AU207: Big Planet - Strategy, Spoilers and Comments

[badams52]

Originally posted by vulture
Yup, you're mistaken. The effect of 'rolling again' if you get a bad outcome is to increase the probabilities of all good outcomes. The ratio of probabilities of good outcomes remain the same, but they 'expand' to fill up the space taken by the bad outcomes (eg if 2 good outcomes have probilities of 50% and 25%, and the reroll probability if 25%, then the final probabilities for the good outcomes are 66.7% and 33.3%)

Correct me if I'm wrong Catt, but it sounds like the case of the expansionist civ, there's reroll. In Catt's case of having no offensive units, the barb probability is ignored with the RNG shortened.

Let's make the numbers simple, let's say there are 100 possibilities for a roll, science has 40, settler has 10, barbs has 20, empty has 20 and map has 10 (I know there are more possibilties, but let's keep it simple).

In the case of expansionist, re reroll for barbs effectively redistributing the 20 by percentage over the remaining and get 50% science, 25% empty, 12.5% map and 12.5% settler.

Now if we ignore the barbs, we only have 80 possibilities on the rolls, which is to say 40/80 = 50% for science, 20/80 = 25% for empty, 10/80 = 12.5% for map and 10/80 = 12.5% for settler.

On the other hand, if the extra 20 taken out are moved to another possiblilty like empty, then you'd see 40% for science, 40% for empty, 10% for map and 10% for settler.

If the first case is the way it's calculated, then it is the same as expansionist, if it's the latter or a slight variant, then they are indeed different.

edit: I reread catt's original comment and think as thus: In all cases, the reroll happens if an outcome is deemed as unavailable (i.e. settler when you already have one). In this case, an expansionist civ vs. a non expasionist civ without a milirary unit will receive the same percentages for goody hut outcomes as both will get rerolls on the barb outcome.

[vulture]

badams (and Catt): Sorry - I didn't read Catt's post carefully enough. I suspect you're right, that blocking the barbarian option by not having a warrior gives you the same set of probabilities as an expansionist civ, although I suppose it is possible that the expansionist civs handle it in a slightly different way, or have a lower 'empty hut' probability than this. But broadly speaking, I guess you're right. Mea culpa.

[Catt]

vulture and badams52 - thanks for the input. I was unclear in my original post but you guys figured out my point.

Asking my question more clearly might have looked like this: Is the expansionist advantage with respect to goody huts an actual modification of outcome probabilities themselves, or simply the result of the "re-roll" concept I had previously inferred from Firaxian comment? If the advantage is solely a result of the "re-roll," does this same "re-roll" function work in the same way for non-expansionist civs when bad outcomes are temporarily prohibited to that civ?

I have always operated on the belief that the "re-roll" concept applies equally and that therefore an expansionist and non-expansionist civ have equal chances of a good outcome if the bad outcome is temporarily prohibited. But I've never seen any test or definitive statement from Firaxis, and I guess I wouldn't be surprised if the whole system works differently. I would be mildly surprised to find that the hypothetical 20% chance of barbs would just be moved into the "empty" or "gold" outcomes if barbs were unavailable -- if only because this function would seem to represent additional programming work to solve a problem already solved in a different way for expansionist civs.

Catt

[Catt]

Originally posted by Dominae


Glancing at your screenshot, I'm reminded at how pitiful even the most wonderful and modern cities look when you take the time to look at their City View. Would it be too much to ask to have buildings litter the landscape, instead of just a few huddled together amongst a sea of Wonders?!? Sigh.

I almost never look at the city view -- I did this time just to see what a wonder-rich city might look like. Like you I was quite underwhelmed.

Another peaceful game. Well done Catt. I await your comments in this game, to see if they match some of my own observations concerning Huge maps.

