Intersite Game - Turn Discussion Thread

[sooooo]

I don't do the math like this on my own games and would usually just build the lighthouse now. But, since the math shows tha we gain more by waiting to be in OR, I favor that plan.

In the end, tho, seems like to not a big deal either way.

This.

Not This. The argument is about not building a lighthouse at all, not about whether we shoud wait or not. The hammers saved from building a lighthouse we don't need is worth a little more than a chariot or a little less than a catapult. Could be a big deal.

[novice]

Can we do a cost/benefit analysis on saving a gsci for PP?

That seems more important than the lighthouse discussion.

[Cyneheard]

Can we do a cost/benefit analysis on saving a gsci for PP?

That seems more important than the lighthouse discussion.

Benefits:
X beakers gained by using the GSci for 100% @ PP instead of <100% @ Edu
PP completes Y turns faster (unknown - this COULD be a negative number: depends on when Taj completes)
- Generating an additonal Z beakers

Costs:
Slows down Edu and therefore Lib and Nat by A turns
- Delaying Taj by B turns (depends mostly on marble timing if B = A)
- Delaying Universities and/or Oxford by an indeterminate number of turns (I don't think we've even tried to figure when 8 universities make sense to build)
- Increased risk of losing Lib and/or Taj (Imprecise answers only)

Time to start filling in the numbers. What's our 1-GSci Lib date?

[Sullla]

Benefit: A Great Scientist lightbulb will get us Printing Press significantly faster. We have roughly 50 cottages right now, and about 30 of them are village/town status. Estimate that Printing Press would be worth something like 30-40 base commerce. Quite a nice benefit, no doubt.

Cost: Nothing if we win Liberalism anyway. If we would lose Liberalism, that's 3200 free beakers given away, plus we would also stand a good chance to lose Taj Mahal, which provides 8t of Golden Age benefit worth hundreds of production and hundreds more beakers. Should we lose Taj Mahal to CivFr, that would be a swing of 20 turns of Golden Age between our teams.

Evaluation: I believe that the Liberalism/Nationalism/Taj combo is worth infinitely more than anything we could possibly get out of a Great Scientist Printing Press bulb, and it would be the height of folly to do anything to jeopardize our chances of landing that combo. Let's not do the RB thing and overthink something obvious. Use the Scientists, claim Liberalism, build Taj, win the darned game.

[sooooo]

I too think it's better to use both scientists on education. It gets nationalism asap, which gets us metal casting and machinery asap, which get us forges and drafted macemen asap. And it makes absolutely sure no one else can steal liberalism.

[sooooo]

Sorry, I mistakenly stated earlier that it was 20 turns of whip anger on a huge map. Don't know where that came from - it's 10 turns on normal speed no matter what size the map. Still, growing at +3 surplus from 8 to 9 is 6 turns.

[NobleHelium]

Disagree here. Say we draft from size 9 to size 8, losing a miner. We regrow to size 9 in only 6 turns, vs 20 turns on a huge map for the draft penalty to wear off. We can still draft here as much as we would want to without a lighthouse.

Draft unhappiness decay is dependent on game speed, not map size. Map size modifies how many units you can draft in a turn. Normal speed will always be ten turns, which is still more than six turns as you say. Edit: Didn't see your last post.

If we need to work crappier tiles than usual (i.e. coast rather than mines in BB) in order to regrow after a draft, we generally should be drafting elsewhere.

[T-hawk]

If we need to work crappier tiles than usual (i.e. coast rather than mines in BB) in order to regrow after a draft, we generally should be drafting elsewhere.

This isn't true, because the coast tiles wouldn't be crappier than usual. If the food from the coast tiles converts to hammers at better than 1:2 via drafting (which it will), then the coast tiles are correct.

[NobleHelium]

I said that incorrectly. I meant to reinforce sooooo's statement that we can keep working mines, draft, and still regrow before we can draft again, instead of working coast tiles to grow faster than usual.

[SevenSpirits]

If we need to work crappier tiles than usual (i.e. coast rather than mines in BB) in order to regrow after a draft, we generally should be drafting elsewhere.

This isn't true, because the coast tiles wouldn't be crappier than usual. If the food from the coast tiles converts to hammers at better than 1:2 via drafting (which it will), then the coast tiles are correct.

In terms of hammer production with drafting, mines < coast < NO TILE AT ALL. Adding coast doesn't help us draft. They are breakeven in terms of food.

The most hammer-productive setup (that doesn't stack unhappy) is going to be drafting from 9 to 8, then regrowing working only two mines, then working 3 mines for the remainder of the 10t draft period. Adding coast to this setup does not help! It can add a very small amount of commerce, yes, by occasionally swapping out one mine for one coast to grow 1t sooner. It can also allow us to do the cycle at a higher pop level, which earns us commerce at the cost of hammers, since growth costs will be raised. But it cannot increase the amount of drafting, since that is limited by happiness not food, and it cannot increase the number of mine-turns we work - it can only decrease that. And just to be a completionist, it cannot earn us more hammers than a mine through slavery, since we will be at size > 5 so conversion rate is worse than 1:2.