NEW Civ2 Tournament August 16 - September 14, 2004 : SPOILER Thread

[Peaster]

If you enjoy game stats, take a look. These are for the 4 conquest players I've got data on. The first line below is my shorthand for "DaveV had 4 cities, producing about 2.8 shields per turn. He had 10 units, including 2 Settlers (etc). He had 6 advances, with another every 12 turns." If you see "i10,s22" it means income/turn = 10 and science/turn = 22" and "@tr" means he is researching trade; "g" is gold and "2W" means 2 Wonders (built ones only). "Re4" is me (4th replay).

2200BC:
DaveV:4c, pr2.8, 10u= 2S6w1a1h 6a/12t
Re4: 6c (via gold from hut); 7a
Solo: 6c (1 from a hut); 7a.
Zenon:5c, 5a

1000BC:
DaveV:10c: pr3.8, 27u=4S16w1A6h, 10a/11@tr
Re4: [950bc] 11c: pr3.8, 34u:6S/21w/6h, 11a(@tr).
Solo: 9c: 13a, HG in 1300BC +near.MPE
Zenon:[925bc]: 10c: size2s, pr4.5, i10,s22, 10a/8,
new MPE, 208g. 32u:7S,20w,2ph,2tri,1cvn

400BC:
DaveV:17c: pr:4.8, HG/MPE, 600g, 19a/20(@phil)
61u:5S/28w/1A/1L/8h/1ch/8el/2tri/7dip
Re 4: 17c: pr4, 2W, 17a/12(@feu)
51u: 7S/31w/1p/5h/2el/1tri/4dip
Solo: 13c, 16a, 2W
Zenon:15c: pr4.8, size4, 5W's, 19a, 5Ws, 1200g
46u: 5S,23w,6ph,1L,1pi,3cru,5tri,2dip

1AD
DaveV: 17c: pr4.7?, 21a/20@phi, 83u, 311g, 3Ws
Re4: 23c: pr4.3, 19a/14@lit, 2Ws
72u: 4S,36w,5ho,12el,2tri,5dip,8misc
Zenon: 21c: pr6.0, to size5, i52,s25, 21a/24, 253g
95u: 9S,22w,7ph,1l,15pi,26cru,10tri,5d (2lost)

END:
DaveV: 740ad: 56c, 151u (34lost), 26a@nav, 3W
Re4: 840ad: 53c, pr4.5?, 170u (50lost),
34a/12@ast, i17,s73
Solo: 1000ad: 42c, size3s, pr4?, 4Ws, 140u's,
Zenon: 460ad: 43c, pr5+, size5, i68, 26a, 5Ws
190u's: 18S,19w,9ph,6A, 1h,35pi,
63cru,10kn,15tri, 14dip (10 lost)


A few notes ....
DaveV and Re4 followed the ICS strategy in DaveV's GL post. I'm guessing that Solo and Zenon did something similar until around 2000BC. I don't have a lot of data for Solo. Zenon opted for larger cities eventually. All players built MPE/HG/ST (at least). Zenon produced a lot of caravans around 500BC (that don't show up on the unit lists above). Re4 was lucky to see very few re-spawns. All used mainly vet crusaders, except Solo used dragoons.

I think one key factor is your total shield production rate at around 1AD. Maybe the number of units lost is also key, but I don't completely trust the defense minister reports on that stat.

These are probably good ballpark figures for setting early goals even on other maps. But this map seemed relatively rich in specials, and low on early threats, so expect some variations. I have similar stats from a few other games, if you are interested in making comparisons.

[Bloody Monk]

Just a few more turns before landing and the Mongs have launched their long expected "sneak" attack. Must have forgotten to chat them up that turn. I had been saying hello to renew the peace every couple of turns and that had kept them at bay. Now they will learn some manners...


Here is the save from the "launch turn".

Monk

[Bloody Monk]

After the ship was launched I followed a dual path in building aiming research at getting Stealth.

The forward city, Thermopoly, got a coastal fort and Sam Batt to go with its Airport. This allowed for greater defense and vet status for the eventual Stealth Fighters. Other cities built Tanks for attack, or Air units where there was an airport, and a few defense units. A fort was built to hold the line between RussCanal and the Germs which brought in many NON units by bribe.

The second prong involved building Cure for Cancer, bumping the Lux slider and celebrating the helpers up in size. Harbors and other white goods were built to facilitate this tact. Life for me would have been easier if I had left this part alone, but, I could not resist. And bigger cities, with more Happy heads make for a better score, right??

Eventually, the Mongs could not deny their basic nature and launched a sneak attack; but, they had waited too long and the "trap" was in place. In the three remaining turns, seven of the Mong cities were taken in "The Chastisement of Bortei, the Treacherous."

The final result was a successful Landing in 1075 with 259 citizens, a percentage of 85%, and a score of 654.