I wish I hadn't vowed peace in this one -- I think it would have been fun to seize the continent (but it would have taken a long time). Additional comments tonight, probably. I'm still pretty uncertain how to apply my thoughts on this game -- with only this one recent huge map game under my belt, I keep wondering if X or Y was due primarily to the map size or to the land features / available terrain / etc. -- in particular with this world, huge swaths of mountain ranges made the land available for settlements much less than it otherwise might have been; how much of an effect did this have on civ and tech progression, etc.?? Just don't have a good feel yet.

Catt

[Catt]

Originally posted by Mountain Sage

With the French and the Alphabet for free, I almost always beeline for Literature and the GL, but I never trade Literature until a few turns before the completion of the GL, even if I know I miss some great deals.
The GL pays me back then the non-traded Techs handsomely.

I briefly considered trading my Pyramids for the GL, but the diversity in starting techs available for trade, and subseqent trades for 2nd and 3rd level techs, meant that, in my game, the GL was probably going to net me less than ten techs. So my choice was Pyramids and game-long free granaries, or GL for a few techs and the culture. I went with the Pyramids and then (since I was experimenting and playing more of a role-playing game than one of efficiency) I decided that the glory of France required building every wonder that offered maintenance-free buildings -- so I would have to get the Pyramids, Sun Tzu's, Smith's, and the Internet if the game got there. I really enjoyed looking at city views and seeing maintenance-free granaries, barracks, markets, banks, harbors, etc.

Afterwards, I either go for Construction (to get an Aqueduct asap, for size 8-9 cities for further gold and shields for Wonders) or Monarchy (for the HG). In your opinion, which is best?

Depends - I want aqueducts available as soon as they are needed -- i.e., if there is a lot of land to REX, aqueducts become less time-sensitive but if free land is limited, I will want Construction soon. I'm not a huge fan of the HG -- I think it's helpful in a "wonder-designated" city for the 3 content people, but the 1 additional content citizen in each city isn't a huge inducement to me, especially since it goes away at Steam Power. I like the HG, but I rarely target it as a "need-to-have" or a "very-much-want-to-have."

Catt

[Chemical Ollie]

Guess what? I installed PtW and didn't get it to work, then found this in the Readme:

NOTE: TBS Santa Cruz sound cards can cause some compatibility problems with Play the World.

[Arrian]

I finished yesterday after putting in one of those "drink a lot of beer and play civ until 3:00 am on Friday night" followed by one of those "lounge around the house playing civ and suffering under a minor hangover on Saturday" experiences...

That sounds awfully familiar for some reason...

Anyway, sorry but I've nothing to report at this time. I haven't played a single turn since my last report.

I recently returned from a Carribean cruise, and have barely touched the computer (at home). But I intend to pick up AU207 again soon.

I'm relishing the thought of pouring my Knights into Germany (and perhaps hitting Zululand too... depending on whether or not I can hit the Mongols with Knights before they get musketmen. If I can, the Knight horde will ride north and show Ghengis Khan what he should be doing! If not, the Zulu will get splattered until I have Cavalry, at which point I'll deal with the Mongols).

Since my "frontier" region is relatively productive with courthouses, my intention is to place my FP further north. Probably in Germany. Of course, I'll need a leader. I think I should be able to muster one, what with all the fighting I'm planning on.

-Arrian

[Arrian]

*Arrian cues the Imperial March*

WE RIDE! (670AD):

[Arrian]

In 670 AD I had roughly 50 Knights. I also had some other riff-raff (such as Med. Inf & a few pikemen).

Sistine, Leos, Sun Tzu (a few turns after this) all done.

Suffice it to say that Germany went down hard. By 800AD they were done (1 island city).

Also, in 730 AD, a nice thing happened:

[Arrian]

Just as I was mopping up Germany, I noticed some Japanese units coming my way.

*sigh* The LAST civ I wanted to fight.

******. Anyway, they declared war. So I enlisted the Zulu in an alliance. Fine, I figure, no problem. I figured could still advance on my primary objective: America (I was looking at prospective FP locations, and the top three cities I indentified were American).

