Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Short Term Plan for Warrior Exploration

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Short Term Plan for Warrior Exploration

    Overview updated post-3840 move:

    This is the thread where we discuss what our first warrior is doing.

    Here is the latest graphic:



    As you can see, we are midway through our first set of moves (known as the Arrian Plan). This map shows what will be revealed by this plan (in yellow) in addition to what we already know/what will be revealed by our culture pop (in green).

    Current question: at 3800, should we go 9 (in keeping with the Arrian plan) or 7 (slightly safer)?

    So come, join the thread, and have your say about where we should go!

    >>>>> Original Post Below >>>>>

    Hi all,

    This thread is an attempt to bring a bit more cohesion to our exploration plans with our first warrior (does he have a name yet?).

    Turn 3 was a bit of a shmozzle, with no clear plan emerging as to where he was going, and Dejon had to do the best he could on the spot (well done Dejon). As it turned out NYE had a better plan as to what to do, but we didn't have it discussed in time. Not good.

    So how to we remedy this situation?

    Firstly, we need better tools for working out where he should go. In the absence of anything better, I have put together an excel spreadsheet that should help. It allows us to plan out routes and see how many squares should be visible from each one.

    Secondly, we need to work out how far in advance we should be planning. I think our upper bound should be the production of our second warrior, which occurs 13 movements from 3880 bc.

    With these things in mind, on to actual discussion of where to go. I have numbered these for easy reference in ensuing discussion:

    My propositions:
    1. Our border expansion will show us a fair amount of territory around our capital in three turns time.

    2. There is *very little point* sending our warrior NE, because the border expansion on to hills that will show us most of this area anyway. It's simply wasting warrior moves to explore this direction.

    [In fact, our current square would have been shown to us by border expansion...but I digress]

    3. We don't want our warrior to be more than 3 (maximum 4) moves away from EOTS until warrior two is produced.

    4. Our most likely second city sites lie to the west and NE, along the river. These are therefore the highest priority areas to explore.

    5. Once our second warrior is produced, our first warrior will have more leeway to move up to 5 squares away from EOTS.

    6. Wherever possible, we want to stay on hills/forests. Duh.

    Accordingly, after a fair bit of experimenting with my spreadsheet, I propose that we move SE first, then sweep around in a clockwise direction. Here is my preferred sequence of moves:

    3-2-7-7-1-7-7-7-9-8-8-6-9
    [This is plan F in my spreadsheet]

    At the end of this set of moves we are North of EOTS, and (once our capital is safely guarded by warrior two) would continue to move NE along the river/floodplains to check out potential second city sites.

    Let the discussion begin....
    Attached Files

  • #2
    Just showing a few pics of gridmaps, to aid discussion.

    First, this is what we can currently see:

    Comment


    • #3
      This is what we will see after the border expansion (assuming we don't move the warrior)

      Comment


      • #4
        This is what we would see if we moved the warrior according to my proposal above.



        We would then send this warrior further NE (for example, 9-9-9-3) to check out the rest of the river in that direction.

        Obviously, this makes no allowance for hills blocking our view etc, but is a good starting point for discussion.

        Comment


        • #5
          Very impressive!
          First Master, Banan-Abbot of the Nana-stary, and Arch-Nan of the Order of the Sacred Banana.
          Marathon, the reason my friends and I have been playing the same hotseat game since 2006...

          Comment


          • #6
            I approve, since I think it'd be a good idea to take a quick peek into the south since he's already down there.

            Comment


            • #7
              Yep, that's what I think. Since our warrior is SE, we should take a peek around there before going on to the more "desirable" lands to the W and N.

              This seemed counter-intuitive to me at first -> since I wanted to go along the rivers as soon as possible. But basically there's no point checking out the NE until we can go further than 3/4 squares from our capital.

              This is the key alternative, I think:



              Note that in this version, we don't spend time looking around in the SE but head clockwise as soon as possible. We see less altogether, but slightly more in the NE. But the problem in my mind is the last three moves of this sequence. They don't really show us much at all (just 3 extra squares) and we still want to search further to the NE in order to check out the rest of the river.

