[SPOILERS] Small Wunders and Izzy of Inca: The fat lady sings

[MindyMcCready]

I'd choose SE-NE to get more intel on whether we really do have free land in that direction. Seems likely with the hut but somebody could have just missed it or had their scout eaten early. We'll need that info before we proceed with our crazy 3rd city plant.

With Retep's late capital plant he likely came from the coast directly west of his current direction or possibly SW of his current position. If both Retep and us hadn't moved, I'd say that means there's room for a civ to Retep's south-east rather than SW.

On the crazy 3rd city plant. Let's say we do that and dedicate that city exclusively to working the corn+gold and whip-chopping out archers. How do you think a little pillaging of Retep would affect those plans? If we moved in with say 2 warriors+1archer as soon as we could,...force him to build useless-against-us warriors/archers and/or pillage all his resources and/or maybe find his infant city plant,....would we be more or less comfortable with having no route to gold-corn-marble city?

It's definately debatable, but I think the choke and the aggressive plant go hand-in-hand. Make sure that he knows not to settle in our direction and we have a chance of firming up those plans before Retep can land horses/copper and become a real threat.

If we could pull this off, it'll be an amazing land grab. Possibly neither Retep nor the Blunders would even know how much land
is up there. The Blunders scout saw us from the SW right? And then moved off?

We'd have to push expansion + military hard while getting to Currency ASAP for our 100% building bonus before we totally crash our economy but it could be very good.

[WilliamLP]

This probably won't be a surprise to you but I'm no fan of early hostile tactics. In the grand scheme of things we have lots of good land to fill (at least 10+ cities worth) and a great economic position.

A friendly neighbour is a lot better than a pissed off but slightly weakened one. Your logic does follow if the "pissed off" is inevitable. But even a tense friendliness is much better than vendettas and both of us massing more military on the borders then we otherwise would, speaking of relative position to the other teams.

The in-game advantage of trade routes isn't something I take lightly either. We have a really easy land connection through rivers, for earlier trade routes than most other teams in this game. It means we get 2 commerce per city instead of 1 commerce for domestic routes. If we declare and pillage something, that doesn't recover back to 2 for a very large number of turns.

So basically, I'd really want something very clear to gain to declare war for any reason. A slightly weaker neighbour wouldn't be good enough. Now, if this were a situation like Commodore vs Pindicooter in PB8, well it would be very different, where two players are really struggling for a very limited amount of land. But here, the situation where we draw a line between capitals and each expand outwards is the the positive sum outcome for both of us, and I don't give a zero chance that it would happen. If Retep has a personality like mine, it will. Now clearly it may not work like that, and we have to be careful that opportunism isn't easy. But I don't take being the first aggressor lightly, and would need a compelling reason to do so. (A sure chance to take a city for very little loss would qualify.)

[MindyMcCready]

I hear and understand what you're saying. I also acknowledge that there a long history of early wars going very badly. In PB8 I though that Lewwyn was a pretty clear cut case of the necessity of a first strike and despite Azza's massive lack of military readiness,...it significantly put them behind. So I get that early wars are bad.

But at the same time there's a counter to that. Azza had strong growth and it's not clear that Lewwyn would have been better off had he built up peacefully and let Azza acquire iron. The scenario that's invisible to everyone: had Lewwyn built up in peace, would he be a stronger civ OR would he be dead/set back when Azza decided the time was ripe for war?

I do think that perhaps too many players incorrectly determine that early war is strictly bad because its difficult to take into account the invisible situation.

Your thoughts very much reflect AT's position from PB9. He very much wanted to build peacefully so much so that he would settle 2nd best cities in a deferential manner towards Jowy. Despite this, when Jowy was ready, a 25 unit stack showed up at AT's doorstep. Jowy's missteps + tech trading saved AT much more than any tech or development advantage. At least AT settled non-aggressively while hoping for peace unlike some aggressive pacifist that I know. :LOL:

So we're in a PB8 scenario to some degree. Or maybe in a PB9 scenario and I'm Noble. We get to decide if we want war on our terms or wait until its out of our hands and its on Khmer's terms.

