RBPB4 [SPOILERS] - De Gaulle of the Egyptians

[Lord Parkin]

This will be the thread where I post all spoiler-rated information about my (hopefully!) long and prosperous reign as De Gaulle of the Egyptians in the Realms Beyond Pitboss 4 game.

Anyone else playing in the game, now's your cue to leave this thread, or else eternally regret your sneaky behaviour.

Bye-bye! See you guys at the end for the afterparty.



...



...



...



Okay, I'm assuming the people who shouldn't be here are gone now.

Everyone else... welcome aboard!

Feel free to discuss or constructively criticise anything I say or do at any point. I welcome all feedback, as long as it's not rude or disparaging. By all means be critical if you wish, but please ensure that negative comments are still kept civil and friendly.

Righto, with that out of the way, we can get into the meaty stuff. Stay tuned for more!

[Lord Parkin]

Reserved for an index post later.

[Lord Parkin]

Why De Gaulle of Egypt?

You may be surprised to hear that De Gaulle was actually my #1 choice for a leader all along, and Egypt was my #2 choice for civ (and #1 after I realized Ethiopia would be handicapped instead of advantaged with its Scout start). So, I guess the first thing that some of you may be wondering is: why the heck would I want to pick De Gaulle of Egypt?!

Well, the simple answer is – it gives me options! I like having multiple options, especially in the early game. Since no-one was able to pick a decent Financial leader with the house rules we had, I valued Industrious as the next most important trait to secure (hoping that not too many other people would pick it too – which didn’t work out quite as I hoped, but that’s another story)… and paired it with a complementary civ and second trait. I deliberately picked my civ first (as opposed to the leader first, which I would usually have been inclined to do) because I gambled that players from this site wouldn’t value the Ind/Cha combo particularly highly. Leaving De Gaulle to my last pick seemed less risky than leaving Egypt to last, and it seems that assumption may have been correct.

So what do I mean when I say that De Gaulle of Egypt “gives me options”? Basically, if the map turns out to be open-plan with easy access to other players, then I’ll theoretically be in the strongest position of anyone to attempt a Chariot rush if it seems feasible, providing that Krill doesn’t deny me reasonable access to Horses with his map design. Not only do I start with Agriculture and The Wheel (Horses and Chariots potentially a single tech away), but I also get the strongest Chariot unit in the game – the War Chariot. War Chariots still fall prey to Spearmen, but they have excellent odds against Axemen – and more importantly, significantly improved odds against Archers. This means, all other things equal, I should need less of them to get the job done if I do decide to attempt a rush. Not to mention they’ll get the slight bonus of being promoted quicker due to the Charismatic trait (and they only need to get to 8 XP to open up the Heroic Epic, which I’ll build faster being Industrious). Much later on, if the game warrants it, an Industrious-sped West Point build will only require 20 XP with my Charismatic trait, which might also come in handy.

On the other hand, if the map turns out to be designed to make it tricky for players to war early on (with choke points and/or multiple islands), then I have the Industrious trait to fall back on, which I personally think is underrated by a lot of people. It’s a bit annoying that multiple other people picked Industrious as well, but I’ll just have to deal with that (Industrious is a trait that becomes considerably stronger the fewer people that have it). Obviously I have the most incentive of any player to grab Stonehenge, since I not only get my unique building in every city but also gain happiness in every city by getting it. I also only really have two competitors for Stonehenge (Roosevelt and Bismarck), since Louis is Creative and as such Stonehenge would be a really silly build for him. Any non-Industrious civ is extremely unlikely to get Stonehenge in this game (and would probably be slightly foolish for trying), so that’s good to bear in mind. Hopefully other players will be aware that I have the most to gain from Stonehenge and thus expect me to build it early (which I may well do), and as such not bother trying for it themselves (which would also help me, since a lack of competition for that wonder would be nice).

Anyway, whether or not I get Stonehenge, I’m still expecting that an Obelisk build in at least one city will net me an early Great Prophet, which will help considerably with offsetting early expansion costs (as well as netting a couple of bonus hammers). The extra happiness from the Charismatic trait may well help me to run the necessary Priest specialists more easily, too. (The exact value of the extra happiness from Charismatic will depend on how generous Krill is with the resource distribution; basically, the fewer resources the average player has access to, the more of an advantage the Charismatic trait will prove to be.)

