Impact of huts on 2x or 1x - Page 2

War4ever · May 10, 2002, 18:50

yes slowwhand....that is all i meant, Rah and i were seeing it from different angles......

rah · May 13, 2002, 09:38

After playing a 1x1x game this weekend, I'm even more convinced that huts add a highler level of luck in 1x games.

In 2x games, you can make up for bad hut luck a lot easier.

Getting that non-unit 2x mov out of that first hut is a much bigger advantage in 1x, since it takes longer to get units out on the board.

Getting that tech hut on or off the path is a big difference. It could make a 20 turn diffence to Monarchy. Getting to monarchy faster is much more important in 1x just to have 3 units per city without support costs. (besides the faster growth and better shields and arrows)

I am not arguing the merits ov 2x vs 1x. Just saying that hut luck is more important in 1x games.

Rich

SlowwHand · May 13, 2002, 09:48

I agree, Rah. But it's stil one of those "half full or half empty" propositions.

rah · May 13, 2002, 10:02

I don't know. In a 2x games you can many units out exploring quite quickly so while you always love to get non-units it's not critical. In 1x your cities can't support more than a unit or two without crippling any building capabilities, it and take forever to build them.
And getting the 50 bucks from a hut might save you only 3 or 4 turns in 2x spitting out that settler, but in 1x it can save 7-8 turns.

SlowwHand · May 13, 2002, 10:13

And that's the 2 sides of the coin.
War4 is giving examples of how a person can get a good lead from huts in 2X.
The other side is that you can get set back from huts worse in 1X.

Of course, I'm basing this summary on the belief I understand you both, which is certainly a reach.

Eyes_Of_Night · May 13, 2002, 11:18

There isn't even any comparison. 4 cities to 1 in 1x1x, game over. 4 cities to 1 in 2x2x, challenging, but the game is far from over. If a guy gets a good start in 1x1x you can't do anything about it. And if the guy has a whale in his capital on 1x1x it is a HUGE advantage. Everything in 1x1x is more unbalanced than in 2x2x. You can just run away with a lead in 1x1x, in 2x2x the game isn't over yet.

rah · May 13, 2002, 11:24

ALL RIGHT EYES> Now it just leaves Markus. (we'll see what kind of man is he

)

I was hoping to get your opinion on this one. Thanks, for not muddying the waters by talking about whether 2x or 1x is better.
AND I agree with you 100%

SlowwHand · May 13, 2002, 12:49

Yeah well, difference of opinion is what makes a horserace.

rah · May 13, 2002, 13:30

Believe it or not, I like dissagreements. It's the best way to challange your own beliefs. (which doesn't seem to happen as much as you get older). Others can provide arguements that I won't think of.
I can see what War4 and Markus are trying to say. But after listening, I'm not convinced yet and stand by my original opinion.
Of course, I doubt I convinced them either

But maybe with a little help from others.

Rich

markusf · May 13, 2002, 15:05

Quote:

Originally posted by EyesOfNight
There isn't even any comparison. 4 cities to 1 in 1x1x, game over. 4 cities to 1 in 2x2x, challenging, but the game is far from over. If a guy gets a good start in 1x1x you can't do anything about it. And if the guy has a whale in his capital on 1x1x it is a HUGE advantage. Everything in 1x1x is more unbalanced than in 2x2x. You can just run away with a lead in 1x1x, in 2x2x the game isn't over yet.

Well for those of us that don't change the riot factor to chieften level its a lot harder.

on diety, unhappiness will kill your civ. In case people haven't noticed if you build more then 7 cities on diety there is no way those cities are going to celebrate to size 8. For every city over 7 one size 3 city can't celebrate on a med map. Once you go to rep and have celebrated up to size 8, your techs at 2-3 while someone with 15 cities is stuck at 5-12/turn because they couldn't celebrate. (assuming niether has HG) Not to mention a player with 7 or 8 big cities can then expand like crazy, and build marketplaces in size 8 cities. (~30 gold/science a city)

rah · May 13, 2002, 15:32

Even if we limit the discussion to number of cities, The person that gets to 7 cities first has a heck of an advantage.

markusf · May 13, 2002, 15:41

Quote:

Originally posted by rah
Even if we limit the discussion to number of cities, The person that gets to 7 cities first has a heck of an advantage.

lol, you haven't played enough.. In 1x you just have no clue how well you are doing in a duel until the happy wonders are built. If your playing in a game with 3 or 4 players, happy wonders don't even matter, the onely thing that matters is economic power. If your playing with 4 players, with a 2 on 2 if 2 players use trade extensively they will complete destroy the other 2 even if they build every single wonder. In 2x if you build HG and mikes on diety there is no stopping you.

rah · May 13, 2002, 15:46

What the heck does any of that have to do with Huts. quit changing the subject. Except that they help you get wherever you want to go/ or kill you, and he who gets lucky has one heck of an advantage.