What are the advantages of going to war?
-Relative to Khmer we have spare troops or are otherwise planning to build them regardless. So the opportunity cost is relatively low at this point anyway.
-At low opportunity cost we have the chance to set back their development by pillaging their improvements.
-This could have a big effect on them settling cities, building workers and getting their granaries up.
-If we go on a pillaging run with 1 archer + 2 warriors the hammer cost is 55H, already invested. Given our UU, Retep is going to have to invest in 7-8 warriors/105-120H to clear his land. In the worst case scenario, we lose 55H but we've cost him a city right there and its unlikely that he could clear his land before we could do substantial lasting damage. Of course, there's the long-term implications but they could be both good or bad. Every hammer that he spends right now on warriors & archers is a hammer that can't hurt us.
-Better case scenario: we manage to raze his #2 city, or possibly even catch him underdefended at his capital. I'd say that razing city #2 would be 'likely' while catching is capital is very low prob of course, but still possible if he's escorting to his #2 city.

So I really do think that these scenarios are better than fighting Khmer later while he's got Protective archers + ballistaphants.
-He's basically immune to assult until Cuirassiers.
-You virtually cannot approach his cities with HA. On slow stacks, Ballistaphants can do huge damage or kill stack defending spears and then he's free to flank away your cats.
-While his cities are all but untouchable, he's free to attack our cities.He would be foolish to pass up the opportunity of attacking with impunity.
-We'll have great difficulty flanking cats that are protected by 'phants'.
-We'll need to have a very large assortment of catapults on hand and ready (with this proximity we won't have time to build enough of them reactively) and we'll get absolutely no return on these hammers because they're strictly defensive.

Lastly, I would like to turn this around a bit and ask you to justify your peace committment.
-When do you want to go to war? Or when do you think war would be a good idea?
-Realistically/best guess, when do you think Retep will want to go to war given the 5-tile plant and that we're blocking his riverside and taking disputable corn-gold location? Will that be better or worse for us?
-And the same question from before: "Have you ever come across a 5-tile from capital plant that didn't result in war?"
-If Retep planted 5-tiles away and blocked *our* access to fertile riverside *and* stole our disputed gold-corn location you would not immediately begin plotting his destruction?

That's my case for a pillaging+ run. When Retep gets ivory, and somebody will trade it to him with your score being what it is, it's going to be a tough period in the history of Izzy of Inca.

[WilliamLP]

But at the same time there's a counter to that. Azza had strong growth and it's not clear that Lewwyn would have been better off had he built up peacefully and let Azza acquire iron. The scenario that's invisible to everyone: had Lewwyn built up in peace, would he be a stronger civ OR would he be dead/set back when Azza decided the time was ripe for war?

I don't know, I think it depends on who is most successful with rapid expansion and economy when the time comes when peaceful expansion is over, and who was most cunning with passive-agressive settlements.

I do think that perhaps too many players incorrectly determine that early war is strictly bad because its difficult to take into account the invisible situation.

Maybe. There are parts of RB belief I'm willing to challenge but early war against an attentive opponent just doesn't seem cost effective to me. I also am confident that Retep can't cost effectively wage war on us, no matter how much he despises our first city.

At least AT settled non-aggressively while hoping for peace unlike some aggressive pacifist that I know. :LOL:

Who could you ever mean?

I haven't followed PB 9 very much, just read a bit about the early game mostly from Cornflakes's perspective. It seems like a very different game, very land based and wide open, where everyone needs military basically everywhere. Also tech trading makes early war much stronger because you don't have to fear falling behind and being snowballed in economy and tech.

What are the advantages of going to war?
-Relative to Khmer we have spare troops or are otherwise planning to build them regardless. So the opportunity cost is relatively low at this point anyway.

I don't think I agree with that! Regardless, we need enough to stake out new cities and be able to defend against human barbs (coming soon) and random wanding axe or chariot "scouts" from other unknown players.

-This could have a big effect on them settling cities, building workers and getting their granaries up.

Sure, but does it have a big effect to speed up our own ability to do the same? It's not clear to me that the answer is yes. If not, and we just invest more into it than the other guy to the SE who eventually surpasses us economically, it's not much good.