The Industrious trait is also great for improving my chances at getting many of the other key wonders in the game, especially the Great Lighthouse, as well as potentially the Pyramids (depending on how generous Krill is with the Stone placement on this map)… not to mention many others. But we’ll have to wait and see how the early game plays out before making any definite plans there. All in all, while it’s a shame so many other people picked Industrious (it would have been awesome if I was the only one!), I’m still glad I picked it. Let me put it this way: I wouldn’t want to not be Industrious with this set of opponents! The six non-Industrious civs are going to have rather a hard time building many (or any) wonders in this game.

So anyway, as I said, with De Gaulle of Egypt I definitely have options – whether it’s for an early rush or for a laid-back builder start. I’m fairly confident my pick won’t prove disastrously wrong, but time will tell. Feel free to comment, discuss and/or constructively criticize if you wish.

[Lord Parkin]

Opponent Analysis

So, what are my thoughts on the other players in this game? As I’m new to this site, I don’t know most of the people here – in fact there are only two guys that I’m familiar with (plako and mackoti). As such, the personality/psychology-based analysis that I’m used to doing will mostly not be present here. I’ll have to make judgments solely from the civ/leader picks. Bearing that in mind, here goes with my own personal analysis of my opponents in this game.

Sleeping Moogle and sciz (Louis of Babylon)

These guys were quite lucky to land Louis (Cre/Ind) with the eighth leader pick, in my opinion. Given the general usefulness of being Creative, not to mention the high priority that I understand players from this site usually place on that trait, I’m quite surprised that the second of only two non-Protective Creative leaders available in this game (the other being Catherine) lasted until this late in the selection process. At the very least I was expecting Nakor to pick this leader, rather than his (in my opinion at least) rather dubious selection of Asoka. (But more on that later.)

Anyway, picking Babylon as their civ to go with Louis was a reasonable move synergy-wise, although with the Maya out of the running I still might have put a higher priority on Greece if I were them (1 happiness might be better than 2 healthiness in the right circumstances). Even with the bonus production speed, the Garden and Odeon still aren’t particularly great buildings, so these guys could perhaps have used their position with the third civ selection to get something a bit better (Vikings or England, perhaps?). All in all though, this wasn’t a bad pick. I expect the Bowmen will be a non-issue in this game, except for perhaps deterring an aggressive Axe-heavy neighbour from attacking for a while (Shaka, maybe?). Their starting techs are pretty decent (The Wheel/Agriculture, same as mine and Sumeria’s), and could potentially lead to an early Chariot rush. These guys start with a Warrior.

Nakor and Gaspar (Asoka of Vikings)

This was rather a dubious pick, in my opinion. As I mentioned above, Louis was still available at the time that these guys made their leader selection, and even if he wasn’t, there were still a lot of leaders available who had far better trait options than Asoka’s Spi/Org. (Just to name a few, Frederick and Alexander were still around, not to mention someone like Montezuma or Ramesses if they were dead set on being Spiritual.)

Their leader pick made even less sense with their pick of the Vikings as their civ – which really should have been combined with an Aggressive leader (or at least a Charismatic one – or even both). As it is, these guys have picked a leader/civ combo which has very little synergy, and is weaker in almost every way than the default Ragnar (who wasn’t available, but that’s beside the point). The only thing really going for them is that the Trading Post has the potential to be quite a decent unique building, depending on exactly how Krill designs the map. (Being Organized will make it cheaper too, although personally I don’t think that’s much of a big deal in the grand scheme of things.) The starting techs (Fishing/Hunting) are rather weak unless these guys get a coastal capital with seafood, and even then they’re not great. They’ll start with a Scout, which will probably be a detriment for them.

WarlordDr (Washington of Greece)

I expected Washington with his Cha/Exp combination would be highly likely to be taken by someone in this game given the high emphasis placed on being Expansive by most players here, so this pick wasn’t much of a surprise. Easy access to larger cities than anyone else, as well as several decent side benefits… yes, Washington was definitely a decent choice of leader.

