First I'd like to say I first learned about RB about a year or two ago, when I was reading articles about Civ 5 (wondering whether to buy it or not) and ended up on Sulla's website where he mentioned that SoDs were not so disastrous as was proved by his PB2 game here were Speaker managed to fend off superior forces. I've followed a few other PBs since then, and I can say that following this forum has significantly improved my CIV skills.
I've met REM on Civfanatics not so long ago when we became teammates on a PBEM, and recently we were both interested in entering a competitive game so we ended up signing up here. He's far more experienced in MP than I am, and overall a much better CIV player, but I'm definitely trying to improve (and with 2 people in the team there's less chance of a stupid mistake ruining our game).
We've been discussing frantically on which civ and leader we should take, and now that we finally have a thread I'll post our conversation in a spoiler (REM in green, I in red) :
Now that the game is almost up I was wondering if you had any thoughts about the civ and leader we should aim for ? I was thinking along the lines of Shaka/Zulu
With regards to a leader civ pick before you say anything further have you opened up the mod? Agg does not work quite like you might think, ie 25% and 50% courthouse and 20% irkanda for total of 95%!!! Reduced costs. Rather it takes the maitainence, applies the discounts and then reduces by 25% further. So after a courthouse it is a 12.5% effect. After a courthouse and irkanda a measly 7.5% further effect... Before I found this out I was really keen on agg but now I am not so sure. The reason I really like it on base bts is the rifle draft, although that is now nerfed requiring 2 pop rather than 1 pop to work also... Also corps are modded out completely so really the only viable end game civic is state property, which will reduced the usefulness of agg.
So my original thinking was actually Hammurabi of Zulu, but now I'm not too sure. Bare in mind that there are huge known tech bonuses also - it is 8% per player from Industrial Age on (as soon as 1 person hits the Industrial Age) so I do not know if teching CivStats are that important other than for first to bonuses...
Also note that in the normal game a barracks is 50ham and an irkanda 60ham whilst they are now both 60, so the Zulus have actually been buffed here.
Yeah I like zulu as well, but if you think that research is not as important in the late game then early development is key so good traits are exp or imp. What I liked about agg/exp was all the buildings that were half priced, which meant good cheap infrastructure in the mid game. But I could be convinced into pretty much anything as long as there's a real strategy behind it. The one behind shaka would be to get our workforce out, get cheap barracks out of our cities for the culture as well as being able to place cities aggressively (with free c1 and barracks everywhere we'll get a lot of promos). But as I said I could be convinced into anything.
Well I think that you can make a strongish case for most of the traits really. I think expansive is actually made stronger with the higher worker hammer bonus and also a work boat bonus, as well as a lot of Finacial buildings, I can live with slower granaries for those. And getting monuments from barracks at the same price seems very powerful, especially if they are giving a 40% total reduced costs pre courthouses seems like good play.
Also to note as Zulu is that hunting will give us a double move scout which is important with huts on, and hunting/agri are the most expensive starting techs now, and unless we have a fishing start pretty versatile. Plus impis retain their usefulness through the medieval era as pillagers.
I am happy with Shaka/Zulu being our top choice, but we also need a few more choices too. Carthage seems like a nice choice now on a water map. Inca mixed with exp seem fairly strong still, the amount of culture out of the terrace was never the issue, 5 extra turns to pop is still ok. Korea are interesting, I really like their uu. Agg France could be nice. Also with the changes to swords I think that a sword uu civ could be powerful here, but that would be needed to play test. Celts for example all units getting double hill movement? Rome strength 7 plus 50% vs cities? Seems like a mixed stack could be powerful.
As for traits I think we should still avoid pro. Also I think we should avoid creative with quite a few ways to make culture now. Charismatic still seems weak. Ind seems ish as there is no fail golding now and we would probably be going up against another couple of inds for early wonders anyway. Imp is only slightly buffed and I don't think worth considering, as it still has little value late game. Spiritual I don't think we will get enough out of especially not being able to ensure a religion.
Exp/org/agg would be my top picks looking at the traits. Philo is now buffed and is rather nice anyway I think, but not as nice as the other 3. Fin I still think is quite powerful but the actual need of teching power is reduced to a point where I would not top line it anymore.
Choice of civ may make us synergise some different traits but for the time I would say
Shaka, mehmed, Hammurabi as leaders, Zulu inca Rome for civs perhaps? I want to world build a few sword attack scenarios to see what odds swords get.
What were your other thoughts re leaders and civs?
I'm not too sure about the synergy between inca and exp any more, since pro gives the cheap terrace instead of exp. Rome is still great of course, and France has seen the salon buffed with the free specialist so my choice would be Zulu Rome France. They also all benefit from the agg bonus on their UU. I like mehmet for cheap harbours AND lighthouses, which means that it'll be strong at sea. If we have a fish start, how about the Dutch ? The Dike is awesome, and the indianman comes with a nice bonus.
