[PB58 Spoilers] Sea Monsters and Other Lurking Types

[pindicator]

Seeing all land people have and actualy playing civ , i feel sorry i dint got into this game.

I wanted to make a map that was different than what has been lately played. On one hand I thought maybe it's too big because there's no barbarians and people have really been able to reach to the gold/silver locations. On the other hand, it's gotten them into close contact with each other a bit sooner, so maybe no barbarians has been good.

[darrelljs]

Would it be to much to tell Ruff that camps for ivory can be build on jungle?

IMO, yes.

Darrell

[pindicator]

I think if Ruff posts something factually incorrect about game mechanics then it's okay to correct him.

[Cornflakes]

I think it is find to tell Ruff a simple "camps can be build on jungle without Iron Working"

[civac2]

I don't understand why AT is so committed to attacking with prateorians now. There is still land to claim pacefully and praets are viable for a very long time as a cheap high power unit.

[pindicator]

He's got a shiny and wants to use it. I've certainly fallen into that trap before: wanting to use the UU or UB just because its the special thing for my civ/leader.

[Mjmd]

I mean the thing is he isn't aggressive. He also plans on building barracks, which is expensive hammer wise considering you could just build another praet or cat (he has a couple going now which is good). He is already pretty close to construction. Just wait and do a praet cat push.

Interesting seeing Ruff do the overflow into gold thing. Civac I had a PB55 question. How does one disconnect their own copper?

[civac2]

You can just pillage it (and then endure NobleHeliums derision). Theoretically, you could reconnect it two turns later. But that requires a lot of workers and very precise planning. The advantage of doing it that way is that unlike scouts warriors are useful as inner empire military police. What Ruff is doing there is not wise. He wastes a bunch of 1-pop whips and forests for pointless scouts and gold which hurts the expansion (chiefly), wonderbuilding or warmaking potential of his empire. I did it in PB55 because I payed almost no heed to the economy while expanding and Currency would have taken forever. But in this game all parties have been pretty measured with expansion so I don't think it's really necessary to pay the economic cost.

In his PB55 thread, AT wondered why I waited for catapults even though I had praets. He may be in for a shock when he reaches a walled hill city with his praets.

[Mjmd]

Luckily he is pretty close already to cats, so should be fine if he gets bogged down. Will be interesting who he finally chooses for target.

[Charriu]

It's only a little bit over 2 weeks since the T50 report and the PB is still running at record pace. As always all the data can be found here: PB58 Tracking

Before we start some notable observations from the last 50 turns:

• We had no major war. This is new and I can't remember the last PB in which we didn't have a major war in the first 100 turns.
  
• Serdoa is making friends around his border by throwing demolition parties in Tarkeel's city
  
• AT really wants to visit somebody with his praetorians
  
• Tarkeel has gotten himself some nice wonders
  
• Jowy misses out on wonders though
  
• All around mostly peaceful development. A builders paradise.
  

General state of the game

First of all the city count:

1. Serdoa = 14
   
2. Superdeath = 13
   
3. Jowy = 12
   
4. AT = 12
   
5. Tarkeel = 12
   
6. Ruff = 9
   

Ruff is missing out on expansion considering that he also is IMP. Next up the pop count as of T100.

1. Serdoa = 61
   
2. Superdeath = 60
   
3. AT = 52
   
4. Jowy = 50
   
5. Tarkeel = 35
   
6. Ruff = 33
   

I'm wondering why Tarkeel is so low in pop count. To be honest I didn't follow PBSpy that closely and likely may have missed some whips.
As you know I'm also tracking Gold and Science output in addition to Total Commerce, but when it comes to the current numbers those three values are still close. I opted to post the total commerce current turn numbers here. You will see all the numbers later in my result screenshot.

1. Serdoa (FIN) = 217
   
2. AT (FIN) = 169
   
3. Superdeath = 169
   
4. Tarkeel (ORG) = 131
   
5. Jowy (ORG) = 125 (T98)
   
6. Ruff = 107
   

First of all I need to clarify what is up with Jowy. As of T100 he is still in anarchy, which is why my tool only reports 0 for him. Therefore I opted to include his T98 numbers for a better overview. FIN leaders are on top of this list, which is no wonder as there trait directly contributes to these statistics. But it is noteworthy that AT is doing a lot worse with FIN then Serdoa and AT is even with Superdeath. This is either a bad performance by AT, a very good performance by Superdeath or both. It's also noteworthy that Serdoa's and Ruff's science and gold output is a bit higher then their commerce, which means that the must have some modifiers and/or specialist in place. Our two ORG leaders are lagging behind together with Ruff, but because their trait improves maintenance we need to look at the current maintenance costs:

1. Serdoa (FIN) = 142
   
2. Superdeath = 131
   
3. AT (FIN) = 113
   
4. Tarkeel (ORG) = 79
   
5. Jowy (ORG) = 76 (T98)
   
6. Ruff = 76
   

As predicted the ORG leaders maintenance cost is lower then the others. Interestingly they are on a similar level to Ruff, who has 3 cities less. To get a better grasp of the actual economic potential we now take the delta of our total commerce and maintenance

1. Serdoa (FIN) = 75
   
2. AT (FIN) = 56
   
3. Tarkeel (ORG) = 52
   
4. Jowy (ORG) = 49 (T98)
   
5. Superdeath = 38
   
6. Ruff = 31
   

Now we see that the ORG leaders are actually doing a lot better. We also see that Superdeath despite his high commerce numbers actually has some economic problems and Serdoa's economy is running smoothly. Once again we see that AT isn't doing that well with FIN. But these are only the current turn numbers. We should also look at the accumulated numbers. Like the current turn numbers these are still close together, which is why I opt to show only the total commerce again.

1. Serdoa (FIN) = 4958
   
2. AT (FIN) = 4016
   
3. Tarkeel (ORG) = 3811
   
4. Jowy (ORG) = 3757
   
5. Superdeath = 3702
   
6. Ruff = 3146
   

These look a lot like the current turn numbers. Ruff is notably lagging behind. AT isn't benefitting that much from FIN. The only big difference is that Superdeath is behind the ORG leaders. In contrast to past PBs we also now know the full maintenance cost across all turns:

1. Serdoa (FIN) = 2935
   
2. Superdeath = 2399
   
3. AT (FIN) = 2010
   
4. Ruff = 1947
   
5. Tarkeel (ORG) = 1877
   
6. Jowy (ORG) = 1741
   

No wonder that the ORG leaders are doing well here. Once again we take the delta of Total Commerce and maintenance for a full picture:

1. Serdoa (FIN) = 2023
   
2. Jowy (ORG) = 2016
   
3. AT (FIN) = 2006
   
4. Tarkeel (ORG) = 1934
   
5. Superdeath = 1303
   
6. Ruff = 1199
   

This certainly is interesting all FIN and ORG leaders are close by including the leading player Serdoa. But of course as we've seen from the current turn numbers, Serdoa is doing a lot better right now and will increase his lead.

Financial Bonus

As a disclaimer just as last time, here I collected all the extra commerce a player (would) have gained if he was working Financial tiles. For example if you worked a coast tile you normally gain 2 commerce and 3 commerce with FIN. In this case my tool notes down 1 extra commerce. You will also find that I am tracking the CtH implemenation of Financial as well as the normal BtS implemenation for comparison.

Looking at the current turn numbers first:

1. Serdoa (FIN) = 45
   
2. Superdeath = 32
   
3. AT (FIN) = 26
   
4. Jowy (ORG) = 24
   
5. Tarkeel (ORG) = 20
   
6. Ruff = 16
   

Here we see one reason why AT isn't working FIN very well. Almost half the amount of extra commerce compared to Serdoa and doing worse then Superdeath, who isn't even FIN.

Here the cumulated numbers:

1. Serdoa (FIN) = 950
   
2. Jowy (ORG) = 592
   
3. Ruff = 567
   
4. AT (FIN) = 539
   
5. Superdeath = 489
   
6. Tarkeel (ORG) = 438
   

I hate to say this, but more evidence that AT isn't playing FIN properly. At the same time we see that Serdoa is benefiting a lot from FIN. Regular readers know that I also compare these numbers to the BtS implementation. Again the current turn numbers. I've also put the delta between CtH and BtS in parenthesis:

1. Serdoa (FIN) = 58 (13)
   
2. Superdeath = 37 (5)
   
3. AT (FIN) = 36 (10)
   
4. Jowy (ORG) = 34 (10)
   
5. Tarkeel (ORG) = 22 (2)
   
6. Ruff = 20 (4)
   

We see a similar picture as with the CtH implementation, just that the numbers are higher. We also see that Serdoa, AT and Jowy all still have some growth potential in that category. Let's turn to the accumulated numbers now. Again these are the BtS numbers with the difference towards CtH in parenthesis and the effectivness of my nerf in percent.