Eyes_Of_Night · May 13, 2002, 16:35

This is just markus trying to tell the world that he is indeed a "trade god" and that there is no stopping his trade genius. Which is why King is no longer a real settings because on King it's too easy to stop his trade strategy. Therefore Deity will now become the official way of play.

atawa · May 13, 2002, 17:28

Quote:

Originally posted by markusf
For every city over 7 one size 3 city can't celebrate on a med map.

So if I understand correctly if you have 10 city's only 4 can celebrate to size 8?

rah · May 13, 2002, 17:49

Quote:

Originally posted by EyesOfNight
Therefore Deity will now become the official way of play.

There is no official "level", that is determined by the players.

But having said that. 99% of the games I've played in the last 3 years have been deity, So I won't accuse Markus of making me play deity level.

RAH

Still waiting for Markus to join the fun. That stealth bomber looks so out of place

Ming · May 13, 2002, 17:55

Quote:

Originally posted by rah
That stealth bomber looks so out of place

Yeah... but if you think about it... the stealth bomber is probably a bigger joke than the muppets

markusf · May 13, 2002, 18:01

Quote:

Originally posted by atawa

So if I understand correctly if you have 10 city's only 4 can celebrate to size 8?

I believe 8, that is your size 3 city won't go into we love the king day even if you have 60 luxeries.

SlowwHand · May 13, 2002, 18:02

...the stealth bomber is probably a bigger joke than the muppets ?
HEY!

markusf · May 13, 2002, 18:05

Quote:

Originally posted by EyesOfNight
This is just markus trying to tell the world that he is indeed a "trade god" and that there is no stopping his trade genius. Which is why King is no longer a real settings because on King it's too easy to stop his trade strategy. Therefore Deity will now become the official way of play.

Gee funny, i don't ever remember posting anything about king since no one here plays using those settings. But none the less Trade beats all, king or not.
Of course if your playing duels trade doesn't apply, unless you can afford it and the reward is extremely high.

Deity Dude · May 13, 2002, 18:13

In general, the impact (postive or negative) of any single unit, city or tech is half as important in 2x1x as it is in 1x1x. As other posters have pointed out, there are numerous modifiers to this simple postulate but, in general, the postulate holds true.

This holds true for all aspects of the 2x1x game vs 1x1x game not just hut luck. (IMO) Thus, each individual strategic decision is roughly half as important.

Note: I am certainly not saying that 2x1x is a less strategic for this reason, I am just saying each individual decision becomes less important because its impact can be made up twice as quickly.

Pick the strategic decision it really doesnt matter; move a unit incorrectly and lose it - you can replace it twice as fast; spend gold foolishly - you can replace it twice as fast; etc.

markusf · May 13, 2002, 18:15

Quote:

Originally posted by rah
What the heck does any of that have to do with Huts. quit changing the subject. Except that they help you get wherever you want to go/ or kill you, and he who gets lucky has one heck of an advantage.

A common strat is to get to go alpha, code of laws and try and find a hut.. if you get bronze or horse you can go straight to monarchy. Now if you find a non monarchy tech just stop tipping huts! After you get monarchy go open all the huts you can find.

Quote:

and he who gets lucky has one heck of an advantage.

Sure you can get a tech or 2 froms huts, but the more techs you have the faster my tech rate is going to get (makes little dif on 2x but huge in 1x. You can't build more then 5 cities in dep, you can't build more then 7 -13 cities in monarchy without temples.. You have no chance to get a run away lead at the start of the game. You can have few cities and wonders, or many cities and no wonders. Its extremely hard to have many cities + wonders

atawa · May 13, 2002, 18:24

Quote:

Originally posted by Deity Dude
This holds true for all aspects of the 2x1x game vs 1x1x game not just hut luck. (IMO) Thus, each individual strategic decision is roughly half as important.

