Nomads and NONE settlers

[atawa]

The archers are excelent for speeding up settler building though

[rah]

Yes, but I don't do that enough. As smart as it is, it's just so tempting to keep it around for core defense/offense when you're playing raging hordes. A considerablly less chance you'll lose an early city to barbs on surprise, that can really put you behind the eight ball. But if I get two, I do it every time.

Of course most people risk it and if they lose, just quit.
And then claim it was not really a lose, just bad luck

[-Jrabbit]

Don't know how I missed this thread's development. It looked like a real dud when I first saw it. ("Free units = Good.") My, how things change...

Let me start with a disclaimer: I've only been playing for just under a year, so I lack experience, have missed a lot of "common knowledge" discussions. I'm too busy learning the game to spend a lot of time constructing tests. I do enjoy seeing all you grizzled old-timers continuing to back-engineer the game, tho.

Rah, earlier, stated:

The unihabited island is a favorable condition in my experience also. But why is it? The one-per-continent theory has been disproved time and time again. Does it truely up the odds or is some other factor, (like proximity that is in play).

Rah, I think you're onto something when you mention proximity (or, as I think of it, isolation).

The one nomad/continent seems to be fully debunked, yet islands seem ever-ripe for nomads and advanced tribes.

My theory is that distance away from other cities -- not just yours -- on the same continent is a key determinant. Perhaps the distance from the hut to the nearest city needs to reach a critical number (say, greater than 10 squares/movement factors) from the nearest city triggers a move to from (say) the Scroll-Heay Result Chart to the Nomad-Heavy Result Chart.

If the continent is unoccupied, you would naturally have the greatest chance for nomads. A new and unsettled -- or even sparsely settled -- continent would be fertile ground. By extension, an unoccupied island -- just a small continent -- would likely have only one hut and ergo max nomad chance.

I think this isolation factor is also likely to affect odds of advanced tribes. But as I say, my experience is limited and my sample size of observations is probably just background noise compared to most of you.

BTW, I play MGE for Mac, all observations in SP -- Deity raging, with medium map.

[solo]

I have been able to get nomads quite close to my capital after using my second starting NON to found another city. I do find them more often in isolated spots, though, so maybe isloation increases the probability.

[rah]

I have found them quite close also, but since we play on small worlds, there is that possibility that another civ is right on top of you and you aren't aware of it yet.

I do get them more once i'm 10 or so squares out, but since the area increases geometrically as you go out, you would expect to experience more huts the farther out you go.

[solo]

Both small and standard for me for close nomads. Type of terrain seems to matter more.

[rah]

Originally posted by solo
Both small and standard for me for close nomads. Type of terrain seems to matter more.

TYPE OF TERRAIN. Do you mean anything more than grass/plains = villages and the rest nomads or that tundra is better than mountains for example? Just checking.

[solo]

Meaning terrain other than villages. I haven't had enough samples from other terrain to make a judgment about which may be better, except maybe for polar huts, which seem to give nomads more frequently.

Also, the theory that their appearances increase with remote locations may have a lot of merit, but it does not exclude the possibility of gettings nomads close to home.

With most of my experience limited to games where nomads were few and far between, I'll defer to rah and other MP players as to whether nomads are more likely in particular kinds of rough terrain. I'd be curious to know.

[Straybow]

rah, you said you usually have 4 cities by 3000 in MP games… I assume that is with 2x production?

[Ming]

Originally posted by Straybow
rah, you said you usually have 4 cities by 3000 in MP games… I assume that is with 2x production?

I can answer that one... Yeah... 2x production. He usually plays MP using "Rah" rules (a standard set of rules used by the group of people we play MP with) and the settings are 2x production and 1x Movement.

[rah]

Yep, in 2x prod, you'd better have at least 4 by 3000 and 8 by 2000 or you're behind. That is the MINIMUM. But it depends on the other settings. With raging, you do have to have a little defense, especially at diety when you need a little martial law.

[Straybow]

Warriors for law, mercenaries for barb defense makes Settlers your only real expense… Also, with 2x production the support costs of Settlers isn't as much of a burden. Using a free Settler to build is a no-brainer decision in that case.

I sometimes play SP with a rules.txt that effectively makes 2x production. I assume the MP 2x setting doesn't have the early pollution problems of a rules.txt mod.

[ramses II.]

As I already mentioned, I've found up to ten nomads in a game (I normally use them to build cities, because In one of my games I've found three nomads on an middle size island (room for 5-7 cities) when I tipped the first three huts on that island (I built two cities with 3 specials, the last settler was for determined for buildings roads and irrigation
I think the chance to get a nomad increases if you're on another island or continent (or in the pole region).

[rah]

Originally posted by Straybow
I sometimes play SP with a rules.txt that effectively makes 2x production. I assume the MP 2x setting doesn't have the early pollution problems of a rules.txt mod.

You'd be assuming wrong. Just like in 1x you start to get the polution triangles at 21 shields and decreasing as you pop get larger. Which is probably why building KRC is very very rare in 2x games.

RAH

[War4ever]

not too mention it expires way too quickly lol......

as for nomads, ming and i tested this in mp in a duel as well over icq phone, and we did find alot of similar things popped up.

i wonder if some of it may be related to the host popping the hut first. but of course there were discrepancies....

nothing definite, but i have wondered about these things for some time.

as for nomads, i at one time thought about the one per continent rule, but i have seen too many pop up to believe that theory.

i have had nomads while my origional settler was still a none...not the first, but the second one.

i am a firm believe in different hut results depending on which tile you take the hut from...thats conclusive to me.

as for what triggers a nomad, i think the random factor is just that.

its like a lotto ticket, sometimes you win, some times you don't....sometimes you win so many times in a row, you wish you could just save some for a game where you really need them.

there is no evidence that makes me believe its nothing but a random factor.....why is it some games i get barbs from almost every hut....some games i cash up the wazoo....

is it my placement amongst the other civs, ala the trading partner?

is it b/c i am behind, ala the evening up process?

too many questions, the only truth i have, is pop every hut you can unless your oedo year will be screwed by a tech you dont' want