Sorry you're right, that's me not paying attention to all the changes. I still think they are a nice pick even without a cheap terrace but that does knock them down a bit (they do save a lot of hammers being able to build the quecha until the medieval age)
If we have a fishing start I think Rome might be better than the dutch. Often the strongest play is to build a workboat and then slave the first worker, as long as you start with mining (which is Rome, England, Carthage and Portugal I think). I do get why the dutch are powerful although they are heavily map dependent. If Krill has not changed the code which I doubt he has, we may be able to catch someone sleeping with the fact that their UU does not get teleported out of territorial waters on declaring war. The dike I am less sold on though. It is a very late building, and is rather situational. Also in practice the places where it is strongest, ie tiny island cities it is an absolute nightmare to build, and don't forget you want to beeline state property in this game really over steam power, with the buffs to workshop and watermill output pre replaceable parts. I think it has good value in a space race, or allowing you to site production cities slightly off a river against a lake (which also triggers allowing you to build it even if the city is not coastal), but I think in practice that will be around 10% of cities that could have a dike and not a leevee.
Re mehemd, I agree which was why I suggested carthage, who are also fishing and mining. I think the cothon has value all game, especially at 40 hammers as exp.
So we are agreed zulu best and rome is up there also, over Zulu for a water start? I think definitely if there is a lake fish/clam, but if we have other food to improve then I'm happy to go zulu first. I'm not sure if I would put france next but it would definitely be up there. Just throwing out celts out there again too, now hunting is a rather desirable starting tech for a double move scout and their UU if built in a dun city it is gurilla 1+2 before any promos, so could easily have a fairly large army of str 6 50% retreat units that could double move and units defending against them would not get hills bonus, and that is before taking them with being agg! Maybe also though to try and snag as many huts and as it is an expensive tech we should think of good hunting civs? Russia stands out in my mind, maybe germany is now interesting with a cheap early factory and cheap cannon UU?
I take it you liked the leader/trait suggestions then?
What about civ or leader first? I think it might be better to get a civ first here especially if we want zulu or rome as I still think fin will be fairly popular amongst people and exp not so as it will appear weakened without the granary bonus.
If we start on the coast there's a good chance that between 30% and 50% of our cities will be on the coast as well, which means that dikes increase our production by a lot (do dikes add up to the moai ? That means a 2/2/2 coast tile in the late game, and 2/2/1 ocean). It's also huge for golden ages, and if we end up with not enough land after the land grab we can always settle island cities and chop the dike out (it is map dependent though). But we'll probably get a lot of forests at the start so you may be right with an early BW.
Anyway we should wait to see the start now, we may have something interesting that will change our mind (especially on the Zulu/Rome situation, if it's for a coastal clam or crab fishing can wait IMO).
I understand why Celtia seems great now, but building Duns everywhere seems like a waste of hammers. Germany would mean a strong industrial age, but both uniques being cheaper/earlier versions of their normal counterpart it doesn't sound too fun.
As I said all traits seem interesting now (except pro which I still wouldn't take), but I'd like to veto the fin leaders. For the past 2 years I've played only fin leaders because the trait is just so overpowered in base BTS, so now that it's back to the level of the other strong traits I'd like to try something else.
Actually I agree about civ first, there are several strong leaders that will probably not be taken so we can take any one of those. But it will still depend on our place in the snake pick and on the start.
Have you noticed that huts are nerfed with the mod ? They can only give you techs from the first 3 rows, it's in the "Miscellaneous" part of the changes.
True, but then how many of them will not be riverside, and actually be using the coast tiles.? It does stack with the moai. I agree it is great for golden ages, but just the expense of building it is very prohibitive in most cities without slavery or universal sufferage, which I doubt we will be running by then. I view them as great for a space race, but pretty marginal apart from that.
I wouldn't suggest duns everywhere if we were celts but in one or 2 unit production cities. You would still need axes and spears and catapults for defense. But it is just a suggestion.
I am cool with a veto on fin leaders, I can live with that. Not too bothered about it as it should be easy to catch up to a tech lead. The only issue would be if teams start getting eliminated. Yeah I think civ is slightly more important here as more traits are viable but some civs still have very questionable UU/UBs knocking around in comparison to others.
I did notice the changes to huts giving techs. But a boost of gold would still be huge, and with a 2 move scout finding a second city spot ASAP whilst roaming for huts is more available.
Also - note this is on monarch difficulty. Unless I am mistaken when barbs spawn they will spawn with archers and warriors. Could be mildly irritating. They will not enter borders until there is a greater than 2 city per person average though.
In some ways I hope we have a later snake pick. I think knowing synergy here might be better. Going Zulu screams a need to be agg for instance to get best value out of it.
