Serdoa's SPOILER-Thread: I am legend?

[Serdoa]

I'm actually back... that is a little bit unreal still. I guess many might not be able to relate; how often does one come back to a community after being gone for years without even thinking about it? Most probably don't even know who I am, so let me introduce myself:

I go by Serdoa, I have played a ton of Civ in the past (according to Steam: 2.401 hours) and have competed in several PBs and PBEMs on RB. I also played and hosted several Werewolf-games on here. I met a great many people on RB and I learned quite a bit from some. Not only about Civ but also about reasoning, deceit, friendship... really anything that has to do with human emotions. Werewolf is an eye-opener, not only the game itself, but the fallout that often comes afterwards when the game itself is done. 

Anyhow - back to Civ. I believe I have won a few PBEMs and a PB, though I really can't remember exactly, the thrill of the games back then was playing them much more than winning them. And I was playing, competing against the strongest Civ-players and holding my own against them. That said, that was in 2016 - and since 4 years, I have not touched Civ nor RB. Till Noblehelium, with whom I played in some Civ-games and also talked to privately, asked me if I would be interested in joining a game of Civ4. And, to my own surprise, I was. 

Being back feels like coming home... but after several years, when you have grown as a human and wonder how and if you will fit in. The green is a green as it always was, the title-bar has had some updates I believe, but in general, it really feels like a throwback to 4 years ago. There is the quote of the ... day, week, month... year? Has it even changed since I last visited?

So, that's me in a nutshell. At least the part that might be interesting to those lurking. 

I am really looking forward playing again, but I'm not sure if I can compete against the other players... or really anyone. I just hope Civ4 is similar to riding a bicycle, something one never unlearns. If not... well, then I will try to at least burn bright and hot for as long as it lasts. Or rather let someone else do the burning, fanning the flames with my chariots or horse archers.

[Charriu]

Welcome back. I'm very happy to see some of the "older" players coming back. My tip for you play a SP game with the current mod version. I've added most of the BUG UI improvements, so there is quite a lot of UI changes to get used to. But don't worry after some time you won't notice, which UI element is from BUG and which from base BtS.

[pindicator]

Anything you want from the map that isn't covered in the settings? I'm going to ask everyone this, so no guarantee that I'll actually use it. Feel free to be as specific or vague as you like, I just want to get a feel for what people would like.

[Ichabod]

Hi, Serdoa. Nice to see you here! I'm willing to bet you'll still play a great game.

[Kurumi]

Wait, so I'm not the only one that believes that the QOTM is not a QOTM but more of a ... QOTE. Eternity. Welcome back Serdoa, I read your report thread once or twice. I know that you're one to be scared of.

[Serdoa]

Welcome back. I'm very happy to see some of the "older" players coming back. My tip for you play a SP game with the current mod version. I've added most of the BUG UI improvements, so there is quite a lot of UI changes to get used to. But don't worry after some time you won't notice, which UI element is from BUG and which from base BtS.

Thank you. I've played with BUG in the past, at least I remember some of the functionality. I think we tested one of the first versions in a PB. I just have to find out if any options have to be turned off for a PBEM or if I can safely let it sit as is.

Anything you want from the map that isn't covered in the settings?  I'm going to ask everyone this, so no guarantee that I'll actually use it.  Feel free to be as specific or vague as you like, I just want to get a feel for what people would like.

I'd like a map that is rather on the lush side, but not overly so. Basically, being able to settle cities with a food source without being forced to keep them spaced heavily to find those food sources but also not so abundant that there is no planning necessary, just plop down your settler anywhere and it is a great cityspot. I believe choosing your city locations carefully and having to balance economy, production, food and defensibility is part of the fun of Civ4. 

Apart from that, only the usual: No mountain-ranges that make it impossible to attack each other till paratroopers, no "cheesy" gimmicks, no completely dry or mostly water map. I don't care if it is mirrored, I understand that it is much easier to balance this way. I don't know if you will use Sevens old map-scripts but I would be fine with them if you do. 

And please, I mention it again: No gimmicks. I'm absolutely no interested in a map that has no bronze, no iron or horses or such things. I'm sure some people would love to see how we do if we are thrown for a loop, but that's not something I want to play as my first game after several years. It's probably hard enough as is for me

Hi, Serdoa. Nice to see you here! I'm willing to bet you'll still play a great game.

Wait, so I'm not the only one that believes that the QOTM is not a QOTM but more of a ... QOTE. Eternity. Welcome back Serdoa, I read your report thread once or twice. I know that you're one to be scared of.

Thank you both for the kind words. I'm not so sure about my skills though tbh. It was a long time ago and I probably have forgotten more things than some players ever knew.  

[Serdoa]

Civilization 4 - An essay on the general workings of the game

Foreword

I'm in the process of getting back into the game. Doing so I realized that it probably would be beneficial, to me and hopefully also to others, to write down my thoughts about the game. Of course, quite a bit of this will be transferable to the single-player mode as concepts like micromanagement, long-term goal planning and research-optimization apply in both cases. Other concepts do only apply to human opponents though, things like psychological warfare, intimidation via show of force, non-aggression pacts in a volatile environment - everything diplomacy really, which there is quite a bit of, even in a game that works under the rules of True AI diplomacy. 

I will however be brief and not go into too much detail right now. This is more meant as an exercise in remembering what is important not a step-by-step explanation of every concept and how to approach it.

Chapter 1: Micromanagement

Micromanagement includes all small-scale decisions, such as singular worker moves, which tiles to work or attack order in a battle. It's counterpart is macro-management or as I called it in the foreword "long-term goal planning". Micromanagement plays a big role at the start of the game with its effect petering out the longer the game goes on, but never ceasing completely. It is the best tool in the toolbox early on but it easily degenerates into an end in itself. One can literally waste hours optimizing the tiles worked in all cities while simultaneously wasting all the production on builds not needed. 

For early game micromanagement it is best to use specialized excel-worksheets that provide automatic calculations for growth, production and commerce. This is necessary to prevent errors when doing these calculations by hand. An example for such a worksheet:



After the third or fourth city these sheets become unwieldy, with too many dependencies that can't be accounted for automatically without basically rewriting Civ4. Which would kinda defeat the purpose of making it easier to handle. In the past also sandboxes have been used. These are custom maps, setup exactly like the game, with all tiles water except those visible to the player - and filled with the explored tiles after each turn. These can be helpful in realizing oversights - for example longer travel times than planned - and to get a better feel for the game settings.

Micromanagement is an art-form in itself, even though it looks pretty straightforward at first glance. But as soon as one starts to play around with these spreadsheets it becomes obvious how many different decision-paths there are, even with just one city. Decision-paths that tie directly into the long-term goal planning. After all, which tech to research should sooner rather than later not be a question of "What do I need now" but "What will I need in 10, 20, 50, 100 turns from now?".

Chapter 2: Long-term goal planning

Long-term goal planning includes all decisions in regards to the bigger picture. This can be what building to produce in a city, how many military units to produce (while where to produce them and which tile setup to use is micromanagement), which land to settle or research to target next. 

Long-term goal planning is - going from my experience - something that most players believe they do. But often these plans are shallow and lack depth. Other times while the plans are sophisticated, they ignore the human factor and are slow or impossible to adapt to unforeseen circumstances. 

Therefore when starting to do long-term goal planning some core questions have to be answered:

1) What goal should be achieved and how can the results be measured?
2) In which time-frame should the goal be achieved?
3) Which risk-factors are present and how can those be mitigated?
4) Which contributing factors are present and how can those be strengthened?

Another factor that is often ignored or underdeveloped is staggered planning. What I mean by this is that it is not enough to plan what to achieve in the next 50 or 100 turns. Instead there have to be several stages of long-term goal planning. The shorter the time-frame of them the more detailed they have to be. This starts with asking yourself which win conditions are most likely, which civics are most important, which wonders are game-changers, which techs are key-research-goals. But also: How many cities does the map-size call for? What type of player are your opponents? From there one has to work backwards and develop long-term goals for the first 10, 30, 50, 100, 200, 300 turns. It is important to do so, else one will find himself in the mid-game realizing that a plan what to do now is missing. Even the best position can be squandered when one starts to lose focus. I'd even go as far as to say that most games I remember have not been won by who played his opening best (though this does contribute to even be a contender for the win) but by those who had a clear goal and focus in the mid-game and ruthlessly followed their plans while others wasted time doing a little bit of this and a little bit of that.

Lastly, tough I did touch on it before, I want to specifically mention research optimization, as one part of long-term goal planning. What I mean with research optimization is mostly choosing your key-research-goals. Do you need Alphabet for diplomacy? Math for Catapults? Are you planning for war, either as attacker or defender? How long can you get away with concentrating on economy-techs? How fast do you get BW for Slavery? Does it even benefit you - that heavily depends on the map. This is again something I saw several players struggling with, especially later in the game. It wasn't uncommon that a technology was researched not for it's immediate or long-term value but because "I had nothing better to research".

Chapter 3: Human interaction

Human interaction is a big part of the fascination Civ4 has for me. While computer opponents act according to their programming which one can learn and use against them, human opponents cannot be counted on. Their behavior is often erratic, not just in diplomatic terms but also when it comes to settling cities, researching, trading. Really every aspect of the game that in a single-player environment is following rules - some one might know, some one might be oblivious to - can be put on it's head in multiplayer. And while nearly everyone acts erratic, everyone at the same time hates it. Therefore having a plan, following it and being reliable - even if it is reliably aggressive - is paramount. Not doing so, even if just by pure accident, makes you a threat to everyone else, an unknown, unreliable, untrustworthy force. If there is nothing certain with humans, one thing is: Players will hate an opponent they can't understand. Displaying your goals - even if it's just a ruse - will make them consider you less as a threat, even if you are just building up for war.

Another part of that interaction is of course diplomacy. Even in "True AI" diplomacy games or even "No Diplomacy" ones, there is diplomacy behind the layer the game provides. This can happen via show of force, by attacking the enemy of your enemy, not settling spots to keep a demilitarized zone and so on. Some of this works only with opponents you know of course - that is why sometimes being regarded as aggressive is still better than being an unknown.

[El Grillo]

Thanks for the write-up, the points you bring up in long-term goal planning are especially relevant for me. I find myself often failing to achieve my mid-game goals (perhaps due to poor micro, insufficiently staggered planning, or bad luck) and then floundering. I think the psychological impact alone highlights the importance of setting realistic goals and following through and achieving them.

I'm looking forward to following the game

[Serdoa]

Thanks for the write-up, the points you bring up in long-term goal planning are especially relevant for me. I find myself often failing to achieve my mid-game goals (perhaps due to poor micro, insufficiently staggered planning, or bad luck) and then floundering. I think the psychological impact alone highlights the importance of setting realistic goals and following through and achieving them.

I'm looking forward to following the game

I believe this is something many players suffer from, me included. It is very easy to lose focus - or give up mid-game because something has not worked out as planned. Adapting and overcoming that hurdle is a feat in itself. Asking yourself "How can I still win this game?", "What needs to happen in the next 30, 50, 70 turns for me to be competitive?" or (most importantly) "Do I overlook something right now?" can help to get back into the groove of the game. Realizing that civs have different times when they shine is also helpful. It's the difference between "I'm far back behind the others, I can't win" and "My civ is a late-game boomer and this is what I have to do to keep up till then.".

[Serdoa]

Ok, after the introduction to Civ4 concepts, lets look at the opponents:

1) Noblehelium and Gaspar

NH is able to do sensible micromanagement, Gaspar has the skills to help refine it and both have shown that they can play till the late game. NH also is good in staying positive even in dire circumstances. He does not simply give up and roll over from my experience. But both also do have a tendency to sometimes concentrate too much on one thing or opponent, especially if someone nearby is rather aggressive. And while their micromanagement is good it does lack sometimes in creativity. They make up for much of this with incredible posting skills, engaging lurkers, often to their benefit. Especially if some of those lurkers become ded-lurkers and further strengthen the team.

Game Understanding: 4/5
Perseverance Rating: 4/5
Focus Value: 3.5/5
Micromanagement: 3.5/5
Lurker Engagement: 5/5

Overall: 4/5

They are probably one of the strongest teams in this game. A few unknowns remain: How many ded-lurkers will they have? Will NH actually be able to bring his A-game or is he as rusty as I am? Who will be their neighbor(s)? To beat them will not only require a cleanly played game, that is necessary to keep up, but to actually plan ahead when and how to beat them. 

2) Lewwyn

I have to admit, I remember more of the WW-games we played together than the Civ-games. Nonetheless I am pretty certain that Lewwyn is one of the stronger players out there. Funnily enough, I would see his strengths and weaknesses very similar to those of NH and Gaspar. Lewwyn is prone to holding grudges though IIRC. That made him sometimes lose focus on the actual goal of the game, focusing more on making sure someone else wasn't winning than getting himself actually into a winning position.

Game Understanding: 4/5
Perseverance Rating: 5/5
Focus Value: 3/5
Micromanagement: 4/5
Lurker Engagement: 3.5/5

Overall: 4/5

Lewwyn is a strong contender and depending on several factors might even be stronger than NH and Gaspar. Also everything I know is based on how I remember them from 4 years ago. They might have changed, they might have learned, so take everything I write here as entertainment, not a psychological study

3) Bobchillingworth

Good old Bob. Nice guy, chill (as is in the name), there was some fantasy mod I think we both played against... Erebus... I can't remember. Anyhow, I think Bob is a decent to good player that isn't willing (or able) to put as much time into the game as others, which is absolutely fine but does cost him. I believe he also often does not have a good late game plan... or one at all. I believe he too holds grudges... but thinking about it, who doesn't in these games? No matter what players tell you, the truth is, when it starts going downhill nearly everyone looks for the reasons that he himself and his play was not the reason he lost or was targeted by an attack. That's probably human.

Anyhow, I like Bob. I feel a little bit sorry for him as from the setup thread I got the feeling that he didn't really want to compete in this game after he saw the signups. That's obviously bad to keep morale high. I also think that he underestimates himself - so if one lurker wants to get in his thread and tell him that I believe he has a shot at winning, feel free to do so. Because I really do. 

Game Understanding: 3.5/5
Perseverance Rating: 3/5
Focus Value: 3/5
Micromanagement: 3/5
Lurker Engagement: 5/5

Overall: 3/5

4) superdeath

What a name! Surpassed only by the fact that in every single thread I checked of games he's playing in, he is at war. That sums pretty much up anything I know about him. Well and the fact that he is bored by micro it seems, though I'm not really sure from the few posts I checked if he actually also doesn't do it at all. Besides that, he seems to be involved in many games at the same time, which in most cases means that none of them gets the attention it deserves. Also the grudges thing...

Game Understanding: 3/5
Perseverance Rating: 3/5
Focus Value: 4/5
Micromanagement: 2/5
Lurker Engagement: 3/5

Overall: 3/5

All those numbers are pretty much pure speculation on my part from maybe 10 posts I read, most while he was at war or at the start of his games. It did seem though as tough he was able to focus on a goal quite well, but simply missing the necessary micro to actually compete with the top dogs.  So that's where my numbers come from.

5) Rusten and Hitru

I have just read one thread from Rusten (well a few posts from the start and the end) and it seems he did very well in that game. He analyzed picks, he made microplans, he expanded well. Nothing makes me believe that he can't win this one. As I really have not read anything more though, and I can't remember him at all even though he has joined in 2009 it seems, I refrain from rating him. Lets just say, my first impression is overall a 4/5. Which yes is a rating but not a real rating. More a preliminary rating. A prating. That's an actual word? And not only that, it pretty much describes what I'm doing here... wow. Rusten, you are a scary opponent!