A couple of turns later, having made peace with Germany, I see Mongolian units coming for me. So I sign an alliance with the Mongols vs. Japan plus a RoP. That next turn, the Mongols violated our RoP and attacked me (and lost a horseman to a pikeman). Filthy jerks.

So now I'm at war with two civs I didn't want to fight yet. A true 2-front war. I signed a RoP with America to kill some Mongolian units, and have therefore accepted that I will not invade America for 20 more turns. Damnit.

So I used my leader for an army. Before I even fought a battle, I generated a 2nd leader (ok, that was pretty good luck, I'll admit). Now HE is being saved for the FP (no wonders available... I'm researching Education at 40 turn pace... twentysomeodd left to go, and I'm still ahead in tech). It is 800 AD. Both Japan and Mongolia have won battles with their UUs. BLAH! I have 53 Knights, 45 of which are available "in theatre." I'm not concerned about losing ground, but I am concerned about not being able to gain much. I'm really worried about the AI getting gunpowder (but, since they don't have invention yet, I've got some time). I will shortly switch to Monarchy to avoid WW. Right now, I'm still a republic and am raking in cash which I've been using to rushbuy culture and defense in Germany. That's pretty much done, and my unit upgrades are done for now, so the loss of commerce from the switch won't hurt too badly.

I'm highly annoyed at Japan & Mongolia, though part of me is kinda impressed with the AI. FOR ONCE, the AI saw me coming and decided to do something about it (maybe) before it was too late. I still think I should be able to hurt the Mongols enough to knock them out of the war so I can wheel on America and get that FP down. Worst comes to worst, I could rush it in Germany, but if you know the map, you know that isn't optimal. And I'm all about optimal.

I won't get much more play in until next week, but I fully intend to finish, even if I'm way late compared to you guys.

'night!

-Arrian

[badams52]

I'm really looking forward to your future posts Arrian to see if you can get UP.

Originally posted by Arrian
I'm highly annoyed at Japan & Mongolia, though part of me is kinda impressed with the AI. FOR ONCE, the AI saw me coming and decided to do something about it (maybe) before it was too late. I still think I should be able to hurt the Mongols enough to knock them out of the war so I can wheel on America and get that FP down. Worst comes to worst, I could rush it in Germany, but if you know the map, you know that isn't optimal. And I'm all about optimal.

I'm just thinking it's not that the AI saw you coming, but you are up against agressive civs. From memory, I believe Japan and Mongolia love to fight. Surprised Mongolia turned on you though.

Sounds like you're in a good position still, though samurai are a difficult lot.

Also just wonder what you think about building your FP near the palace with your leader then palace jump later with a new leader you get from all the war going on. I seem to remember you were in favor of quick FP builds earlier...

[Mountain Sage]

Catt,

Thanks for the explanation.
If you have time, post as many screenshots as you can. Since we have the same playstyle, I'd really to see how somebody else plays the French. The differences would be fascinating (at least for me )

[vulture]

The best laid plans of mice and men...

From the archives, we are proud to present the original plan for operation 'invade the heck out of Babylon', as drawn up by General Billoir down the pub one evening on the back of a beermat. The original plan was for simultaneous stikes against Ellipi and Ur. The attack on Ellipi went well, taking two groups of slaves outside the town and another two from a settler inside the town. As previously metioned, the attack on Ur was frustrated by Hammurbai managing to get 3 spearmen and 3 bowmen into the town before the French forces could arrive.

As an aside, since Babylon is now known as Iraq, I found the French invasion of Iraq rather ironic given the current state of affairs. Especially since I was also allied with the Germans against Afghanistan - sorry, the Mongols. I was wondering if Babylon was set up as the punchbag deliberately...

