(December 6th, 2012, 14:06)Mardoc Wrote: Given Thoth's valid point about our efficiency while playing, maybe an agenda would help us stay focused? We've already talked out the tech path in detail, but there's some other macro things it would be good to plan out. Obviously we don't need them all at once next turn.
Doing some planning ahead of time will help. We got a good start ingame last night and our next 4 mainland cities have their support on the way. We need to plan out the 4 cities after that
. I think we can do 2 in the Far East and two in the Orc West if we build another settler pair in KIPA after the current pair. We'll need to firm up the eastern worker plans to accomodate but there are two orc workers heading east to help out around Zinfandel.Quote:Dotmap! We currently have a sorta vague plan to throw settlers at the borders and find spots when they're close. Can we firm that up into a 'city 1, city 2, city 3' plan, with all cities marked and a preferred order to settle them in? If we've the time in addition, label the settlers with the name of their city to be, and the same for Thanes. Workers are probably not tied to a city, so we'll need to try something different there. I think probably the best way is for one of us to throw down a bunch of c's in signs, and then to discuss and refine; when we're done, put a name on the sign instead of simply 'c'. Then make a list somewhere else of cities in order to found.
We've plenty of sites to chose from, it's more a matter of allocating worker turns and military builds to ensure they have the right support in the right place at the right time. That means working backwards from settler completion dates. We've done the heavy lifting for our next 4 cities. We'll be light on Thanes but that's ok. With three of the cities going Elohim and the 4th Calabim we can't pop borders with an Orc Thane anyway. RoK on founding is nice when we can manage it
Quote:Workers. We need a better way to communicate with/about them. I think, on balance, that Ellimist's scheme of signs will work better than what we're doing. That is, label each tile that you want improved soon, with # of turns to completion (if not started, 4T farm, etc). I didn't like it at first, but the main advantage of a countdown is that you can label all the tiles that aren't yet started and should be soon. Maybe also label workers, something simple like directions to the tile they should work on. But the main confusion last turn came when workers were labeled with tasks, rather than the tiles being labelled. If I'd realized the chop was already done, I wouldn't have tried to start a new chop unnecessarily.
Unfortunately since we don't have a pre done worker plan the "sign with turns left" method isn't working very well atm. It worked great back when we had a handful of cities and workers. With 30 cities and rapidly approaching 50 workers on the board we need to do more in advance planing.
Quote:Also, if you must put a turn #, let's take 100 for granted and just call them T2, T3, etc. For workers anyway. There's currently a bunch of signs that say things like 'mine copper T10' and then we hit the character limit. But I think if we have tasks labeled, and a general policy of resources first, then tiles to be worked, and only last chops, that'll eliminate most of the confusion.
Agreed.
Quote:Thane plans: I like the idea of bringing along Thanes to pop borders early in a city's life, where we can. And it's probably worth spreading the religion, too, eventually. Can we make a count of # of Thanes needed where and when? And when they're born, give them names like 'Border Eiswein'.
Agreed, except for the priority of religion. 1gpt helps with those maint costs. But we are going to be patchy on Thanes for a bit. Lists of required resources (inc Thanes) is on my to do list for Sat am.
Quote:Military plans: Thoth, I'm sorry, but 'we needed those WR's' is way too vague to be useful. And our current approach to building military is quite vague, and a lot of the purpose is confusing. Why don't we work backward instead of forward? Right now, we're building military and then finding a use for it, or building to match Thoth's idea, in his head. Instead, I'd like to plan out task forces, and build to match them.
As a first gasp here: I really think we're going too heavy on wolf riders. I've heard you say things like 'zone defense', but that's a role they really can't do against anything but barbs. What they're good for is worker sniping, pickets, and...um...? Instead, let's go for axes and Moroi and chariots (and cats). Things we can expect to actually win fights if they get into them. WR's have their place, yes - but that place, in my opinion, is being covered by an axe while they do something tricky with their high mobility. And even there, chariots will be able to do many of the same things, and more.
Combat: I can't think of anything better than to take each turn as it comes, sadly. Too dependent on what the enemy does. At the moment - I would like to rotate some fast movers toward Loki. I'd rather not let them scout our core, or interfere with worker micro. Don't think we can kill him this turn with a reasonable level of risk, but if we get more units into the theater, it'll be easier.
We've got Military Planning to do as well, I'm out of time right now but yes we need tighter defense/expansion coverage plans.
Quote:I realize that this list is a lot of work, up front. But honestly I think it'll make the actual micro go a lot faster and more smoothly, and even mostly on autopilot. A lot faster to look at a city, see that it's got a bunch of farms desired, and go build them than to say 'Thoth, what were these workers doing' 'Sorry, missed the ping, repeat' 'here, the ones by Eiswein', 'oh, those were farming, go 2W and start that farm'.
Agreed. We need to put in the upfront time investment to get the planning done, but it'll save time in the near and long terms. And vastly decrease frustration levels while we're playing the turns.
Quote:I think most of our current frustrations are the result of something simple: we all have a slightly different macro plan in mind. Which means we're optimizing for different things. On those places where we're in agreement, like techs and the urgency of getting island cities, we're not finding anything to complain about, because we're all working toward the same goal. Even when we do change things, it's usually obvious if the change is an improvement or not.
Tonight's pretty busy for me, but I expect to have plenty of time this weekend to contribute to a macro plan.
fnord
![[Image: hulk_smash_loki.gif]](http://www.xavierpop.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/hulk_smash_loki.gif)
