For a forum that prides itself on trying new things, for the love of all that is novel and interesting, please can we have a new QotM? - Krill

Create an account  

 
Woden's and Chevalier Mal Fet's [Insert Clever Name Here] Team Thread

Welcome Chevalier Mal Fet, looks like we are teammates. I wanted to start discussions on civilization picks.

Looks like we get first and last pick.

My gut says to pick Nubia as the first choice. I am surprised that nobody picked them for PBEM6. They are ungodly powerful: +20%/+40% bonus production on districts and +50% production and +50% experience of ranged units, additional production to strategic resources, +2 gold on bonus and luxury mined resources, a stronger/faster archer. What is there not to like?

They might work well with someone like Germany or China or a science powerhouse like Arabia, IDK. Thoughts?

I am not set in stone on this pick if you have other ideas, we can discuss. For both PBEM2 and PBEM 4, I didn't pick the civ I initial thought I would. The board is open, are there civs that you think might have good synergy?
Reply

I should preface everything by saying I really don't think I'm up to Realms Beyonds' standards for multiplayer, but I'm willing to try my best and to learn so I'm not an embarrassment or a deadweight to you.

I hadn't given thought to specific civ picks yet, but I was definitely thinking we want to pair a builder and a military civ if possible. Nubia for sure would be a great choice. Something I was toying with was Kongo. It hasn't been picked yet, but has some neat economic bonuses. The disadvantage of being unable to create a religion is nullified in a team game, since Kongo can just take his partner's religion. However, I've never played the Civ (and I haven't been able to do much testing in SP because the starts are still broken), so I dunno how well it would pair up with Nubia.

Another thought I had was that it could be a good play to take two civs that both get their power spikes in the same era. Consider, for example, a classical age rush with legions backed by Nubian archers, or a medieval attack of Crouching Tigers and Mamluks. The idea is the two civs together would be able to coordinate an attack with a very good chance of wiping out another team entirely (and snowballing from there), while taking civs with different era power spikes would just lead to a mediocre team as the two are less able to support each other.
I Think I'm Gwangju Like It Here

A blog about my adventures in Korea, and whatever else I feel like writing about.
Reply

(Temporary) Ded-Lurker checking in. Greetings Woden and Chevalier, and best of luck this game! I will be rooting for both of you  thumbsup 

I've been messaging Chevalier a bit, and I owe him big time for the stellar lurking in PBEM4. With that in mind, I have some insight and general thoughts into team-play based on my experience in PB6 and just general theory-crafting. I don't think anything I'll be suggesting is incredibly revolutionary, so if either of you have already considered what I'm saying, feel free to disregard it  lol

Without further ado. 

The name of the game is specialization. This may seem obvious, and it was true in Civ 4, but it's even more true here because of Policy Cards. Two civs, each with 2 Campuses and 2 Holy Sites, are less effective than 2 civs, one with 4 Campuses and the other with 4 Holy Sites, because now they can both run Natural Philosophy and Scripture more efficiently. 

At its heart, Civ is a game of currencies. It's about most efficiently producing the right combination of the game's 6 currencies, and leveraging them into power. The question then becomes, in a team game, how best to divide the labor of producing these currencies to produce the best collective civ? Since each civ is getting its own continent, you can start getting extremely specialized out the gate and won't have to worry about being independent until you can link up with your ally. 

I believe the most natural currencies to section off, and have one civ focus on producing above all else, are Faith and especially Gold. Both civs will necessarily need to produce at least some degree of science, culture, production, and food. But, one civ can really push gold generation and transfer it to the other civ as needed. As we saw in PBEM4, gold is extremely important for military strength, and if you're able to have one civ entirely devote itself to gold production, it will make them both far stronger. 

There is an argument to be made to ignore religion completely. However, I think that given the lower risks associated with pursuing one in this setting, the strong potential payoffs, and the need to have a religion to block a religious win, it would be advisable to pursue one. 

At any rate, with that general outline, I think you should pursue this rough division of labor: 

Civ #1:
Focuses on Science and Production

Civ #2: 
Focuses on Gold and Faith

Civ #1 will be the military muscle. They will tech for the best units and use their production to cram out tons of units to upgrade. Civ #2 will support the economy with religion and most importantly, provide the gold that upgrades and pays for Civ #1's military. Civ #2 will be lagging in science by comparison, but can draft off of Civ #1's research as the game goes on (note: smart tech coordination for known tech bonuses in the early game will be essential). 

Culture is not as important for most civs by comparison, and both should pursue it but not necessarily specialize in it. Food will be pursued by both as a matter of course. 

Side Note: You both will also want to focus on potentially developing highly district-ed cities for the other to trade to. 

At any rate, this of course doesn't mean that Civ #1 will ignore gold production or anything like that, but instead of building Commercial Hubs, they should be building Campuses. 

