[SPOILERS]The Serdoa way of civ

[Serdoa]

[Serdoa]

Well, I guess I should start writing down what I think about the agreed settings, especially in regards to civs and leader-traits, so that I might be able to draw conclusions from there. Because just thinking about it certainly didn't yield anything worthwhile.

Map and settings information

* Mirrorland map script, Standard size, Ancient era, Quick speed, Critical Resources Close, Waterways.
* No barbs, unrestricted leaders, always war, no vassal states, no tribal villages, no random events.
* Prince difficulty for everyone.
* Mapmaker may make some edits in the name of fun, and will add some pre-placed improvements (mirrored, like everything else).

Nothing game-breaking in there imo. Prince difficulty with toroidal map means high maintenance, making ORG somewhat more desirable. Standard size is 40x40. That makes 1600 tiles with around 25% of them water. So ~1200 land tiles for 5 players. Makes 240 per player. Enough that we shouldn't run into each other early. Also means ancient warfare is out of the question, making all early UUs, except maybe for the war chariot (due to the 2 moves), rather undesirable. One can raze an enemies city, but certainly not take it.

Setup

* Mapmaker will provide a starting screenshot, with all tiles forming the BFC of a city settled in place visible (manually revealed in worldbuilder if necessary, just for the screenshot).
* After deciding turn order, we'll choose a random starting player.
* Leaders/civs will be selected over two rounds of picking, from last player to first player.
* Some civs/traits will cost you turns if you pick them. For each lost turn, you must spend one turn at the start of the game doing absolutely nothing before you end turn. (You can't move or use units.)
* FIN, EXP, and India all cost 2 turns; CRE, Inca, Byzantium, and Rome cost 1 turn.
* Each player will start with a settler and scout on the starting tile (plus of course their civ's starting techs).
* If all players have turns to skip, we'll let those turn skips cancel, so that at least one player is playing an actual turn on t0.

Here comes the meat of this particular PBEM. First we do not have snake-pick. Thats because Seven feels that the last player in turn-order is severly disadvantaged. I'm not sure I agree, especially as we do not have banned any civ or leader, so there are some pretty strong combinations which could theoretically be achieved. I'm not caring enough about that though that I would want to discuss this (I have already brought enough things up which all others didn't seem to care about). Still, it means that whoever is first in the pick will have a good shot at getting his desired civ and leader while the last one probably won't get either.

Also we agreed upon everyone starting with a scout. I'm still thinking we should have started with warriors. Starting with scouts certainly is better for the builders though. It is probably better for me as well, as at least in the first few turns I normally can achieve good results simply due to my excel-tables helping me finding a good opening and not many strategic decisions. Not having to think about potential warriors screwing me over makes that much easier. Especially as that means that we can count at least 10 turns till everyone has produced his worker, another 3 for a warrior and probably another 20 till that warrior would be moved to someone else. 30+ turns before you have to expect any kind of aggression is certainly making the early game very straightforward.

Now for the biggest change: FIN / EXP / India cost 2 turns at the start, CRE / Byz / Inca and Rome cost 1 turn. Thats... well, I don't know. I have thought about it but I don't think having to wait two turns at the start is offsetting the advantage you gain with FIN over AGG for example. But it gets harder when you match it with say ORG. 2 turns at the start, is that enough to make ORG as good as FIN? Seven calculated in PBEM39 that he saved around 50 gold with ORG while FIN would have got him 100 gold more. That was around the medieval age. I guess that difference will be even more pronounced later (due to Banks, Universities, etc.). Of course, ORG got him several buildings cheaper. Now it would also gain him 2 turns at the start. But how much are those 2 turns really worth? Simply adding up the produced food/hammers/commerce does not take into account the turn-advantage you gain. I know Seven has made a thread in the general forum discussing stuff like that, but I wasn't able to understand it completely tbh.

Anyway, I'll certainl get back to that issue. For now lets just say that I'm absolutely lost.

Rules

* No communication between players is allowed.
* Goes without saying, but play in good faith and put up a good fight.
* The only bans are:
- Spy missions.
- Great spy infiltration ability.
- Nukes.
- All UN/AP resolutions if AW doesn't automatically disable them.
- War Elephants

All standard.

[Serdoa]

Starting screenie for reference:

[Serdoa]

[SIZE="3"]Traits:[/SIZE]

Ranking the traits without taking our special rules into account just yet should give something like this I think:

FIN / EXP
CRE
SPI
ORG / IND / PHI
IMP / CHM
AGG
PRO

I guess it is debatable if SPI has to be ranked together with or even before CRE, probably depends on how good one is in using it. But I think it was shown several times now that switching in and out of Caste / Slavery and the different religious civis can be quite strong. But I have my doubts that I am able to pull it off. On the other hand, I remember quite well how often I was cursing that I was not SPI as it really gives much freedom. 5 turns of Caste / Pacifism to get some GPP going, switch back to Slavery / Org. Rel and get infrastructure built or Slavery / Theocracy for some promoted troops. But it is certainly a trait which only shines later when one has unlucked some civis. It also makes Shed. Paya more desirable, providing earlier the benefits of several of the religious civics.

