Spoiler Thread for AU 203

[ducki]

A funny thing happened on the way to the forum

Before I get to the funny, I just got refining, and if my Galleons move fast enough, I might have Oil without having to fight for it.

I don't know exactly what I did differently, but I seem determined to win peacefully, even though I know that's disabled.


Actually, I really, really want a war, but I just can't bring myself to revolt just yet. /sigh

Anyway, this pic made me laugh out loud.
Silly Caesar! Go away before I make a salad of you!

[jshelr]

My account of the game will be short but the game is very long:

We stayed in demo and achieved research parity or leads, except the Babs.

Then we went commie and made a drive for the SE Persian oil supply. (Some oil was "discovered" near our capital right after our heroic efforts to obtain it were concluded.

After that, we turned on China, allying with Persia and then played oscillating wars with Persia and China, the only two civs left on the land mass. When attacking China, especially, they could outproduce us. So, we just let them invade with about 8 MA each turn, bombarded the stack to redline, and practiced leader creation. Slow work, but it bled China enough so that Persia, our alley, could make inroads, which they did not defend well. Later, we turned on Persia again and ended up with the Chinese holdings in our hands. This is not over yet, but it is inevitable that we will win barring nukes. Arty is making the difference

[Fosse]

Re: A pretty bad loss

Originally posted by Dominae

What behaviours are those? I feel like I dictate how I play the game, but maybe I've been playing Emperor so much that I'm not sure whether my "behaviours" are in reaction to the AI or not.

Dominae

I'll try to clear up what I meant by my earlier post, forgive me if it gets a bit off topic, but since the points I'm making were really highlighted by AU 203 and this exchanges started in response to my 203 loss...

For me, once I reach a difficulty level that can provide any reasonable challenge for the first part of the game (emprorer), the game's rules seem to force me into two particular behaviors that are not really strategic choices, because to not take those routes is suicide.

The first, is the early tech-extortion war. How many of us, after all, make this a corner stone of our early game, simply because there is no reliable way to peacefully keep up with the AI research in the early game.
For me, this leads to frustration when the AIs are all in the second tier ancient age techs and I am working my way to Republic, and none of them will trade with me for anything because I don't get the trade multiplier.
Because I don't want to be frustrated, I engage in several tech extortion wars until I hit the point in the mid to late Middle Ages when I can keep the competitive research edge.

So for me, at least, these wars are not a strategy, but a forgone conclusion.

This is really what I was referring to, and 203 preventing me from having such wars really highlighted for me how much I dislike the need for these wars. If my need for them is common, then it is a result of the game rules (not really the AI) and there is probably nothing AU can do, if it is not common then maybe I'm just not a skilled enough micromanager to get by without bullying my neighbor.


I could mention a few other things that I consider in a similar way, but unless there is interest in this thread I'll go ahead and post them in another more relevant one when I've had the time to reason out my thoughts.

[Dominae]

Fosse, the fact that you see tech extortion as the only way to keep up on Emperor means you've still got a lot to learn, and nothing else (pardon me if I sound like I'm patronizing you). This very thread is full of AARs from games where tech extortion wars were not a necessity (in other words, the games were won without them). In my game, I never extorted a single tech. So your anger that the higher difficulties require a restricted set of behaviours is not validated by this example.

Actually, I quite sympathize with your situation. Right before the summer, I almost quit Civ3 altogether because I felt it was an overly simple, once you'd figured out some basic facts about it (like, the "necessity" of tech extortion). I posted a lot of semi-rants on the topic, in fact. I ended up not having access to Civ3 for the whole summer, so the I never actually "quit". But since "coming back" in September, I've learned a lot more about the game. In my AU games since (all on Emperor), I cannot recall two that were even remotely similar, strategy-wise (check out my AARs).

I'm not saying the aren't silly things in the game that higher difficulty levels push you to do. I posted a list of these in a thread entitled 'Dirty Tricks' a while ago. What I am saying is that tech extortion is not among them. But things like ROP exploits are sometimes too good to pass up. If you do not like those things, I've got no answer for you.

If you're not completely disgusted with Civ3, try reading other people's AARs and figure out what they did differently from you. You'll improve your game (and your enjoyment of it) in no time. The whole point of AU is to get you to improve your game by doing trying new things.

Hope to see you around AU in the future.


Dominae

[Catt]

Lessons Learned Pt 1

I’ll state my initial biases up front. I wasn’t terribly excited about AU 203 – I thought that the restraint of no offensive war (but the possibility of war) was too artificial – only the quirky “Give Peace a Chance” AU game seemed as artificial as AU 203. I did think it might be an interesting chance to check out the AU Mod’s approach to communism. A little bit into the game, and I also wasn’t too happy with the initial map set-up – the seeming over-abundance of resources (both strategic and luxury) seemed at first glance to limit both the potential challenge and the potential play options. So I played the first third of the game with a bit of a grudge (thinking I should just play a normal game); and combined with the fact that I was under the weather with a frustrating flu, I played with less than 100% concentration.

By the early industrial age, my view of the game had changed. I liked the fact that my early expansion was severely restricted; I liked that I felt like I was playing an elimination game (I really didn’t want to lose one of my few cities); and I liked the resource-rich map BRC had created ( ). Nonetheless, my initial negative attitude and lack of concentration had hurt my chances – early mistakes in Civ haunt one the whole game. So, some lessons learned (or relearned ).

1. Take stock, formulate a strategy, and execute it. I made the very silly mistake of formulating an approach to the game without due regard for the map presented. Without warfare, I figured my expansion could be stymied early – therefore I needed to REX with abandon, I thought. By virtue of the same thought process, I believed I would need to forgo virtually all city improvements and focus on settlers, the occasional worker, and city defenders (spearmen). I also decided that, without war-based expansion, I would focus on cultural strength, hoping less for flips as for an opportunity to wage war and occupy cities without fear of flips in the distant future under communism. With a scientific civ I decided that early culture would come from libraries instead of temples – the wealth of local luxuries further reduced the need for temples. With both streams of thought in mind, I decided to sacrifice one city’s settler production for a shot at the Great Library, and started an early pre-build (using the Colossus).

In retrospect, after an early look at the start position and the surrounding area, I should have focused more attention on pure REX, and should not have sacrificed an early city’s production on a wonder. Our start offered virtually no food bonuses – REX would be difficult without focus. We very quickly had contact with 6 civs, an indication that tech progression would be very fast (reducing the value of the GL) and also ensuring pretty rapid tech devaluation. A second mistake wrt the GL – as a toothless country, I should have realized earlier that taking affirmative action to reduce my attractiveness as a potential target made sense – hoarding gold due to a 0% research rate didn’t exactly broadcast our status as “not worth challenging” . As a final point, although one prong of my initial strategy was REX, I executed it terribly – more on this below.

2. City Placement. Blah! I focused far too much on what I saw as artificial constraints on the game. With no chance to round out an empire through selective aggression where appropriate, I approached the REX phase with a sort of “do or die” attitude – claim the land now, worry about optimizing land later. With available land consisting primarily of peninsular formations (i.e., little land – lots of coastal access) it behooved us to settle a bunch of coastal cities, each of which would be a powerful research engine and/or gold generator with improvements (with the GL I would be able to afford rush-buying a lot of improvements). I instead choose to plant cities inland – counting on expanding borders from my libraries to “close off” my land from interlopers. Nevermind that the city sites turned out to be good for little else for centuries. Take a look at the screenshot below of my SW peninsula – I’ve marked better city placement (with the benefit of 20-20 hindsight) – though I was pressed for time with other settlers wondering around, I believe I did have the time to more carefully lay out an empire.