              With Plan F (post 4 in this thread) we don't get around to the NE until the second warrior is born and the restriction on how far we can go from our capital is slightly relaxed.

              [Edit: Typo]

              Comment


              • #8
                3-2-7-7-1-7-7-7-9-8-8-6-9

                I think this takes us too far from EotS.

                I'm thinking 3, 9, 9, 7, 7, 8.

                -Arrian
                grog want tank...Grog Want Tank... GROG WANT TANK!

                The trick isn't to break some eggs to make an omelette, it's convincing the eggs to break themselves in order to aspire to omelettehood.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Questions:

                  1) What's the earliest a warrior from a rival civ might plausibly reach our capital?

                  2) When will animals start appearing?

                  3) How much risk are we willing to run to do more exploring with our initial warrior?

                  Those issues define the basic parameters of when we need to have our warrior back in our capital.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    1) What's the closest you've ever seen another civ start on these settings? 10 tiles? More? Less?

                    1a) Would our map checker/mods have allowed something closer than ordinary?

                    2) I've never paid enough attention to the dates myself, so all I can say is "soon."

                    3) None.

                    I think by turn 10 we want to be within 2 tiles of EotS.

                    -Arrian
                    grog want tank...Grog Want Tank... GROG WANT TANK!

                    The trick isn't to break some eggs to make an omelette, it's convincing the eggs to break themselves in order to aspire to omelettehood.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Pretty much what Arrian said. It's rare to get a "surprise" with your first border expansion, but spotting a Warrior a few turns after that is not uncommon.
                      And her eyes have all the seeming of a demon's that is dreaming...

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I play these settings all the time in SP - under the 1.51 rules, 7-8 tiles is about the closest start I can recall offhand. Usual range is 10-15 for your closest neighbor.

                        This map was generated by 1.51, so the best way to answer the question conclusively would be to reinstall and DL the 1.51 and run some iterations, checking with the world editor. You could get 7 values for civs every game, so it wouldn't take too long to get something you could probably hang your hat on. You'd want to discount all maps with an isolated civ, of course, as this map apparently generated land masses where no one is consigned to an island that cannot be reached without Navigation. (Can't say conclusively that there aren't civs on islands off the coast of another landmass from what snoopy posted about the map back in the day, but I think it's probable that all civs share a land mass with at least one other civ located ON that land mass, not across an English Channel sort of affair.)

                        I'm at work/school for the next 5 hours or so, so I can't sim this now, but if you all are interested I can pull the data together for 50 trials or so when I return home. Just let me know!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Oh, yeah, about the actual plan to move the Warrior. I concur with those advocating moving north or northwest - city site #2 is going to be in that direction. The terrain southeast is garbage, and the desert east of the river is likely to be uninteresting at best.

                          On the 'plausability' of a Warrior turning up - the one thing we have not considered is someone catching an experience hut and turning a Warrior into SuperSpeedForestWarrior. If you want to go absolute worst case, we could have a Warrior in our borders as early as three turns from now, assuming a 10 space apart start.

                          Comforting, I know.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Rightio.

                            So, let's clarify how far we are happy to move from our undefended capital. We are safer earlier, because we're assuming (pretty safely) that we're not going to get anybody starting too close on a checked map. However, as time goes on, there is more chance that wandering warriors will find us. So I propose the following parameters:

                            Now (3880 BC): happy for warrior to be 4 moves away from the capital

                            5 turns from now: must be within 3 moves of capital

                            10 turns from now: within 2 moves of EOTS

                            13 turns from 3880 bc: Warrior 2 is born, and first warrior can then go exploring.

                            Does this sound reasonable?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Arrian
                              3-2-7-7-1-7-7-7-9-8-8-6-9

                              I think this takes us too far from EotS.

                              I'm thinking 3, 9, 9, 7, 7, 8.

                              -Arrian
                              OK then, let's look at Arrian's plan:



                              Note that we are 4 moves away from EotS for one turn, which fits with the guidelines I posted above. Moving this way shows us a bit more to the E/NE (particularly if we luck out and the square at (4,-1) ends up being a hill) but we don't see a huge amount more than we would see anyway, given the border expansions on to hills in this direction.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X