Note: I am certainly not saying that 2x1x is a less strategic for this reason, I am just saying each individual decision becomes less important because its impact can be made up twice as quickly.

You might replace units twice as fast etc but remember the other player plays 2x1x too so basicly you're still one unit behind....

Deity Dude · May 13, 2002, 19:38

Quote:

Originally posted by atawa

You might replace units twice as fast etc but remember the other player plays 2x1x too so basicly you're still one unit behind....

Yes but the 1 unit lead is less important in a 2x1x game. For example: In a 2x1x game you can build 2 horses in the time you can build 1 in a 1x1x game. Lets say it takes 2 turns in the 2x game and 4 turns in 1x game. If I lose 1 horse in the 2x1x game our relative strength at that moment is 2 - 1 in your favor and it will take me 2 turns to replace it. In the 1x1x game our relative strength will be 1 - 0 and it will take me 4 turns to replace it. I'd much rather be down 2-1 for 2 turns then 1 - 0 for 4 turns

To carry that 1 step further. A 2-1 advantage for 2 turns gives you the potential of uncovering 8 squares to my 4. A 1-0 advantage for 4 turns gives you the potential of uncovering 8 squares to my none.

Eyes_Of_Night · May 13, 2002, 20:08

"Note: I am certainly not saying that 2x1x is a less strategic for this reason, I am just saying each individual decision becomes less important because its impact can be made up twice as quickly.

Pick the strategic decision it really doesnt matter; move a unit incorrectly and lose it - you can replace it twice as fast; spend gold foolishly - you can replace it twice as fast; etc."

You're absolutely right. I've been so blind. Lets meet on the zone and play 2x1x so you can show me how foolishly you can spend gold yet still be able to win.

rah · May 13, 2002, 21:44

The two games are completely different, SP vs. MP
The two games are quite different, 2x vs 1x.
The two games are different, deity vs king.
The two game vary, raging vs. villages
All are possibilities and I don't believe any can claim to be "pure".

Different strokes for different folks
But hut luck is more important in 1x

RAH

Deity Dude · May 13, 2002, 21:57

Quote:

Originally posted by EyesOfNight
You're absolutely right. I've been so blind. Lets meet on the zone and play 2x1x so you can show me how foolishly you can spend gold yet still be able to win.

Eyes the only time we played 2x1x you quit in about 2000bc and blamed it on being on an island. To be fair you kicked my ass in the only 2x2x game we played. BUT MY POST WASN"T INTENDED TO GET IN A FLAME WAR WITH YOU. Nor was it intended to say that I could "foolishly spend gold" and beat you or any other good player.

It was an attempt to contribute my point of view to an intelligent discussion regarding the impact of huts in a 2x1x game vs a 1x1x game.

As always, I am willing to play you 2x1x or 1x1x anytime you want but please save you BS for someone else.

Deity Dude · May 13, 2002, 22:10

Quote:

Originally posted by rah
The two games are completely different, SP vs. MP
The two games are quite different, 2x vs 1x.
The two games are different, deity vs king.
The two game vary, raging vs. villages
All are possibilities and I don't believe any can claim to be "pure".

Different strokes for different folks
But hut luck is more important in 1x

RAH

RAH you summed it up perfectly.

Maybe I was misunderstood, but as I said in my post - I don't consider 2x1x less strategic then 1x1x. I do think every individual tactical decision has less of a total impact in a 2x1x game then a 1x1x game for the reasons I stated earlier.

RAH, I think you would agree but maybe not, if 50 gold is less important/impactful if discovered in a hut in a 2x1x game (as you said) then wouldn't it also be less important/impactful if that 50 gold were lost in another way in a 2x1x game then a 1x1x game.

Again, I'm not saying that one is a better game (although I know which I prefer). What I am saying is if production is doubled in one game vs the other, then a double amount of output is equal between the 2 games (i.e. 100 gold in a 2x1x game = 50 gold in a 1x1x game or 2 settlers in a 2x1x game = 1 settler in a 1x1x game) As I also said, there are a lot of modifiers to the simple ratio stated here - but in general I believe it to be true.

markusf · May 14, 2002, 01:29

With the settings rah plays there is no stratagy. Build on mountains and attack is impossible.

SmartFart · May 14, 2002, 03:01

I have to agree with Markus. Even hills are impenetrable. In x1x1 you can build on mountains,but if you do it in early game you're doomed.