Stalin is Most Glorious Leader[spoilers]

[Molach]

Ill take the man of steel.

Im already playing cre, and carthage does not fit my start.

[GermanJoey]

Your sim:

http://media.rhizzone.net/civ/pb30.molac...wordWBSave

Notes:

1.) Your starting BFC is cut out of the full save as if using a cookie-cutter.
2.) Strategic resources that are hidden from T0 (e.g. copper, iron, etc) are stripped out of this save file.
3.) The map dimensions in the sim are the same as the live game.
4.) Game settings in the sim reflect the game settings for the live game. If a setting is incorrect in the sim, please report it in the tech thread.
5.) The easiest way to change a civ to go into the worldbuilder on T0 and give yourself different starting techs. Changing a leader requires editing the save itself but is actually very simple; please ask if you don't know how to do this.

[Molach]

Thanks for sim, by the way.

I am of course too dumb to change anything and even run it, but that is okay. I'll sim in the pitboss instead.

Now let's see about other player's leaders and picks:

Dantski
Darius I Ottoman

Darius is bloody awesome leader with FIN/ORG. And leaders in BtS basic are really unbalanced. So yeah. Ottoman are..okay, I guess? Potentially useful janissaries with drafting being popular, hammam okay build in core cities when they hit size 10. But Darius. Dantski is not an idiot, so I guess this means his start is on a single-tile island without fish resources. Or something similar.

2metraninja
Julius Caesar Viking

ORG/IMP. Org is great, imp is okay. Vikings in BtS means that he can be the terror of the seas around macemen...very hard to defend against and potential for severe capital razings. Again, a far superior choice than mine. 2metra is not an idiot, so...bad start. Yup.

Gavagai
Louis XIV Dutch

I recognize this pick....CRE/IND is pretty good. If he was offered same picks as me, then he chose as I would have. CRE is middle-high tier, IND is middle. So okay. Dutch are late-era but galleons are usually very important build, and free moai in every city is nice too. Late on. Gavagai is probably better than me, so his start must be bad.

Old Harry
Frederick Egyptian

ORG/PHI. I'm confused. (I am writing this list while scrolling through, so this confusion is happening while writing). Old Harry, with occasional help from Fintourist, almost won the really big game last time - one of the best player teams on RB. Soooooooooooooooooo how did he get a really really nice leader like that? I was offered PHI, but I got AGG to go with it. If I had lurked this, I would have actually have done it differently, I would have given the best team worst leader combos, worst start and worst neighbourhood....but made sure that the difference between "worst" and "best" was in line with their civving abilities. It seems that instead the different starts very a lot more, so that the best team has a good leader.

Alhazard
Isabella Sumerian

SPI/EXP. Good leader. Good Civ. Don't know too much about the player so start might be crap or good

R.E.M.
Wang Kon German

FIN/PRO leader, which I think is good because FIN, pretty bad civ, but good starting tech for his start perhaps? Don't know what REM ranks as...below average perhaps? But no idiot, for sure.

Molach
Stalin Mongolian

AGG/IND, by far worst leader so far. Civ is pretty good, I must admit. But hey, traits >>>civ in base BtS. Except if india or non-cre inca or something I forget about. So, my start HAS to be good. Very good, I'm willing to add. This is a problem, because I don't see that it is. It could be neighbourhood, of course. Or floodplains. 2 food and floodplains...should I farm them or cottage? Too bad I'm too stupid to know how to use that start. Perhaps sim it? Oh...yeah.

Greywolf
Zara Yaqob Spanish

CRE/ORG. Very good leader. Meh civ. Greywolf is god at FFH, probably not an idiot. He must start next to Old Harry.


Ipecac
Napoleon Native American

ORG/CHA. Above average leader, and synergy with the civ as well. Dunno too much about Ip.


TheWannabe
Elizabeth Arabian

FIN/PHI. 2nd best leader. Meh civ. Is the wannabe good? Can't really look at his thread in PB27.

Again, a wish from me would have been to let leaders choice reflect perceived player skill, now I have to wait till map is revealed/lurker thread is opened to me to find out how I was ranked.

Or I can delude myself for a while that I'm actually the best player of the pack here. Yup, that sounds good.

[Molach]

Figured out the sim, also to give me correct leader traits. Not that having elisabeth would matter much for the early game.

This start....

I think best plan is AH (12 turns...same as worker) -> Mining -> Bronze working.
I might have been better off with mining civ.
Duh.

Anyway. Worker finishes as AH does, then he roads a turn to the N, then sheep, then another turn road, then towards cow, putting a probably useless turn of road on south floodplain, then cow.

