The Spartan Academy

[nbarclay]

Originally posted by Dominae

Economy is everything right now. 6 turns of Game or Wheat will have profound effects on our future development. And, if I hear the economists correctly, the '6 turn' figure is off because we plan to build Worker after our first Settler.

My current preference is to use two chops, one by our original worker and one by a worker from Hurricane (and switching Hurricane to the Pyramids momentarily), to churn out a second settler four turns after the first and our third four turns after that. Only then do we build a couple extra workers. So we're talking a three-turn delay (since site #3 is closer), not a six-turn delay. Site #7 would grow only two turns later than optimal, although we'd also be setting Site #3 back a bit in the process.

Nathan

[Randolph]

We should hold a pole on this before the settler is built (It seems to be a divided enough issue). I'm switching to #3 first (that’s one Dom ), we've already lost the map information game, there's not enough to salvage to sacrifice economic growth. The way to beat Vox now is to out REX, then out produce them (i.e. better economy).
We also should not be all that concerned with the warriors (tim and willy) as a military threat. We'll have them out numbered at least 2:1 by the time they can get to our cities, and as soon as we get anything better than warriors they will be nearly useless in a military sense.

[Dominae]

Nathan, well, if your plan works (which I'm sure it does), there should be plenty of time to settle site 3 first, then 7 before Vox ever gets close to the borders 7 would set up (this requires zig-zag tactics, which, I might add, are just as effective against a human). Am I missing something?

By the way, I'm glad to hear we're pumping out 3 quick Settlers. Sorry I didn't have time to test it myself and give some input...RL calls.


Dominae

[Arrian]

I see both as viable options. One is more economically viable (long term advantage) and one is more militarily viable (short term). Consider me neutral, though the idea of rearranging city builds so close to home because of them irritates me.

EDIT: Oh, can we build #3 and then #7 and still head Tim off? If so, this is a no-brainer.

-Arrian

[Dominae]

Originally posted by Arrian
I see both as viable options. One is more economically viable (long term advantage) and one is more militarily viable (short term).

Actually, they're both long-term viable, it's just that one springs into action before the other. As far as I can tell, the only reason not to let Vox down South is that we want to protect our map (and maybe contact) information, which will hopefully help us in the long-term. I happen to think that one option (site 3 first) will blossom into a greater advantage than the other option promises to (because growth is geometric, while information is not).


Dominae

[nbarclay]

Originally posted by Dominae
Nathan, well, if your plan works (which I'm sure it does), there should be plenty of time to settle site 3 first, then 7 before Vox ever gets close to the borders 7 would set up (this requires zig-zag tactics, which, I might add, are just as effective against a human). Am I missing something?

I hadn't thought to check out that possibility. We can definitely zig-zag Tim long enough. If I'm calculating correctly, if Willie moves onto the mountains along the east coast, we should be able to pull it off with him too, but otherwise, we can't cut him off without compromising city defense. Still, we'll know whether it's possible by the time we're ready to send out our first settler.

Nathan

[Dominae]

We could try one of the two things:

1. Lure Willy on to the Mountain range. Most players will want to explore from mountaintops for obvious reasons, so maybe we could trick Vox into going that way.

2. Compromise city defense (yep!). If our zig zag works, we should be able to get Willy away from either Eye or Hurricane. That city would be without a defend for a couple of turns. Assuming we're going with another Warrior in Hurricane, there should only be a couple of "scary" turns. Will Vox attack once they see our borders? I doubt it; they want to explore, not pick a fight with 2 measly Warriors.

Either option should work to get site 3 up first.


Dominae

[nbarclay]

I misremembered and thus miscalculated by two turns in my earlier timing. (Settler #1 is 4 turns after we grow 2 turns after the granary, not 4 turns after the granary). Even a zig-zagging Tim is likely to get to a point where he could go south to get out of our territory as easily as north (as far as he'd know, anyhow) by the time we could build #3 and then #7.

[Dominae]

Should we create a poll, or is everyone basically agreed other than me (and Conqueror)? If we do go along with 7 first, let's remember why we're doing it. If the Warriors are nowhere near the site when we get our Settler, site 3 should become the first destination.


Dominae

[alva]

Could anyone first open a new thread with the correct info on how things are/will be/could be.

People who only log in from time surely are finding it impossible to follow, let alone vote for something...

(I'm here all day , and even I'm )

[Harovan]

I have printed out our map and played a bit "PTW the board game" with colored paper balls. Results in the turn thread.

[Theseus]

Sorry I haven't been around much this week... I have been keeping up on reading the posts though (and am blown away by how much is going on here in Stormland!).

Without starting a huge debate about timing, I think it's safe to say that we have to consider Vox as much militarily as we do consider them a potential trading / research partner.

That is where I've spent most of my offline time thinking about this game.

And while I consider Immortals to be a HUGE danger and challenge, I only have one thing to say to Vox:

BUH-BYE!!

[Dominae]

I believe one of the major issues that we need to resolve on the military front is: do we let them come to us, or do we bring it to them first? I've been thinking about this recently, and it's not an easy question.

Tacticians: thoughts?


Dominae

[nbarclay]

Without a way to get WCs to the front, I don't view taking the fight to them early in any serious way as a viable option at all. Swordsmen could more or less hold their own defending against immortals on most terrain (i.e. we attack them on the way in before they can attack us), but swordsmen walking into the teeth of immortals? No way. Even if we could gain enough of an economic advantage to make the fight winnable, the cost would be devastating.

In SP play, I've always been a strong proponent of (whenever practical) building up a major scientific and/or economic advantage first and only then engaging in military action. We can almost definitely get the upper hand economically, and chances aren't bad that we can parlay that into a scientific advantage as well once we break their monopoly on foreign contact. The only thing better than going for them with knights before they get pikemen, if we could pull that off, would be getting them to come after us where we could slaughter their immortals in the open under similar technological circumstances.

Nathan

[Dominae]

If they are trading with another civ, our economic superiority may not mean much. And even if we contact the other civ, they may have decided to ally against us (so, no trades).


Dominae