[Spoiler] RB Pitboss #2 - Shaka of Rome

[Pox]

I have to agree that settling production hill seems like you're disregarding the border treaty completely after agreeing to it. Though, that's assuming you've already sent that email, have you? If not, you've still got room to move, I guess.

(Also, the ongoing commentary and screenshots are great - you're certainly keeping my attention!)

[Whosit]

Yeah, I already sent the e-mail.

I've seen a little activity in the Korean thread (by noting that posts have been made, not looking into it!), so I imagine that those two are still talking it over.

I am starting to think that it was a move on my part, but I couldn't think of a way to stall without making it obvious that I was stalling. And I'm really not sure that I could successfully stall for the two weeks it would take in real time. But who knows.

So my plan, crude as it may be, is to wait until my Settler is produced, send them a line telling them that I've identified an important location I need to settle, that it WILL slightly interfere with the Silk city, but offer to try and make up for it somehow. All I can really offer is gifting them a health resource at the moment, but I plan to leave the door open for other options. I'd even give up my clam spot if they really pestered me about it.

Not the best fix, but I'm hoping it'll show that I'm trying not to be TOO dastardly. I don't know what the odds are, but with all those hills, chances for metal this should be relatively high, right? Though it would serve me right if iron was in the fogged tile that my ideal spot wouldn't get until border pop 3.

I guess all I have to say is that my plan is slightly more polite than settling first and asking for forgiveness later. I guess I've just become too fixated on a sealed border, though a 2-turn reinforcement vs. 3-turn isn't that bad a reason, either. Of course, all my plans will fall apart if I never find any Iron! Though that is months away still, sadly.

On less related news, I think I'll call the spot Kattle Keep, unless I think of anything better.

Thanks for voicing in, guys. I give you full "I told you so!" rights if this comes back to bite me.

[LiPing]

Well... I'm usually unavailable on weekends. So... sorry for delay, and this is going to read very badly since there is "Wow so many posts" since then

Name - It was a Touhou naming scheme I was wondering if anyone would be familiar with it, but obviously not (next warriors were going to be Daiyousei, Cirno etc) but anyway, I have absolutely no intention of logging in again so it doesn't matter I'm actually thinking strongly about further demoting myself to being a Lurker after you're settled in and I'm back from my trips - I'm curious how much I got wrong or right, and I'm itching to know while the game is still fresh in mind.

2nd Worker - [This is a very very gross oversimplification and another example of LiPing voodoo math] Worker turns are worth 5H each[pre-Mathematics], as long as they have something to do, so the cost of the worker can be quickly regained, and it'll set up the second city a lot faster: 1 worker between two cities is rather bad.
3(or more) warriors - Playing multiplayer, and Emperor[edit - wrong, but I'll leave it here anyway, Krill's already corrected it] level, so there is some redundancy built in to allow for possible animal losses, and also to have extra guys in case you need to throw two at a hostile warrior, and yes, the other goal was to grow to size 3, since I wanted to work at minimum, the deer/rice/gold irrespective of what else was going on.

Graph - (I guess I should have included all 80+ of my demographic screenshots from T1-15 so you wouldn't need the graph, sorry...)
Korea and Rome both start at 4000 points for power. The first increase is T10 hunting. (2000) The second increase is T19? Warrior. (2000)

Scouts - I think scouts are junk, personally, and I'd rather have too many warriors than too many scouts, usually I tend to do random things with extra aggressive warriors like put medic I on them and drag one along with proper units later, so they don't seem fully bad to me.

Aesthetics - Oh, I've gotten the idea that I'm fully out of place with my thinking/playing here compared to everyone else anyway, so I'm not offended, it's just the way of the world.

Plan - ... should have sent you my sandbox save too, but you have one now, so it's all good.

Plan 2 -
Off the top of my head - T24: Might as well do it the way I had it and let the 2 turn growth come first, (without the worker) it's a 2H gain between then and T30.

