What da heck are we gonna do first in da Middle Ages

[peter grimes]

@ General_W: See my comments about knights in the Defense thread. One thing I keep forgetting, though, (and I'm probably not the only one) is that though the GS may cannot move two on unimproved jungle tiles, he can move 6 on roaded jungle tiles, which is the scenario we are likely facing.

 

[fe3333au]

Which just means that their frontline towns will be just as well defended as our own ... and it really only effects the swiftness that KISS can reinforce.

When KISS attack, the UU's movement bonus will be mired down by terrain.

 

[peter grimes]

When KISS attack, the UU's movement bonus will be mired down by terrain.

Not if there are roads in the jungle, which we can already see that there are. They will have their movement bonus while attacking us.

If we pillage the roads on the west, south, and north of our cities that will mean the GS are attacking from the worst possible terrain.

 

[azzaman333]

Not if there are roads in the jungle, which we can already see that there are. They will have their movement bonus while attacking us.

If we pillage the roads on the west, south, and north of our cities that will mean the GS are attacking from the worst possible terrain.

But they will end up stranded in our territory for 1 turn. We can use that turn to kill off 50% of them.

On a side note, in a recent HoF game i played as the celts the gallics weren't as good as a expected. Vet gallics attacking reg spear won most of the time, but rarely without damage, and spears on hills required an attack of at least 3 gallics to look like winning. Walled hoplites will be great defenders for us.

 

[General_W]

Ok – just so we’re clear, what I’m hearing is the team consensus moving towards adopting a Republic next turn.

I must say, I now find myself in the Republic camp also.

Simply put – Feudalism just isn’t that much better than Republic in the short term, and Republic has a much better upside and long term potential.
Republic will be respectable at handling a mostly defensive war and would really shine if we can manage to get peace. We’ll certainly have to manage our units more closely – but this team (meaning Chamnix) has shown a flair for micromanagement… and I’m sure we can handle it.
Republic improves as our cities grow, when we trigger our Golden Age, when we build the Forbidden Palace, and when we consolidate our defenses… all things we will want to do anyway.
Feudalism will only really shine if we embark on a campaign to utterly wipe KISS off the face of the map… something I’m not sure we’re willing to try.
(Sidebar: I noticed that in CivAssist, the corruption % rate for each city is the same for us between Republic and Feudalism… it’s my understanding the Feudalism should be higher. Any idea why it’s not showing? The % does change for every other form of Government)

So – If the decision had to be made right now – I’d call for a Republic.

I wanted to throw this on the table really clearly so that there is ample time for analysis and discussion before we actually need to make this decision on turn 93.

Please comment – either pro or con!

 

[rujikin]

Perhaps if they are going for republic we can use republic's disadvantages aginst them and use feudalism's advantages for ourselves... If we can get a Military buildup between us maby we will win because of our unit limit would be much higher then theirs then their economy will crash while ours will remain the same then increase with the war while theirs getrs even worse

I vote for an unrestricted war to eliminate Kiss from the map! Bwrahahahaha

 

[Chamnix]

I agree with Republic, and I promise to try not to change my mind again.

 

[azzaman333]

Perhaps if they are going for republic we can use republic's disadvantages aginst them and use feudalism's advantages for ourselves... If we can get a Military buildup between us maby we will win because of our unit limit would be much higher then theirs then their economy will crash while ours will remain the same then increase with the war while theirs getrs even worse

I vote for an unrestricted war to eliminate Kiss from the map!

Remember that KISS can basically change govs whenever they want to, so if we try to crash their repbulic, they'll just become feudal or monarch.

 

[rujikin]

Remember that KISS can basically change govs whenever they want to, so if we try to crash their repbulic, they'll just become feudal or monarch.

That is a problem.... Hum.... Ill let you guys decide since I haven't tryed out the new governments yet and have never been a republic for more then a few turns (Due to my inability to get peace with the enemy ^ ^;

 

[gbno1fan]

I vote for republic. And like Chamnix, I promise to try my best not to change my mind yet again.

 

[peter grimes]

As much of a peacenik as I am, I still think that Feudalism gives MIA the best chances for a victory condition. We will have adequate research compared to the other teams due to our Commercial and Scientific traits, and we will be able to field a larger army than anyone else, while still maintaining our research advantage.

I might remind everyone of something your false 'god' posted yesterday:

By far the most PBEM's are won by the rest giving up. It's no use continuing with your measly 3 cities and 20 units against an opponent that has 50 cities and 400 units.
Diplo: -> not in an all human game
Space: the first one to be able to nuke, does so in PBEM
Culture 100k: no way 1 player can get the double of the number 2
Culture 20k: a player focussing all culture into 1 cities neglects too many things for his nation to survive
Histo: too long
Dom: cities are mostly razed instaed of captured in PBEM
Conq: see my opening line of this post

I read this as sound advice, rather than Dogma from on High. But either way, the implication is clear. Odds are in our favor if we maximize our potential for waging war.