More dubious, however, was the selection of Greece, which doesn’t really have any synergy with Washington (apart from slightly faster promoted Phalanxes, which aren’t anything to write home about). The Odeon is alright, but takes a while to get into play (and is slightly on the expensive side for its benefits). The starting techs from Greece are pretty underwhelming as well, with Fishing/Hunting securing a weak Scout start. WarlordDr certainly could have done better with his civ pick, in my opinion – Native America, Ethiopia or Carthage might have been interesting alternatives, for instance. Still, not too bad on the whole.

Luddite and Atlas1998 (Bismarck of Sumeria)

Bismarck (Ind/Exp) being snapped up by these guys wasn’t much of a surprise to me, given he was probably the strongest remaining Expansive leader at the time they picked him. I’ve caught on quickly as to how much most people here love Expansive! Picking Sumeria was a bit of a dubious move though, especially with a leader that wasn’t Aggressive or Charismatic. In my experience, Vultures are rather mediocre without any additional bonuses from leader traits.

Moreover, I find the unique building for Sumeria to be almost completely useless. Sure it’s slightly cheaper than a regular Courthouse, but it’s not as good as having the Organized production bonus, and even that’s not exactly game breaking. Moreover, I find you simply don’t need Courthouses as early as Priesthood… you just don’t have high enough maintenance at that point of the game to justify the relatively large hammer investment. Plus, Code of Laws is not a tech you want to skip for long anyway, as it’s a great stepping stone to Civil Service – which is a tech you want to get ASAP, especially in a no tech trading game. So what exactly is the benefit of a slightly cheaper Courthouse available at Priesthood, again?

At least they’ve got very decent starting techs (Agriculture/The Wheel), which – like with myself and Babylon – could lead to an early Chariot rush. I do wonder if maybe they picked their civ more for the starting techs than for the unique unit and building. These guys will start with a Warrior.

sunrise089 and Rego (Shaka of Zulu)

The only guys who picked the default civ/leader combination despite having unrestricted leaders on! Shaka (Agg/Exp) is a reasonably decent leader, and being Expansive in particular I wasn’t surprised to see him picked early (at this site anyway). Interestingly, these guys are the only ones who picked the Aggressive trait in this game, perhaps foreshadowing an intention to fight some early wars. In my opinion, Aggressive is a bit situational, and not even really that significant a bonus in wartime once Catapults arrive on the scene. It’s nice to have, but hardly necessary. The only potential danger from my perspective is either from an early rush in ancient times, or much later in the game with potential 17 XP commandos.

As for the Zulu civ, in my opinion it’s a decent pick, though perhaps not optimal. The Ikhanda is a fairly strong and cheap building when paired with the Aggressive trait, and its availability from the start of the game arguably makes the overall maintenance savings in a game (at least before Corporations arrive) somewhat equivalent to the Holy Roman Rathaus (eventual -70% compared to -75%). The Impi, on the other hand, is much more situational – it’s not going to be taking cities once Archers and Axemen come into the picture, but it’s a decent support unit in the field. It'll be the natural counter to my War Chariot, so that'll be a bit of a pain if I start next to them. I do think that these guys could have done better with Carthage (or at least this would have made their civ a more interesting pick than the default!).

The starting techs for these guys are Agriculture/Hunting, which is a bit of a mixed bag (Agriculture is good while Hunting sucks a bit without huts on). They will get maximum speed on researching Animal Husbandry right out of the gate though, if they so choose. They’ll begin the game with a Scout, which will probably be a disadvantage.

Locke and Cervantes (Isabella of England)

As with the other non-Protective Expansive leaders, it was probably inevitable that Isabella (Spi/Exp) would get picked early on (at least at this site). Expansive is a decent trait, but Spiritual takes a while to become useful and only really starts to shine around the medieval ages – and even then only in the hands of a cunning strategic player who takes full advantage of the frequent civic shifts this trait enables. This could perhaps be a reasonable trait combination if leveraged properly, but time will tell.

As for the civ choice of England, it’s obvious this pick is part of a late-game bonus gambit. These guys won’t get any benefit at all early on, but if they make it past the medieval era then the Redcoats and (to a lesser extent) Stock Exchanges will give them a decent edge. All in all these guys have definitely picked late bloomers with both their civ and leader choices, and they’re just going to have to hope no-one decides to attack them early on when they’ve really got no significant advantages to speak of. Personally I think they could have done better (I’m still surprised no Expansive leader ended up taking Carthage), but never mind. If they can hold on in the game until the age of Rifling, they’ll certainly be the ones laughing!

