Gavagai's spoiler thread

[Gavagai]

...
...
...
...
...
...
...

This is a spoiler thread. Are you sure that you want to read it?

[Gavagai]

An unusual amount of drama is ongoing in settings thread. First Noble succesfully lobbied a reroll of a bad RNG result, using his personal issues with Q as a pretex... Then Retep tried to stop arguments about settings by forcing an executive decision. That, predictably, only led to more arguments. This always happens with attemps to suppress free speach when you lack actual guns.
But let's speak about actual game, shall we? It looks like we are going to have a snake pick with minimal bans and I'm not happy with that. It means that actual choice is limited to a few high-tier leaders. Choosing a weaker leader would most likely mean to through the game away from start.
What would I do? Well, I definitely won't play any "strong" financial. Pacal and Willem are banned; Elizabeth - I used her in PB12, didn't like the result; Darius - no, bad memories from PB12; Mansa - don't think I'd be able to get him and he seems boring for some reason, no idea why, actually.
It leaves us with Ragnar, Wang Kong, Hannibal, Vicktoria, or some strong non-financial leader.
I think from this list I will choose Ragnar. Why? Well, because I think aggressive trait is underrated and it received an absolutely ridiculous buff in the latest version of RB-mod. I disagree with Krill that aggressive trait gives no economic benefit; I think that due to aggressive trait you can get away with less units built in the early game and that would give you a lasting economic boost. Also, it allows you to take/keep territory, you would be otherwise unable to claim. Of course, it is really difficult to argue about that in vacuum, how exactly substantial those benefits are, that's why I would prefer to try playing a game with an emphasis on using aggressive in this way. It would be interesting to see how it will play out...
Civ will be chosen based on starting position mostly. I would really prefer someone with strong early melee UU for synergy. The problem is that all those civs have really terrible starting techs. Fishing start would allow us to take Greece or Rome but the thing is that fishing start is by itself a bad thing. Another interesting idea would be to take Maya and try to choke a close neighbor with Holkans (or may be just a Holkan) before they are able to connect copper... But, to be frank, this "interesting idea" feels rather stupid, though Maya is an interesting option to consider. Their UB is really good, practically allows you to save beakers that would otherwise be spent on Monarchy. You will lose in hammers, needed for happiness (75 on three archers vs 100 on Ball Courts) but gain in less unit support costs.
Of course, this is provided that you don't have enough happy to skip Monarchy anyway.

[Oxyphenbutazone]

Wait, this is RB-mod?

[Gavagai]

No, it's not. Were it RBmod, we wouldn't even need snake-picking. What I'm saying is that vanilla aggressive isn't as weak as some people perceive...

[Lewwyn]

Agg is situational. You even put Ragnar in the weaker category. I think Agg is not underrated because often for Agg to be of benefit it actually does the opposite of help to your economy. I think fin/Agg is strong because it pairs two complementary traits (Econ/military), but Agg alone is not strong enough.

[Oxyphenbutazone]

I mean, I could see Ragnar with a later pick, but 3rd? You would take him over Darius/Mansa/Sury?

[Gavagai]

I mean, I could see Ragnar with a later pick, but 3rd? You would take him over Darius/Mansa/Sury?

Well, that's a good question. As I stated above, I really don't want to play some super-strong and boring combo (and, by the way, I don't think that non-org leader can compete with financials long-term in a big NTT game like that, so Sury is out too). But I can't guarantee that I won't change my opinion at the last moment. I mean, you are right, it feels really stupid not to take Mansa when he is available. Especially given that first pick is Sevens/Krill and I bet this team wouldn't go with a high-tier leader.

[Gavagai]

Additional considerations.
1. I really want to try to win this game but it has Sevens playing. So, I will need every advantage I can grab. That means that we should choose the best leader possible.
2. This game has a very high skill disparity and may very possibly be not as long as it seems. It can be a replica of PB12 or it can end up with more than one runaway civs which made easy gains in the early game. In the latter case it would last longer but would be fun for us only if we are one of those runaways. Both of these considerations make me value early game traits significantly higher. It gives a lot of additional points to Sury and, actually, makes Ragnar seriously viable choice.
3. Completely forgot about Huayna Capac when listing financial leaders. He is a very strong leader and also fun to play with. Also, I think we are mostly guaranteed that this game will feature very few other industrials.
Oxy, any thoughts about our leader choice?

[Oxyphenbutazone]

If you really don't like sury, I think one of Mansa//Darius/HC would be great.

[Gavagai]

I like Sury, I said that he gained many points. Actually, he is a very possible option. He is a total blast during early game - about hundred hammers per city saved which can be turned into wonders, units, moar cities. My only problem with him is that even in the best-case scenario we are still going to have endgame on a large map and Sury isn't really helpful in this position.