turns 21-36

[I. Larkin]

I put this number as we normally have some overlap in discussion.

I did some new calculations with alteration "road ivory first". Looks that we gain few gold for that.

4000*"BC"	0	List	              size	"fpt" + 2*(1 - "size")	1 + "spt"	4 + "gpt"	build	worker
3950*"BC"	1	{"sugarhill"}	        1.	2.	2	6		moves to wheat
3900*"BC"	2	{"sugarhill"}	        1.	2.	2	6		i 
3850*"BC"	3	{"bonusiwheat"}	1.	4.	2	5		i 
3800*"BC"	4	{"bonusiwheat"}	1.	4.	2	5		i 
3750*"BC"	5	{"bonusirwheat"}	1.	4.	2	6		r
3700*"BC"	6	{"bonusirwheat", "forest"}	1.	4.	4	6	warrior (MP)	r
3650*"BC"	7	{"wheat", "sugarhill"}	2.	4.	3	8		moves to BG
3600*"BC"	8	{"wheat", "sugarhill"}	2.	4.	3	8		m
3550*"BC"	9	{"wheat", "sugarhill"}	2.	4.	3	8		m
3500*"BC"	10	{"wheat", "sugarhill"}	2.	4.	3	8		m
3450*"BC"	11	{"wheat", "rmbg", "forest"}	2.	4.	6	7		m
3400*"BC"	12	{"wheat", "sugarhill", "rrmbg"}	3.	4.	5	10		r
3350*"BC"	13	{"wheat", "sugarhill", "rrmbg"}	3.	4.	5	10		r
3300*"BC"	14	{"wheat", "sugarhill", "rrmbg"}	3.	4.	5	10		move GL
3250*"BC"	15	{"wheat", "sugarhill", "rrmbg"}	3.	4.	5	10		r
3200*"BC"	16	{"wheat", "sugarhill", "rrmbg", "forest"}	3.	4.	7	10		r
3150*"BC"	17	{"wheat", "sugarhill", "rrmbg", "ivory"}	4.	3.	6	12		moves to Plains 1e
3100*"BC"	18	{"wheat", "sugarhill", "rrmbg", "rgras"}	4.	4.	5	11		r
3050*"BC"	19	{"wheat", "sugarhill", "rrmbg", "rgras"}	4.	4.	5	11	granary	r
3000*"BC"	20	{"wheat", "sugarhill", "rrmbg", "rfores"}	4.	3.	7	11		moves to Ivory
2950*"BC"	21	{"wheat", "sugarhill", "rrmbg", "rivory"}	4.	3.	6	13		r
2900*"BC"	22	{"wheat", "sugarhill", "rrmbg", "rivory", "forest"}	4.	3.	8	13		r
2850*"BC"	23	{"wheat", "sugarhill", "rrmbg", "rgras", "rgras"}	5.	4.	5	12		i 
2800*"BC"	24	{"wheat", "rrmbg", "irivory"}	3.	4.	5	11	settler	i 
2750*"BC"	25	{"rrmbg", "sugarhill", "irivory", "rgrass"}	3.	4.	5	12		i 
2700*"BC"	26	{"wheat", "sugarhill", "irivory", "rrmbg"}	4.	4.	6	13	warrior (MP)	move to Plain 1ne
2650*"BC"	27	{"rgrass", "sugarhill", "irivory", "rrmbg"}	4.	2.	5	12		i 
2600*"BC"	28	{"wheat", "sugarhill", "irivory", "iplains", "forest"}	4.	4.	7	12		i

 

[Lanzelot]

Ok, how does the following dotmap look like? (Of course it will still change as we discover more terrain.)

I think red is the best. Walking our settler for three turns to get to the gold hill just doesn't pay off.

Then please notice that there is another wheat at 3N, so the pink location would be nice to have early. However, quite some irrigating will need to be done, before we can utilize that location, so perhaps it's better to go to blue first. (Due to our worker currently irrigating over there, this town can be productive right away. The capital doesn't need all of these tiles while on settler duty.)

Then the worker as indicated in the ss. It can prepare a road and a bit of irrigation for pink.

Then pink.

Another worker to get the red location productive. (And prepare a road to green.)

Then green, black (can reuse the road to pink) and yellow.

Yes, roading ivory is better! (I thought we need the food, but we can use the grassland for one turn as we have shield overrun on the granary anyway. Good job.)

 

[templar_x]

Strange, I thought I remembered we had already said we´d road the ivory first...

DM is ok so far, but as Lanzelot says we know very little still.