I'm still not actually sure of the map type though. There was talk of big and small, and talk of a remash of previous pitbosses. Do you have any idea?
And because I announced it in the thread name, I'll spam a bit by answering the last part of the discussion here.
I still don't fully agree with you on dikes, because they're not only useful when there's a river around, a city on a river delta with a levee gets +4 hammers, while with a dike it can get to +15. But if you're not a fan of the dike I can live with not considering the Dutch.
I agree that synergy is key when traits and civs are more balanced out, so getting the end of the pick is better.
I remember that the PB13 map was really water heavy with many islands and long coasts to defend. No wonder the Vikings did well on that map (credits to Pindicator and Scooter for their game, and to Mackoti and Plako as well for a 3 way victory, as we Diplomacy players say).
Haha you do yourself a disservice! I am a lot more aggressive which is definitely helpful on duel games. You quickly pick it up after a few games that your unit probability needs to be very high, or if you think you can outtech your opponents just enough to keep on top of their units. It's hard to get multiplayer experience without using the gamespy forums though - you could knock out full games on quick speed in 30-45mins, to the point of an obvious winner, and thus try loads of different start strats and the best way to micro.
I think you would fare a lot better if it were FFAs that we were playing as less aggression is better on them unless you can deal a decisive blow. (plus maybe a few more workers would not go amiss)
PS I think that PBEM is dead. I can't see it getting any life blown back into it now :/
You misunderstand me. I really like the Dutch, I just think the dike is terribly overrated. It is a terrific building, but comes late, takes a long time to build and the game is usually yours to loose by that point. Either by building it you will get overrun whilst they build units or you are in a solid lead and they are just gravy making a spaceship faster.
The east indiaman is game changing though. You are unstoppable on the water until they hit chemistry and astro or steel/steam power. You can control the waves with much less hammers and transport units extremely efficiently.
But I think that other civs can snowball better, especially with a fishing start. Slaving from that early food is extremely powerful.
Yeah the viking trading post is a good building, sadly it is toned down for this mod.
All depends on the map type really. Need to get more information on that first.
Also I just noticed the changes re free speech. It now competes with state property. Im not sure whether a state property or a free speech led empire is better. I think state property would have the edge with such reduced costs. Also serfdom might be better than a caste add on, as it gives bonuses to watermills and windmills. Whilst we may not have as many, there is a 75% worker speed increase (1 turn most improvements there I think, especially after steam power) and is lower cost. I can't imagine that anyone would take emancipation to cause us happy issues. I think a buro cap properly cottaged will keep research going enough and anyone going full cottages will not be able to match the production!
Other thoughts - aztecs could be really nice here, but I have a tendency to whip huge amounts - remember that first NAP game we played? I had whipping anger of 140 turns in one city at the height of your attack. It does halve the anger as soon as it is built, swords are now viable and regardless, the jags are cheap healers.
Also if we have missed things and are at the end of the pick HRE could be nice with mehmed.
Russia should also be considered now the UB is slightly better and the cossack is an ok UU
As you can see I think a hunting start is hugely beneficial in speeding us along to pick up a little more gold and getting a cracking start.
Starting with mysticism has always felt like shooting yourself in the foot to me, unless you're going for a religious opening which is almost always bad. I admit it would be compensated by having great uniques though.
Does anyone have info on how the map creation is going ? Just so we know how close we are to starting the game.
It seems to be pretty slow, the map creation. See I am not too bothered about starting techs in general, and as long as you can upgrade food before a worker gets out I think they almost should be not considered at all. I feel that it should generally go UU > UB > starting techs. The only difference is a fishing start where a work boat first followed by slaving a worker is usually the most powerful play, or hunting in the presence of huts. Basically I am fairly certain that we could research one of agri or hunting if we don't start with them which will unlock any food except fish or deer, so we would be pretty unlucky not to be able to use a worker right off the bat.
Haha, that is annoying isn't it. I think it will be hard to get great synergy at 3/11. That's 19 picks including our first one gone before we make our second choice. I think civs will be easier to say which ones will get picked. Traits I am less sure of. Will people want to run the changed ones? Will people want to stick to fin. Unfortunately with only 2 picks before us we won't be able to get a good idea. The only caution I can see with going Zulu is we really NEED agg to make it work. Most other choices are a bit more ambivalent, but powerful monuments that reduce mait are not so great to build at 60 hammers that early... Agg and what could we live with?
Agg/exp, agg/org, I would say the next mix I would be interested in agg/spi?
3rd day in this thread and I'm already going to contradict myself, but if all these are gone by the time of our leader pick I think we should take Ragnar...
![[Image: wildSquirrelsLounge-7W.jpg]](http://www.rappnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/wildSquirrelsLounge-7W.jpg)