It can also be debated if IMP really is as bad as I make it in my list - together with AGG, which I know can be put to good use. But I honestly doubt that I want to war early with any of my opponents (everyone else will just fly ahead in case of an early war), so neither AGG nor CHM seem very desirable to me. CHM maybe a little bit more, depending if one takes CRE or not. Without CRE it gets kinda necessary to build monuments (or Stonehenge or get a religion and build missionaries) anyway, so the added happiness by doing so is certainly helpful. Also we are not guaranteed to have all happy-resources on this map nor to have any of the early-ones nearby so 2 more happiness than everyone else could be very strong.

But I somehow don't believe that having a higher happy cap would really yield good results. The thing is: I doubt I could jump ahead the others even with CHM. But if I can't do that then I certainly will fall back behind them as soon as other traits come into play. Not sure why I think even so much about it, I think it is clear that CHM is not the trait to choose if you can have FIN/EXP...

Ok, so what are the traits I should take into consideration? I feel FIN, EXP, CRE, SPI, ORG are the best ones. IND or PHI maybe, depending on circumstances. If I am last to pick and no one has a IND-leader yet for example. PHI - I don't know, I'm yet to see PHI making a real difference tbh. It is nice to get a really quick first great person, especially looking at this cap which screams for cottages with an academy. But apart from that? Having SPI to switch in and out of Pacifism is pretty much the same (except for a GA, no one wants to stay in Pacifism for a longer time in an AW-game). PHI for me suffers from the same problem as CHM: I probably can't make enough of a difference early with it, that it would keep me ahead later on when other traits become stronger.

That leaves me with 5 traits or a total of 10 combinations. Not adding IND. I guess I really need to make my mind up how much of a malus those lost turns at the start are. I guess thats a bonus when you pick later, you'll know if others already have a malus and if all have picked something giving 2 turns malus (either FIN or EXP) it isn't such a big deal to also take something with a malus.

Ok, strictly looking at what you lose in 2 turns, we talk about ~20 beakers, 4 hammers, 6 food. FIN and EXP both seem strong enough that I believe they will make up those raw numbers against every other trait over time. But of course there is the turn advantage, which is important, especially the earlier the turns are that one loses. So I think I should only take either one of FIN or EXP - what isn't that much of a hindrance as I have only a 20% chance to pick first, so that combination is probably gone anyhow... though that what also mean that the turn disadvantage is probably not that bad. Question then becomes, what do I pair it with? CRE is not only helping in border wars (important in AW) but makes it also much easier to settle, especially in the beginning. You don't have to try to have the good stuff in the inner ring and you don't have to make certain to have a worker chopping a forest immediately just so you at least only have to wait 5 turns to get your borders popped after settling. Combining it with EXP makes it even better, as then that forest can directly be chopped into a granary. Even with Stonehenge you don't get that great effect but at least you save the hammers for the monument.

But then again, with SPI and Caste unlocked those issues are gone - and thats when the border wars probably start. It really does only help at the start and I'm not sure that this is enough to make it viable. Also if I can secure SH, thats enough. It's not as good - and with those opponents it will be hard as hell to secure it, if at all possible without having so huge opportunity costs incurred by it that it isn't helping at all.

Ok, so what does that leave me with?

FIN/EXP - losing 4 turns at the start is harsh, depending on what the others take, though certainly the strongest combination available normally
FIN/CRE - losing 3 turns for a weaker combination than FIN/EXP; somehow writing that down doesn't make me feel all too interested in this combination tbh
EXP/CRE - again losing 3 turns, this time for a solely early game combination; I somehow like this better than FIN/CRE, just by gut feel. But I doubt I can leverage those two traits well enough that I won't get blown out of the water as soon as FIN or some other late game trait kicks in for the others
FIN/ORG - losing 2 turns and having only late game traits (kinda); actually that combination does seem interesting if one wants to play for a really fast tech-rate, but I'm not sure if I can get to the point when those traits kick in without being kicked out of the game
EXP/ORG - 2 turns lost, as above, but a combination of an early and a late game trait; it is providing many buildings for cheap and does not cost that many turns at the start, so might actually be not that bad of a combination
FIN/SPI - 2 turns lost, but combining 2 late game traits probably is still a bad idea
EXP/SPI - loses also 2 turns, and I am not sure I can go without any trait helping with commerce

Ok, I'll stop here. There are some more combinations with the traits I mentioned of course (SPI/ORG even without losing a turn), but I think I have learned a few things about my expectation for this game and about the value of the traits which I should put together:

1. I want an early and a late game trait. Late game trait because I expect this game to go on for some time and early game trait because I feel that I won't be able to keep up if I don't have an early game trait. Putting them together I would say

EXP/CRE - early game trait
FIN/SPI - late game trait
ORG/IND - middle game trait

ORG and IND are somewhere in between I feel, not really providing something right at the start but also not providing the great boost at the end. Both rather shine in the middle game, though having to put them into late or early I would put IND as early game trait (being more important early one when everyone is nearly at the same tech-level) and ORG as late game trait (as it's savings are seen all the time).