The starting techs for these guys will be Fishing/Mining – the former rather mediocre and the latter pretty good. They’ll start the game with a Warrior.

plako and antisocialmunky (Catherine of China)

Catherine (Cre/Imp) was an intelligent pick, and I’m not surprised she was one of the first leaders to go. Not only will these guys build Settlers much faster than anyone else (having the only Imperialistic leader), but they’ll also getting free border expansions from all the new cities – which is certainly a very potent combination. I can only hope these guys don’t start too close to me… and I’ll feel sorry for whoever their neighbours are.

The only downside for them is that their traits are very early-game centric: once they’ve settled most of the prime land near them (or reach a maintenance-induced limit on expansion) and have had a border expansion or two in most cities, they’ll have very little left going for them. The +100% Great General rate is nice but certainly not ideal when it’s blocking up a whole trait slot, and once Libraries are up and running Creative won’t really have much left going for it (apart from border expansions in captured cities later on). Still, with the superb early game traits, these guys may well be in such a good position by the end of the expansion phase of the game that the lack of more bonuses later on might not matter too much.

The pick of China as their civ was a little more dubious, although admittedly the list of good civs was running a bit thin by this point. The Pavilion is such a cheap building that it doesn’t need the bonus in production speed from being Creative, and the bonus from the building itself is exceptionally underwhelming (only +25% culture quite late in the game). Effectively, it’s pretty much a useless unique building. On the other hand, Cho-Ko-Nu’s are very fearsome though, so I guess this wasn’t too bad a pick. It’s made rather overpowered by one particular game rule (no War Elephants), which pretty much rules out the only truly effective counter to this unique unit. These guys might actually be a nightmare to have as neighbours once Machinery rolls around – we’ll have to see.

Plako is one of only two guys who I actually know from previous games. From what I’ve seen he’s a reasonably competent player, and a trustworthy ally if he can be befriended. It’s too early to tell right now, but I expect to have at least cordial relations with this team as long as I don’t happen to be geographically situated so as to be their #1 target. But then, I guess you could say that about almost anyone!

These guys will start with Agriculture/Mining as their initial techs, which is a very strong combination (arguably the strongest combination possible for this particular game setup). They’ll start the game with a Warrior. All in all I expect these guys to do rather well in this game – possibly even being the main competition, barring elimination from an early rush.

Adlain and Mania Muse (Wang Kon of Arabia)

I was interested to see that Wang Kon (Fin/Pro) was the first leader to be picked, as personally I ranked him fairly low on my priority list. Financial is great, sure, but the effective absence of a second trait (which is really what Protective means in multiplayer) is quite a severe penalty in exchange for the economic bonus of Financial. The only slight advantage I can see for these guys is that other players might be less inclined to attack them (at least early on) due to their potentially harder to crack cities, but even then I’m not sure. In order to take full advantage of the Protective trait, you have to go for a relatively Archer-heavy military (or at least Archer-moderate), which is almost universally a bad strategy in multiplayer because it means your army has more of a defensive than offensive concentration. (Building Archers means you aren’t building Axes/Chariots.) And most experienced players know that you don’t gain land in wars with an army that just sits there and defends.

As for their selection of Arabia as a civ – obviously it was rather a crappy choice, although admittedly they did land the very last spot for picking a civ. Despite this, I think they could have done better. The Madrassa isn’t particularly intimidating as a unique building – especially with a non-Creative, non-Philosophical leader – and the Camel Archer has only a very minimal benefit (the innate 15% retreat odds). Sure, it also doesn’t require resources, but if you don’t have Iron and Horses by this point in the game (Guilds) then you’ll already be in a lot of trouble for other reasons. I don’t quite understand why these guys didn’t pick Ethiopia if they wanted a civ with a decent medieval unit. It’s also worth pointing out that Mongolia and Persia were still available to choose at this point as well, if they were looking for a 2-move unique unit. Even the default Korea would have been better than going for Arabia, in my opinion. But maybe they’ll prove me wrong!

For starting techs, these guys nabbed Mysticism and The Wheel. Normally I’d say Mysticism is underwhelming, but given that they’re the sole civ starting with Mysticism in this game, they might actually get some use out of it. The Wheel is, of course, a very decent starting tech in itself. These guys will start with a Warrior.