Sharing the wheat is a no-brainer. Both proposed city cites allow that (3sw and gh). What are the stats of those tiles as city centers? I believe 2 and 4 for commerce, correct? So commerce-wise the gh would soonish pay off, corruption not accounted for. How desperate do we feel about research?

What I like to do in my games is to "secure one direction". Here I see the south as much easier to do this (barbs are on, right?). So either red or green for me (would have to get calculated either way), then a warrior for mapping to the s-e-n-ne counter-clockwise, so we know a lot more about our surroundings soonish. settling anywhere it does look good and safe.

Just to bring this up for discussion. We do have ivory easily available. Do we consider Maths and a very early SoZ-prebuild and -build so to take over the continent extremely early?
Funny, but I am not too fond of that because I feel we have to little FOOD. Therefore, we won´t be able to settle the continent fast enough. Or do you think this strategy could work?

Yellow probably 1 tile nw for me

templar_x

 

[Memento]

I think red is the best.

Yes,can use BG and Wheat too. Later with green we have MM extrem
I love it.

 

[templar_x]

which bg?

 

[Lanzelot]

which bg?

The one with the mine. While Camelot is working the wheat, the red town can take the BG. Actually in my ss I already assumed that we would be doing that, otherwise we won't get the first curragh in the turn indicated in the ss...

 

[I. Larkin]

Looks that ICS.
Although "red" looks reasonable I think we may put the rest not so tight.

What kind of game we are thinking?
What we are going to take from "philosophy"?
I think MMaking better, but we may discuss...

 

[Memento]

If anybody make a turn, can he post one/some pics in the turnlog thread??
i´ve no time to open the save and in the SS i can´t see how many turns we need for the next tech.

 

[I. Larkin]

If anybody make a turn, can he post one/some pics in the turnlog thread??
i´ve no time to open the save and in the SS i can´t see how many turns we need for the next tech.

It varies 12-14, depending on working tile.

 

[templar_x]

@ Lanzelot - I do not see the ss now. But am I correct that lending the BG works only in the phase of adjustment of the factory? When the combo factory starts regular operation, the capital needs the BG at least most of the time.

@ Memento - you only need to add the beakers in the ss, but in some version I remember that it exactly showed when a tech is researched. A screenshot would not give you any further information. (Sure it would be nice if we should encounter an opponent or barbs though )

@ Ivan - I like the tight placement, escpecially with that narrow land we seem to have. With Lanzelot´s proposed sites, each one could easily grow into its 6 land tiles, and beyond that we will need a duct anyways. I believe this game will be overe before many ducts could be built anyways. But even if we have the time to build them (meaning this game goes at least far into the IA, I would assume), we would have lots of coast tiles to work, which are prime core land with lots of commerce. What we need are some strong producing cities, but there are not the right tiles visible for that yet...

templar_x

 

[Lanzelot]

@ Lanzelot - I do not see the ss now. But am I correct that lending the BG works only in the phase of adjustment of the factory? When the combo factory starts regular operation, the capital needs the BG at least most of the time.

@ Memento - you only need to add the beakers in the ss, but in some version I remember that it exactly showed when a tech is researched. A screenshot would not give you any further information. (Sure it would be nice if we should encounter an opponent or barbs though )

@ Ivan - I like the tight placement, escpecially with that narrow land we seem to have. With Lanzelot´s proposed sites, each one could easily grow into its 6 land tiles, and beyond that we will need a duct anyways. I believe this game will be overe before many ducts could be built anyways. But even if we have the time to build them (meaning this game goes at least far into the IA, I would assume), we would have lots of coast tiles to work, which are prime core land with lots of commerce. What we need are some strong producing cities, but there are not the right tiles visible for that yet...

templar_x

Will need to check more carefully, when we get to the point, but I think red can use the mined BG for 2 out of 3. (Until we leave Despotism.)

I think the tight placement is ok, because a) this is a small map and there will be not much land, b) it reduces corruption and c) the core can be made productive much faster than when spread out wider. Also we need to keep towns at distance three from each other, in case we are attacked.

However, in one point I contradict templar: this game will certainly last into the IA... In August 1914 everybody expected "we will be home for Christmas"... But don't forget, every team has excellent players, and all four starts are of even strength, so this will be a hard and long-drawn struggle.

By the way: only green and yellow need an aquaeduct! All the others can grow to twelve, but still it is not too tight because of the good coastal tiles as templar already pointed out. We have 30-shield harbors, so can easily make a lot of gold that way.

As for production, I think that Camelot and green will be decent sites. (Perhaps we should even move green 1SW? Saves the aquaeduct and we can use three hills for production?! However, we won't be able to use the gold for a while.)
Pink and blue might also become good production places, if a couple of hills/mountains appear on the horizon.

