xxxo xxxo xxxo ...

[DaveV]

Here are the key years for King level. Lower levels are left as an exercise for the reader .

-3850 * -925 * 460_ * 1330 * 1715 * 1853 * 1913 * 1973
-3650 * -825 * 540_ * 1370 * 1735 * 1857 * 1917 * 1977
-3450 * -725 * 620_ * 1410 * 1752 * 1861 * 1921 * 1981
-3250 * -625 * 700_ * 1450 * 1760 * 1865 * 1925 * 1985
-3050 * -525 * 780_ * 1490 * 1768 * 1869 * 1929 * 1989
-2850 * -425 * 860_ * 1515 * 1776 * 1873 * 1933 * 1993
-2650 * -325 * 940_ * 1535 * 1784 * 1877 * 1937 * 1997
-2450 * -225 * 1010 * 1555 * 1792 * 1881 * 1941 * 2001
-2250 * -125 * 1050 * 1575 * 1800 * 1885 * 1945 * 2005
-2050 * -25_ * 1090 * 1595 * 1808 * 1889 * 1949 * 2009
-1850 * 60__ * 1130 * 1615 * 1816 * 1893 * 1953 * 2013
-1650 * 140_ * 1170 * 1635 * 1824 * 1897 * 1957 * 2017
-1450 * 220_ * 1210 * 1655 * 1832 * 1901 * 1961 * 2021
-1250 * 300_ * 1250 * 1675 * 1840 * 1905 * 1965
-1050 * 380_ * 1290 * 1695 * 1848 * 1909 * 1969

Note to anyone who wasn't paying attention: King difficulty level only!!!
[This message has been edited by DaveV (edited September 15, 2000).]

[Sten Sture]

Davey-Dave - are you sure it goes 1986 -> 2000???

[DaveV]

quote: Originally posted by Sten Sture on 09-06-2000 04:25 PM Davey-Dave - are you sure it goes 1986 -> 2000???

Pretty sure - why don't you start a new game to double-check me on it .

Talk about not paying attention ...

[SandMonkey]

sorry I am stupid..

Does the SoL nullify these years and allow a revolution any turn?

[Smash]

yes.

[Sequoya]

DaveV

I have two observations on your list for King level. There appears to be a hiatus between year 1515 and 1635. Also, should the revolution year advance from 1792 to 1800 and then jump to 1818?

My observations are based only on mathematics and not on playtesting. Did you playtest your numbers?

[DaveV]

Sigh. I should have known better than to take this on. I've updated the table, but I suspect I've made yet another error because my dates don't jibe with those reported by Smash. So speak up, anybody, if you see any mistakes...

[SandMonkey]

Dave, your mistake is from 1695-1705. It SHOULD be 1715 instead of 1705, as those turns are still a revolution every 20 years in game terms.

[tonic]

I wonder if exceptions occur when you are lucky enough to get a government advance from a hut in a oedo year. In one of the earlier OCC comparison games, I got Monarchy from a hut in the year 725 BC and when I revolted, was not granted Monarchy in that year!

I haven't come across this anomaly in other games.

[Paul]

That's because you got the advance during the play fase of the turn. New governments are established in the beginning fase of the turn after it has processed all your cities, but before you start moving your units.

[tonic]

Thanks, Paul. Therefore if you get a government advance (Monarchy, Republic or Democracy) by exchange or popping a hut during a oedo year, wait four turns before revolting!

[Scouse Gits]

Surely, tonic, you mean 3 turns not four - if I have grasped this thing correctly the ideal is to discover the government tech in an 'oedo year' and accept the offer of a change of government on the spot. Failing that sort of micromanagement of science or discovery by hut, conquest, trade etc you should hold your Revolution in the turn preceeding the oedo year.

Someone please correct me if I have got the wrong end of the stick - again!

Good civin'

------------------
____________
Scouse Git[1]

"CARTAGO DELENDA EST" - Cato the Censor
"The Great Library must be built!"

[DaveV]

SG1 - you're right. To put it very precisely, the revolt should come before the start of your turn on the oedo year. I say it this way because I discovered (to my relief) that you can revolt during another player's turn in MP.

SandMonkey - thanks for the correction. I've updated the king table yet again, but the numbers still don't match Smash's report ...

[SandMonkey]

Dave, according to what Smash said, your chart is dead on.

quote: Originally posted by Smash on 09-04-2000 09:53 PM He did,1903 came and went without a change.Change happened in 1906 indicating revolt should have been done in 1901.

Revolt should have been done in 1901, which is one of the years on your chart. He said the change happened in 1906, but could this be one of those "everything happens then the year rolls around" type of things? Like maybe his buddy only noticed what year it was after the year had changed? that might now have made any sense....

[Smash]

Yes a mistake my end could have happened easily.It probably was 1905.This looks good now.