There are two elements to waging war in Civ: The Quality and the Quantity. The Quality of the unit is related directly to the research investment brought to bear on the military sections of the tech tree. The Quantity aspect is less ephemeral: numbers numbers numbers.

In case you all have gone over to the Republic side, as poetic as it may seem......

Feudalism will allow us the luxury of maintaining very high research levels (quality) while fielding a larger, more technologically advanced army than any of the other teams can muster (quantity).

Republic forces us to make compromises: Big Army (quantity)?... Sure, as long as we turn off research! Want to get ahead of the other in military techs (quality)?... No problem! - Just trade in those 20 defensive units and we'll put some more boys to work out at the lab! But we can't have BOTH!

If we were playing a theoretical game against ideal human opponents who never made stupid choices (like KISS abandoning our mutually benficial peace pact), then I would be in the front lines of advocacy for Republic.

But we're not playing an ideal game. We are surrounded by humans, with all their petty jealousies and idiocies. If we are going to win, then based on past performance we will win by CONQUEST. Republic is NOT the government to use to achieve that.

Feudalism is the best government to use against human players to achieve a conquest victory.

*but what do I know? I've never even played multiplayer!

 

[azzaman333]

Even though "most" games are won by conquest, "most" games dont have 4 teams of 30+ players in it.

 

[fe3333au]

Good points Peter ... however i am with the Republic

and most of this is because I am comfortable playing this government ... I have never ever played Feudal ... I am also into bigger cities and unit support is very bad in feudal for larger settlements ... not a good reason but because the numbers seem to suggest no clear leap ahead winner, I would like to reap the peace time benefits of Republic before we enter into war.

And as I am also a peacenik ... I don't like that Feudalism seems to lead inevitably to a big war ... we are still at peace and maybe KISS will not attack ... and since we are certainly not going to attack first .... Republic is the better choice.

If it is a bad choice, well there is nothing stopping us from changing governments later ... by then we will probably have more to choose from anyway.

The goal of the Foreign Ministry is to try to prevent the erruption of open hostilities ... and at the same time assemple allies and persuade them to act together against any future aggression (with talk of shared spoils)

Mr Grimes I would remind you to not mock the creator ... RIK has smiled and favoured his true flock

 

[General_W]

I hear you Peter – believe me, I do.

But you’re speaking in generalities (I know – it’s hard to be specific with so many variables and so much guess work involved. And you’ll see how bad my own guessing and generalizing is in just a moment&#8230

For example, this statement…

Republic forces us to make compromises: Big Army (quantity)?... Sure, as long as we turn off research! Want to get ahead of the other in military techs (quality)?... No problem! - Just trade in those 20 defensive units and we'll put some more boys to work out at the lab! But we can't have BOTH!

Your point here is well taken, but the specifics are- there is only about 5-10 gold/beakers per turn difference between Feudalism and Republic as we stand now. Now of course – if we want to just pour out the units – then Feudalism will be better. But with proper city growth and shrewd unit management, Republic can field an army almost as respectable while still keeping up in research. Not the best certainly… but not as terrible as I once believed.

In opposition to what Meleet has to say [EDIT: not really in opposition... just a matter of timing actually], in my experience, multiplayer games with more than 2 good players tend to run into the late game (unless 1 player manages to totally destroy another very early on – as TNT attempted. We’re now past that point, and if my experience is any indication, the game would normally settle into a nervous balance of power). We have 3 very good teams, and one that is doing just fine. Wars are likely to look like the TNT vs. Dnuts conflict until one side gains a truly definitive edge through either size or technology. It’s simply too hard to win against a clever human in their own core unless you’ve got a large upper hand.

Now – we do have a 3 tech edge, and are ahead of KISS by a couple cities (judging by land area) – does that count as a big upper hand?
NO. Not against an opponent with a 2 move UU that can switch into a warmonger government with 1 turn anarchy. (imho)

Since we don’t have the ability to definitely win a cataclysmic war with KISS, our interests are better served by trying to lengthen our tech lead and build that overwhelming advantage that we need to really crush them.

Which is why Republic becomes so appealing. The things we need to really get rolling on a significant technology edge (Big cities, strong infrastructure [at the expense of building units]) are the same things that will make Republic shine.

KISS may hate us for good or stupid reasons – but they know we’re three techs up on them, they know we have hoplites, and if that isn’t enough to make them wait to start the war – then getting smacked around in the jungle should make them change their mind.
Either way – I think KISS will sooner or later realize they need peace for a while longer. (Not that they will become “peaceful” mind you) It is critical that we use the interval of peace to get as far ahead as we can… and I think that means Republic.

