Egypt - Rome - Ottomans?
|
Who shall lead us to Victory!!!
|
|
Stonehenge is 80 hammers, a chop is 13,
Bronze working will take ~7 turns (I'm guessing - no real idea what these settings will do) Mysticysm approx 4, At start 1 a work boat could take 5 turns, then 10 turns for the second, then a worker will take some time too. I don't think we can do it here. At start 2 start with a worker, borders pop about t3 allowing exp bonus hammer for working the sheep which I don't think makes a difference to the worker appearing t8, chop another worker t13, chop 2 forests t17 for 26*1.5 = 39, while making six hammers a turn = 24, then three turns more at six hammers a turn gets SH t20. Ish. So do we want to get it that early and at the expense of so many forests? Or can we wait a little? And do we want the Exp/Ind civ to have start 2? This is all theory, so a sim or two wouldn't go amis...
Completed: RB Demogame - Gillette, PBEM46, Pitboss 13, Pitboss 18, Pitboss 30, Pitboss 31, Pitboss 38, Pitboss 42, Pitboss 46, Pitboss 52 (Pindicator's game), Pitboss 57
In progress: Rimworld
Um, if you want to go for it early, do it right: (start 2)
T0: 1/14 - 4/20 wb T1: 2/14 - 8/20 wb T2: 3/14 - 12/20 wb T3: 4/14 - 16/20 wb T4: 5/14 - 20/20 wb T5: 10/14 - 3/80 SH (imp. fish) T6: 15/14 - 6/80 SH T7: 1/16 - 9/40 worker T8: 1/16 - 18/40 worker T9: 1/16 - 27/40 worker T10: 1/16 - 36/40 worker T11: Anarchy T12: 1/14 - 63/40 worker (1 pop whip) T13: 2/14 - 46/80 SH (move chop) T14: 3/14 - 52/80 SH (chop 2t) T15: 8/14 - 55/80 SH (chop 1t) T16: 9/14 - 80/80 SH (chop finishes) T17: 14/14 -> grow back to 2 Till T11 you should be able to get BW (T7 I doubt very much on those settings). And that is with the seafood-start. Still 1 workboat, 1 worker done at that point, so not even that far back on developing this start (of course 80 SH hammers are 54 hammers for something else, so you could have another worker and a workboat nearly done at that point instead). 
That's brilliant, and it means the Fin civ can start with the rivers... now how do I persuade everyone to settle start 1 1se for 9 river tiles? (Edit: forgot we need the gems... ignore!)
Also Maya? Can we have a guess at what civs everyone is going for with their 2nd picks before we choose Egypt?
Completed: RB Demogame - Gillette, PBEM46, Pitboss 13, Pitboss 18, Pitboss 30, Pitboss 31, Pitboss 38, Pitboss 42, Pitboss 46, Pitboss 52 (Pindicator's game), Pitboss 57
In progress: Rimworld (March 2nd, 2013, 05:06)Old Harry Wrote: That's brilliant, and it means the Fin civ can start with the rivers... now how do I persuade everyone to settle start 1 1se for 9 river tiles? (Edit: forgot we need the gems... ignore!) Indeed, leave the micro up to Serdoa and Jester. If we really want SH early, we'll get it. I strongly suggest we pick Egypt now. It will be gone by the time we get another pick. Why did they pick Maya? And HC as well... 
Egpyt is Agri / Wheel. But you need Fishing, Mining and Myst for the micro-plan I laid out (or any kind of sensible micro on those starts imo - if someone disagrees, please provide the micro on how to play those starts without either Fishing or Myst and still get SH T16 or earlier).
So, either you forgo Egpyt or you forgo getting an early SH. Because you really should have Fishing for that first start but you do need Mining and Myst for SH. If you miss Mining or Myst RMOG might very well decide that they can beat you to SH anyhow (heck, even Smack might decide that they have a decent shot at it). And if you forgo Fishing your start 1 will suck. Plain simple. Honestly, if you pick IND in such a game, you better do something with it. And the only thing to do with it is getting early wonders, the others fall via who gets the tech first (look at PBEM47 and when MoM fell, just for an example of what I mean). And also Egpyt sucks on this start anyhow imo. WCs are nice but with the distances between civs they should not be a real force to think about as their time will be gone most probably when border start to touch. And the Obelisk... well, you don't need that thing. It is nice to get the first Prophet quicker, but aside from that you don't want more Prophets. So it gets worthless afterwards. And you don't need to get that Prophet that quickly and/or can help it along via building Oracle as well.  (March 2nd, 2013, 05:26)Serdoa Wrote: Egpyt is Agri / Wheel. But you need Fishing, Mining and Myst for the micro-plan I laid out (or any kind of sensible micro on those starts imo - if someone disagrees, please provide the micro on how to play those starts without either Fishing or Myst and still get SH T16 or earlier). So, what Civ do you suggest Serdoa? Korea and Dutch?
Assuming Stonehenge, it would make the most sense to pick the civ w/ Mysticism first (plenty of Fishing civs to choose from). Korea would be what I'd pick..even has a somewhat useful UU.
Global lurker
 ; played in Civ VI PBEM 4, 5, 15; DL suboptimal Civ VI PBEM 17
Picks so far:
1: Darius (FIN/ORG) 2: Bismarck (EXP/IND) 3: Huayna (FIN/IND) Maya (Mining / Myst - Holkan, Ball Court) 4: Mehmed (EXP/ORG) Sumeria (Agri / Wheel - Vulture, Ziggurat) Team 1 will pick 2 civs between our 2 most probably. Therefore yes, Korea seems the only viable pick to ensure all the starting techs we need. We could gamble on China / Spain by picking China first. I doubt someone will pick Spain for the civ and Fishing / Myst are not exactly the starting techs that I assume Team 1 would want. Especially with China gone, as that means you either don't start with Mining or Agri - both of which are essential to start with imo. So yeah, either China or Korea. China paired with Spain, Korea paired with Native Americans imo. Dutch are imo weaker than Native A. on those settings. Till we reach Levees the game is probably decided already, so they don't make the difference that you want. And East India Man could be great even on a Lakes map, but I don't see them as deciding anything. On the other hand NAs give us Totem Pole, which will provide us with strong LBs down the line, making us (if we put some emphasis on Feudalism) basically invulnerable till Rifles. At least if we take some care of actually having some of those in the border cities. And we won't even have to build those Totem Poles with SH. On top we get the Dog Soldier, which can defend well enough early on (especially with strong Archers to help if necessary) and doesn't need Copper. Now, what is stronger China + Spain or Korea + NA? I think China + Spain are stronger. Spains UU is not really all that impressive imo, as most players won't defend with Melee-units at that point in the game, so the time-window to use them effectively is very small OR your enemies are so far behind that you'd win without this UU as well. But the UB is nice imo, at least in AW. If you can stay competitive till Cannons you can build 10XP Cannons just with this UB, a Barracks and Theocracy. Thats... great. I would not take it in a PBEM for that, but in a teamer played as AW, yeah, I can see that work (IF you play for it, otherwise it is just wasted). But it is a gamble. Basically the decision has to come from the turnplayers. The difference is mainly "early game protection via NA" to "mid-late game dominance via 10XP cannons". Plus of course the added benefit of Chinas Pavillions if you have culture-battles on borders. For me, both China and Spain can be made worthwhile while Korea I do have a hard time seeing the 10% bonus on the University nor the Hwacha making any difference. But of course, China is a gamble while Korea ensures that we get the needed starting techs. |
