(November 17th, 2012, 11:32)novice Wrote: Maybe build an axe in MM this turn and chop a settler next turn. The axe can guard the gems city, freeing other units for scouting. And the settler can settle the gems city equally fast as a settler from AO, so maybe delay the settler in AO? We can grow the city to 31/32 food this turn and then accumulate some foodhammers in a settler build, for more overflow into a library. Or get the AO settler soon too and settle 3E of MM, sharing the corn. But maybe a better site will show up and we would have preferred saving the AO settler for that.
Are we still going for a second GPriest for a golden age? If so we'll probably have to work some priests sometime in MM.
When do we get the first Great Prophet now that we are not getting Oracle GP points? The second prophet from MM is probably very far away in the future and we might have other means for getting great people by then. My gut feeling says: Let's work extra priests only if it is economically sensible (e.g. we are at the happy cap and have to delay growth) and figure out later how we avoid civic&religion change anarchy.
Axe+settler in MM sounds good to me combined with delayed whip in AO. We have an option of getting city 7 very fast, SE of Focal's point (riverside corn) could be another option although it stretches our empire quite a bit. No way that we have an excess of workers anymore
We optimized for the best result in the best case, rather than the worse case. As the leader in the game, the strategy in this was arguable but hindsight is 20/20. I know it annoys people to say this but I think we should prioritize knowing the land that is more than 5 tiles south of our capital now.
Dang. Should have known that something was up when CivPlayers didn't end their turn like they normally do. Ah well, it was a good plan nonetheless. CivPlayers is now clearly our top competition in this game.
We need a new micro plan moving forward, including for this turn. What are we researching next? What do we build in each city? We have all weekend to work on this, but we'd better get started.
My tentative suggestion is to go Iron Working next before Currency. We'll be settling that gems city almost immediately, and it's rather pointless if we can't connect the gems. We need more happiness right now. This might also open up the possibility of the Monotheism / Monarchy tech path again. I don't think we can wait 30 turns or whatever for a Golden Age to civics swap, now that we're not getting free Prophet points from the Oracle. As great as Currency is as a tech, it's also very expensive (almost 800 beakers on this map!)
(November 17th, 2012, 11:58)WilliamLP Wrote: We optimized for the best result in the best case, rather than the worse case. As the leader in the game, the strategy in this was arguable but hindsight is 20/20. I know it annoys people to say this but I think we should prioritize knowing the land that is more than 5 tiles south of our capital now.
No, we optimised for the play that would give us the best way to continue to expand and tech hard. If we can't set our sights high when we are the leader, when can we do so? Oracling MC or CoL ourselves would only have been spoiler play - maybe good from a meta-gaming perspective, but not an example of good Civ play.
There is an axe going southwestwards right now, so we will get more map knowledge there soon, and don't forget the scouting work boat we'll get from HF next turn.
Furthermore, I consider that forum views should be fluid in width
I don't get the distinction between playing the best meta-game vs "good Civ play". Higher analysis of how a game could play out, independent of the minutia within the game itself, is crucial for winning at almost anything. Good meta-gaming is part of good gaming, period. A first principle of chess strategy is that you plan for the best possible moves that your opponent can make, the ones that are most inconvenient to you.
Good civ play is not giving up a very good chance to blow the doors off of people with a Currency Oracle to scout 5 tiles. Call it whatever you want, but that would have been a terrible decision. Analyze process, not results. So we missed it by 1T. We've known this was a possibility for a long time, and the vast majority of us agreed that the upside was worth the risk. They finish it 1T later due to barb problems, and suddenly it's a coin-flip.
And it's not like we're in a bad position now because we missed it. We're fine.
(November 17th, 2012, 13:07)scooter Wrote: Good civ play is not giving up a very good chance to blow the doors off of people with a Currency Oracle to scout 5 tiles. Call it whatever you want, but that would have been a terrible decision. Analyze process, not results. So we missed it by 1T. We've known this was a possibility for a long time, and the vast majority of us agreed that the upside was worth the risk. They finish it 1T later due to barb problems, and suddenly it's a coin-flip.
And it's not like we're in a bad position now because we missed it. We're fine.
I don't think William was advising we give up the oracle to do a little extra scouting He is suggesting we should have completed it a couple of turns earlier and nabbed MC.
I guess he's right, but hindsight is 20/20, no point worrying about it now.
Please don't go. The drones need you. They look up to you.
Quote:I don't think William was advising we give up the oracle to do a little extra scouting
To be fair, I was arguing for just this earlier in the thread, but for a lot of extra scouting, 4 axes worth, as well as spawn busting to avoid barb problems in our south eastern city tiles. That might have been objectively worse than going for an early Oracle with MC, but I claim either would have been better than where we are now. (Which is still a really good place!)
If you are in the best position, given a coin flip to either dramatically make it better or stay the same, vs a sure chance to improve it a little, there's a pretty good argument that the second choice is the best. The risk / reward might make more sense if we're behind or even, from a meta-gaming perspective.
Anyway, sorry for derailing discussion, the focus now is on what's next, obviously.
We took a risk and it didn't pan out. Only knowing what we did at the time, I would still have taken that risk. Obviously there is some dissent regarding that, and to WilliamLP's credit, he gave that dissent from the very beginning. However much it saddens me, we can do nothing but press on and triumph anyways.
P.S. This post started as me making a point, but now it seems slightly repetative...
Merovech's Mapmaking Guidelines:
0. Player Requests: The player's requests take precedence, even if they contradict the following guidelines.
1. Balance: The map must be balanced, both in regards to land quality and availability and in regards to special civilization features. A map may be wonderfully unique and surprising, but, if it is unbalanced, the game will suffer and the player's enjoyment will not be as high as it could be.
2. Identity and Enjoyment: The map should be interesting to play at all levels, from city placement and management to the border-created interactions between civilizations, and should include varied terrain. Flavor should enhance the inherent pleasure resulting from the underlying tile arrangements. The map should not be exceedingly lush, but it is better to err on the lush side than on the poor side when placing terrain.
3. Feel (Avoiding Gimmicks): The map should not be overwhelmed or dominated by the mapmaker's flavor. Embellishment of the map through the use of special improvements, barbarian units, and abnormal terrain can enhance the identity and enjoyment of the map, but should take a backseat to the more normal aspects of the map. The game should usually not revolve around the flavor, but merely be accented by it.
4. Realism: Where possible, the terrain of the map should be realistic. Jungles on desert tiles, or even next to desert tiles, should therefore have a very specific reason for existing. Rivers should run downhill or across level ground into bodies of water. Irrigated terrain should have a higher grassland to plains ratio than dry terrain. Mountain chains should cast rain shadows. Islands, mountains, and peninsulas should follow logical plate tectonics.
