March 31st, 2017, 05:19
(This post was last modified: March 31st, 2017, 05:26 by Rusten.)
Posts: 1,996
Threads: 4
Joined: Aug 2009
Don't worry too much about the starting techs (or the first 20T). This is a long game and the Inca UB will give a huge boost in the long run. Which techs the civ starts with would be one of my last concerns. Especially in this mod where pastures are available with hunting.
Any starting tech disadvantage is negligible and the rice has fresh water so agriculture is needed early anyway. 5F is better than 3F+3H. I didn't do any sims though, so I wouldn't know the improvement order. I suppose cows first as it's next to the city and will require 4T as oppose to 5.
Posts: 3,978
Threads: 31
Joined: Feb 2010
(March 31st, 2017, 05:19)Rusten Wrote: Don't worry too much about the starting techs (or the first 20T). This is a long game and the Inca UB will give a huge boost in the long run. Which techs the civ starts with would be one of my last concerns. Especially in this mod where pastures are available with hunting.
Any starting tech disadvantage is negligible and the rice has fresh water so agriculture is needed early anyway. 5F is better than 3F+3H. I didn't do any sims though, so I wouldn't know the improvement order. I suppose cows first as it's next to the city and will require 4T as oppose to 5.
You know that Inca gives just 1culture now?Which is still good from my point of view and quechea lost his *, but you still can build it after have hunting and conect cooper so i find again valuable as a cheap military police for a long time. Well if we want to go with something long term and having good start tech i think Rusia might be beter(hunting ,mining if i rember right) then kmer and vikings are realy nerf on this mod and more then that Rusia is stronger because of the whiping penality and drafting rifles requring 2 pop and you need a size 8 city, so people usuay have standing armies which are upgraded frpm previous ones and gues which are 80% de standing armies?
March 31st, 2017, 07:22
(This post was last modified: March 31st, 2017, 07:58 by Rusten.)
Posts: 1,996
Threads: 4
Joined: Aug 2009
BTW, I'm actually not sure if cows before rice is better. I'd be interested in comparing these. Growing on 3F tiles is painful and should be avoided if at all possible and there is the oasis available which means that the advantage of improving a resource sooner is smaller than usual. Would not be surprised if farming rice first is superior, in fact I expect it to be just that. Do you have a save available to sim on? I was not intending to do this, but now I am simply very curious.
Improving cows first (and starting with hunting) would allow for a quicker work boat if we want to tech fishing, but the clam wouldn't be significantly better than anything else we have available (oasis/mines/fp) in the short term. Could see those hammers being better put into a quicker settler.
I'd not be opposed to Russia at all. One of my favourite civs with a buffed UB. 30 hammer terraces will be missed, but I can find something else to fantasize about. Hunting/mining is correct.
@mack
Yep, I know about the nerfs. I still consider the civ good for the same reasons you listed.
edit: wait -- is that clam going to be 5F or 4F when improved? I assumed 4F but lake clam is 5?
Posts: 1,996
Threads: 4
Joined: Aug 2009
The clam icon is blocking the tile yield, but I'm going to assume it's a base yield of 3F2C (rather than 2F2C) in which case I take back my previous comment on improving rice first. Improving cow and going worker-wb should be best. Definitely would be nice to start with one of fishing or hunting then, but as already mentioned I feel this is minor in the grand scheme of things.
Now I'm more in the camp of teching BW before agriculture sometimes and using a mine if we get our settler at size 4 (but size 3 seems more likely working clam+oasis+cow). In the case of Russia for instance I can see us delaying agriculture until after BW.
Posts: 3,978
Threads: 31
Joined: Feb 2010
(March 31st, 2017, 08:18)Rusten Wrote: The clam icon is blocking the tile yield, but I'm going to assume it's a base yield of 3F2C (rather than 2F2C) in which case I take back my previous comment on improving rice first. Improving cow and going worker-wb should be best. Definitely would be nice to start with one of fishing or hunting then, but as already mentioned I feel this is minor in the grand scheme of things.
Now I'm more in the camp of teching BW before agriculture sometimes and using a mine if we get our settler at size 4 (but size 3 seems more likely working clam+oasis+cow). In the case of Russia for instance I can see us delaying agriculture until after BW.
Indeed improved clam will be 5/0/2 which is a strong tile considering how scarce the comerce is.And between Inca and Rusai depends if we want expand via conquest afster or later.If weant faster we should pick Inca and get a pro/imp leader for example(i dont think anyone will want) or pro/exp and get a base and atack at Ha/swords/cats with rusia go all in later.
Posts: 78
Threads: 1
Joined: Mar 2017
Thanks for the analysis. 
I should have posted my thoughts in more detail earlier. I was envisioning worker -> wb with the worker improving cows. If we start with neither Hunting nor Fishing we won't be able to start the WB right after the worker and improve the cow at the same time—and in general starting techs probably don't matter much but that'll set us behind a few turns and the opportunity cost for avoiding it is, uh, why we have so many posts in the thread!
After that I made a mine because it wastes 2 entire worker turns to get to the rice and Agriculture is quite expensive. I was also simming with EXP and IMP so the mine followed by a chop on that forested hill was pretty good. After that we can improve the rice without much of a hitch. Whipping will only come into play once we have two 5f tiles and that should be about when we get the granary and start improving the beavers for happycap too. So that sounds like a plan ...
Finally, if we go with Inca we're like those annoying college classmates who did vision quests in the jungles of Peru, but if we go with Russia we have a fun Putin roleplay the entire game. So Russia it is
Well, boys, I reckon this is it ... nucular combat, toe-to-toe with the Russkies.
Posts: 78
Threads: 1
Joined: Mar 2017
Any thoughts on a leader?
Posts: 3,978
Threads: 31
Joined: Feb 2010
(April 2nd, 2017, 20:37)CML Wrote: Any thoughts on a leader?
Peter of rusia? mehmed? there are plenty leaders which worth only need diferent aproaches as there is no more very good leader and bad leaders.Bismark very good as well.
Posts: 1,996
Threads: 4
Joined: Aug 2009
(April 3rd, 2017, 02:13)mackoti Wrote: Peter of rusia? mehmed? there are plenty leaders which worth only need diferent aproaches as there is no more very good leader and bad leaders.Bismark very good as well.
It's no coincedence that all 3 leaders you mentioned are expansive though -- it'd be good here.
Both Peter and Bismarck synergizes well with Russia.
Bismarck: make (classical) wonders, not war!
Peter: lightbulbing for quicker cossacks and of course the UB+OU.
If there are still no IND leaders being picked when we're up I'd say Bismarck is looking pretty good.
But any EXP leader is good IMO. A good trait made even better by the starting position. Secures a quick start.
Posts: 78
Threads: 1
Joined: Mar 2017
Thanks again
Sims showed that EXP barely accelerated the start, as we'd have to give up working a 3/0/1 tile (then after the border pop a 3/0/2 tile) to gain the extra hammer. This slows down BW which will make us quite possibly use that fast worker less efficiently. Not that EXP is bad, I just wonder if PRO or IMP aren't better.
I think I read somewhere that the map is large—can anyone confirm? This would help me recheck the sim.
IND sounds great, definitely leaning in that direction.
|