Research - instead of 80%, it's (just about) always better to do 1 turn 0% and then 4 turns 100%, same speed ultimately, but you get some rounding benefits (1.2x multiplier for tech prerequisite, +3% for known civs with tech etc)

If I remember correctly, using my 2-warrior 2-worker 1-settler plan (and taking wheel [T36] after bronze) I was able to settle that city on T39 with most of a road between the two cities, so you seem to be 1 worker worse off for 1 turn - sounds like a bad deal, I'll look at it more closely in a bit.

Korea -
Honestly, if you wanted to do that, I'd say just turn the Rumia around and attack them I don't really feel there's a great deal of difference between 'dastardly' and 'justified dastardly', actually if anything I'd consider the second worse than the first. (But my opinion here is useless, since I already feel that I was within reasonable grounds to attack them anyway, and also I don't really feel you were obligated to follow "my" [as in, I feel that NAP's and other arrangements don't carry over when the ruler changes] (bad) NAP)

[Krill]

Difficulty is only monarch IIRC.

[LiPing]

Wrong word, my bad, thanks Krill.

Plancrunching -

I can get the city built (on either the hill with the rice and cow in the first ring, or the E-of cow hill) on turn 39 also with 2 Workers before the Settler - Comparison of the two plans below...

a)
Following spreadsheet plan #2 from original plans post up to T32 -
T32 - Bronze done, tech Wheel
T35 - Workers 1+2 move from clearcut forests N and N-NW of Koumakan to grass forest hill N-NW-NW of Koumakan
T36 - Workers 1+2 chop and then immediately cancel (extra action, might as well do this now because it'll come in useful later if the city's on the south hill), Wheel completes.
T37 - Settler completes, Tech (Mysticism[4t]? Animal Husbandry[6t]? whichever seems better), Workers 1+2 road the forested grass hill, Settler moves N, NW, Revolt Slavery
T38 - Workers move SE, and road under the settler, Settler moves NW-NW-to whichever hill you want to settle on.
T39 - Settled. (Workers probably move SE and NW-NW (each of the two unroaded spots between the two cities) and road those to add 1c to each city from turn 41 onwards, then what they do after depends on if it was AH or M)

Result at T39:
Koumakan: Size 3 (12/26F) Barracks 48/50, working Gold, Rice, Deer
Improvements: Camped Deer, Farmed Rice, Mined Gold, 2 tiles of road, 1 Prechop(2)ed forest.
3 Warriors, 2 Workers, 1 Settler
Techs: Hunting, Agriculture, Bronze, Wheel(89), Animal Husbandry (87/149)

b)
New Plan #2, with growth order change:
Following spreadsheet plan #2 from plans post up to T25, and then Whosit's plan from then on, changes noted below... -
T26 - Koumakan starts Settler
T31 - I let BW finish because it's going to dump 16c into AH overflow with a 1.4x modifier anyway so I figure I might as well let it go.
T35 - The mine finishes.
T36 - Worker NW-NW, Settler NW-NW
T37 - Worker - Chop and Cancel, Settler NW
T38 - Barracks in, Animal Husbandry in. Settler - Whichever hill is wanted to settle on, Worker - Cow, Revolt: Slavery (I picked Wheel mainly for a comparison point, but it's not going to get any turns into it anyway)
T39 - Settled. Worker Pastures Cow.

Result at T39:
Koumakan: Size 3 (12/26F), 3 overflow left, working Gold, Rice, Deer
Improvements: Camped Deer, Farmed Rice, Mined Gold, Mined Hill, 1 Prechop(1)ed Forest, (1/4)Pasture
3 Warriors, 1 Worker, 1 Settler
Techs: Hunting, Agriculture, Bronze, Animal Husbandry(149), Wheel (8/89) or Mysticism (8/74)

Comparison: Same amount of turns worth of useful improvements, City is settled on the same turn, Extra worker for a) over b) + 5 or more Worker turns, assuming b) is going to start worker now, b) has 4H instead.