I think this rough division of labor should be at the heart of any Civ selection. The team environment also means that a lot of normally nonviable choices are stronger, as their weaknesses can be covered by having an ally from Turn 1. I don't have any specific civ combinations to suggest at present. I would generally look at drafting mid-game power-spiking naval civs though. 

For all intents and purposes, this is going to be a naval game, it actually will probably be very similar to PBEM4 in a lot of ways (did VA get banned?). With that in mind, deep beelines to frigates may once again end up being the order of the day. I would strongly consider Australia and England off the top of my head for this game.

Looking forward to seeing what you two can do  jive
Reply

Just from your names, you ought to grab Norway + France, right?  twirl

Chevalier Mal Fet Wrote:I really don't think I'm up to Realms Beyonds' standards for multiplayer
Honestly, what's most important around here is politeness and reliability.  You've got those, so you're welcome.  

Quality of play is handy, but hardly vital - and you may surprise yourself how you play when you take it one turn at a time with discussion, instead of normal SP pace. I've found I catch a lot of mistakes when I compose my reports, even before I get feedback from the thread.
EitB 25 - Perpentach
Occasional mapmaker

Reply

(November 21st, 2017, 15:20)Chevalier Mal Fet Wrote: I should preface everything by saying I really don't think I'm up to Realms Beyonds' standards for multiplayer, but I'm willing to try my best and to learn so I'm not an embarrassment or a deadweight to you.

I think Mardoc hit the nail on the head and will add that communication is very helpful, especially if something comes up that prevents you from playing your normal turn. I will also add that playing in these PBEMs is way different than playing a SP game. In a SP game, you maybe take a few minutes a turn to think about what you want to do and where you want to go. Here you play a turn then take the rest of the day thinking about what your next moves might be, where you might want to go, and what you might do to get there faster. Then you write them down and see all your mistakes or come up with better ideas. I don't know about other players but I am no where near as efficient and strong a player in my SP games as I am in a PBEM (which I guess is also what Mardoc said). On the flip side, I also think playing in these PBEMs has help me become a better SP player, as I discover new tricks and methods to be a better player. 

@oledavy, 
Welcome and feel free to ded-lurk as long as you want. I 100% agree with you that we need to have complimentary civilizations. I am just not sure which ones. 

Before I get to possible pairings, I do want to state that I am think about changing up my play style for this game. PBEM2 and PBEM4, I built strong economies but ended up failing at the end. Here, I am thinking of being aggressive out of the gate and then building up the cities after an initial push at somebody. I would really like a civ that has some advantage for early aggression and would like to plan to go to war as soon as Shipbuilding can be completed. 

If we go Nubia, I would really like a civilization that can get a religion and take Jesuit Education to faith buy campus buildings. Maybe Arabia, Russia, or even China for Stonehenge.  

I agree with you, CMF, that Kongo would be fun to play in one of these PBEMs. I think he fixes the limits with housing during the Renaissance and Industrial Eras that I see in most games and he can be an economic powerhouse. He might work well with Khmer and artifacts but I don't know if that is too late to have an impact in a PBEM. My sense is to go with what oledvay stated about having a military/science civ and a faith/gold civ. 

I am going to have to think about this a little more and see what synergy we can shake out of combinations. Let me know what you think.
Reply

Let's go with your idea of early aggression as a start point. If you can snag Nubia as a first pick, who would work well with them? If I'm picking last, we'll probably need at least three candidate civs, to ensure we land at least one. Nubia's hills and district bonuses seem to suggest a production/science civ - basically the tip of the spear of our duo. So, my pick needs to be a support-oriented civ, one who can generate the gold and faith to support the archer-train to victory.

So, off the top of my head, limiting myself to base civs since we only get one DLC pick:

Egypt:
[Image: oycX5y5.png]

Egypt gets the bonus trade routes, which might be useful in a team game since we can take advantage of Mediterranean's Bride - Egypt will get monstrous gold and Nubia gets a bit of extra food. Sphinxes will generate faith, and the wonder-build bonus makes it easier to rush Stonehenge for a GP. In terms of faith/gold, Egypt looks well-suited, and it will probably remain unpicked since it's otherwise an underwhelming civ.

Disadvantages of Egypt: Well, I won't really have a unique UU to help you with a classical-age push (I'm not impressed by the chariot archer). Our desired settling sites will not be complementary, since we'll both want deserts and floodplains. I've often found that Iteru isn't all that great either - I typically run out of floodplain space fairly quickly.

Still, I think this is a potentially viable choice.

Kongo:

[Image: S87mF0U.png]

Nkisi could be an engine of gold generation later in the game. Mbanzas, too, solve both midgame housing crunches and generate more gold. They can take full advantage of their partner's shared faith, and the UU would be a good complement to Nubia's archers. There could be interesting synergies here.