I think we cannot decide on a VC yet. In all my PBEMs, when I decided on a target VC early, my plans got completely messed up by the events of "reality", and I had to go for a different victory type... So we should keep this flexible. A distance 3 setup would certainly keep that flexibility, as we can get the first ring of 6 up to mass-producing military, if the need arises, but as well set it up easily for a science game. The only VC without a chance here are UN and 20k, I think. Perhaps we can work towards 80K?! Should be easier than domination, as we don't need to invade the other continent. The question is only: does it beat Spaceship?

 

[templar_x]

@ Lanzelot - Sir, would you please re-read my post? I was not saying this game won´t last to the IA, but that ducts in every town would only then make many tiles available...

templar_x

 

[Lanzelot]

Ok, but then I still don't understand? Aquaeducts can make many tiles available already in the AA?! Or let's put it that way: in the core towns that need one, I usually complete it in the early MA.

So basically you are saying, that we will be so under stress with "more immediately urgent projects" that we don't have time to build them until after they no longer yield a sufficient return on investment? (Hey, never thought I would ever get to use one of these banker buzz-words... )
In that case we should indeed think about whether we want to shift green 1SW.

Edit: or do you think food will be a problem and it takes ages to grow them sufficiently enough for the aquaeduct to pay off? In that case we could use a worker pump to pump them up...

 

[templar_x]

All of that.
You know, I do have a PBEM running with just one opponent, and at the edge of the MA (me, he is still in even Darker Ages ) I would think of any build BUT an aqueduct...

Let´s do some Maths re green, but if we find that we do not get Philo earlier by settling it FIRST, red will go first and thus we see some land beyond. The shield potential from those shields to the south looks spicy, for sure.

The problem with the worker pump (and I use those in most of my games) is that we lack another core food bonus.

templar_x

 

[Lanzelot]

I have added Ivan's changes to my SS. We gain 3 gold by this.

(Ivan: are you sure in turn 25 you have 12 commerce? I see only 11. Note that the r grass that gets picked up on growth, does not contribute to commerce! Only shields can be gained on growth.
And also we only have 2 food that turn, but that was already a mistake in my original SS... Corrected that, though it does not matter.)

If Ivan and templar would please double-check, whether everything is correct now...

Important question: if we use a scientist in our second town for the first three turns, we can get Writing one turn faster. Do we want to do this?? The lost growth would cost us 4 commerce while researching Philosophy, but we would still get it in the same amount of turns, so it would be 1 turn faster as well. (Of course this plan works only, if we go for red. If we go for green, the second town will be ready two turns before completion of Writing, which is too late.)

The alternative is to go for green and hope that the gold hill squeezes out a turn for Philosophy. I did the necessary calculations for that:

• At size 1, red makes 3 commerce each turn (2 from city center, 2 from rr wheat or rr BG, one is lost to corruption) That's 9 commerce per 3 turns.
• Green will work the rr wheat for one out of 3 turns and an r grass for the remaining 2 turns. City center is 4 gold, rr wheat 2 and r grass 1. In each case 1 is lost to corruption. That makes 5 + 4 + 4 = 13 commerce per 3 turns.

The beakers for Philosophy are collected in turns 29 -37. If we go for red, the second town grows to size 2 in turn 31, while the green town would grow in turn 33. Also, red has another 2-commerce tile available, while for green we only have another 1-commerce tile. (Will take a while, before we have roads down there.)

In turns 29 and 30 we need to run 10% lux, as our capital is at size 5 then. The third town is assumed to be blue in the first plan and red in the second plan.

1. "red first" (details taken from my SS)

turn 1st  2nd  3rd    sum
 29   13    3          15 (+1 lux)
 30   14    3          16 (+1 lux)
 31   11    3          14
 32   13    4          17    <-- 2nd town size 2 now
 33   11    5    3     19
 34   11    4    3     18
 35   13    4    3     20
 36   12    5    3     20
 37   13    4    3     20
                     ----
                     159

1. "green first"

turn 1st  2nd  3rd    sum
 29   13    4          16 (+1 lux)
 30   14    4          17 (+1 lux)
 31   11    5          16
 32   13    4          17
 33   11    5    3     19
 34   11    5    3     19    <-- 2nd town size 2 now
 35   13    5    3     21
 36   12    6    3     21    <-- not sure, but the 6th beaker might already be lost to corruption?!
 37   13    5    3     21
                     ----
                     167 (or 166 if corruption in turn 36)

That means, in the second example we would have 146 (or 145) beakers at the end of turn 36. So in order to complete Philosophy in that turn, we would have to employ a scientist for two turns (or three, if corruption in turn 36) We could do this e.g in the third town. Do we want to do this??

