Epic 12: The Fall and Rise of T-hawk's Economy

[darrelljs]

To rush a couple cities, axemen can be faster, but to demolish two entire civs, I'm convinced swords are the way to go.t to home, it was obvious to go with the stronger unit right from the start.

That is probably the biggest difference between our approach. I did not use the same force to take out both foes. My Axe rush was for Ashoka, and while I did use some nice CR2/3 Axes in the Incan war, the backbone of that force was Catapults/Elephants (and Swords). So, my first war started and finished earlier, while my second war started and finished later. I'm scratching my head trying to figure out which approach was superior . On the one hand, I never crashed my economy and was able to pull the Liberalism->Astronomy slingshot. On the other hand, your mid game tech rate seemed better than mine (what little land I left to the Incan wasn't enough to make the difference methinks). You also went Democracy before Biology (which I think was a prime difference in Uber's game) so that can't explain it. I wonder...did you have high unit upkeep after your Incan war or did you disband enough troops to drop it to 0? That made a big difference in my game and might be why my Medieval economy looked better than yours, even if the underlying fundamentals were not as sound.

I wonder if you played out the space race when you would have launched...

Darrell

[sunrise089]

@T-Hawk - River deserts have been in at least one other report (I think Uberfish's CFC report on Deity) - I remember the surprise of the poster in encountering them.

@Sullla - I think it is a bit funny that you made the comments section describe the game as tougher than it actually was, it really affected me here. Admittedly, I could be a more adventurous player, but I specifically passed on this game because I knew Emperor was doable for me while an altered, harder map Emperor was not.

[T-hawk]

So, my first war started and finished earlier, while my second war started and finished later. I'm scratching my head trying to figure out which approach was superior .

Here's the big difference: I blundered in killing Asoka immediately instead of letting him live. That blew both the chance to extort from India and trade with Huayna at non-monopoly. And that meant I couldn't get to Construction (I didn't get either Math or Masonry until Huayna conceded them), so I had to take out Huayna before he got to elephants. My choice of timing for conquering Inca was right for my game, and yours was right for yours.

My midgame tech rate was better because I developed Incan territory earlier, but my midgame tech position was behind yours because you got far more concessions and trades.

I had low but nonzero unit upkeep after the Incan war - it was about 6 gpt. I couldn't find any units I wanted to disband, though; every city had just one police unit and I needed my remaining half-dozen swords to kill barbarians. I did train loads of workers early, mostly because there wasn't anything else to build while I limped to Currency and CoL.

I wonder if you played out the space race when you would have launched...

I might just try that Not near Uberfish's 1816 AD, but perhaps close to your 1867 date. I had a roaring economy by then, and two healthy and willing trading partners.

[pindicator]

For my purposes, I found that cover axes were more than enough to take on one opponent. However, if you wanted a more prolonged campaign or to take on both Asoka & HC in the early stages, then swords were probably a better choice.

I would have had to go after HC with cats and axes, however, had he not warmed up to Friendly. As it was I could use him as a tech partner until my rennaisance conquests.

[sylvanllewelyn]

I used to dislike delaying axes for swords too, with the long research time and the risk of running into axes. Warlords makes it a little better because of chariots eating axes, but still, I never thought about just how much +1 strength meant against archers in cities. Not sure about BTS though.

I like your 215AD screenshot BTW. A funny caption would make that a very funny picture.

[T-hawk]

Well, you bring a couple axes along with the swords to defend against axe counterattackers. And swords are way more than +1 strength over axes. There's also the built-in 10% city raider, and also the fact that all the promotions work on a higher base strength. A C1 CR2 axe attacks a city at 5 + 55% = 7.75. A C1 CR2 sword attacks at 6 + 65% = 9.9, over two points higher, and guaranteed to have the advantage over even a fortified archer with CG3 and 60% cultural defense (3 + 25% + 50% + 75% + 60% = 9.3.)

But the real point is that I didn't delay to get swords. I had iron hooked up before I was finished building axemen anyway. When both axes and swords are available, it's a no-brainer to go with the stronger swords. My delay (as compared to darrelljs and Sooooo) was to put out two more workers and some archers (and a spearman in there too.)

