RAH rules: The Neverending Saga - Page 6

War4ever · January 31, 2003, 17:13

WELL I GUESS I CAN LIVE WITH 120 FOR MARCOS ON ITS OWN, I WISH SOMEONE WOULD AGREE WITH THE PYRAMIDS/HG WONDERS

ColdWizard · January 31, 2003, 17:25

am i not someone?

Ming · January 31, 2003, 17:33

While I can understand your position on HG... PYRAMIDS makes no sense to raise. If you build it EARLY, when it will actually do you some good, it either cost you a bunch of early growth, or you got screwed on a better wonder. If you build it late, it isn't going to do you all that much good in our games... and by then, WLYD's have made it kind of obsolete

War4ever · January 31, 2003, 18:50

Quote:

Originally posted by Ming
While I can understand your position on HG... PYRAMIDS makes no sense to raise. If you build it EARLY, when it will actually do you some good, it either cost you a bunch of early growth, or you got screwed on a better wonder. If you build it late, it isn't going to do you all that much good in our games... and by then, WLYD's have made it kind of obsolete

actually building it early is ideal, for all those mountain ciites you can't grow b/c of lack of food....dont' understimate the power of pyramids......its a great long term wonder and a great expansion wonder.... in fact its the second best early wonder in the game and even that is debateable....some people like it better than HG

and of course the two together make it nearly impossible to catch anyone in a one night game ....all that for the price of Mikes.....

haha i will take HG Pyramids any day and lets see who wins

Ming · January 31, 2003, 20:13

Fine... build it before HG

My point is that you can catch up any lost growth through WLYD's quickly. If you build it at the cost of expansion early, it's not really going to do you much good in a typical one night game.

War4ever · January 31, 2003, 20:17

why do you all say at the cost of expansion, there is no cost, if you build caravans when you get trade, which we ALL do, getting hg or pryamids for 1/2 to 1/3 the cost of another wonder is such a bargain, so where is the tradeoff

ColdWizard · February 2, 2003, 19:47

i put in the GW as allowed in 4+ player games since there doesn't seem to be any opposition.

note to self: backups updated

DrSpike · February 2, 2003, 19:56

Quote:

Originally posted by War4ever
why do you all say at the cost of expansion, there is no cost, if you build caravans when you get trade, which we ALL do, getting hg or pryamids for 1/2 to 1/3 the cost of another wonder is such a bargain, so where is the tradeoff

War I am with you on the cost increase, but I have to disagree on the trade-off front. If you really really want a wonder you have to start it early..........forgoing some expansion.

Ming · February 2, 2003, 19:58

Quote:

Originally posted by War4ever
why do you all say at the cost of expansion, there is no cost, if you build caravans when you get trade, which we ALL do, getting hg or pryamids for 1/2 to 1/3 the cost of another wonder is such a bargain, so where is the tradeoff

Some people build it without using caravans

Plus... there is still a trade off... you are trading away a trade route or additional expansion

And Last... it's only 2/3 the cost of the next level of Wonders

War4ever · February 3, 2003, 02:27

Quote:

Originally posted by Ming

Some people build it without using caravans

Plus... there is still a trade off... you are trading away a trade route or additional expansion

And Last... it's only 2/3 the cost of the next level of Wonders

yes and those who choose to build it like myself are being punished, not you wimps that use four vans so whats your big beef?

the trade off is only if the cap demands the route, otherwise the first ones are food vans...so again i see no trade off...when the caravan pump comes and it always comes you always build 4 for an instant wonder and extra if your cities are big and demand it....but generally its the wonder that is the priority early..so again, where is the trade off...?? all your doing is building the same old same old.....

exactly, the next level of wonders..which IMO play less importance in the early game and cost MORE....so again i ask you....200 shields for one wonder which gives an edge over everything else in the ealry land grab, where no routine is broken for you b/c you use 4 vans for the route.....not too mention, the van pump lasts more than one round, its usually 2-3 and while your sets make a few roads and claim the new territory...

traditional game, 8-10 cites, 4 vans instant wonder, two more vans for two routes, another 4 -8 vans for another wonder and/or routes....meanwhile your other sets are in place after making roads....

the early game is so predictable....

anyways...its obvious its not going to happen and we are seeing things from completely differnt angles....i will concede your point on a trade off....that being expansion after 10 cities for vans....but really, lets be honest, who can't have 10 cities 6 turns after monarchy anyways ?????

my vote is no on marcos... bring back GW in games of 4 players only....and i guess the rest stays the same

rah · February 3, 2003, 10:17

The one point you keep mentioning is comparing the cost to later wonders. In my opinion, creating the 4 vans for HG is harder than the 8 for mics, because by the time I get MONO, by core cities are exclusively popping caravans, and I have more cities that I can dedicate to the task. I usually also have the roads in place to deliver them faster and I have more money to rush whatever else I need. So I don't think that part of your arguement is as strong as you're presenting.

