GeneralKilCavalry and thestick talk it out

[thestick]

I think we will want Bronze Working by T20, otherwise there just isn't anything for the Worker to do. There's not enough time for AH. Large-scale farming doesn't seem productive unless we're sure that we can get a city to slough off food, as with the crabs/double sheep this city will have more food than we know what to do with in the early game. Since first level techs are 6 turns and BW is 14 turns, we will only have time to research 1 first-level tech before we want to head for BW, we will want to start with two of Fishing/Hunting/Mining.

The other option is to abandon the idea of early Bronze Working, but what do we do with the worker? Mine? Farm? Cottage? None seem particularly appealing.

Stupid idea is to go Germany and pair it with an Industrious civ, and maybe FDR (Ind/Org). Oracle Metal Casting and GE the Pyramids, then spam cheap Courthouses/maintanence reducing Forges and landgrab. And resist the temptation for a too-early Stonehenge that stunts our growth.

[thestick]

Though of the civs you listed, think Rome is the best. Would have to iron out the details later, but we could go BW->Hunting, chop two forests, then pasture the Ivory. Or bite the bullet and work the crabs for a little bit to get BW to finish T13.

[GeneralKilCavalry]

So I've thought about it...

Germany and industrious - tempting, very much so. But I am not sure I want to play with FDR again, and another forge-reliant civ after pb44. I'm in this for variety.

So we're examining the following civs:
Carthage, England, Portugal, Rome, Greece, Vikings, Ethiopia, Germany, Khmer, Russia, Aztecs, Babylon, Inca, Sumeria, Zulu.

Immediately throw off late, late game civs. This means Russia, England, Germany, Ethiopia (oromos are niche).
Carthage, Portugal, Rome, Greece, Vikings, Khmer, Aztecs, Babylon, Inca, Sumeria, Zulu.

Throw off naval civs. This means Carthage, Portugal, Vikings.
Rome, Greece, Khmer, Aztecs, Babylon, Inca, Sumeria, Zulu.

Throw off Aztecs- c.f PB46.
Rome, Greece, Khmer, Babylon, Inca, Sumeria, Zulu.

Throw off underwhelming civs - Greece, Sumeria, Zulu
Rome, Khmer, Babylon, Inca

Now, this is something we can analyze.
Babylon and Inca are in the same vein, so let's compare the two.

Babylon: Agriculture/The Wheel. UB:  Granary replacement: Garden. Requires Agriculture, cost 45, +1 health, no bonus production from trait. UU: Archer replacement. Bowman. +50% against melee,  no free strike, starts with Drill 1 and 2.


Inca: Agriculture/Mysticism. UB: Granary replacement: Terrace, +1 culture, cost 45 hammers, No trait production modifier. UU: Warrior replacement: Quechua. +100% against archery units.


Techs - Babylon
UB - Inca
UU - Babylon
Synergy - equal

Babylon wins out, but only slightly...

Now we have 3.
Khmer I consider because we have elephants nearby 100%. 
Khmer: Mining/Hunting. UB: Aqueduct replacement: Baray. +1 food, +1 culture, +1 Artist slot. Cost 80. UU: War Elephant replacement. Ballistaphant (I don't know the actual name). Targets mounted first outside of cities. Can construct baray.

This would mean rushing construction and spamming barays. Is this really worth it tho? I believe BAII is playing with them in 46, so I can't judge their power.
I feel they lack oomph.

Then there were 2.
Rome and Babylon.
Let's talk Rome:
Rome: Fishing/Mining. UB: Market replacement: Forum. +35% GPP. UU: Sword replacement. Preatorian. Strength 7, cost 40 hammers.

This is no longer the Rome of BTS yore, however, swordsmen are busted. Go agg, and you're attacking cities with cuirs.

The forum seems to be buffed significantly, since 35% means you get +1 GPP on running 1 specialist.

