AUSG101 - Opportunist team DAR 1

[charlie_six]

I played a ctp2 pbem in these forums a couple years back. fun but kinda like hitting yourself with a sledgehammer on the fingers. I was looking for updates to civ, remembered these forums, saw this and asked to join

I guess my question would be.. would having a "WE ARE GOING MOUNTED!"(tm) (Theseus) rush now be better? I'm not saying even capturing cities, just "containing" japan to what they have, and backfill from the furs. You would have to be at war with them for a while till your cities are placed, but shouldnt be a weariness issue.

All you would need is like what ...3 horsemen? and the spearman with the settler would be fine. Then a spearman with every settler u send up there. You would build like normal, except for those 3 horsemen. You'd take a lil c/w ding but nothing says you couldn't settle the NW later vs sooner. Build a temple in the fur city using the ample woods(being chopped by slaves) and call it a day while your base citites are developed and you are ready.

Overall I guess my arguement is that the cost of getting that land is smaller, (3 horsemen and settler and a spearman), than the cost of getting that land later.

Of course then we'd have to bounce that off the value of that settler more near the capital, c/w loss ratio, value of shields now vs value of future shields..the axis of rotation, and the hyperbolic parabloid of the space time continum...but that im not doin hehe

[Master Zen]

Originally posted by Theseus
Probably an outgrowth of many of us here in 'poly having spent close to 2 years just figuring stuff out and teaching it to newer players (sometimes again and again ).

Do I sense a new city placement thread going up sometime soon?

[Mountain Sage]

My turn to vote, and I feel humbled (well, sort of, being me...) by your achievements and DARs (expecially Dominae's).
My 'philosophy' of choosing a save is not only to compare the differents achievements (in this you all are very close), but also to reward a clear strategy.
In this respect, I must say with Charlie_six that Arrian's strategy of bottling up Japan looks very promising. Osaka should be their last city east.
Now, will you pump out another settler fast enough to achieve this? My opinion is that Medina should switch from barracks to settler to put a city N of Baghdad.
BTW, this is what I'm trying to achieve myself.
And here is the problem with the furs. Getting them seems a priority to me.
Threfore, my vote goes for Arrian, by as very thin margin.
Good luck.

[Arrian]

I'm kinda surprised I'm getting any votes, to be honest. Dominae's start... yikes. I may hate the tight city spacing, but I'm not sure it's possible to argue against its power, at least in the early game (which matters most).

I think my next several settlers, by the way, were planned for the coast SW of Mecca and the jungle S of Mecca, followed by a city by the lake in the east, to grab that iron. So I wasn't trying to cut Japan off (this would likely result in them attacking me, and I actually didn't want to fight yet), but rather to grab furs while I could.

-Arrian

[Dominae]

Some counter-comments (which will hopefully alter you decision!):

Originally posted by charlie_six
Question: by having low research, is your goal to slow down the tech advances?(said in your tip you control pace), and if so why? just wondering

I saw that the AI's tech rate was rather low. Since the goal in the Opportunistic game is not research as quickly as possible (as the Spaceship people want to do), I felt it would be fun to see just how big a tech lead we can get here. However, I seriously underestimated how good the players' research rate is, relative to the AIs on this difficulty. So I researched Polytheism slowly to make some Gold. I knew I would get to it first, even on a 40-turn pace, but unfortunately the AIs will probably not even catch up by then! So it probably would have been better to just beeline for Monarchy.

The thing still nagging me is, what about the fur up by osaka? I just see a missed opportunity there, that outweighs having to do without 1 city at the core during this time. With a settler/spearman and say 3 military units-in one stroke
you could get the fur, sieze osaka, and confine the japanese to that penninsula, and settle the river network. With the current unit setup, you dont have that capability.

There are a few reasons I disagree here, although Theseus has already sketched them out.

1. Furs is just a Luxury resource. When you think about it, there are many many ways to keep your populace happy: Military Police, Wonders, Temples, Luxuries...and most importantly (early on) the Luxury slider. Although it is typically inefficient, the Lux slider is always available, and is better the more pop/Roads there are in your empire. So, between going out of my way expansion-wise to grab a Luxury resource and using the Lux slider, I'll always use the Lux slider first. It conveniently lets you focus on more important things.