The last three turns showed me how much fun you folk who went Conquest had in your games. Kicking in the door and butchering the AI dogs has a definite thrill about it!! Had I the stamina I would have built a 36yr ship and attempted a whirlwind conquest in the interim.

Here is the save before Landing....
Monk

[Bloody Monk]

Very confused I am.

Just managed to finish this Early Landing attempt and enter it in the HOF. But according to the results, this was a pointless exercise. Turns out high score is the criteria for a Landing, not the earliest date. The same 'Score" criteria applies for the Conquest Games.

Oh well, winning isn't the point. Playing the game and having all the renewed interest in Civ2 was more than worth the time and energy. Still, who plays for score these days??

Monk

[Zenon]

Excellent game, Monk! I thought you might have chosen a robust approach to get such an early landing date on this map, but this is almost a lean game. The SSC is well placed and Mycenae works as a railed station to Karakorum. Neat! I look forward to reading your log.

Peaster, you certainly have a very systematic approach to analyze this game. The statistics are mostly as expected, but it is interesting that the losses were so different. In my case I suppose its due to the fact that I started my conquest with vet crusaders and pikemen and finished before the AI had pikemen, crusaders or city walls (the only one was in Moscow IIRC). Therefore I only lost units when advancing in unknown terrain. In general, there was not to much resistance in my game.

DaveV, thanks for the comment!

Zenon

[solo]

I've had a chance to look over Monk's 1040 save. I would not have guessed that a launch that early was possible, but Monk has found the way making the most out of the RR bonus with Karakorum. Those 3 colonies were placed perfectly, too. At first, I was surprised to see you built Magellan's, but with such distant colonies, doing so made sense in this situation.

I've got to reiterate congratulations on this superb effort! More details would be of interest.

[Scouse Gits]

I cannot speak for MarkG, but none of us are looking at the score!

Outstanding BM!

Why did I bother entering my pathetic game - everyone is showing me how to play

Stu

[MarkG]

my memories of how civ2 score are gone

i think we'll give an earliest space landing award as well

[Bloody Monk]

Sorry for the delay in answering. I took some much needed rest after the 'big push'. Even this will be shortish. I'll try to do something longer in a day or two.

Some details and highlights...
1) Early Monarchy--While researching the third tech I met the Mongfolk and traded for the third and the fourth, CB & BW, so Monarchy picked up in mid-stream and was discovered in timely fashion for an immediate revolt/change to Monarchy in 2850.

2) Early Exploration...I was able to meet all the AI by 1750, leading to...

3) Extensive Tribute...I got at least 1300g and many techs by asking everyone often. Before MPE this led to a number of out of sequence techs but it allowed me to move quickly through the tree. It also allowed for lots of camel rushing for WoW building.

4) Station City...Mycenae was a high probability shot in the dark that worked as both a station and as a "Straybow" Canal, allowing easy ship movement to the North for early Mong deliveries to Karakorum. These road bonus, pre-ad, trade routes were each 15 arrows at size 21. It just got better with growth in size and further white goods. With SH and Research Lab, before Flight, Science was clicking along at 1632 (SSC) and 1974 total. And the trade routes were by then at 35 arrows each.

5) Trade...Two parts to this one. First, getting Magellan was a big help in making shipchains (with fewer ships) to both the deep South Chin and the Southwest trade path to the Russ. Also, and integral to making this work, was founding two facilitating canal cities to shorten the passage. The second part is good trade partners. It was a bit of good luck that the Chin (who are good developers) were at max distance and reachable by canal. The only negative was that they did not have many cities. Many, many demanded trades from the SSC were made to the Chin and many to the Russ. Later in the game, Gems and Beads became repeatable (using trade tricks) for both AI's and the SilkIs colony. This meant that from 400a to 860a it was nearly always one turn per tech.

There is probably more I should mention here but I am toast and ready for bed again. More later.

Monk (did I mention that this was fun!! )

[Elephant]

The lack of a Station City in my One City Challenge is my biggest handicap, as I cannot keep the Mongols pacified to get an alliance and finish the "critical path" road to the trade route destination city. I am in my third war with them on "Bloody Neck": aside from a bribed Horse, all the blood has been theirs but that doesn't help. I'm seriously considering razing a few of their cities to knock some sense into them. AD1500 is only 175 turns into a 420 turn game, but this is looking bleak.

Glad you had fun, Monk. I was hoping that the rest of the "tech will be weak, lets kick some butt" crowd had underestimated the RD/RR multiplier for Trade Routes - sounds like you really put the Early Landing strategies to work.

[Bloody Monk]

More details on wringing out a 1075 Landing...

6) Happiness Control...Zenon correctly noted that I chose a very lean approach, and that was especially so in the early going when cash was dear and settlers/camels were a higher priority. Rather than erecting Temples or loading the garrisons with martial law units, I raced to get Hanging Gardens in 1850b, even though the SSC was only size two at the time. The next turn Argos was founded, under HG's shade, without need of a martial law unit to control the rabble. Continuing this policy, Mike's Chapel was built in 1000b, and the only temple at that time was for the SSC. With a Republic in 725b and Shake's the next turn, the need for Temples was handled by the increased Lux used to grow the SSC. Temples could now be added as needed at a time when ongoing deliveries made the necessary cash available. Some of the cities got Colosseums, but not all, depending on whether that city had enough food to grow to seven.

7) Infrastructure...Continuing the discussion from the last point, aside from the SSC and eventual Temples all around, other white goods were added only if necessary. About half the helpers got harbors to facillitate growth and only four got Superhighways; both colonies got airports with two more in the core to receive them . Except for the SSC, no Libraries or Universities were built, concentrating instead on getting big-arrow routes to the SSC and stockpilling Freights. I built Magellan instead of SETI, getting Science from one-turn SSC deliveries. Another unusual build was a Factory for the SSC to facillitate one-turn freight rushing. Nothing was sold off to finish the spaceship because of the continuing need to research up to Stealth after Launch.

8)Huts...While huts are avoided under Solo's most recent Early Landing Conventions, they were not off the table for this game. Certainly, the Conquest Crew used them. I am sure getting a 2-mover at the start helped speed the process of exploring & meeting and hounding the AI for tribute, and I got some tech and a little cash (about 250g) from huts. But, losing units to Barbs and having to burn down unwanted, way out of the area Advancer new cities was not helpful at all. Once I met all the AI, I gave up on tipping huts. However, getting an early Nomad and founding Thermopylae (and containing the Mongfolk) was a strong benifit.

There are other comments above (in a response to offa I think) that should be included here. While this was a decent result, even beating some Conquest enteries, I feel sure that there are several Early Landing pros around here who could have done even better had they not played this as a Conquest.

(For future consideration, that Factory in the SSC was a very cool addition to my game.)

Monk

[offa]

Congratulations again Bloody Monk. I hold to my statement that yours is the most impressive result, largely because early landing games are sooo clever. Anyone who can land early could undoubtably conquer early too as many of the necessary skills, at least in the early game, are the same.

The early conquests, while brilliant, are easier to understand for an occasional player like me: expand quickly, get necessary techs for elephants/crusaders, monarchy + MPE + HG +/- Mikes +Sun Tze, extort cash and destroy the AI before they think to build city walls. While this is easier said than done, and Zenon's game appears near perfect, it it closer to (but still outwith) my grasp than early landing. I had a go at replaying this as a conquest ( trying to follow Zenon's strategy) but I was a bit too slow and the Russians had 8+ walled towns by the time I reached them, and I didn't conquer until 1300 (still a 580 year improvement on my previous best), at which time I had 100 crusaders. I suspect that crusaders are overkill, and elephants would do, as essentially they both win almost all attacks (unless there are city walls) and lose whenever they defend.

City walls appear overpowered and were sensibly toned down in civ3. Combat is also a bit too predictable in civ2 because all units have at least 10 hit points.

The AI seem to correspond to regent strength in civ3. In part this maybe due to the human player being given 2 settlers to start: an enormous advantage. In civ3 on higher levels the AI get the bonuses.

[Bloody Monk]

Thanks much, offa, but I have to demur. Only because of a current familiarity with Early Landing could I play that game. Had I tried Conquest, I would not have had the insights to do so well. Talk about lean development!! Those Conquestadors presented marvellous games!!

Your comment that all the units have at least 10 hit points has me puzzled. And, with respect, I don't know about Civ3. When it came out and was so (I mean SO) disappointing, I allocated no memory to that topic. It is a different game and does not cross compare, IMHO.

Thanks again to all
Monk

[offa]

Originally posted by Bloody Monk

Your comment that all the units have at least 10 hit points has me puzzled.

I am sorry if this wasn't clear. As I am sure you know, in civ2 the notional hit points of fighting units are multiplied by 10 and then combat results are determined by a series of rounds based on relative attack and defence strengths until either the attacker or defender run out of hit points and die. For fully healthy units therefore there are at least 10 rounds of combat. In contrast civ 1 units really had only one hit point, and in civ 3 they have a variable number depending on experience (conscript 2 ranging to elite 5). The net result of this is that there are more hit points in civ2 and so combat is more predictable. Some players may like this, and it makes the hated spearman beating a tank very unlikely. However, having played a lot of civ3 I prefer the civ3 method, as it feels more natural.

[Bloody Monk]

If you think having spearmen beating tanks makes a better game then you are welcome to it. Personally, I fail to see the value in that.

Monk