1. Serdoa (FIN) = 1231 (281) -22%
   
2. Jowy (ORG) = 787 (195) -24%
   
3. AT (FIN) = 685 (146) -22%
   
4. Ruff = 665 (98) -14%
   
5. Superdeath = 609 (120) -19%
   
6. Tarkeel (ORG) = 539 (101) -18%
   

We see that the overall reduction is around 18%-24% with one notable outlier in Ruff, who's economy isn't that great. This is one of the lower reduction values we've seen and mostly due to the peaceful development of this PB.

Now you might remember that I also tracked my new 2.0 implementation. This bonus is essentially the same, but you need to build a lighthouse to unlock it for the city. Now of course because this isn't implemented here the players have less incentive to build a lighthouse for this bonus. But I think these numbers can still help to evaluate the extreme cases of this implementation. If it is in place, we do expect the players to go for lighthouses sooner. Let's look at the current turn numbers.

1. Serdoa (FIN) = 33
   
2. Superdeath = 29
   
3. AT (FIN) = 25
   
4. Jowy (ORG) = 23
   
5. Tarkeel (ORG) = 19
   
6. Ruff = 13
   

Overall these numbers are pretty close to the numbers from the current implementation, which is good because this nerf aims at the early turns. The only notable exception is Serdoa who would have earned 12 commerce less with this nerf compared to the current implementation. This also means that at least ca. 25% of his FIN commerce this game comes from water tiles. Now let's look at the accumulated numbers. You will once again find the reduction in percentage compared to BtS:

1. Jowy (ORG) = 486 -38%
   
2. Serdoa (FIN) = 402 -67%
   
3. AT (FIN) = 367 -46%
   
4. Superdeath = 346 -43%
   
5. Tarkeel (ORG) = 336 -37%
   
6. Ruff = 194 -70%
   

It's no surprise that the reduction is lower for ORG leaders as they have more incentives to build lighthouses. We see that the reduction is all over the place with two players in the upper 60% values and the rest in the 37%-46% range. I would guess that in a game, where this is implemented a the 37%-46% range is actually what we would expect to happen. I still expect that the actual reduction decreases with more turns and more lighthouses built.

Protective Bonus

Nobody took PRO in this game, but that shouldn't be a reason not to track it. I'm skipping the current turn numbers because they are boring. So here are the cumulative numbers:

1. Serdoa (FIN) = 23
   
2. Superdeath = 19
   
3. AT (FIN) = 11
   
4. Tarkeel (ORG) = 11
   
5. Jowy (ORG) = 0
   
6. Ruff = 0
   

We know from Serdoa's thread that he has problems getting OBs from other players, which explains his higher rating in this category. I think the same thing happened to SD, but he hasn't reported in a while. Let's go the accumulated numbers:

1. Serdoa (FIN) = 412
   
2. Superdeath = 259
   
3. Tarkeel (ORG) = 193
   
4. Ruff = 175
   
5. AT (FIN) = 133
   
6. Jowy (ORG) = 98
   

More evidence that not many like to trade with Serdoa. It also shows that having the Great Lighthouse (Tarkeel) is not a guarentee to benefit in this category as many trade routes can be gobbled up by foreign trade.

Now I mentioned in the T50 report that I also tracked the new implementation of 100% trade yield here. I just wanted to mention that there is no difference between these implementations so far except for Jowy, who benefited from an edge case mentioned in the T50 report. This was to be expected and I only mention it for those people that assume 100% is better then 75%. Now I expect and hope that we see a bit of an increase with this in the later turns.

Misc

I'm tracking a lot more but there is not enough information there to justify an own paragraph. Therefore a little summary here:

• AGG is still not generating a lot of money (highest is 4 per turn for Ruff). Now this is to be expected with this peaceful development
  
• ORG is doing a lot better since T50, which we will see shortly.
  
• Everybody is still in slavery and not enough people researched Monarchy or CoL for the other civics. This is to be expected I guess.
  

Comparing traits

The main goal of all this tracking of course is to compare the economic traits related around commerce income or maintenance reduction. So let's do this:




Not that much can be said about the traits in this early stages that we didn't already know from past PBs

1. The old order of FIN>ORG>>PRO>AGG still holds true.
   
2. For some players PRO is almost as good as ORG (Serdoa)
   
3. AGG is doing poorly in a peaceful game like this.
   
4. The new lighthouse-FIN nerf is doing worse or equally then ORG for most players. Keep in mind if it is implemented these numbers are expected to be higher for FIN players