2. What are thost important things? Well, the creating of production centers (cities). The effects of a Luxury resource are duplicable. The "effects" of cities are not: accumulation of Food and growth, accumulation of Shields and production. These two are the most critical in the early-game; Commerce is the least important at this stage. A city founded off toward the Japanese would suffer higher Corruption, would be harder to hook up with Roads, and would be a pain to defend.

3. Strategic resources break this rule. If you're being out-expanded (say, on Deity), and you see that you might not have that Iron, I highly recommend sending a Settler out there (no matter how far) ASAP. I'm on the fence concerning whether you should do this to deny the AI a Strategic resource. Furs are not a Strategic resource, so their denial value to me is rather low. I like to keep my core tight-knit for the first hundred turns of the game.

4. The Japanese are not very strong. It's great to deal with things preemptively, but in this case I felt it was not necessary. With 5 cities (and a Granary) to their 2-3, I doubt the Japanese will be causing any trouble in my game. You mention that taking care of such problems early is more efficient that later on, because you can use fewer units to accomplish the same goal. This is definite merit to your argument (hence the Archer rush). However, it's not about efficiency. 3 Horsemen at this stage of the game is a sizeable chunk of your production capability, but 12 Horsemen will cost less, relatively speaking. If you focus on growth and your economy early on, it does pay off later on (in any way that you choose). This is why the optimal strategy in Civ3 is not simply to constantly rush your neighbors.

5. (Elaboration of #2) A city by the Furs would be productively useless for the most important stage of the game (the early-game). Early on, I rather have cities that do something beyond just sit there. Those cities could, for example, start building a real army with which to utterly crush the Japanese later on.


Your comments definitely got me thinking, though. They just seem more appropriate for a Diety-level game, where real estate is a lot more critical.


Dominae

[Konquest02]

I plan to get my vote sometime tonight, but I have to say that it's very difficult to come down with the best played block of turns. Discussion is great and should be encouraged...

Keep up the good work guys!

--Kon--

[vmxa1]

Some nice insights and an interesting debate gentlemen.

[Dominae]

Originally posted by Theseus
Dominae, I've been meaning to ask: did I understand correctly that you delayed popping huts to get the first tier tech trades done with nearby AI civs first?

If yes, were you not concerned that they would beat you to the huts?

As per Aeson's scouting thread, the key thing you're looking for in early exploration is Contacts. Goody Huts are great (especially around the capital, where a free Settler is really unfair), but are not as important as the advantages you can get by early discovery and trading with the AIs. With a Hut you get a tech, say, 25% of the time, essentially for free. When trading with the AIs, you can very often get the same tech via trade plus a couple of others, for free. So the goal when scouting is to uncover as much land as possible in order to spot those colored borders fast. Sometimes this means that a detour to grab a Hut is not a good idea.

This is all great, but I only actually applied this reasoning once in my game. On the western edge of the continent there is a Hut in a Hill/Mountain range, close to the Japanese. As I was proceeding North I saw this Hut, but grabbing it would take some time and I wanted to benefit from flat land (if you step through my log you'll see what I mean). I ended up contacting the Japanese a couple of turns later, and when I doubled back, the Hut was still there!

I'm not sure how that AI works in this case, but it definitely does not beeline for every Hut on the continent. I might even venture that the AI avoids Huts with "bad" outcomes.

So, in short:

1. Around the capital, always pop Goody Huts if Expansionist (if not, make sure you have some defense ready!).

2. Further out, only pop Huts if they're conveniently located along flat land (when Expansionist), or if you have reason to believe that you have Contacts with most of your continent's civs.


Dominae

[Arrian]

2. Further out, only pop Huts if they're conveniently located along flat land (when Expansionist), or if you have reason to believe that you have Contacts with most of your continent's civs.

I would add another caveat to that, Dominae:

Or if a nearby civ is also expansionistic (and are therefore likely to have a scout running around popping huts early in the game).

-Arrian

[Nor Me]

In respone the charlie_six and Theseus:

The arcane art of city placement: There are reasons for everything I've done. Firstly, this is RCP which, of course, is to reduce corruption. All my first cities will be at a distance of 3 or 3.5. The reason they are this close is so I can palace jump. I need to be able to use those cows after I've abandoned Mecca.

It's not always sensible to found the best eventual sites first. My 3rd city Damascus is behind in terrain improvement and has not always been able to work improved squares. On the other hand, Baghdad and Najran are able to use squares improved for Mecca and Medina when the latter are small due to building settlers and workers. This means that they are better sites in the short term so should be built first.