Problem: Now what. Mining is done, BW is still 8 turns away. And no Agri. I can either put up roads, towards new city spot or to help chopping later, or mine the PH wine. The mine gives +1 foodhammer and +1 commerce compared to floodplain, not too awesome, road network might be better.

I can again grow to size 4 before settler, getting 3 warriors to bust this place up, and speed it with a chop, or build it at size 3, where no chops can speed it up. Either way, a slow-ass turn 34 before second city.

Next techs will be Agri - pottery to enable granary in new city and cottages on FPs.

I tried a version where I went for AH - Agri - Pottery, but this is very much slower, can't use more than 1 cottage due to happy, nothing to speed up expansion. Better to chop these forested hills and build a mine. Might consider which early wonder I go for too. Oracle into MC into engineer into pyramids perhaps? Have to see how to do that.

[Molach]

And that concludes the micro plans for Molach.

Here is a little reminder to myself. A mantra, or prayer, or whatsitsname.

I have shit traits compared to everyone else.
There are FIN and ORG civs out there.
There are also about 10 players better than me.
They will beat me easily in an endgame unless I am twice their size.
I must become twice their size.
I have AGG.
Which is shit, as mentioned above.
It does help with aggression.
I must be aggressive.
My CIV has a nice mid-early aggressive unique unit.
And building.
(AGG helps building the building, does it not?)

Rules for this game:
I must be at war by turn 100.
I must, obviously, be successful in said war.
If I come to turn 80 and find myself building economy, I must turn the other cheek and prepare for war.
Really, I must.
No exceptions.
Okay, if nearest player is 30 tiles away and I have an ocean of territory to expand into.
Only then.
Otherwise, I shall strike fast, strike true, strike deep - strike home.
So help me RNG.

[Molach]

I found a better way. I think.
Improve cow first. Produces two warriors, growing only to size 2. Then right into settler, working my two good tiles. This is a bit dependent on finding a good second site. A good site for me needs animal food-resource...or very distant second, a horse tile. A grassland gems tile would be okay too, I guess.
I get settler out turn 30, worker can road towards new site.

However if new site doesn't have animals, I can't improve it...except by building a mine, which isn't top-notch tile improvement at size 1, so to speak.

So interested to see the map. Tech plan might be altered to accomodate a grain-rich 2nd city site - must grab agri before BW then.

Luckers: What about those floodplains? Am I an idiot for wanting to cottage them? This is capital, after all, bureaucracy and all...

[Molach]

Game on!



And here is the screenshot to prove it. Worst leader ever. Well. In base BtS, at least. I dare, nay I double-dare someone to find a person choosing a worse leader in a base BtS pitboss game.

[GermanJoey]

C'mon, Stalin ain't that bad. There's lots of worse leaders in base BTS... Tokugawa, Charley, Sitting Bull, Qin Shi Huang, Qin, Saladin, Churchill, Boudica, Genghis Khan, Alexander, Lincoln... I guess it depends on how you feel about Ind.

[Molach]

Oh, Im not dissatisfied. Just wondered, is this the worst leader to feature in a Standard-BtS pitboss game?

Also a reminder to myself, I must make use of the head start i get from map-related balancing, cuz my leader is not good for the long strech. There must be a map-related advantage, I need to identify it, take advantage of it and become hugely dominant before the other catch up. Become the leader of the pack of leaders.

Agg + Mongolia is a good combo...if I find someone to horserush. Can afford to make a 'professional' force with cheap barracks + ger. This must be a plan. 'Rush' just to hurt mr. FIN/ORG would be AGG well spent.

[taotao]

Here is a little reminder to myself. A mantra, or prayer, or whatsitsname.

I have shit traits compared to everyone else.
There are FIN and ORG civs out there.
There are also about 10 players better than me.
They will beat me easily in an endgame unless I am twice their size.
I must become twice their size.
I have AGG.
Which is shit, as mentioned above.
It does help with aggression.
I must be aggressive.
My CIV has a nice mid-early aggressive unique unit.
And building.
(AGG helps building the building, does it not?)

Rules for this game:
I must be at war by turn 100.
I must, obviously, be successful in said war.
If I come to turn 80 and find myself building economy, I must turn the other cheek and prepare for war.
Really, I must.
No exceptions.
Okay, if nearest player is 30 tiles away and I have an ocean of territory to expand into.
Only then.
Otherwise, I shall strike fast, strike true, strike deep - strike home.
So help me RNG.

As a global lurker I thoroughly approve of your mantra!
(and I also believe it's a good one to have considering your playstyle in previous pitbosses).