[SPOILERS] Chevalier Mal Fet and Marcopolothefraud lead a Soviet Down Under

[marcopolothefraud]

Hey CMF, can't wait to play this game with you!

As a player, I think my biggest struggles in Civ VI are gold management and military tactics. I'll probably also commit many common newbie mistakes, like failing to see a strategic picture, not expanding enough, or mistiming my builds.

I think my strengths are my understanding of Civ VI mechanics, and my willingness to scout through old threads and learn from previous Civ 6 PBEMs.



What do you think of a naming scheme? I want to name my cities after influential hip-hop albums (I'm a high-school student, after all). From what I understand, music-themed city naming isn't too common, but it happens occasionally.

EDIT: Here's all the hip-hop writeups that I did in this thread!
Introduction
1994: Illmatic by Nas 
1996-2000: Interlude
1996-2000: Enter Jay-Z
2001: The Blueprint by Jay-Z
2001: Nas' Response to the Blueprint

[Chevalier Mal Fet]

Hello marco! Welcome back, glad to have you. I'm a bit older than you - in my 30s, a teacher, so I need you to keep me in touch with the kids these days. 

My strengths as a player are generally a good metagame and strategic sense - I think I have good gameplans, I generally know and can respond to what other players are doing, and I have a certain sunny disposition that keeps me going even when I inevitably meet disaster. My weakness lies in details - I'm inattentive to small details and micromanagement, I frequently overlook things, I'm terrible at optimizing my builds/research/civics for maximum effect. 

My naming themes are usually civilization based. I try to find something that bridges a trait of the civ with something important to me. For England, I did famous naval battles. For Canada, Stanley Cup winners in reverse order. For Arabia, Kansas City Royals paired with the Names of God in the Qu'ran. For the Zulu, VC winners at Rorke's Drift. So I can't choose a theme until I know my civ!

So let's talk gameplan. We have the whole board to choose from. We can look for fun synergies like Korea/Russia, naval strenghts like Norway/England (or Ottomans??), that kind of thing. It's a really wide open field for being creative! Figure out how we want to win, choose civs likely to accomplish that, and take our best shot.

[marcopolothefraud]

Thank you so much! Unfortunately, it's going to be very difficult to talk about civilization picks until The Black Sword gives us lists to choose from.

Until then, I want to talk about early build order, tech strategies, and golden/dark age management.

I have played one Random Tech Tree multiplayer game before, and a big takeaway from it is that beelines are nigh-on impossible, so we need to boost as technologies and civics as we can. The second takeaway is that if one team member researches something, the other player gets a boost to it. That means we can "divide and conquer" the techs and civics to our liking.

Here's all the Ancient-Era technologies and civics:
   
   
Archery, Bronze Working, and Military Tradition are military in nature. One of us should go Slinger first and research these three as quickly as possible.

Irrigation, Masonry, the Wheel, and Craftsmanship are tile-improvement boosts. One of us should go Builder first (although that might be Barbarian vulnerable?) and research these four as quickly as possible.

The problem is that Archery-Bronze Working may be very far from each other on the Tech Tree, and the tile-improvement technologies are almost certainly going to be far from each other on the Tech Tree. 

Later on in the game, we can plan civics and techs too. The Construction -> Games and Recreation boosts, and the Feudalism boost in particular strike me as ones that we can specialize.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
On to golden/dark age management. I assume that none of us want a Classical Normal Age, because that gives no benefits at all. If one of us wants a Dark Age, that should be pretty easy to manage. But for Golden Ages, naval maps are pretty hard to get Era Score on. Scouting a little with naval units (or 1-charge builders ) would hopefully net some Era Score. Is Amani generally useful in multiplayer games, especially as an Ancient Era governor?

[Chevalier Mal Fet]

Well, we're not getting civ lists - instead, it's a snake pick, with all the civs except Maori, Hungary, and Scythia available. So the field is really wide open. 

One simple but straightforward and strong strategy is to select the two strongest naval civs we can. Phoenicia and England are both quite good with their unique harbors. Another one is to use one civ as a "drafter" - to blaze ahead in science or culture and have the other civ feast off the inspirations provided. Korea with the seowon is a good example of this, or Australia with its strong adjacencies (I might actually say Australia is the strongest overall pick, honestly). There's also possibilities with religion - work ethic is obvious, but you also have Tithe, Pilgrimage, other beliefs based on number of cities. 

One danger is that DotF only works with YOUR cities, not your allies', while Crusade works with everyone's cities BUT your own, making that belief actually quite a bit stronger in a team game. 

If you have the time, I recommend PBEM7 for the team dynamics. Skim Sullla/Singaboy and Woden/myself's threads for lots of previous experiences. PBEM4 and PBEM12 are good for naval warfare, although outdated now.

[marcopolothefraud]

Ohhhh, I understand. I was confused as to what a snake pick meant in the organization thread.

Phoenicia has
- a niche-sounding loyalty boost
- a niche-sounding move Capital project
- a Harbor that costs half the production and gives +50% production to settlers
- a niche unique Galley unit
- easy access to a Classical Golden Age, which would convert Harbor adjacency to science

All in all, it seems okay but not great. Settler bonuses would be more useful on a Pangaea map than here, but they're still very nice. I feel like its abilities might decline from the Medieval Era forward.

England has
- Victoria: free naval units with the completion of Harbors
- gimmicky abilities around settling "outside of England's home continent" (very hard to manage)
- a useless unique Redcoat unit
- a somewhat decent unique Seadog unit
- buffs towards Iron, Military Engineers and Industrial Zone buildings

I like Victoria's unique ability, and I'd love to time out some Frigates. Military Engineers require Encampments and Industrial Zones are pretty useless.


All in all, I would prefer Phoenicia over England. Both are mainly reliant on their cheap Harbors, and I'm still unsure on how useful they are. The Lighthouse, which provides food and gold, isn't as useful (or as cheap!) as other tier 1 buildings like Libraries and Shrines - and the more Traders I spam, the less useful they tend to be. (The same is not true for Libraries or Shrines). I like the production bonuses of the Shipyard, though the Renaissance is a little late to make full use of them.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Onto the scientific civs! Australia, the "strongest overall pick", is pretty dependent on Appeal - and that means that we can't have as many Mines with them, nor as many forest chops. I would prefer Korea over them, because Korean mines get +1 science, and hopefully The Black Sword gives us a relatively hilly map.

The Netherlands is half-scientific and half-naval (I like their unique frigate a lot!), and Indonesia is half-religious and half-naval (I like how their frigates are medieval-era civic. In a normal game, their frigates would be late-Medieval era, but tech shuffle mode makes it possible to get the Mercenaries civic earlier).


Still, even after considering everything, my number 1 pick would probably be Japan. I would love to play religion, but I have no idea what the other 6 players will do. If I have little religious competition, I could use their bonuses to give me one - and if I do have religious competition, I can ignore religion entirely without sacrificing much. Their district bonuses are very very strong, and they have combat bonuses on coastal tiles - which we could probably use to great effect, depending on where the naval engagements take place. They only partially lack a scientific edge.

I think Japan and a scientific civ would have great synergy. Or, if I'm underestimating the power of England and Phoenicia, I think Phoenicia and a mid-game powerhouse civ would have great synergy.

[Chevalier Mal Fet]

We should make a shortlist of civs to pick from and think about strategies.

For naval civs, I like Norway and Victoria more than Indonesia and Phoenicia. Norway has absurd production of melee ships, plus excellent pillaging. The stave church is a bit niche, as is the beserker, but a longboat based gameplan similar to thrawn's Nubian archer flood is possible - and longboats are more useful than archers, as they can take unwalled cities. Victoria's free unit is also nice, and the redcoat is a decent late game unit. 

Japan is a strong choice, with sufficiently sized islands. Meiji is a good ability, as is Kamikaze. The UU and UB are useless, sadly. 

Australia would be great to pair with the Vikings, I think. Australia would use its high adjacencies to play a builder-game, focusing on science and gold production. That money would then fuel the Viking war machine, supplemented iwth Harald's pillaging. Harald would also keep Australia safe with his melee buff. It'd be a flexible combo. I don't think we could land both, though, since we'd have 4 people choosing between us, I think. Australia would also pair well with Japan, though I think less synergistically. 

Korea/Russia/Rome are strong generalist choices. Most other civs seem second tier after this. Brazil could make something fun with Minais Gerais, Germany has good Hansas but never has the time to get them going, China is a strong generalist and can abuse naval wonders. 

I'll have more thoughts on things specifically this afternoon, and general thoughts on the game. But I'm excited! 

I'm also chatty.

[marcopolothefraud]

I'm worried that I'm misunderstanding Victoria's free melee unit/free trader bonuses. How will I effectively settle new continents without losing cities to loyalty pressure? After all, the high seas setting mean that continents are going to be far from each other, so that even high-population cities won't be able to sustain much loyalty pressure on new continents.

Norway is a one-trick pony, though a very fun one at that. Sullla in PBEM1 and Singaboy in PBEM4 both launched naval invasions without many ships to a lot of success. I can see Norway doing the same - they can throw Crossbowmen and Knights (or maybe even Swordsmen and Horseman) across the ocean before anyone even reaches Cartography. Pillaging seems powerful, but it would likely obsolete after everyone has Frigates.

Is Rome really a strong generalist choice? The Legion will be useless here, and that's been an important staple for them. Monuments are nice, I'm not sure how effective free trading posts and free roads are, and the Bath seems somewhat underwhelming on this map. (Australia and Indonesia have better housing bonuses, after all).

I'd strongly disagree about Indonesia. The more I read about them, the more I like them.

Like Japan, I don't have much to lose if I don't push religion. I can build a few Holy Sites, and even if I have 3rd or 4th religion, I can channel a lot of faith into buying ships for cheap. Jongs (unique frigates) are 600 faith, which is relatively pricey, but the most important thing is that they don't cost niter. You mentioned in your PBEM19 thread that Musketmen were the only effective counter to the Zulu, and Musketmen were hard to get because Niter would be limited. Indonesia wouldn't need to worry about that.

Kampungs are awesome too. The Black Sword made really good use of housing and production in PBEM17 to win the game, and the Kampung improvement provides food, production and housing for a great value.

So they have a great military peak (Jong), great infrastructure (district adjacency, Kampung), and a potentially-useful faith economy. They would be somewhat bad at science, though. It seems like I can really use all of their bonuses on this map, and that's not something I can say about even the most powerful civs here.

Here's my shortlist.

10/10
Korea
Indonesia
Australia

9/10
Japan (forgot about the useless UU and UB! Oh well.)
Norway
Netherlands
Aztecs (The UU and UB will be useless. But luxuries providing combat strength is still crucial, and builders boosting districts will help newer cities a lot. I like them as a generalist civ.)

8/10
England
Phoenicia
Rome
China? (I'm most worried about building too little military and getting caught with my pants down. Or not building enough districts and getting caught with my pants down.)
Russia

7/10
Germany (free district, not much else)
Greece (Free wildcard. I'm completely unsure how valuable wildcards are in multiplayer. Also better culture too, which is nice.)
Arabia (Faith is a flexible resource, but both Russia and Arabia are more valuable on land maps, no?)
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

If you're focused on Norway, I would agree with you and pick Australia (or Korea or some other good-science civ).
I would prefer not to take a generalist, though. As a newbie, I think I would lose sight of a strategic goal and get builder-itis. Indonesia has a nice focus around the Jong and would help me solve this issue.

EDIT: Accidentally rated Russia in 7/10 instead of 8/10. Oops.

[Chevalier Mal Fet]

We pick 2 & 7, so we'll want to be flexible with #7. I think Australia/Indonesia in particular sounds good, or Australia/Japan, Australia/Norway. 

Australia/Indonesia: Aussies focus on science and gold generation, Indonesia on military and faith. Indonesia can build holy sites and take Pilgrimage, which gives faith per city, and spread that to Australia, too. That faith then gets spent on jongs. Australia focuses on science and leads the way for Indonesia. Both nations excellent housing and growth, with opportunities from the medieval to the lategame. I'd worry about the kampungs and Australian coastal cities getting pillaged by Norway, though. We'd be vulnerable to an Archduke/thrawn classical rush.

Australia/Japan, lots of building, again, Japan is the military specialist with kamikaze. Again, lack of classical strength makes this my last choice.

Australia/Norway would be insane, but we'll never get it - no way will both civs last until pick #7. Norway gets +50% melee naval production bonus, which can be stacked with maritime industries, for truly cheap longships. Norway can get an early snowball with a swarm of longships and pillaging, then Australia comes into its own right as Norway fades. I like this one, if we can land it.

Alternatively, Indonesia/Norway and Korea (as a backup Australia) might work, but would be a bit vanilla.

[Chevalier Mal Fet]

Australia/Netherlands? Hmm, do Dutch get bonuses from international trade?

[marcopolothefraud]

The Dutch get +1 culture from international trade routes, regardless of whether its an incoming trade route or an outgoing one. This isn't a particularly good bonus in my book, because the non-Dutch player would have to sacrifice useful food and production bonuses to give the Dutch slightly more culture.

The order goes
1. Ljubljana
2. Roland
3. Marco
4. Thrawn
4. Archduke
3. CMF
2. Suboptimal
1. Woden

Which one of us picks 2nd and which one of us picks 7th? I'm a little confused. If I'm picking 2nd, then I would gladly go with Korea (which I think is still slightly better than Australia), and allow you to pick a naval powerhouse civ.