Pre-1000AD landing

[Adam Smith]

I see no reason why you can't pick both the settings and the AI opponents in going for the record. Here's a few thoughts on things I've tried, and I would love to hear from other people who have tried.

Age of World:
3 bil, wet gives a change to land in a large grassy area, with a substantial river system. Drawbacks are that there can be substantial swamp and jungle areas, and the AI might get stuck in a vast forest to start.
4 bil, normal seems to give a decent start to everybody.
5 bil generally has a busted up landscape, making it tough to find good sites for big cities

Continents:
Large continents lets you grab more tribute, while normal continents allow more profitable trading possibilities. Which is more important?

AI Opponents:
I usually play as Romans and pick the following civs for the following reasons
Babylonians (good early science)
Chinese (good early science)
Egyptians (large cities to trade with)
English (decent science for military advances)
Vikings (decent science for militray advances)
Sioux (why pick mongols?)
If I did not play the Romans, I would pick them over Celts or Russians.

Side question:
Has anybody tried going to republic early (ie., pre-Mike) then switching to Monarchy for a few turns (using Oedo years) to grab enough tribute to build the SSC infrastructure?

[solo]

DaveV,

Thanks for the detailed reply. The addition of railroads makes a big difference, something I wasn't considering. Your success at ICS and samson's at limited infrastructure in both OCC and early landing attempts, show how much of a bad distraction all those possible city improvements can be! For example: I would rather have the raw science of 2 extra cities for 80 shields (cost of 2 settlers) rather than build a library in the orginal city! Not much beats geometric progression. When you do the math ICS wins hands down, but I suspect ICS is not as fast with science as a quickly developed SSC. SoL gets to Communism quickly, but as you say, 8 more caravans are needed. After your current game, it would be interesting to see you try again with ICS for an early landing in order to compare it with the approach samson and I are taking.


Adam Smith,

In regards to a wetter world, a slight problem with this is that more grassland will end up covering more specials, which may or may not be where the pattern suggests. You have to mine or make a hill out of the grassland square to find out. It will be harder to locate those 4-special city sites.

I also agree with freedom of opponent selection. That's part of the game strategy, selecting options that you think will improve your chances for what you are trying to do.

As for your side question, I believe East Street Trader gave this a try recently, and was not thrilled with the results. For one thing, I believe each switch of government loses a turn of research, even when done in oedo years.

[samson]

Solo,

One question about the STC, was how long did it take you to get it full size to where it was really paying off?

In my testing model of the STC (using the cheat-menu) it didn't take long at all -- a few clicks and BOOM! there it was. However, to answer your question I had to try it out in a real game, which I have now done.

As discussed in this thread, I prioritized the SSC over the STC. So the second super city, on a single square island, was late in developing. SHAKES was built there in 100BC. It had a population of 4 with temple, harbor, and marketplace at that time. The We Love! fest took a 40% lux rate to get going. By 80AD I had it up to size 11 and had delivered 8 or so freights to it. At this point I got Automobile and switched resources into producing Superhighways in the SSC. After that, I decided the cost of the STC'S infrastructure and the lost research from the high luxury rate would take too high a toll to justify the freight bonuses. These were barely over 100gold at that point, much lower than the model (based on a size21 city).

However, between the small bonuses and ongoing trade routes that were established in the helper cities and STC, I was able to sustain 1 turn advances from that point on to Space Flight. My conclusions from this game:

1) In an early landing attempt, the infrastructure cost of building two Super Cities is just too high. It means 2 of everything - marketplace, aqueduct, sewer, bank, harbor, library, university, superhighways. Plus, the costly We Love! days of the STC can slow research at a critical time.

2) The trade routes in helper cities are more beneficial in the long run than the one-time freight bonuses. Higher paying routes can be obtained from cities connected by road (and later rail) to the SSC.

3) The occasional replacement of foreign routes in the SSC by lower paying domestic ones can be reversed by having SSC freights standing by at foreign cities ready to re-establish them.

In spite of the problems this game had with the STC and in spite of almost no help from the AI (I only traded for 1 tech the whole game), I was able to achieve Space Flight in 480AD. However, with only 8 freights towards Apollo ready and little cash, I did not attempt to complete the game. Still, that long string of 1 turn advances was quite amazing.

Adam Smith,

During this game I was so strapped for cash that I twice (3 times with the switch to Demo) went into Anarchy on oedo years to demand tribute from non-allied civs. This brought in about 300gold each time. It was a neat trick, thanks. However, this cost me 2 turns of research and I would not have done if I'd had more gold on hand

DaveV,

I agree with you now, that the focus in trading should be on routes not bonuses. Roads and railroads are vital, too. However, I remain staunchly Rep/Demo in government preference.

My next attempt will be using a single super city connected by road/rail to a small group (6-8) of size 3 cities delivering local freights for high paying routes. I will build SHAKES in the SSC and max it out. I will cache SSC freight at foreign cities to maintain highest possible routes in the SSC.

I think progress is being made here. A couple more warm-ups and then maybe a serious attempt at early landing.

samson

[solo]

samson,

Fascinating, but too bad about the lagging SSC. One thing that might salvage that idea is the use of Hanging Gardens. 3 happy citizens helps tremendously in "we love", and with it marketplace and bank are not really needed, which together cost 200 shields, the same amount as HG. HG can also do the job of a temple in helper cities, or help the ones having tyemples already grow a little more. Getting helpers to size 5 can really make a difference. I was very happy with its benefits in my 1056 game, but there I used it in my SSC, which slowed early science.

Comparing DaveV's trading numbers to his SSC to yours with the STC, makes me think more island and overseas helpers (hopefully via advanced tribes) , or maybe even an island SSC (if the map permits) would increase trade and require fewer settlers for building roads and railroads. Just an idea to try and boost what you are short on, gold.

Once you get a taste for those 1-turn advances it's hard to be satisfied with anything else, except perhaps 2 per turn! Congrats on the earliest Space Flight, yet. You have really pushed pure science about as far as it can go, and the 480 date is most impressive because you did it all on your own!

That's also a neat trick, caching SSC caravans to restore the continuing trade bonus. I had a poor SSC as far as commodity supplies went, and no one was asking for food!

I have too agree that for early landings, rep/demo can not be beat. Good luck on your next try, however you decide to go about it. I'll be away a few days, but will eagerly await the results of the next experimental game.

[samson]

Solo,

HG is NG. By the time the STC got going, I already had Railroad.

My latest game was intended to test out domestic trade routes boosted by road/rail
but I got awesome trade routes with a nearby AI city that I built railroads to.
Check it out: 396AD.

I still want to try the domestic road/rail plan.
It is more certain than waiting for the AI to drop a city down beside you.

samson