I think now we need a volunteer for the F11 analysis to find out, whether Philo in 36 instead of 37 would make a difference!

If we use a scientist for Writing, we throw away 10 food (4+2+4). If we use him for Philosophy, we throw away 4 food (or 6, if we need him for three turns), but our Curragh will be around 7 turns later.

My feeling is: the extra turn is not worth it, unless we know for sure that it's the only way to finish Philosophy first.

If we do get Philosophy first, my vote goes to "pick Code of Laws for free, then research Warrior Code in 4 and then start Republic".

Lanzelot

 

[I. Larkin]

1) My feeling is: the extra turn is not worth it, unless we know for sure that it's the only way to finish Philosophy first.
2) If we do get Philosophy first, my vote goes to "pick Code of Laws for free, then research Warrior Code in 4 and then start Republic".
3) Ivan: are you sure in turn 25 you have 12 commerce? I see only 11. Note that the r grass that gets picked up on growth, does not contribute to commerce! Only shields can be gained on growth.

1) We never know for sure. My brief F11 check showed that we were first at commerce always, but I did not make calculations if it is enough if somebody went to Writing -=> Phylo straight. Note, that we need pay for Granary.
Two teams go "settler first" mode, so they most probably bypass Pottery.
2) I vote MMaking free Tech + "depend" what situation is. MMaking give most of advantages of seafaring civ. Our ICS "assumes" that we are preparing for short game.
Even if we make cooperation with "our" continental friend it is reasonable to destroy economy of overseas enemy first.
3) Yes, I wrote a program that draw table for ss. It indeed make a mistake when "governor" put next tile not to forest. I can correct it and check what if "green first".

We gain some gold when second City works on Wheat.

 

[I. Larkin]

4000*"BC"	0	List	size	"fpt" + 2*(1 - "size")	1 + "spt"	4 + "gpt"	build	worker
3950*"BC"	1	{"sugarhill"}	1.	2.	2	6		moves to wheat
3900*"BC"	2	{"sugarhill"}	1.	2.	2	6		i 
3850*"BC"	3	{"bonusiwheat"}	1.	4.	2	5		i 
3800*"BC"	4	{"bonusiwheat"}	1.	4.	2	5		i 
3750*"BC"	5	{"bonusirwheat"}	1.	4.	2	6		r
3700*"BC"	6	{"bonusirwheat", "forest"}	1.	4.	4	6	warrior (MP)	r
3650*"BC"	7	{"wheat", "sugarhill"}	2.	4.	3	8		moves to BG
3600*"BC"	8	{"wheat", "sugarhill"}	2.	4.	3	8		m
3550*"BC"	9	{"wheat", "sugarhill"}	2.	4.	3	8		m
3500*"BC"	10	{"wheat", "sugarhill"}	2.	4.	3	8		m
3450*"BC"	11	{"wheat", "rmbg", "forest"}	2.	4.	6	7		m
3400*"BC"	12	{"wheat", "sugarhill", "rrmbg"}	3.	4.	5	10		r
3350*"BC"	13	{"wheat", "sugarhill", "rrmbg"}	3.	4.	5	10		r
3300*"BC"	14	{"wheat", "sugarhill", "rrmbg"}	3.	4.	5	10		move GL
3250*"BC"	15	{"wheat", "sugarhill", "rrmbg"}	3.	4.	5	10		r
3200*"BC"	16	{"wheat", "sugarhill", "rrmbg", "forest"}	3.	4.	7	10		r
3150*"BC"	17	{"wheat", "sugarhill", "rrmbg", "ivory"}	4.	3.	6	12		moves to Plains 1e
3100*"BC"	18	{"wheat", "sugarhill", "rrmbg", "rgrass"}	4.	4.	5	11		r
3050*"BC"	19	{"wheat", "sugarhill", "rrmbg", "rgrass"}	4.	4.	5	11	granary	r
3000*"BC"	20	{"wheat", "sugarhill", "rrmbg", "ivory"}	4.	3.	6	12		moves to Ivory
2950*"BC"	21	{"wheat", "sugarhill", "rrmbg", "rivory"}	4.	3.	6	13		r
2900*"BC"	22	{"wheat", "sugarhill", "rrmbg", "rivory", "forest"}	4.	3.	8	13		r
2850*"BC"	23	{"wheat", "sugarhill", "rrmbg", "rgrass", "rgrass"}	5.	4.	5	12		i 
2800*"BC"	24	{"wheat", "rrmbg", "irivory"}	3.	4.	5	11	settler	i 
2760*"BC"	25	{"rrmbg", "sugarhill", "irivory", "rgrass0"}	3.	2.	5	11		i 
2720*"BC"	26	{"wheat", "sugarhill", "irivory", "rrmbg"}	4.	4.	6	13	warrior (MP)	move to Plain 1ne
2680*"BC"	27	{"rgrass", "sugarhill", "irivory", "rrmbg"}	4.	2.	5	12		i 
2640*"BC"	28	{"wheat", "sugarhill", "irivory", "iplains", "forest"}	4.	4.	7	12		i 
2600*"BC"	29	{"wheat", "sugarhill", "irivory", "iplains", "rgrass"}	5.	4.	5	13		i 
2560*"BC"	30	{"wheat", "sugarhill", "irivory", "rrmbg", "irplains"}	5.	4.	7	15		r
2520*"BC"	31	{"sugarhill", "irivory", "rrmbg", "irplains"}	3.	4.	6	13	settler	r
2480*"BC"	32	{"wheat", "sugarhill", "irivory", "irplains"}	4.	4.	5	13		moves+i plains 1sw
2440*"BC"	33	{"sugarhill", "irivory", "irplains2"}	3.	2.	4	11	worker	i 
2400*"BC"	34	{"wheat", "sugarhill", "irivory", "forest"}	3.	4.	6	11		i 
2360*"BC"	35	{"wheat", "sugarhill", "irivory", "irplains2"}	4.	4.	5	13	warrior	moves to plains E-NE-NE
2320*"BC"	36	{"rmgrass", "sugarhill", "irivory", "irplains2"}	4.	2.	5	12		i 
2280*"BC"	37	{"wheat", "sugarhill", "irivory", "irplains2", "forest"}	4.	4.	7	13	warrior	i