Here’s what I perceive to be the most likely evolution of the game… (with what’s already happened thrown in to help show the arc)

All teams start on large, resource rich world (no one gets robbed of something necessary)

1) Dnuts and TNT meet – TNT starts war hoping to secure whole continent for themselves and eventual victory

2) KISS and MIA meet – Sign treaty hoping to get ahead of warring neighbors through research

3) Dnuts slaps down all TNT attacks, but recognize TNT will do the same thing to them in TNT land – war stalls

4) KISS becomes Jealous of MIA out-playing them (even though both teams are getting rich) KISS declares intent to leave tech treaty with MIA

5) MIA makes new tech deal with TNT and both rocket far ahead of their rivals

6) KISS rants and fumes [and foolishly declares war on MIA – KISS loses their luxury towns, before seeing the light, and suing for peace. MIA gives back 1 of KISS’s cities to secure the peace] * this may or may not happen depending on the work of Mr. Fe3333au.

7) KISS and MIA settle into an uneasy peace – KISS building units and plotting revenge.

8) Dnuts and TNT continue to pick at each other – no one can win decisively, and the war drags on.

9) KISS tries to attack again, but now MIA has cavalry – we thoroughly stomp them.

10) MIA now has a big tech lead and a core of highly productive towns – we proceed to take apart KISS piece by piece.

11) TNT finally begins to make progress against the Dnuts – not as much as us of course.

12) Game comes down to MIA vs TNT – and we all know who the better team is, and who only survived because MIA gave them the deal of the century.​

Now – will the game go just like that? Probably not.

But since we’re all doing a bunch of guesswork – I thought I’d at least reveal the broad assumptions that I’m basing my thinking on.
The above is the most realistic expectation that I have based on past PBEM experience… which may or may not be relevant.

Going on my guesses and hunches – and based on the smaller than expected difference between Republic and Feudalism – and based on the fact the Republic is much more appealing with little-to-no war weariness in mp – and based on the fact that Republic has a better “upside” – and based on the fact that I think it’s still too early for our Armageddon brawl with KISS…

I still have to go with Republic.

Ok, that was long and rambling, but hopefully parts of it made sense.
Comments?
Are my expectations wildly off and/or stupid?
Other ideas?

 

[classical_hero]

@classical_hero - whatever happened to we must build military not now, but yesterday?

@peter grimes - where do you see the short-term significance? I see 11 gpt right now which will drop to 5 gpt immediately when we lose the taxmen. Granted, a lot will happen after that with some growth and some units and it's uncertain which will win out, but the turn 92 figures of 5 gpt don't strike me as significant.

My whole beef that we did not have the Iron connected already and that we were not building Hoplites. We still do not have enough of these cheap excellent defenders.

 

[Rik Meleet]

lurker's comment: Explaining my quoted post.
There doesn't have to be always war to win by forcing the others to give up. It can be a completely peaceful game, ending with 1 side having cavalry and then declares war and overruns the opponent's knights, pikes and muskets. Or the first with nukes fires them at their opponent's Uranium sources. Or 1 side realises on the discovery of Steam Power that they are the only team without coal. Or <whatever> ...
Usually knight, cavs, tanks or nukes...

 

[peter grimes]

Very well argued, General_W

I'm still on the side of Feudalism, though. But understand that whichever government we choose, I'll swear an oath of loyalty to it, will humbly serve to the best of my abilities.

It would be super to have a secure peace with KISS. I hope we can pull that off.

 

[rujikin]

Very well argued, General_W

I'm still on the side of Feudalism, though. But understand that whichever government we choose, I'll swear an oath of loyalty to it, will humbly serve to the best of my abilities.

It would be super to have a secure peace with KISS. I hope we can pull that off.

If ar weryness is as bad on PTW as is on conquests I say monarch or feudalism (Soon as i switch to republic I have to change governments because all citys are on fire >_>...)

The only problem with republic is if we get into a war and half our citys are on fire... Then who will win with their quick change ability? I know with a republic on PTW it was both money hungry and production killing

Besides after a war with them they may be looking for revenge, i say we make a Fortress Egg Island for the war with the other island after that and eliminate a potential problem

 

[peter grimes]

The only problem with republic is if we get into a war and half our citys are on fire.

I don't think that a megamaniacal micromanager like Chamnix will let any city fall into disorder. That's one thing we don't have to worry about, at least!

 

[rujikin]

I don't think that a megamaniacal micromanager like Chamnix will let any city fall into disorder. That's one thing we don't have to worry about, at least!

But at what cost do we keep the city's happy? Production? Money? Troops?