Lizzy's rise to greatness

[mzprox]

If RB attacks the Inca then we should try to grab as much of the Inca lands as possible. That seems a given.

This was my thought as well, but it kinda goes agaist the way we play at apolyton. I mean: Inca would probably lose, but what if they want to put up a heroic fight till last man standing. backstabbing them.. and entering a war like we would help the biggest civ against them.. it's not honorable to say at least. If we refuse the nap it would send them a message about what we are planning.

So my opinion now: let's accept the nap with inca. This way at least we wil lbe sure they won't attack us ( that is still a likely scenario-I mean that they work with RB) and if RB attacks them we at least won't be seem as scavangers . (but maybe we can talk to them about cancelling this nap just to "save" 1-2 of their cities from egypt).

[mzprox]

13 turns later our capital will be pop 14/15 (depending how we develop it).
Let's say we have a choice then:

we could either get.
A, +24 food in the capital
or
B, 26(13 base) production and about 240 research point

which one would you choose?

Note the 24 food is about one pop at this level, but the difference in a pop14 an pop15 city's output is quite marginal since there aren't really good tiles to use at that level.

If you guessed the question is about to slave or not to slave.

i know if i ask this question the answer is always no.. as if you didn't see how powerful it is. In this scenario i'm proposing a slave in an already high pop capital city, which is normally a no-go, BUT: it really depends what is that we slave and how. If we slave down the population which works not so great tiles (and i'm not taking about unimproved tiles, but normal hill mines for example) and if the slaving results in a big immediate bonus it still worth it.

In recent example I rebuild our capital in a world builder game and played many different scenario: some involved slaving of a Bank, others don't. then I took the best from each group and compared them. it worked like this: all path must finish a bank, a grocery, a buddhist temple then start working on a wonder(without spec resouce). Research slider was on 50% (in our actual game that is our current stable rate). and research went into a big tech just to count research at the end.

The result was this:
Those without slavings had 20-26 more food (in some cases that meant 1 more pop), they had about 30-40 more research point.

Those with saving had more production (becaue they finished all those buildings sooner), but most importantly they had about 140 gold extra. 140 gold can be turned into at least double amount research points.

(the unhappiness from salving is no issue in the capital. since no other salving is planned anyway it won't reach happy cap before all the unhappyness from salvings gone)

So i hope it's clear that the 'slave' approach gives much better result in the short term. in 13 turns we get lots of extra money and some production.
what about long term: the 'no slave' city's output will be bigger in production, but only for a short time. it's hard to estimate how much extra production this means, it gets lower and lower as time goes on. But: the extra research and production we got from the slaving approach will too have some hard to estimate benefits: we can send missonaries sooner, we get certain technologies sooner etc.

I hope you appreciate the work i put into this and not just dissolve the question with " no slaving, because it sucks and bad and..whatever" but try to reason about it. i'm even up to a competition where we compare the results of different approaches. So the question is: should we choose A or B.

[Hercules]

There is a problem with logging in atm.

[Hercules]

I do appreciate the work you put into this. I think we all do.

It's partly a question of evaluating the credibilty of our neighbour's NAP and friend's NAP against our exposure to a sudden attack.

Evaluating slaving against growth/production is a fine art. For me the turning point is the estimation of when the unhappiness ends: some of that stretches to 25+turns.

But the positives by that stage and within the terms of our NAPs agreements (If not broken) give us an edge, I think. So B.

[Hercules]

to Tatu

I responded to WPC

Greetings friends,

After brief discussion, it was agreed to accept the nap to turn 200. Best wishes.

[mzprox]

This was a very long turn, with server crashes, reload and pauses that's why there was no update. We got 'banking', some cities started working on Banks, otherwise nothing interesting.

Egypt's army is probably moving NW, India revolted to policestate/nationhood.

As a reminder: this is t146, economics: 3t, nationhood+gunpowder: 8t then golden age and drafting: 8t. Right now it's important to build banks and marketplaces to be able to keep our research high. The latter helps with happyness too.

[Calanthian]

I vote C: build workers!!!!.. excess food goes into worker production as well, resulting in very short worker builds. And extra workers have the best Return on investment (invest once, get returns for ever).

[mzprox]

It's hard to say how much return those workers would have. Delaying the construction of the bank and grocer by 4 turns (building 2 workers) would cost us about 160gold (~40g/turn + maintenance for workers)+ we "lose" one potential pop by halting the city growth. And how much return we would get if we have these workers ten turns earlier? hard to say, but much less.
So I suggest: build the bank and grocer first, let the city grow from pop12 to pop14 during this time and then build workers.

[OzzyKP]

So I suggest: build the bank and grocer first, let the city grow from pop12 to pop14 during this time and then build workers.

That sounds good to me.

[Dinner]

I want workers.

[mzprox]

+1 for more workers

I also want more cities, more soldiers, more courthouses, more missionaries, more marketplaces etc etc, but most of all i want the best chance to win the game. Now you can say that you think building worker in the capitol helps more than building a bank, but if you play a test game you will see it doesn't. It delays us by one turn on our path for getting advanced soldiers (getting techs later, starting the drafting later, the happyness penalty goes away later so we will have to wait more for second drafts etc.

But.. nevertheless I will cancel the production of the bank in Apolytan and build workers. I still think that the +11 gold/turn from the bank would be better, but anyway...

[mzprox]

First of all, check the incan diplo thread.

Several pictures from current turn:

Economics is coming in 2 turns.

First picture shows our new settler. We are going to build a city on the desert hill (unless someone has a better idea), though it's next to the mayan border.

There are some pictures about Egypt's army and some about our newest cites close to the border.
Egypt's next tech probably will be Engineering so their troops can move faster on the roads. Ithink ther northern army is already in position to take the NW Incan city just in two moves.

as you can see i did some sacrifice in our development to try to get use our great spy. I delay the workboat in ankara to build a spy there, maybe even two. Then the taoist missonary in bursa which was intended to khoisan maybe will be send to an incan city so we get discount on our stealings. I might build an other missionary or an other spy in Bursa (this delays the forbidden palace). But stealing engineering or maybe even nationalism for example would be nice.

[Hercules]

I took a look but there was pop up ingame message from civfr (Inao) which didn't say anything. I just responded 'ok'

but we may need to clarify what was said.

[Hercules]

As above I actually thought it was a message from the Aztecs, not Civfr as I checked later.

But it made me look a bit closer.

Here's my suspicion: This could be ruse by RB, Inca and Maya to suck us in to a support agreement to Inca. But the real target of their attack is the Aztecs.

[Hercules]

But of course it could just be the Maya saying, watch where you plant your city.