Adventure 4 - Pling's report

[pling]

This was rather outside my comfort zone, but I thought I'd have a stab at it anyway

My report can be found here

Short version: I sucked

Executive Summary: I'm really not ready for playing at Monarch level - I lost in 1720AD when the Khan finally trampled over the last remnants of my empire. I've not provided a final save, though I can if required, to prove that I lost without using alphabet to help me do so

[VoiceOfUnreason]

How on earth did you end up with an Inca city on top of Elephantine - I thought cities had to be two tiles apart. Not your fault, certainly - but weird.

The dot maps that you drew are so regular, it makes me think that you could strengthen your game by thinking more about what you want a city to become when you place it.

"By 1000AD I'm building Markets everywhere" Yeah, I tend to do the same; I think it's a habit we need to break. Markets offer a bit of extra happy, but primarily they justify themselves by feeding on commerce - a city with high production low commerce doesn't get as much leverage out of them, so should probably spend those 150 hammers on units.

The better readers may have more insight - those moves stand out as being particularly familiar (and therefore likely to be mistakes).

[pling]

How on earth did you end up with an Inca city on top of Elephantine - I thought cities had to be two tiles apart. Not your fault, certainly - but weird.

You know, I'd not noticed that - maybe it's because the one tile that seperates them is water? That's not the one that tried to revolt, either ... I'm still amused at Vilcas

The dot maps that you drew are so regular, it makes me think that you could strengthen your game by thinking more about what you want a city to become when you place it.

When playing Civ3 my cities were always laid out on a precise grid (no, I was never very good at Civ3) I'm gradually weaning myself away from that - but I think you're right about that being a definite weak spot.

"By 1000AD I'm building Markets everywhere" Yeah, I tend to do the same; I think it's a habit we need to break. Markets offer a bit of extra happy, but primarily they justify themselves by feeding on commerce - a city with high production low commerce doesn't get as much leverage out of them, so should probably spend those 150 hammers on units.

Mmmm. Yeah. I think that's the same problem as above, actually - I'd not really thought of it like that before, but I do tend to end up with cookie-cutter cities (hence less thought about where they're going) all with the same things in them, which really isn't the best way forward.

Thanks for commenting, you've given me several things to think about

[Arathorn]

Bad luck with Khan declaring on you. Yes, a bit more military might have deterred him. Once he did, though, your response wasn't terribly appropriate. Building only one type of unit is just asking to get thumped. Axes are OK general troops, especially in the ancient age. But crossbows have a bonus against melee units (like axes), so they chew through axes VERY rapidly. You had horses and Egypt's UU is the war chariot. A mix of both would have been a better choice. Did you have Construction? With ivory so close, it's worth a semi-beeline to get war elephants, which would have been enormously helpful. All axes all the time is not a particularly good idea.

1190AD was a good year - Giza was founded on a 3 food bonus site:

You say that almost as if you couldn't decide that yourself. Don't let the layout force you into city locations. Plant your cities to grab those 3-food-resource sites earlier. See them, recognize them, and claim them. Don't let your expectations on far apart cities "should" be dissuade you -- resources are critical and claiming them appropriately is a large part of Civ4.

I also noted you had 4 smallish cities at 1 AD. Most people had 5 or 6 cities at that point AND the populations were larger. I'm not sure why Thebes was unhappy at size 6 -- ivory + gold + normal starting value should have had it OK, even without religion or MP from Hereditary Rule (which might not have been a bad idea, too). Could be worker actions that is also a significant problem.

Just some thoughts...

Thanks for reporting!
Arathorn