Mackoti and Ioan76 (Roosevelt of Netherlands)

These guys did reasonably well with their leader pick considering their last-place position. Roosevelt (Ind/Org) is certainly a decent all-around leader, and I actually had him pegged as a possibility for myself before the selection process began in case the list of Industrious leaders happened to become thin. I might have prioritised Stalin or Augustus (or perhaps Ramesses) in their position instead, but Roosevelt was still a strong pick considering the circumstances. Roosevelt’s theoretically the leader in the best position to grab the Great Lighthouse (given his wonder-building bonus and half-price Lighthouses), but in my experience it probably won’t be a deciding factor by the time Sailing rolls around. (The bigger factor is simply whoever gets to Sailing first.)

Mackoti is one of the few players I’ve played with before in this group – we had a duel match a long time ago (which I eventually won after multiple fierce battles). I remember he was a reasonably aggressive player as well as a pretty good military strategist, and I recall a conversation with him where he valued Philosophical quite highly. I was actually a bit surprised he didn’t pick a Philosophical leader this time around, given that they were all available – but all in all Industrious was probably a better pick given the circumstances (for him at least; it wasn’t so nice for me to discover a third Industrious opponent with the last leader pick!).

The Netherlands is, of course, a strong civ pick, and I’m not surprised it went so early. It won’t do anything for them in the early-mid game, but if they’re still a competing power when Steam Power and Astronomy roll around, they’ll become an extremely serious threat. All in all, it would be best to eliminate or at least subjugate these guys by the end of the medieval era, if at all possible. Starting techs are Fishing/Agriculture, the former mediocre and the latter decent; they’ll begin the game with a Warrior.

[Lord Parkin]

Early Vulnerability Rating

Just for fun, here’s a quick tally of starting units, early unique units, access to Chariots/Copper and relevant traits, intended to identify the weak and the strong in the very early game with respect to early rush defence. The weighting I attributed to each factor was kind of arbitrary and debateable, but at least it gives a rough idea of relative vulnerability (or at least my evaluation thereof). Some of you might disagree with the ratings - feel free to speak up if so! Anyway, here goes:

Louis of Babylon – The Wheel/Agriculture – low vulnerability (starts with Warrior, easy access to Chariots, slow to Copper, Bowman available)
Asoka of Vikings – Fishing/Hunting – high vulnerability (starts with Scout, moderate access to Chariots, slow to Copper)
Washington of Greece – Fishing/Hunting – medium-high vulnerability (starts with Scout, moderate access to Chariots, slow to Copper, Phalanx available, Charismatic trait)
Bismarck of Sumeria – The Wheel/Agriculture – low-medium vulnerability (starts with Warrior, easy access to Chariots, slow to Copper, Vulture available)
Shaka of Zulu – Agriculture/Hunting – medium vulnerability (starts with Scout, easy-moderate access to Chariots, slow to Copper, Impi available, Aggressive trait)
Isabella of England – Fishing/Mining – medium vulnerability (starts with Warrior, slow to Chariots, quick to Copper)
Catherine of China – Agriculture/Mining – low-medium vulnerability (starts with Warrior, moderate access to Chariots, quick to Copper)
Wang Kon of Arabia – Mysticism/The Wheel – high vulnerability (starts with Warrior, slow-moderate access to Chariots, slow to Copper)
Roosevelt of Netherlands – Fishing/Agriculture – high vulnerability (starts with Warrior, moderate access to Chariots, slow to Copper)
De Gaulle of Egypt – The Wheel/Agriculture – low vulnerability (starts with Warrior, easy access to Chariots, slow to Copper, War Chariot available, Charismatic trait)

[Tatan]

Nice analysis!

De Gaulle does seem to be an unorthodox choice; it'll be interesting to see how you can leverage it.

You seemed to mention that people "on this site" value traits differently than you're used to; what particular things seem to be valued more/less here, in your opinion?

If you're interested, some of the most influential posting around here on the topic was done by Sullla and Speaker in their RB Pitboss 2 thread, which probably warped our metagame quite a bit [I know it warped me!].

[Lord Parkin]

Nice analysis!

Thanks Tatan! Glad you enjoyed it.

De Gaulle does seem to be an unorthodox choice; it'll be interesting to see how you can leverage it.