2. I feel I need some sort of commerce-trait. I'd put FIN and ORG as commerce traits, helping the economy along. IND and EXP most definitely don't belong here while CRE and SPI are somewhere middle-ground (cheap libraries; no anarchy).

EXP/CRE/IND - non-commerce traits
FIN/ORG/SPI - commerce traits

Ok, so putting that together I get the following combinations:

FIN/EXP - Pacal
[strike]FIN/CRE - Willem[/strike]
EXP/ORG - Mehmed
EXP/SPI - Isabella
[strike]CRE/ORG - Zara[/strike]
CRE/SPI - Hatshesput

Striked out the combinations which do fit but I'm pretty sure I don't want to play. And as a honorable mention:

FIN/ORG - Darius
all the IND combinations

So, thats actually much better. I still have no clue how to add those lost turns to the equation exactly but it seems obvious that either FIN or EXP will be most likely part of it, giving at least 2 lost turns. CRE/SPI would only yield 1 lost turn, but I think I'd rather eat one more and get EXP instead of CRE tbh.

Lets look at possible leaders next, as I don't think I can refine the trait-question anymore before we don't actually seen some picks.

[Serdoa]

Well, 68 views at least let me hope that someone actually read through all that stuff Let's look at civs:

As most have probably learned by now your civ should normally be decided by starting techs, maybe UB depending on its usefulness (Incas Terrace comes to mind) and nearly never for UU. Even Rome and Byz I would not take just for their UU anymore. They are strong but they also railroad you into thinking you need to make them worth it. And thats normally getting you to try and attack someone with Praets when you better would have kept expanding and simply enjoyed that no one attacks the guy with Praets.

So, what does that translate too? Looking at this start, starting with Agri seems neat, for getting the corn online and being closer to AH. Wheel / Mining as second seems most desirable. Mining for being closer to BW and whipping, which should be kinda strong with +9 food at size 2, probably even more than the Wheel, despite it having a lower beaker-value. Wheel will get important for Pottery and cottages, but I don't see myself plopping them down that early.

Or we can simply conclude that this is a start as normal as it can get and therefore neither Hunting, Fishing nor Myst are really desirable. With the exception for Myst maybe if one wants to try a really, really early SH. But as talked about earlier, I doubt the costs would be worth it. And if you get it in your second city, you can as well research it by hand. Or of course if one wants to be certain to get a religion.

Agri/Mining is only available through China. India does offer only Mining coupled with Myst, though the time for the first worker is certainly enough to get Agri and AH before you actually want to pasture the sheep. But you won't get BW in time afterwards for chopping and having a Fast Worker with nothing to do is a sad sight (especially when you paid 2 turns for it). Inca on the other hand starts with Myst/Agri, which is probably nearly as good as a Wheel/Agri start but with the added benefit of Terraces. Quechua on the other hand are probably absolutely irrelevant.

Apart from that there are a many civs starting with Agri. Zulu with the Ikhanda (though do I want to build a Barracks everywhere without it being cheaper via AGG?), Native Americans with the Dog Soldier (if someone goes for Rome) and then France, Ottomans, Egypt, Sumeria and Babylon all starting with Agri/Wheel. Sumeria with the extra cheap courthouses at Priesthood. France with the 2-move Musket(eer)s, Egypt and their War Chariot... though decision.

[Qgqqqqq]

I read through it! (Well all for a given value of all...)
LOve the pic!

Is FIN really late-game? Isn't the increase at its most (% wise) in the early-middle game?

[NobleHelium]

First pick Sumeria? Shocking.

[Commodore]

First pick Sumeria? Shocking.

According to Locke:

15) Sumeria (+Bismarck): Terrible civ! You have UU that is worse than normal axe. You have UB that offers no advantage. Courthouse that comes 2 techs earlier on tree. Starting techs are good but this is awful civ. Why would you pick this when CHina, France, England all available? Is stupid.

I think we've moved beyond this point.

[Serdoa]

I wanted to get some lurker-posts at least But I'll try to give my reasoning sometimes the next days.

@Qgqqqqq

I rank FIN as late game trait simply because in the early game it seldomly makes that much of a difference imo. You need some research sure, but EXP for example is offering much more to get your new cities quickly started. FIN on the other hand might help to get a tech a turn earlier, but for that you need to be focussing on commerce when really you shouldn't. You should build Workers and Settlers as quickly as possible. FIN isn't helping with that at all.

[Merovech]

Sumeria is fun. Is it great? It's not bad, imo.