The battle for Ur turned into a protracted affair. My first wave had to withdraw to heal, as the second wave moved in, although due to losses taking out a marauding spearman threatening to recapture my slaves they were nowehere near enough to gtake the town. A lone Babylonian bowman launched a counterattack against Ellipi. he was killed, leaving a wounded swordman on the hill. Another bowman attacked, killing him, leaving a wounded bowman. I counterattacked, leaving a wounded swordsnman...

This war of attritition continued for a while. Although I was quite happy to exchange units on a one-for-one basis like this, since I could out-produce Babylon (even though it was in its golden age), it slowed down my buildup considerably. Eventually I managed to get a large enough force in position, and took Ur. A brief rest to heal wounds, and the horsemen roder to Babylon, while swordsmen took out bowmen terrorists wandering the mountains. Babylon fell quickly to the stack of horsemen.

[vulture]

Revenge of the cheese eating surrender monkeys

In the original plan, with Hammurabi having lost his capitol and the great lighthous, this was the point at which he would capitulate and give up his remaining cities in return for peace. Actually, he'd been quite busy settling new towns up in the northwest (in the jungle) during the war, but I was surprised when he wouldn't give me more than one town for peace. In particular, I wanted Eridu, which was just past the NW chokepoint, and just south of the German town on the spices.

Luckily we'd been developing a contingency plan, and been moving a number of medieval infantry (newely discovered fuedalism) and horsemen in that direction, just in case of such an eventuality. The horsmen in Babylon took the new capitol, the last Babylonian city left in their starting area right on the southern tip of the continent, and the infantry swarmed through the jungle to Eridu. Even after the second capitol fell, they wouldn't give up Eridu, so I'm guessing that there are some undisclosed resoures in the jungle around there.

On the hills overlooking Eridu, we could see a Bowman outside the town. faced with the choice between attacking across a river, or moving to hills on the other side and attacking from there (with the bowman having moved into the town), we decided to go for the quick option and launch a damp attack. As an incentive for this dangerous mission, Joan said that Paris would build a monument to those who died to take Eridu.

The monument, which I saw on my way here this morning, read "This is dedicated to Arnoud Betsen, who sustained a nasty cut to his upper leg in the battle of Eridu".

Babylonians resistance having melted away completely, we were prepared to accept peace in return for two more towns, one in 'my' land on the subcontinent, and one in the NW jungle. Hammurabi was left with two towns in the jungle, producing a grand total of 2 shield each for the rest of his golden age.

Curiously, depsite having iron and horses, I only ever saw one swordsman and no horsemen at all. They stuck with the all-purpose bowmen - I guess getting troops out quickly was more important that getting good troops.

So now there is only one non-French town on the subcontinent (the land between the two chokepoints), and we have begun to expand beyond the subcontinent into the wider world.

[vulture]

Meanwhile, in other news...

Parallel to the Babylonian war, there was plenty of othet stuff going on. A few turns after I got them into an alliance aganist the Mongols, the Germans backed out and made peace. I bribed the backwards Zulu into an alliance instead, although they wouldn't do my defending for me.

My research plan worked well enough - I was the first to get engineering, and traded for monotheism and feudalism. Due to the round of upgrading coming up for spearmen->pikemen (and swordsmen->medieval infantry, horsemen->knights) I thought my best bet next was to turn research off and build up cash for upgrades and buying the next techs as soon as they were available. Theology and invention soon appeared on the scene. I bought theology, but couldn't afford to trade for invention, so set to reasearching printing press as fast as I could afford to use for trade bait.

Somewhere around this time, Japan spontaneously declared war on the Mongols. Shortly after America joined in as well, all without alliances. Perhaps they were all getting narked off with Mongol hordes wandering through their territory to attack the Zulus.

Peace was soon negotiated between France and the Babylonians, and those good old industrious workers got started on connecting the frontier towns to civilisation via the mountain roads.