-If we go on a pillaging run with 1 archer + 2 warriors the hammer cost is 55H, already invested. Given our UU, Retep is going to have to invest in 7-8 warriors/105-120H to clear his land. In the worst case scenario, we lose 55H but we've cost him a city right there and its unlikely that he could clear his land before we could do substantial lasting damage. Of course, there's the long-term implications but they could be both good or bad. Every hammer that he spends right now on warriors & archers is a hammer that can't hurt us.
-Better case scenario: we manage to raze his #2 city, or possibly even catch him underdefended at his capital. I'd say that razing city #2 would be 'likely' while catching is capital is very low prob of course, but still possible if he's escorting to his #2 city.

The cost is that we could have used that 1 archer + 2 warriors to stake out more land earlier. We may just discuss in circles and not reach any agreement on this but I don't even see that substantial lasting damage to him actually helps us that much, compared to the loss of trade routes, assuming we can get and stay ahead of him. The game isn't a duel.

So I really do think that these scenarios are better than fighting Khmer later while he's got Protective archers + ballistaphants.
-He's basically immune to assult until Cuirassiers.
-You virtually cannot approach his cities with HA. On slow stacks, Ballistaphants can do huge damage or kill stack defending spears and then he's free to flank away your cats.
-While his cities are all but untouchable, he's free to attack our cities.He would be foolish to pass up the opportunity of attacking with impunity.
-We'll have great difficulty flanking cats that are protected by 'phants'.
-We'll need to have a very large assortment of catapults on hand and ready (with this proximity we won't have time to build enough of them reactively) and we'll get absolutely no return on these hammers because they're strictly defensive.

Are strength 7 elephants this massive and completely game-changing unit that puts him at a qualitative advantage over us? We have them too if we get ivory, without the field ability. It remains to be seen and maybe I'm naive but I don't fear this part of the game that much if we wind up with a better economy. Especially if we can get catapults first or at the same time, the defender will still have the advantage at tech parity.

Having a large assortment of catapults is something we're going to need no matter who's next to us.

Lastly, I would like to turn this around a bit and ask you to justify your peace committment.
-When do you want to go to war? Or when do you think war would be a good idea?

Honestly, never would be perfect. War with someone who isn't protective would be better. Alternatively, if we get maces and catapults substantially before him and we could get additional land with them I couldn't argue with war then.

-Realistically/best guess, when do you think Retep will want to go to war given the 5-tile plant and that we're blocking his riverside and taking disputable corn-gold location? Will that be better or worse for us?

He'll want to. I just don't think it will be in his self-interest to to improve his position in the game.

-And the same question from before: "Have you ever come across a 5-tile from capital plant that didn't result in war?"

I don't think so! But I don't think I've ever seen capitals 7 tiles apart either in one of these games.

-If Retep planted 5-tiles away and blocked *our* access to fertile riverside *and* stole our disputed gold-corn location you would not immediately begin plotting his destruction?

Honestly if it was his best long term economic play to do so, I wouldn't take it personally. If war was the best way to improve my position I'd do it. And I think he'd make it cost ineffective for me if he were a competent player. Like if there's a protective archer and a spear in a city on a hill, what do we conceivably have that could even take that out in the next 100 turns?

Anyway, the turn report:

Retep had a 2 power rise last turn, and finished a tech this turn. (I don't think we know if the tech had a power rise with it until next turn.) I think that means he has a second warrior, and could have sped a settler with a chop.

We will settle next turn, unless he somehow can make an interfering plant this turn. It's a situation where it's good we're established with the first part of the turn.

Last turn Azza planted the first city in the game (I think).

Plako just got another tech from a hut!

Scouting info:




I went NE-SE to take advantage of the extra vision over water. The river seems to suggest there's quite a lot of land to the east. Next move is SE-NE probably unless the first move shows a hut or something.

[MindyMcCready]

Ok. Peace it is.

With that much eastern land we must have just gotten lucky with that hut. Team Orange Arrow almost certainly exists, likely to the north of where our WII currently is.

As for tech trading making war easier,....I don't think that that's the case. Players try to maintain the balance of power so if anyone is winning a war, the others gift tech and resources. So its virtually impossible to have any type of advantage barring monopoly on tech.