 

[templar_x]

@ 1. - how do we know about the settler first approach of two teams? did their caps already shrink?
to me it is doubtful that we could beat someone who goes -> Writing -> Philo straigtht. How much was Pottery, 70 beakers? That is hard to gain by better growth and optimal beakers, on only 2 techs...

@ 2. - let´s see what we know and how things look then. I see the advantage of MM, but my memory tells me that CoL is quite a bit more expensive, and we will need it at some time anyway.

I think I placed a thought somewhere in the strategy thread under which circumstances someone would see early warfare as an option. Nobody having thoughts on this?

templar_x

 

[I. Larkin]

I think I placed a thought somewhere in the strategy thread under which circumstances someone would see early warfare as an option. Nobody having thoughts on this?

T-x, did you mean this?:

i dislike the Ports and England for this as they have completely useless UUs in my eyes until quite late in the game.

my assumptions are: there will be 4 civs in the game. 2 on each continent. we need to overcome one and then build up a strong economy and production base. after taking over our continent we have to become the research leader and the production leader.
this can last very long (until bombers and marines...) so we can manage D-day. the only exception is if the other continent still holds 2 civs of nearly the same strength when we have taken our own.
my logic tells me that with a human opponent you practically will not make peace after you got into war. is that correct?

@1. Yes, green and blue civs have 2 Cities already. However their commerce is low. Pottery cost 50 b, so if we systematically 2 bpt ahead we will beat them on Phylo.
@2. CoL less expensive then MMaking. And, to win this game we will need MMaking for sure, but I am not sure about CoL + Republic. It is very expensive couple and we may consider BW->IW-> Massive upgrade warriors->Swords.

 

[Lanzelot]

@2. CoL less expensive then MMaking. And, to win this game we will need MMaking for sure, but I am not sure about CoL + Republic. It is very expensive couple and we may consider BW->IW-> Massive upgrade warriors->Swords.

I'm pretty sure this game cannot be won in the Ancient Age. Even if it's a small map, the distances are so long, that anybody can defend easily in that time. Ivan, are you planning to stay in despotism?? I'm pretty sure, the early swords-rush strategy will fail, and even if it succeeds, it will only lead to the other two teams making an alliance against us. And then we are hopelessly lost, if we are still in despotism.

I rather think: stay peaceful/passive early on and go Republic asap!! If someone attacks us, it will only hurt their infrastructure and development, we can certainly defend. (Defending is much easier. I found this out in CDG1: Calis attacked me with Gallic Swordsmen quite early, but I got pikes on time and was able to refute the GS rush.) Then we use Republic to gain a large tech advantage (e.g Knights or even Cavs) and take over a backward nation. (If we want to go military. We can also go for space or 80K.)
Therefore CoL is the most important tech. Things like MM, IW etc can be done in 4-5 turns, once we are a Republic!

Edit: in our case defending is especially easy, once we have the Numidean! And that also requires getting Republic asap, as we don't want a despotic GA...