Challenge format
1) Three games are played with mostly the same build (small tweaks allowed between games at your own discretion), you pick your build freely and modify the save with the wizcopy tool and alter your race with whatever tool you prefer
2) For each game, create a new thread and state your overall strategy with as many words as you care for (you may tweak your overall strategy between games)
3) Each 12 turns, report the following:
Overland map
F4 and F5 screens
Magic screen
City screen
Gold income
List of military buildings you own
List of spells researched
Brief summary of units you own
4) Don't peek at the threads of other challengers until you're done with that game (ie. you can look at someone's game 1 report when your own game 1 is done)
5) Game settings for game 1 / game 2 / game 3 (all are Impossible with 4 opponents):
Land: Huge / Large / Fair land
Magic: Good / High / Max
Minerals: Rich / Fair / Poor
Climate: Wet / Fair / Dry
ORIGINAL POST
Hey Nelphine.
We discussed settling vs conquering a little while ago. I argued that going with both was the stronger option, you argued that ignoring settling and going straight for conquest was the stronger option. How would you like to test that in a series of 3 games?
If you agree, I suggest that we use fairly similar builds (for sake of accurate comparison of strategies) with minor variations allowed (for sake of allowing each of us to play to our strategy's strengths). I think Lizardmen are the best race choice, as it is equally well suited for settling and for conquest. I think Omniscient is also a no-brainer (with 1 each of Life + Death + Chaos + Nature), equally good for settling and conquest. We probably both want Warlord, so add that as well. That's 7 shared picks, 5 left to pick freely with the wizcopy tool Seravy devised (haven't actually tested it yet).
I propose these settings for the games (all on Impossible with 4 opponents):
Game 1
Land: Huge
Power: Good
Minerals: Rich
Climate: Wet
Game 2
Land: Large
Power: High
Minerals: Fair
Climate: Fair
Game 3
Land: Fair
Power: Max
Minerals: Poor
Climate: Dry
I know you're not fond of heroes, but I suggest that you use them as optimally as possible for sake of fair comparison. Alternatively, we can both agree not to use heroes at all and reroll all prisoner outcomes.
Reporting should be done with identical formats to make comparison as easy as possible. Focus should be on macro management, I suggest that the following be posted every 12 turns:
Income
Magic Screen
List of spells researched
City list
Brief summary of units commanded
List of military buildings owned (access, experience and
alchemist's guild)
Overland map of one or both planes
What do you say? The format is up for debate, of course. Others are invited to participate as well, with their own stated strategy. It would be fun if someone wanted to test a long-term strategy against the rush strategies me and Nelphine will probably both be employing.
Hmm. To be honest, I've done lizardman settling games to the point that in extreme I would pick myrran and lizardman and just go nuts.
My particular argument is for impossible, and I do occasionally settle (usually 1-3 cities in early-mid game, usually sftery first or second node, and then a pile when I completely control arcanus since there are no enenemies left to conquer).
However, lizardman are weak for rush builds (relying on multiple cities to get armies going - I want a stack of 9 before that's physically possible), and I haven't yet been convinced of the usefulness of the nature spellbook. Its strong no doubt, but on impossible it needs to be more than strong.
If we can do it I'd love to pit my preferred build against yours, on the same maps, any build goes, just to get some comparisons in.
If not, I'd try the build you suggested (it is strong), but I'm iffy about my success.
I'm open to using completely different setups, but then you run the risk of different results being because of the setups rather than the different strategies.
Have I misunderstood you when I took your comment to mean that settling is always an inferior choice because you can conquer instead? I recall you being quite categorical about it.
You need to settle for two reasons: one, because your capital might not be on a coast, and you need warships, so unless you get extremely lucky with neutrals, you'll need one city to build warships. 2, one city isn't enough to put out enough troops to take on the third AI, and most AI cities won't build as good troops as your capital, so you need to build 1-2 more cities to get those going. But those are for fighting the third AI - its quite possible to get good neutrals, or cities from other AI, that do build strong enough troops, and even without that, nodes and the first AI are more important than those few settlers.
All your other cities are primarily resource generators. The AI grows population faster, and spends its own gold to build buildings, so if you want a pop 10 city with amplifying tower on a quark crystal, you will get that faster and cheaper if you let the AI settle it and grow and build it.
Which means, if the plane has 30 city spots on it, then, let them fill 25-28 of them - and conquer them.
Remember, I advocate getting a stack strong enough for fortress striking the second AI by 1404, which means its far more than strong enough for taking all the other cities of AI 1 and 2. Which means every city AI 1 and 2 build is actually yours, you just don't control them yet.
However if you get delayed (like my last game), you may have to raze some of those cities, in order to keep rolling into AI 3 early enough. Then, for me, I usually end up razing almost every city on AI 3s home continent simply because he has too many troops for me to hold the cities while conquering a new city every turn. So once AI 3 is dead, you blockade all 6 towers. AI 4 cant get to your plane, so no new cities will be built on your plans, so you may as well settle just for something to do.
Usually though AI 3 is the challenge, not AI 4. Due to AI 4 not being able to get at you, you could skip settling your plane and just raze everything on the other plane.
So, settle the bare minimum to beat AI 3, conquer everything else on your plane that you can hold, raze everything else.
Realistically, you probably could raze everything past your tenth city, and do at least as well, possibly better. Not having to stop your kill stack makes a huge difference.
To keep it as fair as possible, let's go with complete freedom to choose builds and race. I also suggest that we outline our strategies ahead of time. Do you have any other suggestions for the format? Are you fine with the proposed format for reporting?
Easiest is to just compare with the last list and see what's new, but yes. Full list of all spells you own.
The important thing about the reports is that we use the same format. That way it's easiest to compare our progress. I forgot to add that the F4 and F5 screens should also be posted.
We should post a thread each where we first outline our overall game strategy and explain our chosen setup. It's important that we both choose the setup and strategy which gives us the highest chance of winning.
After that, we should post updates each 12 turns to let spectators follow our progress.
I will set it up tomorrow. Anyone unspoiled can join anytime, no matter how many games have been completed. Should we wait for each other between games so we can discuss outcomes after each game before moving on? Also, should we use the same build for all 3 games?
I'm not sure what you mean by that. Are you intentionally handicapping yourself? I don't know if my build and strategy is best either, but I'm trying to pick what's strongest.
You want to compare strategies. If I use dufferent strategies that will make it harder. So, I'm using the same set up and strategy each game. Even though in theory it might be better to tweak it based on the setup, I can't say that will be the same strategy. (Like the first game, obviously designed for focus on cities, lots of cities, but my strategy is to conquer and get nodes. The third game on the other hand is perfect for my strategy. So should I tweak for the first game? Probably, but then I might be tempted to focus on somethimg other than conquering and grabbing nodes.)