Edit - I suppose, possibly more sensibly, researching AH before Wheel, with two workers, will also result in the grass hill mine existing, and with the city founded on T40 (1 turn later) instead

[Whosit]

Heh, well, you make some interesting points regarding my plan. I'll do a few more sandbox runs with your numbers so I can get a better feel for it. I never said I was the most efficient at these things!

LiPing, if you wish to be a lurker after your trip, that's fine, but I figure that you might as well wait to make that decision. I kind of get the feeling that we each have some skills in different areas (you seem much better at crunching numbers than me and our neighbors, uh, seem to hate me less ). I recall you expressed uncertainty regarding being able to work with someone else, but I've played in a lot of SGs (not sure if you have) so I'm used to it.

Of course, I disagree on a few points.

Scouts: Not junk. They get two move, and knowledge is power. Granted, it's probably getting a little late in the game for scouts to reach their full potential, but we still have a LOT of fog to uncover, so the more ground we can cover, the better. I know I would much rather meet our other opponents before the Koreans. I just woke up from a terrifying dream where the Koreans developed a massive coalition to crush us . . . .

Research: Well, not disagree, I just need to practice binary research a bit more. It's not something that's second nature to me. Though I did read that it's most effective while building multiplier improvements.

Attack Korea/Breaking NAP: I really do not believe that just because a "new administration" comes to power that all previous deals are rendered void. Of course, I do have a healthy respect for John Marshall's defense of the sanctity of the contract. I could be overthinking it, but what would then prevent teams from recruiting a "new" player just so that they could break their deals at the drop of a hat? You signed a NAP (which I know was a good idea at the time) and I intend to follow it. I DON'T intend to extend it indefinitely, though.

Anyway, I'll run your plan through my sandbox. I'm kind of a "hands on" person, so it won't make full sense to me until I do it myself. If it really does get a Worker out, too, in the same time as my plan, then that's pretty cool.

Though, the reason I slowed growth in my plan was because I didn't think working the unimproved Gold tile for 6 turns would make a huge difference. It's +2H/+1C and -2F. So it nets +1C until the mine is up and doesn't contribute the Settler's build time. So I guess the question I need to check out is if that +1C makes a difference in tech times.

Edit: Oh, yeah, and I'm completely unfamiliar with Touhou, so it was basically nonsense to me. Sorry!

[Whosit]

Oh, and for all the fans out there, the diplomatic saga continues! Again, about the response I expected, though there was a wrinkle I didn't see coming . . .

Dear Whosit

Thank you for your prompt and detailed response. We believe there is a framework here for a long term relationship but also believe it needs a little more work to guarentee both our long term prosperity.

We believe you reluctance to commit to a long term NAP is mildly concerning. Any military build up by either of our fine nations would negativly impact our ability to expand and compete with empires in the fog that are growing more quickly. We understand that you do not want a blanket NAP length so we suggest the following compromise.

Our original NAP is set to end on turn 66 not turn 60. It was a 60 turn nap agreed to on turn 6. I appologize for not being clear about that before. You have suggested an 20 turn extention with a 10 turn notification. We submit that it be a 40 turn extention with a 20 turn cancelation period. And would ask that you agree to 1 extention at this time.

Also I believe that you missed our original intention when we broached the subject of military build up. We would find that any build up of offensive forces in excess of what is needed to reasonably defend your cities 1-2 units per city plus and escort for the next settler would be a prelude to military action. At this point in our nations growth early hammers are more productive when focused on growth than on military. We hope you agree.

We thank you for your kind words and willingness to negotiate and compromise. We also feel this is how diplomacy should be handled between two great nations.

Best regards,
Broker and plako

Quibbling over the NAP extension? Yes, I saw that coming. Their definition of "excessive military?" -_- Yeah, uh, not happening. Well, it looks like I found the issues to stall on, but I still doubt my ability to stall for 20+ in-game turns plus the two weeks minimum real time those turns will take.

