RBPB4 [SPOILERS] - De Gaulle of the Egyptians

[Lord Parkin]

There's much more uncertainty in the land around the capital to the east, I'd have sent the warrior that way. If you're planning to circle around anticlockwise though then the direction you've started off in makes sense.

Yeah, I was thinking of doing an anticlockwise circle, at least if we confirm it's a peninsula to the SW. Keep in mind that we'll have another 2 exploring units around turn 23 and 26, so that fog to the east will definitely be busted before too long. I certainly don't want us unsure of what's to the immediate east when the first Settler arrives, so don't worry.

I usually start planning my spawnbusting around now, but there's no need to with no barbarians (that is the setting, right? Or am I getting games mixed up again?).

No, you're correct - there are no barbarians in this game. Therefore spawnbusting isn't necessary (nor optimal). Although a few Warriors acting as watchmen looking out for potential invading units might not be a bad idea later on.

[Lord Parkin]

Righto... new turn. Bob headed 1NW as planned, finding a 1-tile lake but no resources. He should go either 1W or 1SW next turn I think, based on what luddite vaguely told me about the latitude of his capital (which would make sense on a 5x2 layout, should be similar latitude to ours). I don't have a strong preference either way... maybe 1W?



Meanwhile, Joe headed 1SW, which revealed that the land to the SW of our capital is not a 1-tile peninsula... it's at least a 2-tile peninsula, or a land bridge. My bet's on a land bridge, probably connecting up to the west again. Either way, I think our move with Joe next turn should be 1W, since at the very least that will reveal if we have any seafood for a decent city immediately SW of the capital. It'll also confirm whether the land bridge connects up to the west, or if it's just a peninsula. Thoughts?



Oh, and we switched production from a Warrior to a Worker in the capital. A Warrior can be produced in 2 turns if an emergency comes up (e.g. hostile civ appears to the south/east), which is less than the minimum time any rival would be visible to us, so I don't think we need to worry about that. Camp on the second Deer started, will be finished in 3 turns.

[Yamps]

Subscribed and lurking exclusively! :blob: Nice map layouts btw.

[Lord Parkin]

Okay, so what have we got here score-wise? Nobody researched a tech this turn, but the following people grew to size 2:

- Us
- WarlordDR
- Adlain
- Mackoti

The following people are still at size 1:

- plako
- SleepingMoogle
- Nakor
- sunrise089
- Locke

Now, WarlordDR could have grown a turn earlier due to his expansive trait. Why he didn't I'm not sure... perhaps he got choked, or tried to improve the plains-hill Deer first (which would be suboptimal). However, I think the bigger question is why so many people still haven't grown. It's really perplexing me. Here are my guesses:

- plako is Imperialistic, so maybe he's building a Settler straight after the Worker?
- sunrise089 didn't settle in place, thus maybe had a slower Worker build and/or lack of access to a 3 food tile?
- Locke is Expansive, so maybe he's building a second Worker straight after the first?

As for SleepingMoogle and Nakor, I can only guess that they made suboptimal Worker moves or something (misclicks?). As non-Expansive, non-Imperialistic nations, there's no real reason for them to build a Worker/Settler immediately after their first Worker - in fact it's rather suboptimal. Not sure what on earth could be going on there.

So it's an interesting start to the game anyway, with only half the civs growing to size 2 when they "should", while the others delay growth for potentially dubious reasons.

[Lord Parkin]

Subscribed and lurking exclusively! :blob:

Glad to have you here Yamps! Hope you enjoy watching the game as it progresses.

Nice map layouts btw.

Thanks! Clearly it's a testament to what you can achieve when you're bored waiting for the next turn. It's even been useful to refer back to on the odd occasion, for instance to tell us which direction we expect the best chance of finding a neighbour in (although that may have been just as much luck as anything else).

[Irgy]

Either way, I think our move with Joe next turn should be 1W, since at the very least that will reveal if we have any seafood for a decent city immediately SW of the capital. It'll also confirm whether the land bridge connects up to the west, or if it's just a peninsula. Thoughts?

It seems like a dead end to me is all I'll say. Doesn't make it wrong, that just depends on how many turns it will be until the settler. If you've got time to visit the other areas east then indeed the best time to fill in the small gap to the west is now.

As for SleepingMoogle and Nakor, I can only guess that they made suboptimal Worker moves or something (misclicks?). As non-Expansive, non-Imperialistic nations, there's no real reason for them to build a Worker/Settler immediately after their first Worker - in fact it's rather suboptimal. Not sure what on earth could be going on there.

An alternative is to revist your assumption that the starts are completely identical. Certainly it appears everyone went hunting first, suggesting they all had deer. However maybe not everyone had deer on the same tiles as you, so some civs have a lower maximum-food-yield tile. Or maybe for some the more hammer heavy deer was on a river. And so on. The right demographics screens might shed some light.

[Lord Parkin]

It seems like a dead end to me is all I'll say. Doesn't make it wrong, that just depends on how many turns it will be until the settler. If you've got time to visit the other areas east then indeed the best time to fill in the small gap to the west is now.

It's probably a dead end, yeah. But the potential for seafood makes it worth moving at least one tile west to get visibility into those tiles, if not two.

An alternative is to revist your assumption that the starts are completely identical. Certainly it appears everyone went hunting first, suggesting they all had deer. However maybe not everyone had deer on the same tiles as you, so some civs have a lower maximum-food-yield tile. Or maybe for some the more hammer heavy deer was on a river. And so on. The right demographics screens might shed some light.

Hmm, well I guess it's possible not everyone had identical starts. It just seems odd that luddite and I would have pretty much (if not exactly) the same capital, and yet other people would have differing ones. Where would be the logic in that? Surely it makes more sense to have them either all a bit different, or all the same.

Still, I'll keep in mind the possibility that the starts weren't identical, and check out the demographics a bit more often to see if I can figure anything out.

[Yamps]

Ok, to add a few comments of my own: ( )

IMO, Joe should have been exploring down the river SE from the capital to check for second's city spot. Also, the sheep-fur spot up north seems appealing for the third city to get some early commerce. Maybe even for the second city, plains hill 2E from the sheep tile looks good.

I don't think you need a second worker right now. I'd go with settler next, aiming to get the second city up asap. The plains hill city could pick up the cows tile from the capital, the first worker should have it done by that time.

[Senseless]

I agree with Yamps about the second worker. Since we're getting BW so late, and chops aren't a factor, the second worker doesn't really do much right now. I think the initial worker can improve all three resource tiles before we grow enough to use them, assuming we go settler now. The question is, do we want to start the settler now or grow to size 3 first?

[Yamps]

Just a question about dedicated lurker behavior since I'm pretty much new to this forum, are we free to discuss everything? That would be alright in a SGOTM on Civfanatics with lurkers attached to the team. However, I've had another look on the lurker behavior thread so I'm not so sure anymore...