Indeed. I'll have to wait and see what the map looks like before I settle on any firm decisions strategy-wise.

You seemed to mention that people "on this site" value traits differently than you're used to; what particular things seem to be valued more/less here, in your opinion?

I think it's more that the group of people I usually play with value traits differently to the people at this site. It's interesting seeing the change of priorities here though. Going through your list of the most-picked traits in five games (which isn't exactly a method for measuring how everyone values the traits, but is close enough):

20 Financial - I'd agree with the first place position here, though I'd probably rate it a bit further above Expansive and Creative. It depends on the type of game, of course - with tech trading on or in duel matches Financial is substantially less useful, but with tech trading off in a large-scale pitboss like this one it's absolutely huge. I'm glad it was banned (except for Wang Kon) in this game though, because I have to say I'm a bit tired of seeing the other Financial leaders crop up in almost every single game I play.

18 Creative - While Creative is very handy for early border pops and cheap Libraries, it's a very early-game centric trait that doesn't really offer anything later on. Roughly speaking I'd agree that it's valued about right here as a decently strong trait, although perhaps it's rated slightly too highly by some players.

16 Expansive - I'd probably put this one above Creative, but it seems roughly right in ranking to me. No arguments that it's a very decent trait, it just wasn't what I was looking for in this particular game. (Plus I wanted to try something different, which obviously I achieved.)

9 Philisophical - This trait seems ranked about right to me. It's useful, but a bit tricky to leverage given that you have to make quite a conscious effort to emphasize specialists. Quick Universities are great when you get to that point of the game, but really not a game-changing factor.

6 Spiritual - Seems about right to me. It's reasonably powerful in the hands of the right player, but doesn't start becoming useful until the mid-game, which sucks a bit.

6 Organized - I'd maybe rank this one a little higher. Depends a whole lot on the geography and size of the map though. Cheap Courthouses and Lighthouses are a fairly decent addition to the economic bonus of this trait.

6 Aggressive - Depends a lot on the game setup, but I'd say it's roughly ranked right for this type of large-scale pitboss. Much more valuable in a duel or cramped start.

4 Imperialistic - My regular gaming friends are divided on this one. Some absolutely love it, some hate it. Personally I'd probably rank this one a bit higher than it is in this list. The main thing is that you have to make a conscious effort to abuse the Settler bonus in the early game if you pick this trait, since that's most of the benefit of it. It can get you off to a pretty powerful start if you have several extra cities compared to the other players before AD years.

4 Charismatic - I think this trait is more useful than most people at this site give it credit for. But perhaps it's just because my usual gaming group tends to play on randomly generated maps, which on the whole are a lot less generous with happiness resources than some of the crafted maps for games here seem to be. Regardless though, the cheaper promotions - while apparently a small benefit at face value - can prove very potent in the right situations.

3 Industrious - This is the main point of contention for me: I rank Industrious second after Financial, not second-to-last behind Protective. Surprisingly, a lot of players (both here and at the sites I usually play at) underrate Industrious in multiplayer. The main issue is that it's quite a difficult trait to leverage properly, so you have to be a very competent player to get the most value out of it. The key is not to attempt to abuse the trait to wonder-spam, since that'll just make you a target and get you killed due to your lower soldier count. Instead, the main benefit that Industrious offers is that at any time you can freely pick pretty much any wonder of your choosing and have a good chance to get it. As an Industrious player you can decide "I want the Pyramids", and provided there aren't too many other Industrious players around, you'll get them - even without stone. That's something a non-Industrious player just couldn't do. Plus, people often forget that all the necessary infrastructural national wonders are cheaper with Industrious too (Moai Statues, Heroic and National Epics, Oxford, etc). Add to that the fact that the Forge is an awesome building to get for cheap, and Industrious can stack up to an awesome trait in the hands of the right player.

0 Protective - No arguments here, Protective definitely stinks compared to the other traits.

So I guess for this game's setup, I'd go:

Tier 1 - Financial, Industrious
Tier 2 - Expansive, Creative, Philosophical, Charismatic
Tier 3 - Imperialistic, Aggressive, Organized, Spiritual
Tier 4 - Protective

I could probably subdivide Tier 2 a bit more, but really most of them are fairly equivalent if leveraged in the right way. (EDIT: Okay, I subdivided Tier 2 into Tier 2 and Tier 3, although arguably some of them could still be interchanged.)