RAH

Alexander's Horse · February 3, 2003, 19:35

I built HG last night - and London to a brick finbar was after it - I'm happy with the cost the way it is thank you

Ming · February 3, 2003, 19:48

Quote:

Originally posted by War4ever
yes and those who choose to build it like myself are being punished, not you wimps that use four vans so whats your big beef?

Now you aren't even making sense.

By making it more expensive, you are almost guaranteeing that you have to use caravans to build it.
It will be almost impossible to build it in the normal way before somebody can get trade and build 4 or EVEN 6 caravans...

We've seen people build it by 2800 BC (Xin Yu, often in 2x production games). By raising the cost, this wouldn't be possible.

So your suggestion just means that it's a race for trade and caravans to get it... instead of the choice/trade off of giving up on early expansion by building a wonder instead of cranking out settlers... Yes, one of those trade offs you seem to be ignoring

Also...

Quote:

the trade off is only if the cap demands the route, otherwise the first ones are food vans...

Again... what the heck are you talking about. If you have a decent trade capital... and a direct road route to another city that has decent trade, even a non demanded commodity can be good, and still worth delivering for the money and science boost... again, another "trade off"

War4ever · February 3, 2003, 21:14

ok ming your right

rah · February 4, 2003, 09:24

Darn, just when I was thinking of proposing 250 shields.

RAH

DrSpike · February 4, 2003, 09:29

Not sure if you are just stirring Rah but think 250 is spot on for HG, and maybe pyramids. The point above about later wonders being easier despite their higher cost is a fair one though........I think to be consistent the whole wonder cost structure should be revamped.....but that is probably too much effort.

rah · February 4, 2003, 10:13

The original intents was not to muck with the rules.txt file, due to some of the incidents involving changes to it.

The only reason it was done with oracle was because no one ever built it. On HG and Pyr., War has made some good arguements changing them based on the cost for other wonders. I can see his point on some of them and on others I choose to dissagree. My problem is that I view it like the instant replay rule in football. Unless there is indisputable proof that the rules.txt needs to changed, don't change it. (consensus is usually a good indicater) War's arguement (while having some valid points) doesn't seem indisputable to me. Which I'm sure frustrates him since I'm sure he believes it is.

That's why I brought up MP. Just like Oracle, no one ever builds it in our games (except on the last turn sometimes just to build a wonder, or if they get trapped by other wonders being built). I was just putting out feelers on how low we would have to make it before someone would actually desire to build it. I fear War4 is using it for payback and saying 200, Which he knows can't be right since no one ever builds it.

The GW is a good example. Consensus was that we shouldn't use it but after considerable experience, people are now thinking differently. This doesn't seem to have happened with Oracle.

RAH
It was never my intent to redo the entire wonder rules.

DrSpike · February 4, 2003, 10:50

Point taken, and it _is_ harder (though not impossible) to make a case for increasing the cost of just one wonder. It's just that if I was building the game from scratch I would increase the cost of most wonders.

rah · February 4, 2003, 11:22

The only ones are the early ones. Once you have your infrastructure built, I always have spare caravans in storage for emergencies so the cost of later wonders is really immaterial. But I do consider those early caravans more valuable because they represent a higher percentage of my production capacity at that time so Most of the early wonders aren't cheap.

RAH

War4ever · February 4, 2003, 11:59

i concede the point....its not that i feel as though i am right or wrong.....you have pointed out many areas of my arguement which have validity btw (probably just being nice)

either way it really makes no difference to me...i don't like changing marcos b/c it really has little value in a game like ours and all your doing is rewarding someone who doesnt take chances to see who and what every one has....so my vote is to keep marco where he is .

The GW is only going to be built by those who are wimps.... er i mean those whom are under extreme pressure and if we only allow if in 4 player games that makes me happy.

i am finished with my crusade on pyramids or HG...... while i will concede the trade off point that many are trying to valiantly make here on the forums, i still feel that at only 200 shields, (yes thats five settlers) and a choice

that both are great wonders and come very cheaply no matter how you look at it. They allow for catch up or that early lead at 1/3 -1/2 of the cost of the next round of happies/ "valuable" wonders. Which by then if you can't put together afew cities to crank caravans, you have no business playing this game.
However, we have all learned a bit over the last few weeks and i know that some players have deliberately not built HG or pyramids till later just to prove their point , seems to be a trend i have started

except i still don't build it.

anyways...looking forward to friday when we can play a game.

oh and the arguement about the higher capacity Rah...come on now....EVERYone once they have 8-10 cities does a mini caravan pump........how do you think all those wonders are being built....good will

so reality dictates that if were all using the same strategy for the most part, its really just a race to monarchy and trade, so that someone can pick off HG......

at least that used to be the way you played almost EVERY game.no offence.....