What's funny about my 215 AD screenshot? Just that the economy is at 0%?

[DerangedDuck]

Well, you bring a couple axes along with the swords to defend against axe counterattackers. And swords are way more than +1 strength over axes. There's also the built-in 10% city raider, and also the fact that all the promotions work on a higher base strength. A C1 CR2 axe attacks a city at 5 + 55% = 7.75. A C1 CR2 sword attacks at 6 + 65% = 9.9, over two points higher, and guaranteed to have the advantage over even a fortified archer with CG3 and 60% cultural defense (3 + 25% + 50% + 75% + 60% = 9.3.)

Uh, nope. All the promotions and other bonuses except for the combat I to V promotions are applied to the defender's strength (if the numbers get negative, it's applied so that -100% would be 1/2, not 0). This means that CR and CG pretty much cancel each other out, except that CR3 gets 10% vs guns and CG3 gets 10% vs melee. I have no idea why this is ( maybe ?).

So, C1 CR2 axe vs. CG3 archer with 60% culture -> 5 + 10%(combat) vs 3 + 25% (fort) + 50% (city) + 85% (CG3 vs melee) + 60% (culture) - 45% (CR2) = 3 + 175% -> 5.5 vs. 8.25

C1 CR2 sword vs CG3 archer -> 6 + 10%(combat) vs. 3 + 25%(fort) +50% (city) + 85% (CG3 vs melee) +60% (culture) -45% (CR2) -10% (sword vs city) = 3 + 165% -> 6.6 vs. 7.95

Either way, ouchie.

[T-hawk]

I wonder if you played out the space race when you would have launched...

Well, I did it. For a space race attempt, I picked up from a 1721 AD savegame, right after researching Mass Media.

I started by revolting to Free Religion, both because it would pay back economically by the time the game ended, and to get rid of religious diplomatic penalties with Mansa and Frederick. That brought both Mansa and Frederick to Friendly (I was in both their favorite civics), so any war was impossible. I disbanded military until my unit costs were zeroed out.

Apollo completed in 1770 AD. Tech path was Rocketry for Apollo, then to Robotics for the Space Elevator (via Plastics for the Dam), then Satellites-FiberOptics-Fusion, then Refrigeration-Genetics, and last Ecology. I got 4 techs in trade, all from Frederick: Railroad, Combustion, Assembly Line, and Fission (for Radio, Mass Media, Computers, and Robotics.) Then Frederick got stupid and wasted his time on Fascism, Communism, and Flight.

I fired two Golden Ages with Great People, including the Engineer from Fusion, since they couldn't lightbulb anything on the spaceship path (stupid Fascism and Communism.) I was researching at a Normal speed pace, 4-5 turns each for most of the late techs. The last parts completed 6 turns after the last tech, and the space launch came in a surprisingly early 1826 AD. I think that's my earliest launch in any game - so much for Sulla's "low-commerce start".

[darrelljs]

The last parts completed 6 turns after the last tech, and the space launch came in a surprisingly early 1826 AD. I think that's my earliest launch in any game - so much for Sulla's "low-commerce start".

Wow, that's early...pretty close to uberfish! It didn't seem like tech trading helped you that much, it must have been the economy. I'd love to compare the GNP graphs (your modified ones) between your game and mine to see how close we were, but alas I can't seem to find the save.

Darrell

[T-hawk]

I wasn't playing with my modified GNP graph - that's not legit for RB play. But we can compare numbers, from my savegames...

Code:

Date    Slider Research    Gold Expenses    Net
215    0%    0    111    110    1
575    20%    22    139    127    34
755    40%    96    143    127    112
995    40%    96    148    140    104
1244    40%    134    202    201    135
1292    40%    145    221    209    157
1541    70%    508    241    237    512
1574    70%    822    339    264    897
1667    80%    1362    389    332    1419
1756    90%    2086    355    334    2107
1820    100%    2683    321    309    2695

The first big jump there was sometime around 1500 AD, and the jump between 1541 and 1574 was Free Speech. The bulk of the raw beaker production, though, concentrated into the late game. I bumped beaker production by 50% from 1667 AD to 1756 AD, and doubled it by 1820. Some of that was running Research or Wealth - those do become significant economic producers in the end game.