Hope that was somewhat informative as to my thinking. Feel free to agree or disagree if you wish.

If you're interested, some of the most influential posting around here on the topic was done by Sullla and Speaker in their RB Pitboss 2 thread, which probably warped our metagame quite a bit [I know it warped me!].

I've actually already read it over while waiting for this game to get up and running. Certainly very informative and interesting to read. Thanks anyway though!

[Shoot the Moon]

Interesting ideas on traits. To play devil's advocate on expansive, it is probably the best expansion trait in the game (what an apt name). Between the bonus on workers (an immediate 2t bonus on your first worker build if you can get 4 hammers, which has been common on these hand-built maps) and the bonus on granaries, which is perhaps the only building that literally every city will build (and build first a lot of the time), it is a powerful boost to early expansion. Looking at your top two tiers of traits, expansive is clearly the one who's effects are felt the earliest (with creative being second soonest once your second city is settled). It's also worth pointing out that exp has awesome synergy with one of the best civs in the game (India) and another quiet good one (Inca), although obviously both those were banned for this game.

[novice]

Nice analysis. Your only controversial trait valuation is the Industrious trait. It is an advantage for grabbing early wonders, but:
- If another player has the doubler resource and you don't, he'll still beat you.
- National wonder bonus is nice, but you're not in a race here. Other traits might give you a better competitive edge than this.
- For later wonders, in a no tech trading game, the deciding factor is who can get the tech fastest, not who can build the thing fastest.

PBEM13 plug:
So if you find yourself in a game with an industrious civ, rate them very low on the threat scale.

[Lord Parkin]

Interesting ideas on traits. To play devil's advocate on expansive, it is probably the best expansion trait in the game (what an apt name). Between the bonus on workers (an immediate 2t bonus on your first worker build if you can get 4 hammers, which has been common on these hand-built maps) and the bonus on granaries, which is perhaps the only building that literally every city will build (and build first a lot of the time), it is a powerful boost to early expansion.

Fair points. Probably the key point of difference between your games and the games I usually play is the part I've highlighted. On maps that aren't custom-crafted, you can't count on having a plains-hill tile available to get 4 hammers right at the start - in fact usually you won't. I guess if a human's making the map they have a tendency to be a lot more generous than the random generator is. I can see how that would artificially inflate Expansive's position a bit (as well as pulling down Charismatic somewhat, assuming resources are more generously distributed). Difference of philosophy I guess.

Looking at your top two tiers of traits, expansive is clearly the one who's effects are felt the earliest (with creative being second soonest once your second city is settled). It's also worth pointing out that exp has awesome synergy with one of the best civs in the game (India) and another quiet good one (Inca), although obviously both those were banned for this game.

Yeah, Expansive would have been more useful with those civs in the running, no doubt.

Nice analysis. Your only controversial trait valuation is the Industrious trait. It is an advantage for grabbing early wonders, but:
- If another player has the doubler resource and you don't, he'll still beat you.
- National wonder bonus is nice, but you're not in a race here. Other traits might give you a better competitive edge than this.
- For later wonders, in a no tech trading game, the deciding factor is who can get the tech fastest, not who can build the thing fastest.

Yes, I possibly inflated the position of Industrious slightly in my own analysis to compensate for the massive underrating that I percieved from Tatan's analysis. I guess arguably it's not Tier 1 (and indeed wouldn't have been if there was any non-Protective Financial leader available in this game). Still, it's exceptionally complementary to my typical game plan, and I haven't had a game as an Industrious leader recently where I haven't got decent leverage out of the Industrious trait. So even if it's not Tier 1, it certainly isn't far off - and I don't mind either way.

As for players having access to Stone/Marble, that will depend entirely on how generous the mapmakers (in this case, Krill) are with Stone/Marble placement. On the maps I'm used to playing on you can't guarantee you'll have access to either Stone or Marble, and they certainly won't be abundant around the map, but I guess on these custom-made maps there might be a tendancy for them to be considerably more common. If so, that'll suck a bit, but it still won't negate the benefit of being Industrious - just curtail it a bit. That is, unless most other players get Stone/Marble and I get neither. That would really suck, but it would probably be an unbalanced map design and thus unlikely to occur.