Turn 75, 1040BC

[Krill]

Worker 1 should move 6 and start the cottage...then next turn immediately move 6 again and finish the irrigation, so Worker 2 can move 3 and cottage to start of improving WS floodplains.

[Hot Mustard]

Originally posted by Krill
Talk to AC, send them Polytheism accepted this turn and say we will send masonary accepted next turn, we can justifiably ask for IW or AH.

The bad news though is that MC is 647 beakers...construction is 500, so we are kinda screwed if we are to trade with AC for MC...

This is up to the diplomats, but I'm not in favour of making our communication and trade more complicated that we've already agreed. Next turn we'll be able to send them both, only 5 turns after we agreed to do so - 2 turns better than the 7 we promised.

[Hot Mustard]

Originally posted by Krill
Worker 1 should move 6 and start the cottage...then next turn immediately move 6 again and finish the irrigation, so Worker 2 can move 3 and cottage to start of improving WS floodplains.

Huh? That seems like a bunch of wasteful moving around to me - the farm will be ready in 2 turns anyways. And with the growth that will bring, we'll want to have the 2nd cottage ready fast.

[Krill]

Taz will have 2 improved tiles and won;t need a third for a number of turn, yet WS will need 3 iimproved tiles next turn and has one. So we should try to get WS' tiles improved be Tazs'. This way we are not wasting worker turns and are acheiving this aim.

[Hot Mustard]

No, it is wasting worker turns - you just don't see the waste until you have to move back to the unfinished improvements.

If this were gaining more than just 1 turn sooner on starting a cottage for WS then maybe...

I think we need more opinions - people!

I'm not playing this turn soon - we turned around the last one on a dime, so I feel no need to rush this one out.

[Krill]

1. It's not wasted because you still have that worker turn but into the cottage on that tile.
   
2. I think you come out with more gold/beakers if you do this than if you just leave W2 to cottage that tile, because getting the cottage one turn sooner gives us something like an two gold/beakers for every flood plain we're going to cottage. That isn;t exactly bad

[Arrian]

Krill's worker idea has merit. Winestrom needs another cottage before Taz does.

The one worker turn spent this turn by worker I doesn't go away.

T75: move 6, cottage, cancel
T76: move 6 again, irrigate, worker II moves 3 and starts cottage
T77: worker I moves 3 to join worker II to assist cottage.

Then, when that's done, they move as a team 8 and build another cottage (useable by either city).

Eventually, one or both gets back to the tile with 1 cottage turn invested and completes the cottage. Granted, there will almost certainly be a worker turn wasted in movement there... but I do think that's outweighed by the advantage of getting Winestrom new cottages ASAP.

If you wanted to do it without any turns wasted in transit, you could do this:

T75: worker I moves 6, cottage, cancel
T76: worker I moves 6, irrigate. Worker II moves 3, cottage.
T77: worker I moves 4, cottage.

-Arrian

[Arrian]

Does Vox have LoS on Winestrom? As in, if we move an axe into Wines, would Vox see it?

There is a slight chance that they gamble and bumrush the archer we have on the hill. If they do, it's probably close to 100% that they lose the first archer, but it's possible they could win with the second... at which point it would be nice to be able to immediately zap it (wounded, I imagine) with an axe.

Am I overthinking this possibility?

-Arrian

[Hot Mustard]

Originally posted by Arrian
Am I overthinking this possibility?

NO! More, and over, thinking is encouraged! :-)

I actually expected a lot more thinking and discussion within GS than we're seeing.

[Krill]

Vox can see into WS actually...the only place we can place teh axe where they won't see it is 2 of WS, but the axe would have to attack over the river, so I doubt that it would be worthwhile...

Arrians second proposal is the best one, because after the first cottage is complete both workers should move 8 to cottage, then they can complete Tazs' cottages and then one of them can wander over to cottage the last WS fp that is 2 of the city.

[Hot Mustard]

Originally posted by Arrian
T75: move 6, cottage, cancel
T76: move 6 again, irrigate, worker II moves 3 and starts cottage
T77: worker I moves 3 to join worker II to assist cottage.

Krill, I take it you mean his first proposal? The second one has a worker returning to the started-and-canceled cottage while still close by in order to not waste movement.

I get what you're saying though - I'm okay with either provided you are both in agreement.

[Blake]

Ok..

Worker : I think Krill's plan looks good. It's a commonly used technique to extract maximum work from the workers.

As for our skirmisher use, taking the sweet hill for fogbusting/denial is I think a good idea. We want to have a city there sooner rather than later and it'd suck if Vox entrenches an archer up there (the city may or may not be on the hill, but either way the archer would either need to be removed or would be a thorn in the side of the city).

I think we probably want to move the axe along the road so it can attack across the river and kill an intruding unit, if opportunity presents itself.

Vox know that we have a unit waiting in the wings and are simply tempting them. Or at least they should be assuming that because there's no possible reason for us to leave a city ungarrisoned.

Things are pretty much playing out as I predicted, Vox are going for an ineffectual "counter-choke" which really means just dancing out of range of our units, refusing to actually advance or put their units at serious risk. It's just something for them to do while passing the time and it forces us to get a couple of extra units, although it must be pretty annoying to them that we are only bothering with the minimal credible defense (that is forcing them to simply imagine what our defenses are... hahah).

[Krill]

Yeah first one sorry. It's hard to plan this stuff while playing a ladder game and talking on ts...

[Hot Mustard]

Re: Turn 75, 1040BC

Turn 75, 1040BC

Units

Warriors
Spinebreaker: 0.9/2 9/10 Exp (W2). Heal (6 turns)
Thug: 2/2, 0/2 Exp. Forted (EotS)

Skirmishers
Zidane: 4/4, 0/2 Exp Forted (Choke)
Materazzi: 4/4, 0/2 Exp. Forted (Choke)
Beckham: 4/4, 0/2 Exp. Forted (Choke)
Cantona: 4/4 0/2 Exp. Moved 9
Schumacher: 4/4 0/2 Exp. Forted on Hill

Axemen
Axemen I*: Moved into Winestrom
Axemen II*: Moved onto road hub

Scouts
Scout I: Moved 7-1-1

Workers
Worker I: Moved 6, Cottage, Cancel
Worker II: Farming (2 turns)


Science
Cranked rate down to 70%

Current (20/turn +8): Masonry (86/114) (1 turn)
Mathematics (235/357)

Cities

Eye of the Storm (Size 5)
WF: 1, 44, 74, 7, 78 (same)
Growth (-/turn): 0/30
Production (12/turn): Scout (15/15) complete, start Axeman (0/35)

Winestrom (Size 2)
WF: 4, 7 (same)
Growth (5/turn): 20/24 (1 turn)
Production (1/turn): Granary (21/60) (39 turns)

Taz City (Size 1)
WF: 41 (same)
Growth (3/turn): 18/22 (2 turns)
Production (1/turn): Skirmisher (6/25) (19 turns)











Okay, so first off - I missed something staring me right in the face in my earlier summary - there is a Vox warrior also threatening Schumacher. So I moved our first Axe into Winestrom, as it may be necessary to clean up Vox remnants on the hill, if Schumacher dies.

I did the Cottage & Cancel worker move, moved onto the Vox cow, and I took Blake's advice on claiming the hill as tad more distant from Vox, but which is the one better for us long term, in terms of claiming a city site.

Can anyone tell me why that filename dialog intermittently shows up in the shots? Very annoying.

[Arrian]

Well done, HM. I'm glad you put the axe in Winestrom.

-Arrian