[MindyMcCready]

Are Ballistaphants Strength=8 or 7? War Elephants are Str=7. In that post from Brick/Krill I didn't see anything about the Ballistaphant which I would presume to mean that its still strength 8? If they're strength 8, yes they will be a real pain to deal with. At strength 8, they're the best military unit in the game now and they last a very long time. From construction to past guilds. Maces are a way to deal with them but not even. Its easier to get an elephant to Shock than it is to get a mace to formation. So gunpowder I guess.


On the defense:
Even collateralled, they'll still have odds on our best Strength5 or 6 units of the day. They need to be heavily collateralled meaning that, to wipe out a stack, you're going to need close to 50% more units than your opposing number. 1/3 cats for collateral + 1:1 ratio for killing units.

On the offense:
They'll slaughter Knights and HA. So when you'd normally send in a slow moving stack with catch up fast movers,....not a great option anymore. Leave them at home because they'll probably just end up dead. So that means slow offensive warfare,...which is already very heavily stacked in the defender's favour.

Aside:
I checked out Carthage and their UU is C1 Horse Archer rather than the Str=5+50%vsMelee. That makes them a more dangerous now I'd say.

[WilliamLP]

Are Ballistaphants Strength=8 or 7? War Elephants are Str=7. In that post from Brick/Krill I didn't see anything about the Ballistaphant which I would presume to mean that its still strength 8? If they're strength 8, yes they will be a real pain to deal with.

Just a note on this, there is not a very good and definitive post I've found unifying the list of changes compared to BTS, but you have to combine a few of them to get the full picture.

Anyway as of July 15th from the general forum:

Changelog 2.0.3.2: No mod to be posted as yet, waiting on T-hawk to send me the DLL when he has time.

Khmer: Ballistaphant reduced to strength 7, targets mounted units first, no longer gains bonus against knights

So in the previous version (i.e. what PB8 was played on) they were strength 8 and now they are strength 7 and weaker against knights.

[WilliamLP]

Gioachino Rossini was the most well known composer of "Opera Buffa", basically comic opera with stylistic conventions. The Barber of Seville (Il Barbiere di Siviglia) is probably is most famous work. Many people know songs from it without knowing they know, maybe through Buggs Bunny and other cartoons, and the famous "Figaro" aria. One of the only composers to be fantastically rich and successful in his life, Rossini retired for forty years and focused on cooking, decadence, and debauchery, and never composed music again.




"Barber of Seville" didn't fit unfortunately. We are one of the first few to settle a city, and it will be a good one! Already the extra point of commerce from settling on the silk is valuable.

I'm being kind of paranoid leaving the quechua in the city fortified. I'm also tempted to poke him down S to defog a couple of tiles.

I'm working one turn at 50% science, and then will work 100%, because working 90% wastes a beaker with rounding. We should have Bronze on T36. At this point there's no mysteries to Retep about what we're up to and he won't like it much.




It looks like you're right about this being a lake. This could be a very large continent, and indeed more of a PB9-ish setup with long land borders. Not having more than 1 close neighbour is a really big advantage here. Would you rather see what's north right now, or south around the lake? Both are really nice to know, and it would be good to know whether we have competition for that bold city plant by marble / gold. If we don't we could afford to expand more conservatively and save it for city 4-6.




Retep's tech last turn was apparently Wheel. He still has to settle and hook up copper but we certainly want a couple of archers out by then.

His warrior build, plus the fact that he hasn't settled yet, makes me wonder what he's up to. Maybe he went for a double-worker opening and will settle his first city later? His economy is weak to be starting a settler only recently though.




There's very little not to like there! We are one of the first few to having two cities.

[MindyMcCready]

Demos look great!

Interesting stuff on the opera. We'll definately have to make a run at first to Music.

[WilliamLP]

Lol at image. A couple more turns have gone by, nothing extremely exciting, although:




They both burned their anarchy turns, and Bacchus may be doing our choking and pillaging for us, LOL.




That's Bacchus's scout down there. It could be his original one or a bonus scout from a hut. After thinking about it a while, I decided to loop back around the lake to the SW, both to see what's around the city site, and also so that W2 quechua can be closer to home since he could be useful in some tactical scenarios and fog-busting for settlers.

I find it a little strange that we've explored this much land in an 18 player game and only met two people.