What happens after the war?

[Blake]

No whip until granary.

Let me explain.

At size 5 working the mines, we produce 12hpt. Growing while working the sheep we produce 5hpt. It takes just over 4 turns to generate 30 hammers (with the "lost" 7hpt), it takes somewhat more than 4 turns to grow 1 pop - about 7 turns. So by not whipping we get nearly ~40% more production.

Ie producing over 7 turns: 84h
Produce + whip 1 pop over 7 turns: 65h [and there is unhappiness too]
It gets worse whipping 2 pop because we are working lower yield tiles (no sheep), or growing much slower (sheep).

I experimented with a build where we grow to size 5 faster and chop the settler (so only building 1 skirmisher) and then a worker (non-pop) and that does actually work out quite well.

I believe that 2 workers will be enough. This is especially true if we found Wines then Furs, since Furs requires zero additional investment. Our worker pair can build the 4 cottages at EotS (which only takes 10 turns between them) and then move on to improving wines, after wines they can move on to the next floodplains city. I'm not seeing a need for a 3rd worker - like since it takes 10 turns to fully improve a size-4 city, and 10 turns to train a settler, the workers will very nearly keep up. In fact since workers can produce 2 improvements in 5 turns they build improvements faster than the new cities can grow to work them. So 2 workers is enough (especially if we get the 2nd worker very fast),

Wines I think should grow straight to size 4 then have something whipped in (I would prefer Granary for nearly +100% production), altough of course it should have production adding to a skirmisher and it would be fine to whip it at any time if needed.

Furs is a nice city because once founded it keeps the barbs down there under control and can go straight to whatever we need, it's just hammers on tap. Also it allows EotS to work another Floodplain Cottage so it's really a VERY profitable city - probably more profitable than the second floodplain site.

[Velociryx]

Yes, but is it not the case that the unhappiness "penalty" doesn't really affect us (or wouldn't, in this case), since we won't yet be at the happy cap anyway? And speed is still speed. Again, I note a bit of a divergence here, between hammer coddling and the raw turn advantage of popping a settler out several turns ahead of what we could build naturally. Given that said settler will be working a Flood Plain, our net yields on the popped settler would be 3f, 1h, 1c (I am deducting 1c due to a predicted bump in maintenance costs, but if our next city is the Wines site, then our net yields are 3f, 1h, 2c--because of the extra commerce we get at the city tile (AND comes with the added benefit that it will shave a smidgeon off our research by providing us at least one extra bpt), which is higher than any tile yield we give up by popping = net gain for us in total resources collected. Thus, again, I'm not seeing what hammer coddling is getting us, other than a claim that it's more efficient from a hammers spent perspective. In short, popping a settler even without a granary is good for us, because although we're giving up one worked tile, we're gaining two (the city tile of the new city and the FP it works), and there's NO tile we could work in EOtS that can match the yield of the two tiles we'll gain from the new city. Add to that the fact that we can do all this, squeeze out a spare worker too, and get rid of the unhappy penalty before we even GET the tech to build a granary, and I'm still not seeing a downside.

-=Vel=-

EDIT: And if we popped at size 4.9, we could afford a 2-point pop because we'd gain one of them back the very next turn of growth.

EDIT #2: What I'd like to see us do is build a Skirm and time a two point pop at size 4.9 so we can net ourselves the settler and most of the worker too (see my revised build order post on pg. 4)....that, combined with a chop should get us all three units in exceedingly short order, and we bounce back in size the very next turn and get our city founded several turns earlier, and get an extra worker out there. Unhappy penalty still goes away before we even GET pottery and in fact, new city should reach size two before then as well (which means that we could begin working on a Skirmisher at the new city, whip him to completion the turn we get Pottery, and immediately start a granary there, using the spillover to give us a few more hammers toward it, then whip it to completion when the unhappy penalty goes away there).

EDIT #3: The above only takes into account the single chop we have planned. There are still two new forest tiles we'll have inside our borders to the west of the Capital with the next expansion, and these could easily be set upon to speed the next build along--whatever it might be...a second settler, another Skirm...whatever...more than enough hammers there to give us a "free" Skirm with change left over (barb protection and/or choke materials for Vox)...would be an excellent way to let the extra worker pay for himself early on...chop some extraneous forests for a free unit, and then get down to the business of assisting with the copper hookup, road building, etc).

[Arrian]

I was just thinking...

Notice that ivory resource to the north? It's not THAT far away. If we are going the construction route, we could bring a War Elephant or two into play if we were willing to put a city up there. It's a long way off, but WEs eat archers alive. They eat anything but Spears and other WEs alive, really.

-Arrian

[DeepO]

EotS has a happy cap of 5, health of 5, correct? Any new city will have happy 4, health 5 (or 4 if fp and no forests), right?

If so, there is a certainly a point to be made for going for the furs. Not only will the raw output of our cities improve, but they will be excellent whip-cities. Not going for the furs would be a good thing to do without whipping, but it looks like we'll need to whip heavily in any new city we build.

Concerning timing: we can use furs when our second city can reach size 5. That's sooner than we can build 2 settlers (city #3 and furs = city #4). So I agree with Blake that the sooner we can get furs going, the better.

The problem is in protection, not in growth. If we go for construction, we are probably best to build 4 cities to kill Vox asap, but only if we don't risk our protection/choking.

As to another worker: a 3rd worker doesn't seem to bring enough, I'd certainly prefer a 4rd city. Do we really have the time to build both? A 3rd worker would primarily increase our gpt, but with 4 cities on rivers that won't be the biggest issue.

DeepO

[Blake]

The problem is in protection, not in growth. If we go for construction, we are probably best to build 4 cities to kill Vox asap, but only if we don't risk our protection/choking.

Simulations suggest that a 4th city will not help us destroy Vox. There's no way it'll pay off the ~125h investment in time.

As to another worker: a 3rd worker doesn't seem to bring enough, I'd certainly prefer a 4rd city. Do we really have the time to build both? A 3rd worker would primarily increase our gpt, but with 4 cities on rivers that won't be the biggest issue.

Exactly, I think a 3rd worker isn't needed at all. We might be a bit slow hooking up the deer without it (and we'll be able to use the deer to SOME degree) but I think there are better uses for the 60h.

Here's my plan for "Operation Devoxification of The Voice":

EOTS:

EotS should train the current skirmisher then grow to size 5 ASAP (ie spend the last turn NOT working the sheep), the chop should be timed to land on the settler. The grassland should be mined, because the settler will start at 20/100 (from the chop), 7 turns of production at 11hpt puts it 97/100h, so we need +3h total, mining the grassland hill will (just) provide that, and thus it will get the settler out 1 turn quicker and also sets us up for 12hpt. A chop would acclerate the settler by a further 1 turn, but at the expense of a forest and we'd still be at 11hpt. I prefer the mine.

After the settler EotS should train a worker (or finish the skirmisher), this can either be chop assisted, or we could hook up the copper. I prefer the copper since our workers don't really want to go back that way for a while.

After that EotS should train one or two new units, depending on Vox. After the units it should train Furs Settler. After furs settler it should grow to size 6, so that it can work another floodplain cottage while still at 12hpt (it'll be unhealthy, so in effect the FP cottage is like a grassland cottage). That means EotS needs 3 cottages in the short run - only 15 worker-turns. Once we get a granary we can be more productive working pure FP cottages and using the whip, but without a granary we are by far and away more productive on the mines.

WINES:

Wines will quickly get the workers from EotS so it doesn't need to train a worker. Given that, I feel there's only one right course of action, start training a skirmisher and grow to size 4, the skirmisher can be whipped at any time if needed, but only if needed.
At size 4 whip the granary, why not double the city production as soon as possible?
Wines should then be allowed to grow to size 6 (!) or at least 5.9.

Wines will only have 3 floodplain cottages (the 4th requires the cultural borders from another city). The grassland hill could be mined, or some lesser tiles improved, or the workers could just build roads.

FURS:

Furs is very simple. It's basically 6hpt on-tap and provides +1 tile worked in the other cities (this is considerably more than the other floodplains city).
Those 6hpt can be used to pump out a rabble of skirmishers and axes, or a barracks then units (I favor no barracks). It should probably have growth killed at size 2.


DESTROYING VOX:

Construction should come in about as Wines has grown to size 6. It's pretty obvious what happens next right? We whip 4 population to death in Wines and turn it into catapults. If we are comfortable with the whipping quirks it can be done this way:
Turn 1: Switch to Catapult, Whip.
Turn 2: Switch to a new Catapult, Whip.
Turn 3: Overflow goes to a 3rd Catapult.

This gives us 3 catapults in as many turns, at the expense of 4 pop and about 5 hammers lost to overflow truncation. This exploits "zero hammer whipping", that you can whip a catapult for 2 pop @ 60h, without first putting a turn into it. If we are uncomfortable with or forbidden from doing this we must do something much less optimal:

Turn 1: Start catapult
Turn 2: Whip catapult.
Turn 3: Overflow to Axeman.
Turn 4: Start Catapult.
Turn 5: Whip catapult.
Turn 6: Overflow to Axeman.

This gives us 2 Catapults and 1 Axeman [we could 1-pop whip the other catapults, but I don't really like doing that because the unhappiness bites].

Obviouly exploiting this particular whipping bug is a massive advantage and I say we shamelessly do it unless this is veto'd be game management (or a new patch comes out in the meantime...).

In EotS we also want to whip out at least one catapult, I think the best way to do this would be probably get a Granary to about 28/60h, then whip the granary on the turn before construction and let the overflow complete a catapult. Future catapults from EotS probably ownt make it to the front in time.

Anyway we will have 4 Catapults very soon after getting construction. This should easily break The Voice, taking 2 turns to reduce defenses to 0% and then the collatoral damage will give our rabble of skirms/axes winning odds - not to mention that chances are only 1 catapult will die. Even if Vox have a lot of archers it is likely that enough of our units will survive and promote that we'll be able to finish the job the next turn. Even if the RNG really hates us, we'll pretty much be trading hammers 1:1 (because the bonuses are gone) and The Voice will have been extremely broken by the last minute whipping and be quite unable to replace defenders.

The simulations in game suggest that this plan will work out just like that, like the timing and stuff works. There's flexibility in that we can whip in extra skirms/axes, or use the high production of EotS to pump out units at any time (2 turn skirmishers are nice).

There's no "room" for a 4th city. We CAN get one, but it's really an investment for after the war. The 4th city will add another floodplain for Wines, but Wines is going to spend most of it's time growing at size 3 or below, and once it finally busts through size 4 it'll grow all the way to size 6 in like 6 turns, so there's not much time for that extra floodplain to pay off. I think if Vox go lightish on units we should get City #4, but if they get lots of archers we want more rabble to contain and later siege The Voice.

[Arrian]

I would lean against the zero hammer whipping exploit, personally. I mean, like you say, it's hugely powerful and exploitive. I suppose we could ask the mods. At the very least, we should confirm that no one else is using it.

As for the rest... ok. It certainly sounds good. I'm generally dubious about going no-barracks. But general rules (build barracks before pumping out units) are not always right.

-Arrian

[Cort Haus]

I guess that in this plan the catapults are doing the job of the barracks, in giving us the extra %.

[Hot Mustard]

Originally posted by Arrian
I would lean against the zero hammer whipping exploit, personally. I mean, like you say, it's hugely powerful and exploitive. I suppose we could ask the mods. At the very least, we should confirm that no one else is using it.

We put ourselves at a competive disadvantage if we don't and others possibly are, so either we assume everyone is doing it and we say nothing, or we ask the mods to come to a decision that everyone must abide by.

[Arrian]

I'd go with the latter, HM. Talk to the mods, and request that they clarify this with all teams.

-Arrian

[Velociryx]

There's no good way to verify if the exploit is in use or no, is there? I mean, aside from the mods checking on each save, each turn as it passes from team to team?

That sounds like a tedious, thankless job. IMO, it's fairly common knowledge, and everybody has access to it. Still, I agree we ought to check to make sure, but I'd be willing to bet that nobody is going to want to do the per turn checking to make sure nobody's doing it.

-=Vel=-

[Arrian]

They could simply discuss it with each team. How much poprushing could possibly have occurred yet anyway? It's more of a "hey, to the extent you guys are aware of this, don't do it" thing, really.

-Arrian

[Velociryx]

I agree...so far, there's only been a pretty small window of opportunity to have done so, but if the Mods want to ban it, then they need to check, and that will entail a wampum lot of work on their part.

-=Vel=-

[Arrian]

I really think that it can simply be a honor system sort of thing. In each team's forum:

Step one: poprushed anything yet? Answer: no. Response: ok, there is an exploit. Don't use it, ok? Ok.

-Arrian

[Blake]

The problem is that zero-hammer poprushing is sometimes a legitimate thing to do, the second problem is that for most units you either get the exploitive whip or a dud whip.

Warriors, Axes, Spears, Swords and Catapults get whipped for 2 population, 60h total.

Archers and Chariots get whipped for 2 population, 30h total.

What it should be (for both), is 2 pop for 40h. Certain units, like Crossbows or Galleys, get whipped for 3 pop @ 60h, which is the correct ratio, but this is only true of units which cost 60h or 120h.

In an emergency you can hardly be faulted for not wanting to take the dud archer option and indeed a counter unit (axe or spear) is likely to be much more useful. Rather than trying to figure out what constitutes an emergency and on how to avoid the moral hazard of leaving cities underdefended because you can always emergency whip without penalty, I think it's easier to just go with "to hell with it, just always do it".

If the mods want to forbid zero-h whipping, either of exploitive units or altogether (or even fuzzy-wuzzy "only when justified") then I'm happy to abide by that decision but I feel it's simpler (and also quite fair) to just let everyone do it.

[Metaliturtle]

Easier to ask forgiveness than permission...