RBP3 [SPOILERS] - Zara of the Ottomans

[WarriorKnight]

i like the growing to 4 and then settler, i'd also like to get four warriors out rather than invest in a barracks. that can come later in my view.

Maybe, but what exactly is that 4th warrior going to do? He can't scout since barb archers will probably be around by then. We already have enough units for military police. I think it's just better to sink some hammers into a barracks we are inevitably going to build whereas we don't know if we will use the warrior. It also very likely that the 1st thing the 2nd city will build is a warrior so IMO we will have too many of them.

i wonder if we go two settlers straight off rather that build workers, quick calcs and we could have three cities by turn 43

This, however, I must disagree with. 3 cities by t43 is nice only if we have enough workers to improve the tiles around the city. Since we will only have 1 worker by the time you suggest city 3 is founded, we will be working many unimproved tiles. I would rather ensure we can always work improved tiles.

[WarriorKnight]

Sorry guys. Is it possible to have a reload from after rego ended his turn. As far as I am aware it will only reset my move. Basically I tried to remove a sign we had put up and I didn't notice the warrior was selected.

Total newb I know, but please could I have my move redone?

Just posted in the IT thread. Maybe we can also use this to redo our move?

No big deal if not but might as well ask.

[Sockboy]

Just posted in the IT thread. Maybe we can also use this to redo our move?

No big deal if not but might as well ask.

Yeah I think if there's going to be a reload anyway, may as well try to get our misclick fixed too. But to be honest I don't really care.

[Sockboy]

Going back to some map speculation we had earlier, today I loaded up a huge shuffle map with low water levels, and temperate climate. I think this matches the type of game settings we see in the setting tab of our Pitboss game.

Settling in place with 8/9 tiles in the first ring typically (I regenerated a number of random starts) gives around 0.3% of domination limit (I also notice that our earlier tile predictions were for the domination limit, so around half of the world size). The major difference here is that there is approximately 30-50% extra land than on a typical map (shuffle includes continents, pangaea and archipelago I think...). That's a substantial increase in land area.

The other thing I did was quickly play out a game with 17 civs to see how the distribtion of cities worked out... At around 1000AD (essentially after all of the land is taken) Civs have on the order of 8-15 cities, with a mean around the 12 cities mark. So with an extra 50% land around, we should be expecting to get up to 15-18 cities each! That's seems to be a lot to me, maybe there's a new world out there? I know Sullla claims this concept is broken for MP, but I can't think that we would all have this much land freely available. A slight caveat here is that the land in general is sparsely resourced, so what WK mentioned about this being a relatively standard map may be correct.

We also might not start very close to each other at all if my tea-leaves reading is correct (at least we NEEDN'T start very close to each other).

The recent land area figures show that at least 14 civs have cities that have 0 coastal (or lake) tiles in the BFC, while one other civ has 2 lake or coast tiles. We'll still waiting on Team Morgan's borders to pop to see what they have. I think it'll be pointless to track these numbers after that though.

[Pegasus]

My my, quite an eventful turn we are having.

Not too much harm done I dont think in moving North this turn - so don't feel too bad about it Ad I'm fortunate to have a seperate numerical keypad on my laptop so I avoid the mouse wherever possible :neenernee

New build plans in I see. I shall try them myself through the WB to see if I can see anything more, but I doubt I will. Whats the consensus on Conan over the next few, are we going to arc round to the East and hope we are not blocked into a cul-de-sac. I am ok with seeing whats that way.

[WarriorKnight]

Demog's from this turn:



Well, since we are tied for last in land area, no one has more than 1 water tile in BFC. However since we are 15th, there are 2 other civs with 1 lake tile (which the rival average agrees with).

Not much else to report, everyone is still at size 1 and no-one has got a tech yet. Hopefully some real action in C&D might start soon...

Didn't play since we don't have a consensus of move after the misclick. I say NE then SE to curve back around the east.

[Sockboy]

I think most of us are ok with the NE, SE combo for Conan. Maybe don't head any further away from our capital after that though, either we loop through the mountain pass or we backtrack if it's a cul de sac.

WRT starting moves, I like the settler4 option myself, it times BW with getting the settler out and it gets us another 2 workers very quickly. So I think there is a minimum time spent working unimproved tiles.

Ad, I think WK is right about getting another settler out so quickly. It looks good on paper, but you spend a lot of time working unimproved tiles, not great. I think we should probably let the capital regrow to size 4 and then two pop whip out another settler, but that's just gut feeling right now. It might be better to grow to size 5/6 and just hammer them out. Or we can collect overflow from a granary whip, etc. For now I think we should concentrate on the workers.

The warrior v Barracks I'm a bit undecided here. With only 3 warriors, and two playing home defence we're not getting a lot of exploration done. Another warrior could be useful a bit longer than WK thinks, mostly due to not everyone having archery, which means barb archers aren't likely to pop in the near future. We will however definitely want a barracks in the capital and the sooner the better. I haven't checked to see if the warrior pops before we hit size4, if it doesn't we probably end up with hammer decay I think, since there's a 10/12 turn period of interrupted building (settlers+ anarchy+workers). I think we won't lose any hammers if a building is interrupted, but I think if you stop building a unit for 5 turns you start losing hammers, is this correct?

Pegasus, you got any thoughts on this so we can make a consensus?

[Sockboy]

Re C&D: a few little things come from those numbers.

I see that the average soldier points has moved up by 125 = 2000/16.
Someone who's not Broker33 + dsplaisted has built a warrior. Likely candidates are one of the two teams who started with a scout, the HRE or the Aztecs. At 7 turns to build, we're looking at 2-2.5 hammers per turn.

Production numbers have changed again, maybe due to bonus tile being available in the second ring?

Finally, our health numbers have changed... did we get a forest growth in our boundaries? I can't think of anything else which explains it. Another 20 hammers can't hurt! Does this explain why the gamestate didn't match the sandbox?



Popped another one ! It's 2N of the capital, so it doesn't explain the difference between the game and sandbox. Free hammers!

[WarriorKnight]

The warrior v Barracks I'm a bit undecided here. With only 3 warriors, and two playing home defence we're not getting a lot of exploration done. Another warrior could be useful a bit longer than WK thinks, mostly due to not everyone having archery, which means barb archers aren't likely to pop in the near future. We will however definitely want a barracks in the capital and the sooner the better. I haven't checked to see if the warrior pops before we hit size4, if it doesn't we probably end up with hammer decay I think, since there's a 10/12 turn period of interrupted building (settlers+ anarchy+workers). I think we won't lose any hammers if a building is interrupted, but I think if you stop building a unit for 5 turns you start losing hammers, is this correct?

I forgot about archery. In any case, I think the barracks will be more useful in the long term while we can use chariots or scouts for scouting. I'm happy to go either way for now.

As for the hammer decay, I have no idea. I assumed that everything eventually starts losing hammers but i've never tested it.

Popped another one ! It's 2N of the capital, so it doesn't explain the difference between the game and sandbox. Free hammers!

Wrong reference, don't do that or I might be disappointed when we don't pop gold . Still good news of course.

As for the sandbox, I forgot to put a forest on the tile 2S of the capital.

[WarriorKnight]

Did NE since we seem to be in agreement: