RCP question

[vmxa1]

Ok, I admit I did not use camps or RCP. I have been aware of those concepts and figured they worked well.
I know that camps can be very effective, I am not so sure about RCP.
This is not an attempt show any short comings or anything like that. I am interested in understanding.
So I tried a test. Now this test was probably flawed, but I could only do what I could do.
I cranked up a game and tried to make a ring with 3 then 6.
That is CxxC in direct lines from the capitol and CxC on the diagional. I then played as usual. At 50AD I stopped with 16 cities.
I started over with OCP and stopped with 13 cities.
I compared them and found they were quite close. The OCP was better in that it had two early wonders. The problem I see with the RCP is that it will not be able to build wonders and will stay quite weak for the inner ring as they do not have many squares to draw from.
The capitol in OCP has no such problem. I also started to run into placement problem as this happen to be on a peninsula.

So my question is would it be better to have used a 4 and 8 ring.
Does being on a penninsula negate the use of RCP One of the values of the 3 ring was to be able to defend and attack quickly. This is not of any value if you do not have but one immediate neighbor. So does if change if you are in an area that has more direct contacts? If so then, what do you do? I mean you will not know before you have committed to the RCP that you are in such a location? I suspect that camps will also have to be down graded, if you are in a spot that will not have direct contact, but a bit less of a problem.

So I would like to hear what the logic is from those that use and understand rings. I know we have a few here. Again this is posed as an opportunity for me to learn, not to confont.
Thanks...

Oh is it worth the effort to make the run with say a 4 ring and a 7 or 8 second ring? Does the level of difficulty factor into it? I used Monarch to leave the setting out of it. Would it be more effective if I use Emp?

[Harovan]

You don't have to build at every possible ring position. At the countrary, the less you build, the more effective will be the next ring. I don't like 3-rings, it's too close to my capital for my taste. If I have enough space, I usually build 4, 8, 12 rings.

[conmcb25]

I was a doubting thomas as well.

I tried a 3 ring on a very cramped map and a four ring on a more open map and was impressed with the lack of corruption.

But then I did not do a diredt comparison with OCP.

Hmmmmmm

Can someone provide a link to an OCP discussion? I want to make sure I have that concept correct. Thanks

[Cort Haus]

I used a 4-7-11 ring on the AU210 (large map) and was impressed with the corruption improvement. I got 2 shields straight out of about my 13th city, which is not usual. The '7' was determined by an advanced tribe, and the 11 was determined by a hot resource location. It worked well.

Theseus tried a 3-ring in the same game and found it too cramped, I think.

I like the 3-spacing for defensive power though. Build a Vet Pike in the core and it can be at a remote border city the same turn by shuttling Pikes from city to city.

[Arrian]

I've been using RCP lately, but only with 1 ring (often that's all you can really manage, due to geography) at 4 from the capitol. After that, I ignore RCP.

That first ring at 4 can be pretty damn powerful. It's the early leverage you get from having multiple cities classified as city #1 for corruption that makes RCP good. If you take that initial boost and parlay it into a strong position (say, oh, kicking the everliving**** out of a neighbor or two), then it's worth it.

-Arrian

[Arrian]

conmcb25:

As I recall, "OCP" stands for "Optimal City Placement" which was coined by purists who don't like overlap. It isn't realy optimal, but nevermind that.

I have a hunch that vxma1 isn't talking about zero overlap, but rather cities spaced such that the overlap is the minimal possible without having tiles fall completely outside city radii. This usually means 1-2 tiles overlap.

-Arrian

[Datajack Franit]

Tsk tsk do you play monarch?

[Arrian]

Yes I do, mostly. Some Emperor. I've won up there, but it isn't as much fun.

-Arrian

[vmxa1]

Originally posted by Arrian
I have a hunch that vxma1 isn't talking about zero overlap, but rather cities spaced such that the overlap is the minimal possible without having tiles fall completely outside city radii. This usually means 1-2 tiles overlap.

-Arrian

I forget if it was a no overlap, but most likely it was a size 19. This may not be OCP for all, but it is close enough. I would expect some cities may have had zero overlap, due to the land, but most used 19 tiles with 2 tiles over lapped. What I would do is to find the spot for size 19 and use if unless there was a reason not to do it. The main reason, would be if having an extra space or two of unused tiles allowed me to get a border to cover access or a key resource or luxs. That sort of thing.
Remember this was only at Monarch.

Looks like this:

[vmxa1]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
You don't have to build at every possible ring position. At the countrary, the less you build, the more effective will be the next ring. I don't like 3-rings, it's too close to my capital for my taste. If I have enough space, I usually build 4, 8, 12 rings.

This is what I was looking for, some clues as to how it is best used and if it should be used. So I guess I will have to make another pass with either a 3 ring, minus a few location or a 4 ring.

In a 3 ring, if you drop a few cities, you end up with the same number as the OCP. Many of these will have fewer tiles, but a some what better (less) corruption. I am not sure how that would stack up. This location will have very few second ring cities with a 4 - 8 ring, the land is not that large.
I actually replaced one or two tiles in case I should attempt a 4 ring, so it could have a valid location. I know this will not be a fair comparison, but it is just to get the the jist of it.

I attached the map for any that wants to eye ball the map.

It is labeled as sav, but is a bix.

[vmxa1]

Originally posted by Cort Haus
I used a 4-7-11 ring on the AU210 (large map) and was impressed with the corruption improvement. I got 2 shields straight out of about my 13th city, which is not usual. The '7' was determined by an advanced tribe, and the 11 was determined by a hot resource location. It worked well.

Theseus tried a 3-ring in the same game and found it too cramped, I think.

I like the 3-spacing for defensive power though. Build a Vet Pike in the core and it can be at a remote border city the same turn by shuttling Pikes from city to city.

I suspect that a 3 ring in a emperor game with several neighbors, makes this a much better plan. I would wonder if using camps would be better still, in that game. I do not know, only asking.
So it looks like a 4 with 7 or 8 second may be a viable method.

[vmxa1]

Originally posted by Datajack Franit
Tsk tsk do you play monarch?

Not sure who this was addressed to, Arrain responded, but since he never said anything about the level and I did, I am guessing it was for me.

So if it was, I am not sure what you mean by play on? I play on all levels at any time. I have a contact that I am helping with a chieftain game. I load games from here that are at all levels.
I tend to play emperor on my own games, but will play deity ever few months, to remind myself why I do not find it as much fun.

This is not a game perse, it is a test and is not intended to be palyed to a conclusion, just to a point where it can be compared to another run. I used 50AD as that was long enough to not get to be too much time. I used Monarch as I did not want to have a higher or a lower level cloud things. Monarch has very little bonus for the AI and is close to neutral. Lower ones give a bonus to the player and higher extra to the AI. I hope that answer the question, if it was directed to me.

[vmxa1]

The attachment for the pat19 is a bmp. It is meant for use in paint where you blow it up by 800% and drop a grid over it. Then it is very easy to match it to tiles.
I went ahead and made a blow up of it as a jpg:

[vmxa1]

So you can see 19 tiles to work in addition to the capitol. You have no tiles that cannot be worked. Now this is perfect for all of the people that want to automate their workers, since you do not have tiles that will never be worked. I would of course advise against automating workers.

[Theseus]

Originally posted by Arrian
(say, oh, kicking the everliving**** out of a neighbor or two)

That's why I friggin' love Arrian.

Serious response:

I have had limited experience with RCP, but it's been very positive.

That first ring seems to be best at 4/4.5, stuffing in all cities possible (AUSG101). That's pretty powerful, with or without camps.

That does forego the 3-tile defensive advantage though, so in AU210 I tried a 3 initial ring... I realized too late (see my upcoming end-of-Industrial DAR) that I should have treated the cities at 2 tiles NESW as camps. Execute that properly, and my guess is this is the most powerful opening possible (given terrain constraints).

[YES, you read it here first!! Strict initial ring 3-RCP, Ralph/Zen out the NESW camps, second ring prolly at 4 tile from the first (not for corruption but for tile access), and we've got a winner... until C3C, that is.]

I don;t really bother with RCP outside of the first ring, and am still confused about what to do with the whole set up when the FP and a Palace jump come into play.