There's a few angles I could take, so I'll brainstorm a few. This time, I don't think I need to respond immediately. Maybe wait a day or two . . . .

Let's see, points . . . .

*I do NOT want a NAP extension that far. I don't think. I'll have to run my simulation a few more times to see how long it will reasonably take to get Iron Working. Without knowing if there is even Iron, or Copper even!, this is really a gamble. If I become too belligerent, but discover I lack strategic resources (I doubt that I'll have 0, but lacking iron makes for a sad Rome) then I'll be in a much weaker position.

*Basically, I want the NAP to be able to expire about when I'll have a reasonably large strike force. Minimum 6 Praetorians, maybe with a couple of Archers for backup/captured city garrison. In my most recent sandbox, I got to turn 57 without Iron Working, though I think that was the next tech. After Bronze Working (currently being researched) I want Animal Husbandry (to work cows and reveal horses), Mysticism (to get my border pop!), and the Wheel (for the all-important roads). Wheel should probably come before Mysticism, though. Wheel will come before AH, actually, if Copper is already in my borders somewhere. THEN Iron Working. While I could do Iron Working first, I think it would stunt the growth of my cities, which would be worse.

So, yeah, even if I get Iron Working as late as say, Turn 75, I don't think it will take 25 turns to build up my forces. I'll have to do some more testing, though, with a best-case scenario and a less-ideal scenario.

*Either way, the 20-turn grace period is too long for me! I'm definitely not going longer than 10 there. I can't think of a good way to spin that, either. Saying that I want to retain "flexibility" is the same as "I plan to attack you." Suggestions, LiPing? . . . That don't involve attack with our Warrior immediately?

*Also, their definition of what is "reasonably necessary" to defend my cities? I think I have some more legitimate complaints in this area. "You are not necessarily in a position to determine what is 'necessary' for my defense." Also: "Recall that my neighbors to the east were destroyed. I'd rather have too much protection than too little."

So all I know that my response will contain is haggling the NAP. Definitely going for 10-turn cancellation. MAY accept the 40 turn extension, but I might argue down to a 30-turn extension good now. Might as well argue down. The worst that could happen is that they'll say "no" and I get a few more days to stall.

I am definitely outright rejecting their limits on military. 1-2 units defending a city may be OK in Single Player, but from what I've read of other MP games (well, basically the Apolyton game and the ongoing PB1), that's not enough! I am also offended that they think they can dictate my military size! Of course, whatever my response, it should be couched in terms of "wary for my own defense," which I am.

Anyway, I'll spend a couple days thinking it over and let them stew. Ha.

So long as they don't get Axemen before I do, I'm reasonably secure in my military position. 2 (Aggressive) Warriors guarding each city should be enough at this stage if they have nothing better than Warriors themselves. Does Archery, the tech, provide soldier points/power upon research? I want to watch out for that. Anyway, I think that if I take my hill, I can defend my claims, while saving Settler #3 for an Iron location. I don't want to expand TOO far, lest I bankrupt myself. I want to be able to afford a decent military, though I think Pottery will be after IW so I can put down some cottages to fund further growth.

[Cyneheard]

http://www.civfanatics.com/civ4/strategy...aphics.php has all the soldier count data. Archery provides 6k, Wheel 4k, BW 8k, IW 10k. Sailing, Hunting, Mining and AH all provide 2k. The rule for unit soldier count is "strength in thousands", except that anything which gets +50% to melee gets +1k strength (so axemen are 6k, like swords).

Huh: Maoi Statues are worth more soldier points than the Heroic Epic.

[Whosit]

Thanks for the link! Very helpful.

The Demo screen says that our current Soldier points are 8000 . . . rival best is 21000! I hope that's just from some techs . . . .

Moved a bit. Seoul finished a warrior just now (Spy screen says they have no production built up). I thought that they were another turn away, but maybe they were working a higher hammer yield tile and just switched to the finished farm. Anyway, the window for a decapitating strike is over now, not that I was going to do so.



