Huts and scrolls of wisdom

[Marquis de Sodaq]

Re: A quick update

Originally posted by Six Thousand Year Old Man
I have tipped 850 huts

Working late at the CivLab...

Did you type up a summary of what popped out of all those huts?

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

Re: Re: A quick update

Originally posted by Scouse Gits


Can you expand on this point? You must be in post hut test trauma ... a serious condition

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

SG(2)

I probably shouldn't have mentioned it, if I was afraid to expand on it.

The point requires more testing. LOTS more. This is why I didn't put it down as something I was sure of.

In 3850... tipping a hut seems to provide a less equal distribution of results than in 3800 or 3750, if a city has already been put down and the hut is away from the city radius.

Here's what I mean...

.

#3 (1 city hut away from city radius)
hut-grassland 3850 - 25 tech 9 unit 9 cash 7 barbs

In the oedo year, we received a great many more techs. No nomad (already a non-settler on the map, doing the tipping) and no tribes (no specials in radius around hut).

#3.1 (1 city hut away from city radius)
hut grassland 3800 - 11 tech 13 units 13 cash 13 barbs

As a control - distribution of results is balanced again



and...



#9 (1 city - hut on plains 3850, black around hut, hut not touching radius)
4 units 4 techs 4 cash 4 barbs 34 TRIBES

Oedo year - note large # of tribes

#10 (1 city - hut on plains 3850, no black around hut, hut not touching radius)
6 units 7 techs 9 cash 2 barbs, 26 TRIBES

Oedo year - again, large number of tribes.

#11 (as 10, but a year later, 3800)
12 units 11 techs 9 cash 8 barbs, 10 tribes

#12 (as 11, but a year later, 3750)
12 units 10 techs 9 cash 9 barbs, 10 tribes

#s 11 and 12 seem to show about equal proportions of each result.

The annoying thing is, I haven't been able to corroborate this in 3650 or 3450... I should mention that the tests are in 2.42, large map, random, deity, raging hordes, as romans, with no starting techs.

Back to the drawing board....

[DrSpike]

Good work. If there is a different distribution for some oedo years I hereby dub the popping of such huts as STYOM popping.................doesn't roll off of the tongue as oedo year does, but it will have to do.

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

Originally posted by DrSpike
Good work. If there is a different distribution for some oedo years I hereby dub the popping of such huts as STYOM popping.................doesn't roll off of the tongue as oedo year does, but it will have to do.

Well, let's not get too excited yet. I would like to do some more testing of this phenomenon. I need to generate some more starts where I can even find a hut by 3850. The results at 3650 are inconclusive (fewer barbs, but not so few as to be inconsistent with the normal product of a random # generator). 3250's results were distressingly similar to 3350. 3450, I haven't tried yet, due to circumstances (impending carpel tunnel syndrome). I'm not sure if there is another factor involved, or if the spacing of 'hut years' is based on something other than xxxoxxxoxxxo...

However, even if I can show that tipping a hut at 3850 with 1 city down is a good thing to do, I'll be happy And I was glad to have been able to confirm other things I wasn't sure of..

And yes, Marquis, I have several excel files with the data. It could have been 1 file, I suppose, but I was just looking for a scratchpad to type the information into.

[Scouse Gits]

Great work STYOM!

Just a quick question in some of your tests you state 'no special in radius of hut' do you mean the 8 adjoining squares or a 'city radius' for if the latter there is ALWAYS a special two squares either NE or SW from a hut (of course this special may be hidden)

SG[1]

[Scouse Gits]

Drat - that didn't work!!

SG[1]

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

Originally posted by Scouse Gits
Great work STYOM!

Just a quick question in some of your tests you state 'no special in radius of hut' do you mean the 8 adjoining squares or a 'city radius' for if the latter there is ALWAYS a special two squares either NE or SW from a hut (of course this special may be hidden)

SG[1]

Good point, I forgot that one. I meant, no visible special within the 21 square city radius.

I am trying to discern, among other things, whether surrounding terrain influences the nomad/tribe result. IIRC (I'm at work and don't have all the data with me), the nomad results all came up on grassland with no visible specials and lots of ocean.

The tribe results came up on a plains square - with a a river, forest, not much ocean, and a pheasant in the city radius.

If SG(2) reads this... he left a note in one of the succession games re: whether you could get a nomad on grass... Yes, you can!

[Scouse Gits]

Thanks STYOM - that clears that up...

SG[1]

[Scouse Gits]

Originally posted by Six Thousand Year Old Man
If SG(2) reads this... he left a note in one of the succession games re: whether you could get a nomad on grass... Yes, you can!

It was the first time I ever recall doing that!

Just goes to show that the game still has surprises

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

SG(2)

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

Fear not, I'm going to drive myself bonkers by tipping more huts. I'm going to test other oedo years, and try to narrow down the circumstances that will give you a tribe instead of a nomad. I am pretty sure than if you tip a hut and get a tribe, you can reload repeatedly and never get a nomad... and vice versa. Thus it isn't totally random.

I think that you have a possibility to get a nomad

IF

there are no other nomads (NON Settlers) on the same landmass

and IF

a new city would produce less than 5 food sheafs at size 1.

(Otherwise, a result which otherwise would produce a nomad would produce a tribe.)

The first IF seems to be received wisdom around here. I haven't really tested it, but it rings true. I don't recall getting nomads when I already had one, and I know that no nomads came up when I had a NON settler running around in my tests.

The second IF is guessing at this point. Pheasant + plains in my tests = 5 food, and all I got was tribes. Grass + grass (in despotism) = 4 food, all I got was nomads.

That sounds really unconvincing as I read it. Better go tip some more huts and I'll hopefully be on firmer ground.

[Scouse Gits]

STYOM ... if you're not banging your head against a brick wall run a few tests on the game below. It's 2.42 large world. Just run a 100 tests reloading every time. I remember solo thinking the outcome of huts could be related to your computer's clock ... let's see how Canadian time differs from the Scouse variety

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

SG(2)

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

That's a frightening thought. Computer clock? I wonder if I should re-do some of the tests I did before

I'll see if I can test your uploaded file tonight. (I try not to tip more than 200 huts in a sitting. ) What were your results?

[Scouse Gits]

Originally posted by Six Thousand Year Old Man
That's a frightening thought. Computer clock? I wonder if I should re-do some of the tests I did before

As part of the work on starting techs I became interested in huts; mainly to see if the warlike civs obtained sciences from huts in the military category, like Warrior Code, more often than peaceful advances. I'm convinced there is no difference! However, here's more scary thoughts ... ever adjust your tax rate? Gold @ 60% more money from huts? What difference does it make if you revolt and go into Anarchy when you hut tip? Less science?

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

SG(2)

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

Originally posted by Scouse Gits

As part of the work on starting techs I became interested in huts; mainly to see if the warlike civs obtained sciences from huts in the military category, like Warrior Code, more often than peaceful advances. I'm convinced there is no difference!

That's the best news I've heard all day. I didn't see a correlation - not that I was looking really really hard - between what was being researched and scroll results. So, I'm not going to worry about that.

However, here's more scary thoughts ... ever adjust your tax rate? Gold @ 60% more money from huts? What difference does it make if you revolt and go into Anarchy when you hut tip? Less science?
-------------------
SG(2)

I'm ignoring all those scary thoughts

Why? Because I tried to make a list of variables and there were enough (terrain/# of cities/# of units or settlers/# of sciences/science being researched/continent size/year/AI civ on continent?/barbarians already on map?/tax rate/government/etc. etc. etc...) to make this exercise unworkable. It may be fruitless but at least it's manageable if I try to keep as many constants as I can, constant, and play with the ones that seem likely to be meaningful in a game. Nobody's going to sit in anarchy or set science at 0 in order to get a 30% better shot at a nomad, for example.

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

Re - hut producing nomad on grassland

Originally posted by Scouse Gits


It was the first time I ever recall doing that!

Just goes to show that the game still has surprises

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

SG(2)

By the bye... do you recall if there were any food specials nearby, or any terrain that would produce more than 1 food?

I suspect nomads appear in place of tribes on squares where a city would be hard to feed. Remember the AI's love for putting workers on high food squares? Thus, nomads from hills/forest (mountains? swamp? jungle? desert?) usually, and tribes on plains and grassland, usually.


STYOM