Disadvantages: All the pressure of founding a religion would be on Nubia, which distracts from the war machine. Nkisi doesn't really come into play until too late to matter, I think - Relics are hard to come by with no goodie huts, and the Great People stuff really only starts to come into play in the Industrial and Modern ages, I've noticed, which games rarely reach. It might be possible to drop more theater districts to press this earlier, but that as always distracts from other priorities. If it could work in any game, this would be the one, but it'd be an experimental strategy for sure. Faith production, however, would really lag with this civ. Finally, the Mbanza also comes relatively late.

I'm less enthused about Kongo than I was. Still, I think they're a possibility. I also like the two other African civs pairing up decently with Nubia.

Arabia 
[Image: dQN0ok3.png]


The Last Prophet's +1 science per foreign city following Arabia's religion synergizes really well with a team game. Madrasas further boost science and can generate lots of faith at the same time. Mamluks remain great as resourceless knights with built-in healing. This civ could become a monstrous researcher.

Disadvantages - Arabia is a science powerhouse and not especially efficient at gold generation, and it's probably important that Nubia stay on the cutting edge of military technology as much as possible. This civ pick would probably lead to a weaker economy overall, and while that's not insurmountable (PBEM4, Dave struggled with his gold generation all game long), it's still not ideal. The UU powerspike comes later in the game compared to Nubia's.

Russia
[Image: DKcBJE5.png]

Lavras are great, as Alhambram showed, and can create a powerful monk economy. Peter's bonus lets Russia piggyback off his partner's more advanced science, and Russia's tundra bias meshes well with Nubia's desert bias - we won't be competing for tiles. The Cossack is scary, as you know better than anyone.

Disadvantages: Nothing particularly gold-oriented. Have to generate it using religion, like Arabia. The UU comes at the other end of the game from Nubia's, so no synergy there. Still, I think overall Russia is a really strong pick and is probably in my top 3 choices (the Cossack gives us two bites at the apple - an early game Nubian rush to set up, and a climactic Cossack assault to decide things at the end).

India
[Image: 5J44yg4.png]

Potentially interesting. Dharma lets India run two religions at once, essentially, which could be neat in a team game. Ghandi's bonus discourages others from attacking our team, and gives India a further faith boost if Nubia founds a religion. Stepwells are strong out of the gate and boost faith generation, only really falling off in later eras when the game is over anyway. Varus are a great support unit, since the -5 malus stacks. Overall probably a strong pick.

Disadvantages - requires Nubia to found a religion, too. We'd both have to chase religions, which would substantially weaken our early game, and if either of us failed we'd have no special bonuses to show for it. India's a cute pick but I don't think the benefits of dharma/satyagraha are worth the risks here. Also, no bonus to gold generation at all. India is very much a big risk/big reward pick.

I looked at Norway and Spain, but they remain underwhelming, even in a team game. Phillip needs trade routes to other continents, which pairs him up well with England, but overall he's like a less-good Arabia at generating science and faith.

So, I think my rankings:

1)Egypt/Russia (both could be interesting).
2)India (but it requires cuteness)
3)Arabia
4)Kongo.

5)Any civ that I missed? I looked at all those that bonuses from a religion or holy site in some way, so I could be missing like a really crazy synergy with Catherine or something.
I Think I'm Gwangju Like It Here

A blog about my adventures in Korea, and whatever else I feel like writing about.
Reply

I really love these ideas so far. 

Regardless of preference, I would caution against going all in on early aggression. If the map is 4 continents (please someone correct me if I'm wrong), its just going to be extremely hard to make it pay off. Especially because you don't just have to land a knock out blow on one civ, you have to land it on two. The only 'rush' civ I would strongly consider is Norway, because with their production bonus, they provide a source of renewable strength. 

I'm not sure Nubia is better than Australia in this setting, but I do really want to see them in a game, so....  mischief

The district production bonus strikes me as really strong. And the ranged unit production bonus will pay dividends the entire game long. You probably won't get much mileage out of that UU though. 

I really love the idea of picking Egypt. Although, I'm a little leary of picking a sub-par civ just to make a synergy work when there would still be objectively stronger ones on the table. But....it could turn into a ton of gold, and I don't think Iteru is anything to sneeze at either. 

That being said, my favorite idea from Chevalier's list is by far Russia. With proper planning, you can leverage Grand Embassy in a huge way. Also, having a teammate overcomes one of the biggest drawbacks of Lavras - that you have all these Great People and nowhere to put their works. Now, you are teamed with a Civ you can trade them to! Moreover, if you pick Nubia, that Civ gets a district production bonus for more TD's!