But we all know your tactics can change as ferrets are known to be crafty

rah · February 4, 2003, 13:21

My strat on HG has changed over the years. I used to blindly race for it. Now I don't. In fact the war academy is a higher priority in most games for me. I will never research pottery before trade because I hate seeing it built while I'm still researching it. (if I get it from a hut, and I'm not too far behind, I will go agressive for it, just to get something from the deviation off the desired path)

But you are correct, it is a sweet wonder that makes celebrating quite easy. SO, if it's still available later when I know I will have the caravans ready and I can quickly develop the tech, you have to give it a shot. When Ming or Berz are in the game, it's usually built by the time I will even consider it. While ming will go for trade first, berz, Xin and a few others will try it before trade. (unless you can keep them occupied with some troops so they're concentrating on defense

)

I have gotten HG more frequently lately, but that's because it's not being built as early as it was. The last game I got it, I think it was around 1600, and you promptly built leo's just a few turns later. If you're beelining for invention gunpowder and metalurgy, I really don't want to be too far behind in techs.

Pikes and cats can be nasty, but muskets and cannons are death.

Scouse Gits · February 4, 2003, 14:51

Slightly off topic I fear but rah you say "to get something from the deviation off the desired path" indicating that Pottery is not your chosen 'junk tech' that has to be acquired on the route to Monarchy.
So what is your chosen junk tech assuming that you don't pop WC from a hut?

SG[1]

rah · February 4, 2003, 15:11

in raging horde. Bronze gives you three benifits,
defense, buying the second rack, and on the way to currency/trade. Or horse, defense(through offense), buying up the second rack, faster exploring.

Since I'm conservative and like to have defense before 3250 (barb time), I'll usually go bronze.

Rich

DrSpike · February 4, 2003, 15:15

Bronze for me most times, with horsies and writing preferable to pottery most of the time. Bronze is most flexible.......going pottery so early can backfire.

rah · February 4, 2003, 15:30

And you must remember that in 2x on small rocks, your opponents can be right on top of you before 3200, before you've surrounded your cap. Nothing discourages early aggression than losing the first couple of encounters. Or horses coming out your cities to kill those non chariot and archer aggressors.

Early in the game your cap is so vulnerable. You've just spit out that first settler, you cap is size one again and is only defended by a warrior. That wandering horse that you got from a hut, stumbles on another's cap and there's only a warrior defending. Suprise attack bonus and their game is over. I know others will stay with the warrior defense early on, but I feel a lot better once that phalanx is built. (even though it costs me a rack that could have gone to a settler)

War4ever · February 4, 2003, 17:09

lol i stay with the warrior defence as long as i can....but your right, if an enemy archer or chariot shows up, good night irene....ah the chances we take.

junk tech is always bronze in small mp games, in large SP games i like horsies to explore with, and to defend my horde or warriors

i agree that HG is playing a lessor role these days, my arguement would have had more merit 3+ yrs ago when HG was built by 2500 bc most games

i agree that STWA is a better wonder in our games..especially since its difficult to plop more than 25 cities in our games now....

the new race has been for STWA and not HG the last couple of months...which is fun b/c i can often win that race

i have revamped my trade strategy again...we shall see how it works, my game has become too predictable..so we will try something new out

rah · February 4, 2003, 17:33

Yep, you're certainly right. Three years ago when HG was always being built by 2800-2500, I would have leaned more towards your arguement. (the 2800 was put in there as a tribute to XIN) but when it's not being built till 1800 or 1600, obviously players like you and me have determined that we have other priorities. While you claim that you intentionaly don't build it. I'm claiming that I have other priorities that early (STWA). BUT, eventually if it's still there, "what the heck".

War4ever · February 4, 2003, 23:46

well i think its pretty obvious i don't build it for a reason..i have crusaded this way for quite some time

we both know this to be true....you on the other hand have reframed from building it just to spite me for as long as possible

DrSpike · February 5, 2003, 05:48

Is War saying he doesn't build it to give you guys a chance?

War4ever · February 5, 2003, 12:52

no, i am saying i don't build it b/c i believe it makes you lazy

in a duel, that is different, the benefits are much larger....in a four player game perhaps not so much anymore...but 3 yrs ago...different story.