Next world event was the Mongols declaring war on the Germans! As if they didn't have enough on their plate already. Then our alliance with the Zulu finished its 20 turns, so we could back out of the war with no penalties, and be the only civ at peace with the Mongols. Good trading opportunities... (and the Mongols were willing to give up some gold for peace as well).

I'd had to pay 36 gold per turn to the US for invention, but was making most of this back from selling theology to the mongols for 26 per turn (all they could afford).

The Mongols, with no cash and no gold per turn, decided to try and recoup their losses. They demanded my territory map and 17 gold. Since I was getting 32 per turn off them, I decided to give in, even though they'd have to have been crazy to declare war on yet another civ - they'd already lost a town or two to the Americans.

Quick risk-reward calculation: Since there were 18 turns of me getting 32 gpt from the mongols, and they wanted 17 gold, I could only tell them to stuff it if there was less than 3% chance they'd declare war. Hah! And take into account the loss of ability to buy tech on gpt deals, and its even worse. Definitely time to bow to the pressure.

I'm now 1 turn from printing press. 3 civs have invention and chivalry. The Mongols have chivalry, but not invention. Obviously the plan is to trade for invention, then got chivalry from the Mongols. Then hoard cash to buy the next tech, since no doubt both gunpwder and education are being researched already.

A war against Germany is in the offing. Since they are fighting the Mongols, their mobile forces should be far away from their southern towns, especially the spice town. Hopefully I can upgrade to knights, launch a quick strike to capture the southern 3 German towns (spice town and 2 more as a buffer zone), and declare peace (having not been at war with them before) before any troops actually turn up. Meanwhile the Mongols, as the biggest kid on the block, get worn down by Japan and America.

The entire subcontinent is now mine, apart from one zulu town. While I'd like to tidy that up, and expand a bit more, that can wait until after the luxury grab.

During the Babylonian war, we've gone from 14th in land area to 4th, and 13th in population to 6th (will get better when those Bab towns start growing again). Incidentally, did you know that starving off foreign population in captured cities hurts your attitude with their home civ?

And that is the state of play in 460 AD. Although it feels like I've been off the pace in this game, I actually seem to be doing quite well when I look at my little empire.

[Arrian]

Originally posted by badams52
I'm really looking forward to your future posts Arrian to see if you can get UP.

*snip*

Also just wonder what you think about building your FP near the palace with your leader then palace jump later with a new leader you get from all the war going on. I seem to remember you were in favor of quick FP builds earlier...

I intend to try, of course.

As for the Palace/FP thing, I've been thinking more and more about that. The problem is, Thebes is pretty much centered in the southern core of my empire. Even moving the "eye of the corruption storm" one city south would kinda throw things off-kilter. Then again, its getting late in the game, and I'd love to move my Palace up north for the flip-fighting power it has (flip prevention in the city its built in, of course, but also the proximity to capitol boost it will give to surrounding towns).

I'm considering biting the bullet and building the FP just south of Thebes, and then immediately rushing the Palace in Berlin - for now - counting on another leader to later move the Palace further north. With the HE and several more civs to kill, more leaders should appear.

Right now, I'm facing a potentially bloody war a long way from home. And I'm starting to worry about the civs on the "other continent" passing me in tech and snagging MY wonders (Bach & Smith's in particular).

-Arrian

[badams52]

Good game vulture!

Originally posted by vulture
The Mongols, with no cash and no gold per turn, decided to try and recoup their losses. They demanded my territory map and 17 gold. Since I was getting 32 per turn off them, I decided to give in, even though they'd have to have been crazy to declare war on yet another civ - they'd already lost a town or two to the Americans.

Wow I had noever thought of it that way before! My usual thoughts are, do I want to risk war now? If no, give in, if yes, shine 'em. Of course I don't know how often I have a gpt deal with a civ and then they demand tribute.

From the archives, we are proud to present the original plan for operation 'invade the heck out of Babylon', as drawn up by General Billoir down the pub one evening on the back of a beermat.

You had beer back then.

Actually, I did a quick web search on beer history and it seems that beer goes father back than civ itself. Around 6000 BC humans discover beer! This should be a researchable tech.

[badams52]

Originally posted by Arrian
I'm considering biting the bullet and building the FP just south of Thebes, and then immediately rushing the Palace in Berlin - for now - counting on another leader to later move the Palace further north. With the HE and several more civs to kill, more leaders should appear.

Right now, I'm facing a potentially bloody war a long way from home. And I'm starting to worry about the civs on the "other continent" passing me in tech and snagging MY wonders (Bach & Smith's in particular).

Ah yes, the "man, my capitol is already in the absolute prime position to battle corruption, it would be a shame to move it" start. Kind of makes you hope your capitol isn't in a great continental position to start of the game.

Ah yes, gotta have those wonders, otherwise it wouldn't be UP! And being a non-millitaristic civ creates more of a risk to war for leaders.

[Fosse]

Originally posted by badams52


Ah yes, the "man, my capitol is already in the absolute prime position to battle corruption, it would be a shame to move it" start. Kind of makes you hope your capitol isn't in a great continental position to start of the game.

Ah yes, gotta have those wonders, otherwise it wouldn't be UP! And being a non-millitaristic civ creates more of a risk to war for leaders.

I have actually built a new palace one city away from the capitol, built an FP in the original capitol, and then rushed the Palace out in its ideal position before.

Naturally, it's more time effecient to just rush the FP in the new area... but I wanted the culture boost, and I also feared my prospective new core cities flipping due to some high culture in the area.

[badams52]

Originally posted by Fosse
I have actually built a new palace one city away from the capitol, built an FP in the original capitol, and then rushed the Palace out in its ideal position before.

I never thought of that before. Brilliant, just brilliant!

[Arrian]

Actually, what might be better is to use a small wonder (if available... such as the Heroic Epic) to save up 200 shields in your capitol.

Then rush the palace elsewhere, and switch your former capitol from the small wonder to the FP, which would complete the following turn. Voila!

I'm considering that option too.

-Arrian

[Nor Me]

Catt, why did you build the Pyramids?
I built them since I had a high production city (because it was size 5) and I was going to claim the same land by settling however long it took to do so (Up to the 2 chokepoints). But you were in strong competion with Babylon and Germany for land.

Originally posted by Arrian
Actually, what might be better is to use a small wonder (if available... such as the Heroic Epic) to save up 200 shields in your capitol.

Using an equal cost wonder takes some micromanagement. Before PTW, your first city was at the top of your city list and produced first.


I'm at 690AD, still 6 turns from the FP. Could I get the other civs to research more for me if I didn't get so much gpt from them?

[Fosse]

Originally posted by Nor Me
Could I get the other civs to research more for me if I didn't get so much gpt from them?

They would definatly research more quickly, but not necessarily "for you."
It would probably cost you a great deal more to buy that from them.

If you don't keep their economy busy paying you gpt, then you have no guarantee their economies will work for you later on by selling you tech. As long as your the tech leader, you have that extra income as a guarantee.

Of course, if you mean letting them research and then beating it out of them, that's different.

[Nor Me]

Fosse, provided I get to a different tech first, I can always trade if I'm at peace. As you can see I have gold to spare anyway. Of course I try to aim for a different path than I expect the AI to research
Would giving gpt to an AI make them research faster or do they just pile up cash and rush/upgrade? I could just select one AI not to take gpt from.

[Nor Me]

Can I enter into the expansionist debate, especially since it was aimed at me anyway? In my experience an Expansionistic civ is far less likely than a non-expansionist to get nothing from a hut but it still happens. The reroll theory would give a higher probability of that if it happens.
Although I heard that difficulty affects hut results, that's harder to prove from experience. It certainly affects suicide galleys.

[badams52]

Nor Me:

Unfortunately, doing a test based on hut results would take many, many trials to even come close to an appropriate answer (at least 1000 I'm thinking to get percentages, and even then, it won't be a certainty). And I don't know anyone who wants to spend that kind of time doing it.

[Catt]

Originally posted by Mountain Sage
If you have time, post as many screenshots as you can. Since we have the same playstyle, I'd really to see how somebody else plays the French. The differences would be fascinating (at least for me )

Well , I have several additional screenshots, but they didn't "make the cut" for being intersting or informative enough to make it into the AAR. I also have a quite a few saves if you're interested enough to look at them.

Before you answer though, I should warn you that we don't necessarily share the same playstyle -- I will occasionally play games under my own extreme rules or play games according to a pre-selected plan, but I also am quite happy to play the game as a bloodthirsty agressor exploiting any relative advantage I might have over a neighbor -- I am convinced that war, particularly offensive warfare, is always the best approach in Civ if the desired result is power, score, or simple efficiency. Once the AU 207 map unfolded before me, I sincerely and urgently wished I had decided to play the aggressor, because I think the map lent itself to conquest (even though I also believe that larger maps mean declining power of warfare). So my saves and screenshots represent my approach to this particular game rather than my approach to the game in general.

PM me if you want saves or additional screenshots, and please keep contributing to the strat forum and AU games

Catt

[Catt]

I don't think I posted it earlier: love your AAR vulture

Originally posted by Nor Me
Catt, why did you build the Pyramids?
I built them since I had a high production city (because it was size 5) and I was going to claim the same land by settling however long it took to do so (Up to the 2 chokepoints). But you were in strong competion with Babylon and Germany for land.

I did not build them for their strategic value or for a good and objective Civ-playing reason -- with the approach I had adopted for this game of no offensive war (and a subsequent overly-friendly attitude to the Babylonians) the Pyramids offered little strategic value. I built them solely in pursuit of the "Joan's Grandeur" concept as a prize to be had. If I had been playing the game to win as efficiently as I could, I wouldn't have built them and I woudn't have devoted my second city to building wonders -- I would have archer rushed Babylon, and horseman/swordsman rushed both Germany and the Zulu, and counted on wiping out the Japanese, Americans, and Mongols with knights and cavalry. I would expect, with the alternate approach, to secure a bunch of wonders via leaders and captures. The same (inefficient) reasoning compelled me to build Sun Tzu's -- I was on a "free building maintenance" kick -- even though I wouldn't utiltize the wonder efficiently by blitzing neighbors.

In other words, I built them out of vanity and emotional interest - not for any legitimate strategic interest.

Catt

[Catt]

Originally posted by Nor Me
Can I enter into the expansionist debate, especially since it was aimed at me anyway? In my experience an Expansionistic civ is far less likely than a non-expansionist to get nothing from a hut but it still happens. The reroll theory would give a higher probability of that if it happens.
Although I heard that difficulty affects hut results, that's harder to prove from experience. It certainly affects suicide galleys.

I've never run any tests but have been operating on the assumption that the "re-roll" theory applies. If it doesn't - or if there's any reason to suspect that it doesn't that I've never noticed - I'd appreciate hearing about it.

And now you've gone and peaked my interest with this:

It certainly affects suicide galleys.

Will you expand on this, please?

Catt

[Mountain Sage]

Originally posted by Catt


PM me if you want saves or additional screenshots, and please keep contributing to the strat forum and AU games

Catt

I understand we don't have the same playstyle, but I think that some screenshots about this particular game could be interesting for comparing our two styles with the same civ. After all, AU is also for comparing styles and strategies given a set starting point.

As for contribution to the strat forum and AU games, I think I did enough for AU207, except if somebody wants more info.

I still hope to do something with my 'Ultimate Guide to Strategies on a Huge Map' thread. If nobody puts there his experience from AU207 there, then I would be really

As for AU games, I was the first asking when would AU208 start...