start: 37 food, 14 Commerce, 14 hammers. Pro's: Plantation will increase commerce greatly later, Defense bonus by river and hill, fair commerce, all tiles usable, 4 flood plains. Con's: Bad health

Fair spots for cottages: 4 flood plains+ 4 grassland

Bananas: 34 food, 10 commerce, 15 hammers. Pro's: Early bananas, fair production. Con's: Desert Tile.

Fair spots for cottages: 2 flood plains+ 5 grassland

I'm not sure how you are counting the food (I assume you are adding up the base food of all the tiles)
The more relevant analysis would be what food surplus each capital would have at each size

bananas
at pop 2 working corn, deer it has a food surplus of 10
at pop 3 working corn, deer, cottaged FP is has a food surplus of 11
at pop 4 working corn, deer, 2 cottaged FP is has a food surplus of 12
at pop 5 working corn, deer, 2 cottaged FP, cottaged river grass tile is has a food surplus of 12
6 pop (add plains riverside cottage) 11 excess food 4 riverside cottages
7 pop (add plains riverside cottages) 10 excess food 5 riverside cottages (-1 without a granary and just corn if we keep a forest and the deer forested)
8 pop (add grass cottage) 10 excess food 5 riverside, 1 non cottages (-1 with a granary and just corn)
9 pop (add grass cottage) 10 excess food 5 riverside, 2 non cottages (-1 with a granary, corn and deer)
10 pop (add grass cottage) 10 excess food 5 riverside, 3 non cottages (? )
11 pop (add grass cottage) 10 excess food 5 riverside, 4 non cottages (? )

SIP
at pop 2 working corn, farmed banana it has a food surplus of 8
at pop 3 working corn, farmed banana, cottaged FP it has a food surplus of 9
at pop 4 working corn, farmed banana, 2 cottaged FP it has a food surplus of 10
5 pop (add FP cottage) 11 excess food 3 riverside cottages (-1 without a granary and just corn)
6 pop (add FP cottage) 12 excess food 4 riverside cottages (-1 with a granary and just corn)
7 pop (add grass riverside cottage) 12 excess food 5 riverside cottages (-1 with a granary corn and deer)
8 pop (add grass riverside cottage) 12 excess food 6 riverside cottages (? )
9 pop (add plains riverside cottage) 11 excess food 7 riverside cottages
10 pop (add plains riverside cottage) 10 excess food 8 riverside cottages
11 pop (add grass cottage) 10 excess food 8 riverside cottages 1 non

 

[bcool]

In a competitive game like this, opening with a religion instead of a worker (and corresponding techs) is usually not the most efficient start. Getting a second population to work a FP only adds one yield to a worker or settler (as the second pop will eat up 2 of the 3 food). Improving the wet corn ASAP adds 3 yield to a worker or settler (going from 3 food to 6 food). We wouldn't get the one extra coin, but I think 1 coin for 3 food is a pretty good trade-off. Plus, all our subsequent pop growths will come that much faster. Finally, we won't need the culture or happiness from the religion right at the start. The benefits don't really kick in until we have a couple cities that need border pops, or we start hitting up against our happy cap.

I think we need to establish an Official Polling Method and conduct a new vote for starting location. Based on the amount of great input and discussion everyone on this team contributes, I do think it's important for us to have a clear way to call a vote and finalize our decision. Not just for this decision, but also future ones that we might not have as much time to discuss.

Edit: Crosspost with Arkipeller and bcool

I agree. We need a way to decide.

 

[Aivoturso]

I agree that we call a proper vote here to reach the final decision. Some opinions seem to have changed since they last were tallied and at least I'm confused what the current opinion is. For voting method my suggestion still is the Borda count (see this post for details). How do we call an official vote on this? It should be done ASAP to give everyone enough time to vote and the turnplayer (who?) to finish the turn.

Edit: Crosspost with YossarianLives and bcool.

 

[YossarianLives]

The Borda count seems like a great way to handle voting. How do we make it official? Do we vote on it?? Do the Team Captains make an executive decision on this? I think part of the problem is that talonschild was handling a lot of the polls for us, but...

Heads up - tomorrow I will be gone for two weeks.

This was posted on July 5, so we'll need to figure this one out in his absence.

My thought is that one or both Team Captains should make a decision on how to conduct an official poll, and then we implement that method for this decision.