Other thoughts: 

 - I think Pericles's Greece might be interesting because you can guarantee all 3 CS survive to proc full benefits from "Surrounded By Glory" 
 - I really want to play Kongo in my next game, but I think the difficulty in getting relics will render them of limited utility here. 
 - China is potentially extremely strong, as one civ can basically produce builders for the both of them, and China can really efficiently focus on this early (allowing Nubia to spam campuses, etc). 
 - I still think you guys should strongly consider England, even first picking it for this map.
Reply

The main advantage of Egypt is that it will probably still be available when the pick gets around to me, and it's not at all bad in a team game. I think if I had my druthers I'd take Russia, with Egypt as my first backup.

I think Spain might be surprisingly viable as a partner for England. England grabs a foreign city and gets a free unit to protect it, then Spain routes all his treasure fleets there. With religious units occupying their own title, creative use of missionaries can give conquistadors a double GG boost, and their religious conversion ability could sync well with DOTF (I can see situations of boosting a Conquistador+20, up to 75 melee strength! in the right circumstances). And that's without Phillip's anti-other-religion bonus. Basically, Spain needs a religion backing it up, but it COULD be a really strong conquest civ in the mid game, right around the time England gets its Sea Dogs and just before Redcoats. Then missions can produce 4 faith/4 science potentially, keeping the Spanish competitive scientifically.
I Think I'm Gwangju Like It Here

A blog about my adventures in Korea, and whatever else I feel like writing about.
Reply

(November 22nd, 2017, 12:54)Chevalier Mal Fet Wrote: The main advantage of Egypt is that it will probably still be available when the pick gets around to me, and it's not at all bad in a team game. I think if I had my druthers I'd take Russia, with Egypt as my first backup.

I think Spain might be surprisingly viable as a partner for England. England grabs a foreign city and gets a free unit to protect it, then Spain routes all his treasure fleets there. With religious units occupying their own title, creative use of missionaries can give conquistadors a double GG boost, and their religious conversion ability could sync well with DOTF (I can see situations of boosting a Conquistador+20, up to 75 melee strength! in the right circumstances). And that's without Phillip's anti-other-religion bonus. Basically, Spain needs a religion backing it up, but it COULD be a really strong conquest civ in the mid game, right around the time England gets its Sea Dogs and just before Redcoats. Then missions can produce 4 faith/4 science potentially, keeping the Spanish competitive scientifically.

Spain makes me really sad in general. It has a lot of interesting things going on, and realistically could be a mid-game military powerhouse. It just desperately needs some way to generate more GPPs early. 

At any rate, I think its interesting to be sure. I would just be wary of making a Civ pick based on one really cute interaction that's dependent on a lot of other factors. Two strong civs with a modest synergy are likely to outdo two weaker civs that have a really exquisite synergy.

In regards to what's available. It's probably worthwhile to simulate a draft at this point. It should give you some idea of what will be available. I did this with Scythia and Sumer banned, although if they're are, they probably should be unbanned for this game. Separate continents makes it pretty unlikely either will be able to rush. Here's my best stab at a draft:

1. Nubia
2. Rome
3. England
4. Australia
5. Germany
6. Persia
7. Russia
8. China

Possible Wild Card Picks: Norway, Indonesia. 

Anyone who doesn't draft from this expanded list is aiming for a some unique synergy. Point being, there will be some top tier civs available even at Pick 8. One of China/Russia should still be available at least. 

I still really like England for a first pick, the biggest issue with it is that there is an inherent anti-synergy if you want to adhere loosely to the division of labor I outlined. England wants to be the military and science arm of the duo with its GAs, but the RNDs predispose it to be the gold-generating partner. 

Out of everything discussed so far, I really like the idea of Nubia/Russia. I wouldn't worry necessarily if the civ doesn't have a gold-generating tool in its kit, it can still just spam out CHs. A religious civ is a good back door to gold generation, as you can get Church Property to massively boost your GPT (A la Alhambram in PBEM2).  With that in mind, if none of the top tier choices are available, I think Arabia could be really interesting. If you guys decide against Nubia, I think Australia and England would both be solid choices. If you can't bat the Nubia/Russia combo, China or Germany would be my go-to for the second pick (provided they're still up). 

Can I just say that first picking in a snake pick draft is my least favorite position to be in  lol

By the way, I am salivating at the idea of Nubia getting City Patron goddess.   hammer
Reply

Returning briefly to Nkisi. You two could potentially try something really cute by pairing Kongo and Russia. Russia produces sculptures with Lavras, gives them to Kongo. Kongo also has an easy source of religion and gets access to all the beliefs despite not founding it. Found lots of large inland cities, keeping safely away from the sea. Maybe even go for a cultural win. If you wanted to try for one, this would be the combo to do it with.
Reply



Forum Jump: