[SPOILERS] Magic Science and Nobody Else in Pitboss 66

[Magic Science]

The password for my civilization is: 

homeo4001

[Magic Science]

Turn 0, Turn 1, and Turn 2 – 4000 BC, 3960 BC, and 3920 BC
   
Hello world!

homeo4001

…

The post-Gigantomachy [EDIT: post-Titanomachy ] plan for the Greek Pantheon is sadly shaky. Still, I am pretty sure that the best idea is to produce a workboat and research Mining to start, so that is what is happening for now. I can only hope that by Turn 6 that special tyrant-subject bond will have motivated me to actually perform some simulations to determine the best course for my baby civilization to follow.

Meanwhile, Nobody the Scout is exploring the west. The plan is to run in a quick circle to look for a spot for my second city over here, then run in a line back through my culture to the east so he can run in a quick circle over there for the same reason. Then?

The grassland hill between the Corn, Gold, and Crab resources is nice, but not quite what I am looking for with my second city.


   
The Foreign Advisor screen is so lonely.

[Magic Science]

Snakepick: The Final Analysis
I am playing as Greece (Fishing/Hunting, Phalanx/Odeon) led by Sulieman (IMPerialistc, PHIlosophical).


Civilization Selection Thoughts
Pre-game simulation work revealed that the best opening started with building a workboat at 5 hammers per turn, so I needed to start with Fishing so the workboat could improve the Fish immediately upon completion. I also needed to start with either Hunting or Mining so I could research Bronze Working in time to enable an immediate post-camping chop, which I was less sure, but still pretty sure, was part of the best opening. There are seven civilizations that fulfill my Starting Technology requirements.

Greece, Native America, and Scandinavia. Carthage, England, Portugal, and Rome.

Piccadilly + plemo chose Rome, and superdeath chose Scandinavia. Frightening.

England’s Unique Things are too late. Pitboss 66 will likely last to Banking and Rifling and beyond, but I may not be there to see it. Did you know that more than half the teams in this game have won before? Maybe. Did you know that I have never won before? I think so . I fear early elimination. Give me early unique bonuses or give me death.

Carthage and Portugal are weak because their UBs are weak because foreign intercontinental trade routes are uncommon on Torusworld under the given settings. Portugal is doubly weak because the Carrack is just sad without any Astronomy islands. I want to make Portugal work and recreate my shining moment of glory someday, but today is not that day.

Native America makes my head spin. I spent about half the thought-power allocated to pondering this civilization on trying to comprehend the differences between the BTS version, the RtR versions, and the CtH versions. Fishing/Agriculture? Fishing/Hunting? Totem Poles at Archery? Trackers building Totem Poles? superdeath slaughtering Commodore’s settler in 2018? Where did all the years go? Where is my youth? What is happening? . Then I remembered that Dog Soldiers are still much worse than Axemen at too many of the things that you want Axemen to do, and this civilization was also eliminated. My sanity was saved.

Greece wins because it is the only civilization not disqualified by crippling flaws. The CtH Phalanx has the simple and excellent bonus of an extra point of base strength, and it is unlocked in the Ancient Era. Even better, it is less an Ancient UU and more an Ancient + Classical + Medieval UU because Spearmen are the only anti-mounted unit available for so long. The Odeon is the lesser of the two Greek Unique Things. With the CtH colosseum buff, the Odeon has two ways to provide unique value. ONE, if you build it to alleviate unhappiness caused by war weariness, same as a baseline colosseum, then it does the job slightly better. TWO, it can create your secret second UU, the “Great Artist That Comes Earlier In The Game Than Any Other Civilization Can Manage”. I see two ways my Great Artist could be better than the equivalent conventional Great Scientist or Merchant of the enemy. ONE, Great Artists can bulb Divine Right well ahead of schedule just like how Great Scientists can bulb Astronomy. But how often will you have any use for an early Divine Right? TWO, Great Artists can help in battle with their infamous culture bombs and all the tactical trickery you can do with those. This is so very situational, but if the stars align, then the enemy will be crushed and my second UU will be the greatest in the game. I will also emit an evil laugh worthy of a Sith Lord. I still wish I just had a boring UB that improves my economic output per turn somehow. Oh well. Could an Odeon birth a Great Artist early enough to flip tiles in the depths of the enemy core with a bomb?


Leader Selection Thoughts
Conventional wisdom says you should pick at least one early game foodhammer acceleration trait if you can, and I agree with that with special vigor because of my fear of being an early snack. IMP is the only of the three traits wholly of that category in CtH that I have not played before, so I knew that it was the trait for me. Also, Torusworld often generates chokepoints gating lots of land, and IMP is excellent at making you be the first one with boots and culture, any boots and culture, on the vital ground.

But what should I pair IMP with? Conventional wisdom says it should be an economy-boosting trait, and I agree. PRO is the earliest economy trait, but I have played it before, and there may not be any islands for me to settle. FIN and PHI are the next-earliest economy traits, and nothing known in advance about the game disqualifies either of them. Also, neither Victoria nor Sulieman were chosen in the first ten rounds. I was guaranteed at least one of the two. I favored Sulieman because PHI has synergy with the Odeon and I want to try to use Great People better in this game.


Putting It All Together
In the snakepick, everyone is trying to choose the best Leader/Civilization combination they can. To do that, you should start by choosing the half of your combination with the greatest gap between the possible best and the likely worst. My picks are a poor example of this idea in action because I picked 11th and 14th, so I was unlikely to get screwed by another player between my first pick and my last. Still, the idea affected the order of my picks.

I chose Greece first because I thought the drop in quality from Greece to one of the other remaining Fishing/[Hunting or Mining] civilizations was greater than the drop in quality from Sulieman to Victoria. There is no clear second place among the civs, because the non-Greek barbars are all bad. Also, JackRB is a newish player, so I thought he was likely to act as newish players usually do and avoid PHI and SPI like the plague for being “too complex to use well for the likes of us”. Fortunately, JackRB chose Lieu-Ye, so I could choose Sulieman like I planned.

So here we are.

I have only one regret: I should have chosen Julius Caesar and participated in the beautiful ORGanized meme that this game became. . Alas, I had no way to know this would happen. 
Also, I worry that I have somehow missed something important about ORG. Sure, the trait is better on Emperor, but is it that much better? Am I an idiot?

[Charriu]

Don't forget that the Phalanx also gets +25% defense on hills.

[Magic Science]

Don't forget that the Phalanx also gets +25% defense on hills.

Roger roger.

My first Phalanx will be named "Charriu" in your honor.

[Charriu]

I bet there are more lurkers who want a unit named after them.

[Magic Science]

Pitboss 66 Opponent Analysis: “The Dog Ate My Homework!”
Firstly, in this game we have:

Plemo + piccadilly [Plemadilly]: Rome led by Tokugawa (AGG/PRO)

Amicalola: Khmer led by Washington (CHA/EXP)

Gavagai: Suryavarman (CRE/EXP) of Azteca

civac2 + Tarkeel [Civeel]: Mehmed (EXP/ORG) of Spain (Conquistador/Citadel)

Mjmd: Zululand (Impi/Ikanda) led by Julius Caesar (IMP/ORG)

superdeath: Scandinavia led by Hammurabi (AGG/ORG)

GeneralKilCavalry: America (Minuteman/Carnegie Public Library/) led by Kublai Khan (AGG/CRE)

Alhazard: Napoleon (CHM/ORG) of Egypt

Ginger() + Miguelito [Ginguelito]: Asoka (ORG/SPI) of Holy Rome

Vanrober: Zara Yacob (CRE/ORG) of Mongolia

JackRB: Lieu-Ye (ORG/PRO) of Carthage

and finally
Magic Science, Destroyer of Hope: Greece (Phalanx/Odeon) led by Sulieman (IMP/PHI)
so now the many lurkers who wisely mistrust the mainstream media and only read my thread for their PB66 news know who is who in this game.

…

Here on Realms Beyond, much of our effort in our multiplayer Civ IV games is spent on trying to predict the future, because the best move to make right now depends on the shape of things to come. [EDIT: Can I conquer this player? Can I win the race to build this wonder?]. This is a very important part of the game, so we try to account for as much information as possible in our forecasting. With that in mind, the goal of opponent analysis is to consume the vast quantities of spotty, vague, biased, or otherwise flawed information about other players that has been produced over many years and many games on this forum, and refine it into reliable, actionable information about your rivals.

You know the great in-game Civlopedia that Civ IV has? All the units and buildings have an entry, and each entry has a left side and a right side. The left side consists of a concise series of bullet points conveying accurate information about the subject. “Chariot: 4 strength, 2 move, 30 hammers, unlocked with The Wheel, requires Horses to build, etc.” This is the great side, I love it. Meanwhile, the right side has a brief description of the subject that uses many more words to convey fewer true details and sometimes even some false ones about it, and also a bunch of sketchy historical information that you should just read about in a book to learn properly. THE OUTPUT OF YOUR OPPONENT ANALYSIS SHOULD BE LIKE THE LEFT SIDE, NOT THE RIGHT SIDE! Not a paragraph of florid prose, but a terse batch of bullet points.
(EXCEPTION: Maybe some of the veteran players on this forum know some of the other veteran players on this forum so well that a terse batch of bullet points will not suffice to express the depth of their knowledge of the enemy. In that case, go ahead and write a paragraph, and more power to you.)

For example, it is a fact that the Great Lighthouse is cheaper to build for Organized leaders, so players with ORG leaders are more likely to build it. It is also a fact that Amicalola likes to build the Great Lighthouse, so a player who is Amicalola is more likely to build it. For another example, it is a fact that Praetorians are much better at combat than normal Swordsmen, so players with Rome are more likely to have wars with you. It is also a fact that Superdeath likes warmongering, so players who are Superdeath are more likely to have wars with you. That is what I mean by “actionable”. You can make choices based on it in the same way to you can make choices based on knowledge of game mechanics and occurrences. I hope I make sense.

…

The preferences of AI leaders can be understood numerically, down to the integer, in the form of “weights” in the code that they all have. I think the preferences of human players cannot be understood like that, both because the minds of other humans are too mysterious and complicated, and because some of the reliable, actionable information about players that should be documented is… unique(?). For example, if Krill was in this game, I would say in his analysis “Likes to plot to use Great Artist culture bombs in war”. But it would be stupid to describe that on a quantitative category/scale as 10/10 “WartimeCultureBombLoveLevel”, because Krill is the only player I can think of who cares about that matter one way or another. Other players might do it, sure, but it’s not a whole big thing for them, so everyone else would be “0” or “Unknown” or “No Opinion”, so I should just leave this information as a qualitative thing mentioned in Krill’s section and absent in all the others. For another example, if naufragar was in this game, I would say in his analysis “Likes IMP”. And in this case, it would be sensible to make a bigger category out of this called “Favored Traits” (or maybe “Favored Leaders” or “Favored Trait Combinations”?), because lots of players, even most players, do like some traits more than others, so this category would see a lot of helpful use. 
“Player: naufragar. Favored Traits: IMP”. 
“Player: Rusten. Favored Traits: Spiritual.” I hope I still make sense.

…

Now we are at the point where I explain how, figuratively, “The Dog Ate My Homework!”. Because despite all the above rambling about the matter, I will not be presenting an opponent analysis for your perusal, not this time. . But it’s not my fault, teacher! Honest, it’s not! .

This is because I think I myself could not write an opponent analysis that is up to my own standards for what a useful opponent analysis should be. Too many of these players only started playing in RB Pitboss games after I stopped lurking the forum, so I just don’t know enough about them. And my requirement that the information provided be reliable and actionable means I’m not so sure I’m up to the task even for the players with longer histories, who I have read a lot about. For example, I have lurked plenty of games that Gavagai played before, so I know enough about him to regurgitate some coherent, plausible analysis bullet points. But could I regurgitate reliable, actionable analysis bullet points? So much of what I know about Gavagai comes from reading Commodore’s enjoyable threads, which are surely biased, and “He is a relentless, ruthless, slight-prone Russian stereotype” is not actionable information anyway, is it? There is no way to write a good opponent analysis without thinking deeply about past games, and I have never treated past games (except for the two that I participated in, of course) as anything more than a passive and passing, though excellent, source of entertaining reading material.
So, I will not be writing an opponent analysis in this game, and that is my excuse. Next time!

…

But fear not! In accordance with what is apparently now my style, I will provide a rambling, disorganized (heh) snapshot of what my opponent analysis would look like, IF I HAD ONE.

Previous Winners: plemo, Amicalola, Gavagai, Tarkeel and Civac, superdeath (diplomacy game), GeneralKilCavalry (vs. me), Miguelito and Ginger, and vanrober. 8/12.
When did this forum become so infested with skilled players who win games? . What are poor little newbies like me supposed to do now?

Mjmd:
• Favored Picks: Victoria of India
• Unbothered by repetition of leader and civ
Amicalola:
• Favored Wonder: the Great Lighthouse
superdeath:
• Loves GPT deals, tries to extort gold
vanrober:
• Previous Games: 51, 52, 54, 56, 61, 62 (all players should have this easy category, but I am lazy)
plemo:
• From civforum, different meta
etc:

…

In conclusion, despite all the above, I look forward to the day that I am free to read the other spoiler threads and see whatever the other players have said about me. Amicalola has twice called me a “returning vet”, so clearly, he is cool and his thread is cool. . In the end, this is all for fun, and the fine RB tradition of opponent analysis has produced some enjoyable reading material the years, no matter what.

[Magic Science]

Instruction just in case:

Scout NW N to grass hill, use judgement about animals.
Worker to deer.
Zeus builds warrior, works Fish Fish and Deer
Research still BW.
And please take an overview screenshot, and demos, Top 5 cities, victory advisor, and religion advisor. Thanks.

[Magic Science]

DISREGARD. Turn played, instructions no longer necessary.

[Magic Science]

Turns 4 through 23, 3840 through 3080 BC
The tyrant-subject bond truly is the greatest treasure in the world.
So, for the past 20 turns I have been playing a neat little opening, which I devised with the use of my brain, and also Microsoft Excel!


   
What do I produce 1st, Worker or Workboat? Simulations indicated that Workboat 1st was far better. What do I produce 2nd, Worker or Workboat? Simulations indicated that Workboat 2nd, produced slowly as I grew Zeus to Size 3, was far better. And that is the abridged story of how I used my plains hill capital and its first-ring plains forest Deer to complete my first Worker on Turn 20.

When do I revolt to Slavery, before or after Zeus completes my second settler? This was a fun question to answer. Revolting to Slavery pre-settler rather than post-settler delays everything between that revolt and the turn the settler moves out by one turn, and in return I only gain the power to trade 26 or 28 or X food for 30 production in the 20s instead of the 30s. Questionable. But with the power of the IMP settler production multiplier, I can use the whip to gain 15 hammers in sundry items in Zeus, albeit at the cost of delaying the settler by one turn and suffering the obligatory whip unhappiness. Worth it. The trick is to make sure as few hammers as possible pass through the queue as overflow off the settler.

Where do I settle the second city? In the end, this was barely a question. Of course, I will settle the second city, Hera, on the riverside hill between Corn, Crab, and Gold that is three tiles from the capital. There is nowhere else. But it was only “barely a question” because of poor scouting. I failed to adjust my scouting timing in light of the necessity of backtracking for five turns to the other side of the starting isthmus, and then I failed to prioritize quickly revealing the whole immediately relevant region in the east over “efficiency”. So now I will have “efficiently” revealed all the possible second city spots in the east by about Turn 30, but I needed to have decided my second city spot by soon after Turn 20.


   
Oh well. It’s not really that bad. I just feel down about it because I finally learned how to use the flying camera on Turn 17, and it revealed that the near southeast may be an isthmus and not the pathetic peninsula that I thought, but by then it was too late for Nobody the Scout to take the proper path in light of that. Also, I feel down because the discovery of Bronze Working on Turn 21 revealed no Copper. . I like the idea of using the power of IMP and Phalanxes to leap out from my starting core of 3 or 4 cities to lock down the relatively distant contested chokepoints or other flashpoints, but that is impossible without Copper. There must still be some around, but I really wanted to get off to a certain start for that idea by claiming it with the second city. And Charriu needs his Phalanx ASAP. Oh well.


   
Wheeeee!

Yep, I have made contact with the enemy, and it only took 23 turns. Also, they were the ones who made contact with me, and it’s piccadilly + Plemo [Plemadilly], Tokugawa of Rome. Not what I hoped for, but at least they are across the water on another part of the main continent, making them only one of the “additional amphibian neighbors” I mentioned in the map analysis post. I will send a Workboat in their direction to learn about the "overseas" contested zone before Turn 40.

At least I can start filling in my KTB and Espionage tracking spreadsheets now.