EDIT: I failed to point out what so galled me about this screenshot. Nuremberg (here at size 9 and growing) was stuck at size 4 for centuries until Electricity -- I didn't have the worker power to chain irrigation all the way from Berlin, so the only self-supporting tiles were two grasslands to the east; the remaining tiles all produced only 1 or 0 food! A desert coastal city could have at least grown considerably (with a harbor) and produced a fair amount of research and gold.

[Catt]

Lessons Learned Pt 2

2. City placement (continued). My city placement was also screwy in terms of priority. I identified an attractive city site close to the capitol very early in the game – I would follow our lone river to the eastern coast and build a powerful city there. But the need to expand towards our enemies and claim land took precedence – settler after settler was sent south (and then a few north for fear of galley-loads of interlopers), all the while a promising site remained unsettled. By the end of the REX phase the site remained both unsettled and forgotten. When the oversight became apparent, I was far enough along that I decided to keep it unsettled as a painful reminder of my oversight. See the screenshot below as the “ghost city” remains fallow land in the 1600’s AD.

[Catt]

Lessons Learned Pt 3

3. City Build Priorities. Once again I focused too much on a perception that I needed to REX, but executed horribly. I prioritized libraries, even to the detriment of marketplaces (OK decision), but didn’t prioritize marketplaces nearly enough. For virtually the entire time my GL allowed me to run science at 0% (and with the luxuries available, the luxury slider at 0%), only a few cities enjoyed marketplaces. How much gold did this decision cost? Hundreds and hundreds, I’m sure – and I still would have been able to build libraries before the GL expired.

4. Lack of Adequate Workers. Surprisingly, I think I missed captured workers more than captured land with our lack of offensive war. I never perceived that I was far behind in needed terrain improvements, and so never cranked out more workers. But I was woefully behind, and only the occasional shock brought home the truth. The most memorable shock occurred when I bribed both Russia and Persia to fight the Chinese aggressor. Both allies happily sent troops to the front (through our SE border), but a lack of an adequate road network greatly delayed the flow of allied troops to the front. See the screenshot below for the status of the German road network in the SE in the 900’s AD – do I look ready for Steam Power and RRs?

[Catt]

Lessons Learned Pt 4

4. Lack of Adequate Workers (continued). A second shock came with a look at Berlin in +/- 500 AD – Berlin seemed productive, but only because the surrounding forests provided adequate shields. Berlin’s surroundings were largely unimproved – early workers concentrated on expansion roads, and with the end of the expansion, tended to improve tiles around cities that were within easy reach. Several core cities (Berlin being the best example) were woefully under-producing for centuries. See Berlin below.

I complained about my own errors on several occasions in my AAR posts – there were many more than the four broad subsets described above, but these four capture a good chunk of the damage done early, all through inattentiveness and a simpleminded approach as I “waited” for the game to really begin. In fact, I think I missed a bunch of the game simply because I choose to ignore the fact that the game was on from turn one, and that I was laying the groundwork for future success or failure.

Catt

[Dominae]

Very nice final post, Catt; it embodies what I think AU is all about. I'm glad to see you stuck with it, even though certain things were not making it fun for you (trust me, I know the feeling; I quit AU205 - Power of Gold 2 - just because all the AIs were angry with me when I wanted to trade!). Your criticisms of your own game are great take-home lessons. Specifically:

1. Workers: Remembering to build your own Workers is a very important skill in MP play. In SP, a few relatively early wars will net you a nice workforce. This game pointed what Civ3 is really like when you need to be relatively self-sufficient. By the way, this is why I think the 'Total War' scenario would be interesting, because you would have to do all your own research. A challenge, to be sure.

2. City placement: Looking at your previous AARs, I was actually wondering why you neglected to put a city in the spot west of Berlin! Expanding toward your neighbor to deny them land is a nice tactic, but I've found that building up a good core first is a lot more important.

3. Wonders and Improvements: I would have liked to even try for the Great Library in my game, but the Persians and Chinese were building so many so rapidly that I felt I had no chance! I'm surprised to hear the GL was not useful to you in your game. Concerning the improvements, I think people in general overestimate Temples and Cathedrals (not Coliseums, they suck) for non-Religious civs. You may have done so in this game. I felt that with all the Luxuries around, Libraries then Marketplaces would be the staples in my cities. Temples came a lot later (after Universities), and Cathedrals mostly never came.


Finally, your comment about the "game being on from turn one" is right on, IMO. If you want to play your best, the decisions you make in the BC years are probably the most important. This is another something MP play has taught me well.

Once again, nice community contribution, Catt.




Dominae

[Fosse]

Originally posted by Dominae
Fosse, the fact that you see tech extortion as the only way to keep up on Emperor means you've still got a lot to learn, and nothing else.

Actually, I don't doubt it one little bit!

I think I would enjoy the early game more on Regent, but once I get out of the middle ages.... but I think I'll continue to hone my skills on emperor and watch these games to see what I can learn, and hope to contribute in whatever ways I can

But one encouraging thing! One of my most prosperous cities in this game (and the last to be taken by China) was exactly in Catt's "ghost city" spot!
I'm not a complete loss! Of course, unlike me Catt did make it out of the ancient age intact...

Keep up the good work guys.

[Dominae]

Originally posted by Fosse
I think I would enjoy the early game more on Regent, but once I get out of the middle ages.... but I think I'll continue to hone my skills on emperor and watch these games to see what I can learn, and hope to contribute in whatever ways I can

Glad to hear it! My best advice is to perfect your early-game; this is the one area that I thought I had mastered, but was so wrong. The most stressful time in the game for me is still pre-1000BC.


Dominae

[nbarclay]

Thanks to my activities with Gathering Storm, I didn't get a chance to start this one until last night. When I saw that there were no food bonuses near the capital, with me playing AU Mod on Emperor level, I was afraid I might be in serious trouble.

But I had four things going for me. (1) There was lots of room between my neighbors and me. (2) England had lousy terrain for REXing. (3) Rome actually somehow managed to take a big bite out of Russia, stopping them from expanding toward me. And (4) I know how to use granaries.

Someone asked a few days ago in the granary thread whether granaries are something only good for industrious civs. I can now state categorically that non-industrious civs with a good production base can also make excellent use of them, especially when there's lots of room to grow. I have seven cities in what I think of as my core, and every one of them has a granary. (Not that granaries were always the first thing my core cities built, but they were surprisingly often.)

All those granaries meant taking absolutely enormous risks sending settlers out with no more than a warrior to protect them if they were lucky enough to have an escort at all. But fortunately, Persia's two warriors who wandered into my area turned out to be nothing more than tribute collectors, and the large Roman force that started wandering through my territory has mostly exited back down south now that there's no significant amount of unclaimed land around.

It's 110 BC now, and the First Reich has finally began its transition to the Republic of Germany. (I've had Republic for a few turns, but I wanted to pop rush a couple libraries to see if I can persuade Smolensk that it would be happier under German rule.) China is up one tech on me (Feudalism), but I'm doing better than average. As for how far I got with my REXing, I'll let the picture below do my talking. (Sorry about the poor quality.)

Nathan

[Jawa Jocky]

I guess we can close the "Why Granaries don't work" thread now.

[ducki]

Originally posted by Dominae
Very nice final post, Catt; it embodies what I think AU is all about.

Most Definitely, Catt. Your writeups are always so detailed, analytical, and coherent. I need to make a template from some of yours.

I've previously stated that since I still think like a builder, this particular game was supremely suited to my strengths. Fortunately, you and Dominae have given me some specifics to expound upon.

1. Workers: Remembering to build your own Workers is a very important skill in MP play. In SP, a few relatively early wars will net you a nice workforce. This game pointed what Civ3 is really like when you need to be relatively self-sufficient. By the way, this is why I think the 'Total War' scenario would be interesting, because you would have to do all your own research. A challenge, to be sure.

Being used to having a workforce of my own workers and having slaves as an added mid to late game "bonus" for jungle-clearing and pollution cleanup, I had a leg up here.
Granted, I still feel like my workforce is always too small to get everything done, yet too large to justify paying, but I have a subconscious rule of thumb that usually kicks in just before Monarchy/Republic.
This is the timeframe where your Despotic empire begins to experience painful corruption due to REX.
Rules for building a Worker first in a new town:
1. Is it unfeasible for any of my existing workers to connect this town?
2. Is it unfeasible for any of my existing workers to improve tiles for this town?
3. Will I grow to size 2 before the Worker is complete?
4. Is this town suited to be a Worker Farm, i.e. lots of food, very few shields?

Note, the Worker(or Settler) Farm question is last on my list and is merely there as a catchall. The first 3 rules are the ones that really "matter" for me.

2. City placement: Looking at your previous AARs, I was actually wondering why you neglected to put a city in the spot west of Berlin! Expanding toward your neighbor to deny them land is a nice tactic, but I've found that building up a good core first is a lot more important.

For my game, at Monarch, I found both to be v. important - it's finding the right balance that's key.

3. Wonders and Improvements: I would have liked to even try for the Great Library in my game, but the Persians and Chinese were building so many so rapidly that I felt I had no chance! I'm surprised to hear the GL was not useful to you in your game. Concerning the improvements, I think people in general overestimate Temples and Cathedrals (not Coliseums, they suck) for non-Religious civs. You may have done so in this game. I felt that with all the Luxuries around, Libraries then Marketplaces would be the staples in my cities. Temples came a lot later (after Universities), and Cathedrals mostly never came.

I'm still learning to not build temples asap everywhere, so when I do skip them, my empire feels incomplete.
I'm not really sure you can overestimate the value of extra content citizens, especially in your powerhouse/metro cities.
As for Wonders, I almost feel like I'm playing a UP game. I listed in a previous thread the ones I got to which I can now add Longevity - I don't know how, but I did - which is great for those slow-growing outlying towns, but can really throw a monkeywrench in the works of your Cores, especially if you are tightly packed on city placement and having to constantly micromanage 3-4 cities to get everyone stabilized and working the "good" tiles.
For me, the Library was... .... .... nice. Not the gamemaker it can sometimes be, but quite nice. The AI didn't start pulling away until the Late Middle Ages, by which time Persia and China went to war, dragging everyone but Babylon back down to my level.
Leo's was a gamemaker for me.

Finally, your comment about the "game being on from turn one" is right on, IMO. If you want to play your best, the decisions you make in the BC years are probably the most important. This is another something MP play has taught me well.

I think playing the CFC Quickstart Challenge and reading cracker's Opening Moves helped me understand just how important the first 3000 years are.

To close, I just want to say, this is by far my best Monarch-level game. I'm Commie, I'm cranking out Panzers like there's no tomorrow, I've stolen Sistine Chapel from China, and I seriously doubt I can lose.
Tech is still 5-10 turns per advance, I'm still making ok money from Russia, Rome(believe it or not), and Babylon, 100% science and still +300gpt or better, almost no corruption in my Cores - almost - and manageable corruption on the outskirts.

I can do no wrong.
Now if I could only use my treasury for rushing.

[Dominae]

Originally posted by ducki
I'm not really sure you can overestimate the value of extra content citizens, especially in your powerhouse/metro cities.

A couple of comments here. First, the very fact that you do not think it is possible to overestimate Temples and Cathedrals (I assume this is what you're saying) means that you overestimate them yourself! Second, "extra" content citizens is misleading; the effects of Temples and Cathedrals do come at a price (60 Shields and 1gpt for Temples).

My point is simply that the knee-jerk reaction to put Temples everywhere as a matter of course is potentially detrimental. The same goes for Barracks.

By the way, have fun with your UP game, ducki!


Dominae