Gaspar, Lewwyn, et al go full Sartre

[NobleHelium]

By the way, I guarantee that Gaspar's actual game reporting will be much better this game. What normally happens is that I make him talk about every minor detail until he can't talk any more, so he generally doesn't have the energy or inclination to write about everything we've just argued in detail about. So the details of what we're actually doing every turn are generally not reported. Not so in this game.

[SevenSpirits]

I'll stop arguing about your civ skills if you promise to not lose to a pair of chariots again this game.

[Gaspar]

By the way, I guarantee that Gaspar's actual game reporting will be much better this game. What normally happens is that I make him talk about every minor detail until he can't talk any more, so he generally doesn't have the energy or inclination to write about everything we've just argued in detail about. So the details of what we're actually doing every turn are generally not reported. Not so in this game.

I'll stop arguing about your civ skills if you promise to not lose to a pair of chariots again this game.

I'll do my best.

[Ichabod]

PBEM38 - Isabella of China

This game is my only win. I had wanted to reprise the start from PBEM24 but the map didn't allow for that so Noble and I prioritized a measured expansion and leveraged the Monk wonders to a production advantage which allowed us to conquer enough land to be the game winners. The end of the game was pretty ugly and led to the falling out with Commodore. This is the only game I've played where I've eliminated another player.

Yeah, I decided to leave the glory to you after I got Yuris on the ropes. Same thing about the win. I'm a nice guy like that.

I actually let my opponents win in all my games!

[Gaspar]

Alright, so let's play our game of leader bingo. I think it is important to note that I don't think these are the 10 best leaders available in this game - in fact, they certainly are not. These are the ten I could psyche myself up to play.

Augustus (Imp/Ind)


Augustus is pretty terrible, really. Imperialistic and Industrious both have their place. The problem really is that both are complimentary traits. I actually think Ind works best the more cities you have, since those cheap Forges are by far the biggest benefit - getting that more often is clearly a bigger benefit. Imp obviously is all about the cheap Settlers, the GG points are really only an ancillary benefit. The thing is, Imp doesn't let you have more cities, it just lets you get them out quicker. That has an advantage if you can pair it with a trait that helps those cities be productive faster but when Metal Casting doesn't come around until after the Imp benefit is reduced, well... yeah, just not a lot of synergy here.

Catherine (Cre/Imp)


This is more like it. Creative is the second best early game trait, after Expansive. In some ways, its even better, since you don't have to actually do anything to get the benefit. So the synergism is in planting your early cities faster and claiming more land by popping borders faster. In a lot of cities, Cre basically works like Exp, since you get the hammers back you would spend on a Monument. Cre also saves you beakers, but that's another discussion. The weakness of course is that you're not really getting anything interesting after t75 out of these two, so much like Sury, you need to have really executed your early game well to win with her.

Joao (Exp/Imp)


Joao is a fun pick - you just feel like you can expand all over the map for cheap. Its strictly worse than Catherine though, because you don't get the beaker savings. Joao in fact needs religion more than most, so you can't wait on the religious techs. And that's the rub - how do you pay for it? Joao doesn't so much limp to Currency as have his corpse rolled over en route. I'd play him to challenge myself, but I don't think he's a game winner.

Julius Caesar (Imp/Org)


JC is another choice with good synergy. Spam those Settlers, don't bankrupt your economy. This also gets some extra points because I really like the ancillary benefit of "win EP battle" that Org provides. You forget how annoying losing the EP battle is until you're in the middle of it. He still has some issues, again needing some culture to really make this all pay off. But he's a solid choice if you want to expand hard.

Justinian (Spi/Imp)


I've got a bit of a soft spot for Justinian since I just listened to a Byzantine history podcast but yeah, this combo is pretty mediocre. Spi is one of the best midgame traits, letting you take advantage of Caste and Nationalism and Theocracy in a way that non-Spiritual leaders simply cannot. The cheap temples are fantastic if you can land AP as well. The problem is always that you need something with a good start - this is why Spi/Exp is by far my favorite combo to play. She's only good, not great, but so much fun. Anyway, the similarity between those two means I won't be picking Justinian. (I've played Isabella twice.)

Kublai Khan (Agg/Cre)


Kublai is underrated, I think, and the best Agg leader after Ragnar. Agg/Cre just says "Eff you, I'm settling here." You can establish some great early game position and if you execute well, become a very difficult to dislodge object. The problem is Agg really is bad compared to others. You might be able to get some strength early but you lose a lot of that verve when someone with better economic traits comes with units an era ahead of yours. That's why I'd only ever play Agg with Cre, Exp or Fin.

Louis XIV (Cre/Ind)


Louis is a bit weird in that Cre and Ind really don't go together that well. But they're just two solid traits. I've discussed what's good about both ad nauseum above, but Louis fits into the realm of guys I wouldn't mind getting but am not going to go all out for.

Roosevelt (Ind/Org)


FDR is the undisputed king of the Great Lighthouse, as everyone knows. Beyond that, he gets a lot of good buildings cheap. But he has obvious early game issues. FDR's viability goes up along with all the Org leaders based mostly on how many lighthouses you need to build. Anyway, I'd take him over Augustus or Justinian, but otherwise he's pretty uninteresting.

Shaka (Agg/Exp)


Shaka is a top-tier restricted leader - his traits have great symbiosis with Zulu's UU/UB, both of which are above average. Without Zulu, he loses a lot of that value. Still, his script is the same as Kublai's and he executes it well enough.

Zara Yaqob(Cre/Org)


Zara is just a fun leader. Cre for the early game, Org for the mid-late game. He's the best sustainable expansion leader available in this set and I expect at or near the top of many of my opponents lists. This, of course, is the weakness of Commodore's random banlist - what's the difference in strength between Mehmed and Zara, for example, other than that in Commodore's mind Mehmed gets played more?

So, without seeing the starts, here's how I'd rank these guys:

1. Zara Yaqob
2(tie). Shaka of Zulu/Kublai of Zulu
4. Catherine
5. Julius Caesar
6. Louis XIV
7. FDR
8. Joao
9. Augustus
10. Justinian
11. Kublai, non-Zulu
12. Shaka, non-Zulu

Anyone care to agree/disagree/ask questions?

[SevenSpirits]

Imp doesn't let you have more cities

Ya know, I think I disagree with this statement.

[Gaspar]

Imp doesn't let you have more cities

Ya know, I think I disagree with this statement.

How so?

[SevenSpirits]

I think settlers being cheaper means you build more of them faster, which results in you having more cities.

Like, people stop building settlers when there is no more land to settle. Since IMP got their settlers quicker, as you say, they are liable to have built more of them at the time the land runs out.

It's true that if everyone is in their own sandbox with mapmaker-prescribed borders and no contested land, this effect is removed. I would hope that most maps these days aren't like that though.

[Gaspar]

I think settlers being cheaper means you build more of them faster, which results in you having more cities.

Like, people stop building settlers when there is no more land to settle. Since IMP got their settlers quicker, as you say, they are liable to have built more of them at the time the land runs out.

It's true that if everyone is in their own sandbox with mapmaker-prescribed borders and no contested land, this effect is removed. I would hope that most maps these days aren't like that though.

That's fair. I just think most of the time the thing that stops you from settling is the cost. If you're on a smaller map, where more of the land is contested then probably Imp gets a bigger slice of the pie. I haven't been on one of those maps in quite some time and I've never played Imp, so I guess my thoughts are more informed opinion than fact. As per usual.

[Lewwyn]

It's looking like the pick style is going to be FFH.