I'm getting better at checking the turnlog each time. Turns out that Rumia fought a wolf inbetween turns, and won flawlessly! So she(?) [Rumia sounds like a female name to me] has 1 XP now. Heh.

Meanwhile, I cautiously send Thannis out. He spies a Lion in the distance. If that Lion moves 1W, I'll have to stay on the hill and hope it attacks. It's 77% odds to attack it, so I'd rather get the 25% hill defense bonus.



Koumakan grows next turn, 3 turns left on the warrior. I'm really hoping that nothing jumps out of the fog at me, but I think that I could still recall Thannis in time, so long as I log into the game first . . . .

If nothing shows up by next turn, our newest warrior should finish in time to defend the capital from any wandering marauders. I'm going to try to maximize scouting for now.

[LiPing]

Don't work the unimproved gold, work one of the grassland forests for 2F 1H (or the lake, for 2F 2C if you want commerce), and it doesn't make a difference in the build time, it's just that you'll either get 2H or 4C more doing it this way, and the settler isn't slower so... I figure, even if it doesn't show a significant visible difference, might as well have more than less.

SGs - I played a grand total of 1 SG, it was with friends, and it went... very badly something to do with me using my turn to make a lot of axes, and they are all very builder minded...

NAP, and Lurkerism - I actually disagree that the NAP was a good idea at the time, I kinda... agreed to it only because I felt obligated at the time to attempt to try to play as if I hadn't gotten the accidental spoiler (really, I wanted to cancel the offer immediately after that, and it's been quite trying knowing that it's "no good", at least for me personally, it was very stressful a feeling ), before being told by everyone here that I should just continue with having seen it since I couldn't do anything about it, and partially also because I let myself get frustrated into it so I wouldn't have to bother with them for ~2 hours every day . I also don't feel a NAP is guarantee enough to allow (imo) questionable play like the worker thing (Alliance on the other hand, sure, if it was Mortius, I wouldn't think about it, or even make that peek move), so yeah... I don't mind saying, that with everything that happened, if you'd been one day later and if I'd played one more turn before you took over, with the same moves, I'd have broken my own NAP anyway. , and that probably does greatly affect my thinking towards your obligation towards it. I did also think it was a standard, reading about other games, whenever anyone was replaced, it never seemed like anyone felt particularly obliged to follow policies of their predecessor they felt were bad, nor did the people who had those deals on the other side ever expect them to be kept.

Actually, something I have been wondering about, I had offered initially, the idea to enforce the NAP with every 10T declare war and declare peace, and they rubbished that idea, and actually expressed revulsion and horror to why it should even be necessary. I actually thought people would be very keen for that, or to gift 1g (or other weird stuff) back and forth to accomplish the guarantee, but my ally didn't like or understand it either, I'm really shocked by that.

This section entitled, "LiPing sucks at English" - I've decided to leave it here simply because the husband glanced at it and burst out laughing, asking what sort of nonsense I was trying to write.

I guess I'm thinking of the new administration in a very different way, I'm thinking of it more like err... the ruler of Wei is allied with Zhao, a faction of nobles within Wei who are friendly with Chu, depose the ruler and enthrone their candidate, Wei remains intact, but the ruler now is not so interested in what the predecessor had to do with Zhao, compared to say, if the two were going to both be Prime Minsters and so the government composes of the people who were responsible for the policies and has an obligation to them...

...this looks like a terrible mess, I don't think I'm doing a good job of this explanation at all. (Please don't misunderstand, I'm not saying you did that at all, I'm just having... great difficulty trying to articulate what I mean... or how I was envisioning it... bah to my English Euhhh... something like, there aren't two suns in the sky, similarly just one absolute power of a nation, and there is instability when that shifts, so I feel like easing that is my duty as the outgoing person, and you won't need me once you've warmed the seat