However, there are annoying edge cases, for example having 7 GPP will yield 19GPP from a forum+phil even though you have 19.95 GPP's before rounding. However, 6 GPP is veryyy efficient. Library running 2 scientists will be equivalent to running 5 and 2/3 in raw output. Can get the second great person in a span of something like 10 turns?
Running 2 scientists by themselves combined with another two? Oh boy. You're gonna see 9 great people spawned in 130 turns.

Also, praets are fun and the starting tech are good.

Babylon, on the other hand, offers a tried and true formula, but again, not spicy.

Plus, wouldn't it be fun to ram into praets against gavagai after pb 44? Yes, yes it would.
Rome it is!

[thestick]

Well, civis romanus sum, I guess.

What do you mean by 'go agg, and you're attacking cities with cuirs'?

Definitely skeptical of the efficacy of ramming a stack o' death into an opponent, but hey. Good, nice all-rounder units are good.

The obvious synergies are Industrious (Mids) and Expansive (Forums), which gives us Bismarck and a near-lock on the Hanging Gardens. But maybe not. Forums/libraries aren't spamable since a specialist economy kills city growth, and Industrious means Forges.

I'm personally always a sucker for Spiritual, even though I could definitely work on my GP game. I love me Caste/monk economy.

Could always go Ramesses, pick up a religion on the way to the Oracle, then GP our way to the the Mausoleum and spend the classical/medieval period basking in golden ages. Use stacks of legions/HAs to defend in the classical era, then build up and crush someone with maces.

Though this is all very tentative, and I could easily be talked out of this. Or you could just use your main player authority and do whatever you like.

How good are Barracks in Krillmod? Seems underwhelming.

[Hollybombay]

How good are Barracks in Krillmod? Seems underwhelming.

Barracks are improved over the base game. Being built quicker by AGG, and giving +1 culture.

[GeneralKilCavalry]

Swords already get 50% attack. Add 10% strength and 25% from city raider....

[thestick]

Oh, that's what you meant. Any particular vision for using praets?

Re: barracks, okay, so good for warmongers, but not worth peaceniks building?

[thestick]

Well, we are almost up. This is moving quickly... Current thoughts?

Current thoughts/personal opinions:
Our unit/building are both classical era, so we'll probably want some traits with more power at another point.

Are we planning on using our praets offensively, or defensively as deterrent? Need to decide how high to value Aggressive/Organized.

Expansive is nice due to having a plains hill to settle so we can get 3 hpt easy. Plus one-chop work boats. Could always free up some hammers for scouting warriors... Also thinking of whether we should just take Protective for the cheap granaries.

Is Financial good without a ton of fishing villages? How big is the Imperialistic/Aggressive free discount reduction?

[GeneralKilCavalry]

Well, we are almost up. This is moving quickly... Current thoughts?

Current thoughts/personal opinions:
Our unit/building are both classical era, so we'll probably want some traits with more power at another point.

Are we planning on using our praets offensively, or defensively as deterrent? Need to decide how high to value Aggressive/Organized.

Expansive is nice due to having a plains hill to settle so we can get 3 hpt easy. Plus one-chop work boats. Could always free up some hammers for scouting warriors... Also thinking of whether we should just take Protective for the cheap granaries.

Is Financial good without a ton of fishing villages? How big is the Imperialistic/Aggressive free discount reduction?

So, let's recap so far

Raskolnikov ???/India
GeneralKilCavalry ???/Rome
Mr.Cairo Catherine/France
Superdeath ???/Inca UP for leader
TBW Boudica/America
Gavagai Sitting Bull/Native America 

Gavagai is going phi/pro, very interesting, very very interesting. Archer rush, cheap granaries?
TBW is going for super aggro.
Mr. Cairo i think has made a mistake in going super cultural victory oriented, just no clue what's up there.

I want agg 100%. Otherwise, expansive? philosophical? still thinking.

[thestick]

From the current rough pass micro, growing to Size 4 and working Sheep/Crabs (x2)/Mine, plus a Warrior, will give us our first Settler T33, while Expansive knocks that down to T30.