The "Barren 'Burbs" Succession Game

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

Well done... and SG(2) is next.

1. atomant
2. Jrabbit
3. OldnSlow
4. SG(2)
5. STYOM
6. Bob_Smurf42
7. sirsnuggles
8. SCG
9. La Fayette

[sirsnuggles]

Your discussion regarding the perils of shipchains illuminates my disagreement with SG concerning science improvements.

In an impromptu study several weeks ago (when SG first criticized my tactics), I determined that it takes 8-12 turns of normal science production from improvements to equal the journey of a caravan.

Now, when one considers how long it takes to build a caravan (or the cost if one rush builds), the effective rate of 8-12 turns decreases.

When you consider the cost and time involved in producing the necessary transports and escorts, coupled with the numerous turns of waiting for complete shipchains, that 8-12 turn ratio is dropped even more. It can, in fact, be more reliable to build library's and University's and live off of three high established trade routes (in each city), than to simply build caravan after caravan.

I think the point that SG misses, is that a city with 3 trade routes, with a library, and with a university can very nearly produce the same amount of trade per turn (without all of the risks involved).

Besides, if all of one's cities are toggled for the continual production of caravans in order to gain scientific advance, and thereby neglects science improvements, that civilization is hence reduced to complete and perpetual subservience to the caravan trading system, and must neglect all other game avenues.

A powerful advantage to not having to rely upon the caravan-only-strategy, is that one can utilize their cities for producing happy improvements, settlers, and military units. And thus conquer the world without worrying about not producing enough caravans to maintain the scientific advantage.

Yet, if one builds library's early (when caravans are really quite ineffectual), then sends out caravans, and then adds university's when they are discovered, any complete and total reliance upon the caravan trading system is abolished. Now, certainly, after one has done this, one may continue to produce the occasional caravan in order to supplement scientific advance. The point, however, is that one is not reduced to complete subservience to the caravan strategy. I would point out that, utilizing both strategies (caravans and library's) in tandem, would in fact, be the most effective route to take, giving one much more flexibility.

[Scouse Gits]

Sirsnuggles

I would recommend that you read the Early Landing Guide by Solo. There you will find a vast amount of his writing is devoted to the subject of Trade. Perhaps you would care to tell us where he went wrong!

The danger of losing Caravans in transit is a puerile argument against trading. Using the same logic we can arrive at a variety of absurd propositions. E.g. - Ban ambulances as they might crash and kill people on their way to hospital.

Originally posted by sirsnuggles
I think the point that SG misses, is that a city with 3 trade routes, with a library, and with a university can very nearly produce the same amount of trade per turn (without all of the risks involved).

Yes I do miss this point as they increase science NOT trade. The only city improvement that increases trade is Superhighways.

Try starting a new game with an emphasis on heavy trading. I bet it beats the way you play at present!

--------------------

SG(2)

[Scouse Gits]

A cheap two ha'p'th worth on a game in which I am not involved ...

The purpose of ship chains as opposed to a number of ships is to ensure that valuable cargo can never be caught at sea!!!

SG[1]

[sirsnuggles]

You dismiss (and misunderstand) my point too readily.

When I mention the peril of ships at sea, I do not mean that one should not trade (or send ambulances), I simply refer to the peril of relying so completely upon such a risky strategem, that is, a complete dependence upon the continual ferrying of caravans for science and gold. The disruption of shipping (as England well came to understand, and as also applies to civ2, during the initial stages of WW2), especially if this disruption is catastrophic, can lead to the complete cessation of scientific and economic growth-if indeed the entirety of these growths come from caravans.

Now, if ambulances were invariably navigated by intoxicated coachmen, than perhaps we might do well to outlaw ambulances. In my opinion, relying completely upon the insecurity of ferried caravans constitutes complete folly.

One must possess the backup, that is the unremitting science and gold output that "white goods" ensure when the Vikings (or some such villain) destroys an entire ship chain; or when caravan production must be abandoned in lieu of military units necessary for the preservation of the empire. The idea succintly: when one relies completely upon the ceaseless production of carvans, no other development may occur either militarily or infrastructure.

Such thinking does not constituted puerility, but abstraction




My point, goodfellow(ess) SG, is that one should always establish three trade routes in each city complete with libraries and universities. When one possesses such stable institutions, if one wishes to risk further caravan shipments the reward may well be beneficial, yet even if these shipments meet with disaster, scientific and economic growth will continue without disruption or collapse.

Yes I do miss this point as they increase science NOT trade. The only city improvement that increases trade is Superhighways.

Trade=science and/or gold; or trade arrows. Used interchangeably throughout both my posts, and Civ2's official handbooks.

To be technical, Superhighways increase 'trade arrows' from the production screen (not trade routes, although the increase in trade arrows directly lead to a subsequent increase in trade routes). This 'trade' that is increased, benefits the three tiered monstrosity of science, gold, and luxuries.

To say that libraries increase trade is informally still correct, since libraries do increase a certain aspect of trade, namely science.

I fully understand the complexities of trade, trade routes, trade arrows, science, luxuries, gold, etc.

I hope this constitutes a robust constructive defense.

PS. I am not attacking the concept of shipchains, indeed, they are quite useful, I simply wish to point out the temerity of these endeavors. That ship chains cannot always be maintained, that disruptions occur, and that costly production must be spent defending these ship chains.

When these disruptions occur, science progression must continue, and it will continue best where libraries and universities exist.

[Scouse Gits]

Originally posted by sirsnuggles
Trade=science and/or gold; or trade arrows. Used interchangeably throughout both my posts, and Civ2's official handbooks.

Let's get some joined up thinking about trade arrows. Trade is allocated via the Tax Rate into Science/Gold/Luxuries. I have never seen a Civ2 manual but many respected posters frequently comment that they are packed with errors. I suggest you believe the players who have veteran experience backed with proven results.

There is no semantic technicality about Superhighways - they increase trade.

I think you have attempted to mount a defence but it's hardly robust. I suspect you have jumped on the occasional perils of caravans in transit to justify your position on buying libraries in awful locations. You have obviously been thinking hard since my first criticism some weeks ago.

The manual you should read is Solo's Early Landing Guide. Then come back and tell us who is correct - Solo or sirsnuggles? Alternatively, you could go on playing the same way … stuffing cities with improvements that are not really needed. Just like the AI!

-----------------------------------------

SG(2)

[La Fayette]

sirsnuggles,
There is a very easy way to know for sure whether a strategy is performing: play it and win .
Here is my proposal: you play any of the Early Landing Comparison Games designed by solo and then come back here and tell us what you achieved.

[Scouse Gits]

I have this Monster

NO Engineers. 15 turns unless we eliminate a civ then the turn passes. Thinks ... could probably take out the French in 1860 which would save learning a lot of geography

----------------

SG(2)

[La Fayette]

Originally posted by Scouse Gits
could probably take out the French in 1860 which would save learning a lot of geography

----------------

SG(2)

May I help ?

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

15 turns is the limit, not the minimum, SG(2).

Those who want to develop a plan and implement it (you can't always do both in 6 turns) have 15 turns to do so. If you can knock out the French in 3 turns... by all means do so, if you want

[Zedd]

Well, well, well, here I am back from the Unemployment lines and what do I see....Round three of snuggles v/s git

My personal weigh-in..... Caravans are great for obvious resons and If you could spend most of your time building caravans and getting 300gp deliveries for them then that would be great, but each city should at least have a market and library, especially after adams place is built. If you are only relying on your caravans you are not letting cities live up to thier full potential and therefore are wasteing a valuable resource. Besides I like to micro manage city's more than i like to keep up with caravan movements.

Anyway back on topic, you are all doing extreemly well and I hope you don't mind me checking in now and then.

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

Here's my take on the Caravans vs. Improvements debate:

Caravans are more efficient, but also more work. Examples:

A) You could spend a turn to contribute 1 shield towards a wonder and rushbuy it and great expense. Easy, but expensive. Or, you could incrementally buy the caravans needed to build it, and drive them all to the intended home for the wonder and deliver them all in the same turn. Much cheaper, I'm sure, but much more work.

B) By building a Library and University, you only need to pay a little attention to the city as they're being built, and you get 'automatic' science every turn from that city. Using the same number of shields, you could build several Caravans and get a large lump sum of science and cash with each delivery (plus a small increase in ongoing trade). Of course, the delivery requires a trade infrastructure (boats, roads, RR) and takes more work, as well.

Now, if you're really disciplined, you'll go for Caravans almost all the time, in all but your largest cities. However, sometimes it's just easier to build a market, library or other improvement - particularly if the city already has a lot of trade, or doesn't have desirable supply commodities, or will celebrate with a little increase in base luxuries that's generated by a marketplace, for example.

[Scouse Gits]

MarketPlaces are important if built wisely, as they aid cities growth under Rep or Dem. Larger cities allow better caravan returns.

Progress Report. I will post the save later on. At present I've played 7 turns establishing footholds on the Zulu, Spanish and Chinese continents. Russia next!The French are a zoo at Tours. Have not taken out the Indians as some of their large cities can produce trade bonuses of 1700+.

Please note that all Gits will be on holiday from this weekend for two weeks

------------------

SG(2)

[Old n Slow]

While we’re waiting for the Gits report, I’ll throw my 1.5 cents into the camel/infrastructure debate. I don’t know enough to make it the full 2 cents, but:

Why not both?

The advertisers play with our minds (candy mint/breath mint; tastes great/less filling -- to try to get us to absorb two messages. I’m just now coming into full appreciation for he power that camels can bring to a civ -- the questions remaining for me are those of balancing the ‘when’ to expand further, the ‘when’ to shift to military activity and the ‘when’ to set in place (and expand) the boat chain to distant markets.

With a reasonable boat chain, reasonable supply of camels (implying a reasonable number of cities) I’ve been able to mostly get a tech a turn during the mid game. At this time my non SSC cities are flirting with size 8 or so, some camels are distracted by wonder building (Mike’s, Leo’s, Magellan, Isaac), so there’s serious opportunity coat in making settlers for additional cities. Similarly, I have a hard time justifying additional infrastructure when -- lots of cash is coming in & I’m getting a tech a turn (with some exceptions due mainly to mismanagement of boat resources.) Building libraries won’t gain techs faster unless I can build enough to get TWO techs a turn -- which means a LOT of libraries (in a lot of cities, which I usually don’t have either.)

Once Mike’s is in place, I figure that size 8 cities are easy to maintain with only a temple, so even a market is optional -- the $1-2K per turn from camels pays for the bulk of the ongoing expenses. Thus markets come into play as primarily the next step for size 12 cities, but this often requires some irrigation -- which means settler time, which means fewer or later additional cities.

Once the camels start to dry up & I have multiple routes for my major cities, I’ll start to shift some of the economic activity to building infrastructure -- again keeping in mind that slots open up calling for another camel…

So medium story short -- if one has enough cities to garner a tech a turn with infrastructure, then one can have two techs a turn with trade & infrastructure (and yes I remember a post where on player was getting four or five techs per turn -- very late game I figure), so infrastructure has significant value. but I think that mid game -- camels need to be put on the road & crammed into foreign markets.

[La Fayette]

Originally posted by Scouse Gits
The French are a zoo at Tours. [/b]

------------------

SG(2)

Sainte-Maure would be better, but unfortunately it is not on the list

Have a nice time on vacation.