I'm surprised that it's Najran rather than Baghdad whose placement is being questioned. Najran has access to bonus grassland on rivers. It was only founed in 270BC so has been around for 4 turns. It was originally building a warrior because there was a barbarian camp just outside it. But the Americans destroyed that (allowing me to sell them the alphabet for 50 gold. That opportunist enough for you?) so I changed to a barracks for long term military gain. Najran's placement allows me to see whether the Carthaginians get contact or not.

As for horses, Medina's next build would likely be a temple and the next city would be 777 of Mecca so I'd have a choice of which to link up. Medina would be building settlers at this stage of the game so it wants the flood plains.

My long term plans for city placement were build cities at 777, 332 and either 44 or 411 of Mecca. Eventually Medina would build the FP. Then Mecca would be disbanded when a palace jump could be set up. In the end Baghdad would probably go too. This would allow Medina and Najran to work 12 decent tiles each and make them both good cities.

It does really make sense!

My plan for securing the fur is simple: kill the Japanese. charlie_six, you especially seem to overestimate the AI. Dominae, BRC and I have good starts and unless you lot manage to irrationally pick Arrian, we'll be playing from a good position. This is Monarch and there are plenty of good players on this team. We will be in a position to outproduce the AI by a decent margin.

It looks like my start is peaceful. But I certainly don't plan on continuing that way. It's designed to maximise food which will eventually mean the most production and commerce. There is no question of not conquering Japan and America relatively soon.

I'd expect from this position, the most important question is not "how much will it cost to conquer Japan?" but "how much is gained by conquering Japan?" If the Japanese build a city on those furs, then I'd hope for it to build a temple of reach size 2 so it could be ours. I'd probably even consider gifting them Monarchy before the attack to stop them pop-rushing. I think that the gain from taking cities is bigger than the cost of building more units to take them. while hitting a japanese settler team now would give us workers, it would be better not to slow down their expansion by making them build more units early.

In the end, we should aim to have the most productive empire earliest. What position the Japanese and Americans are in is secondary to this.

I think that this will be the position for all three teams. Is there so much difference between what's needed to launch an interconinental invasion amd aiming for the spaceship?

But the iron is another question as that makes a difference to how easily they will fall.

[Arrian]

Dominae, BRC and I have good starts and unless you lot manage to irrationally pick Arrian, we'll be playing from a good position.

Ouch! While I do think that you guys may have outplayed me, I don't think my game lacks a "good position." I think we're all in good positions, and I do feel I did several things right:

1) Early contact with Japan, and the worker purchase
2) RCP, albeit a wide ring.
3) Early temple, with a barracks ready next turn.
4) Good tech trading + money hoarding.

So, while I have no problem with a different save getting picked, I am a bit surprised at your comment.

-Arrian

[Dominae]

Originally posted by Nor Me
and unless you lot manage to irrationally pick Arrian, we'll be playing from a good position.

This is why we're judging another team, and not our own!

Gotta love that honesty, though. Personally I think Arrian's game is a fine start...and there's still enough time to correct the things I dislike.




Dominae

[Nor Me]

Arrian, I was going to use a smilie, honestly but I forgot. I'm just surprised especially by MS's bias. It's just a good thing he's on the spaceship team. I'll be sure to critise him appropriately.

Yours is a good and indeed a winning position. But with your luck and skill, it could have been better, couldn't it? But I'm not judging so you don't need to take my comments seriously.

[alexman]

Arrian has a good plan and execution, but the lack of Granaries hurts, IMHO.

Dominae has an amazing start, based on excellent decisions. However, I feel that picking his save would load the dice too much. The initial scout move along with the Settler in 3850 is too lucky to be considered a "normal" game.

BRC has a solid, well rounded start, and I cannot find any flaws in his game. He could have been close to Dominae's position if he had similar luck.

Nor Me also has a solid start. His game is closer to what I would have done, and his use of Granaries and a tighter city placement gives him the edge over Dominae and BRC, I think.

So my vote is for Nor Me.

Edit: I see now I'm not supposed to vote here. Whoops!

[Theseus]

alex, what do you mean about Dominae's initial scout move?

[G'Kar]

2630: got warrior from hut next to Boston. Boston is not guarded 'move warrior towards Boston, declare war on America to Weaken them by taking Boston
2590: destroyed Boston, build Damascus

Plattfuss,
I have an unwritten rule also to always attack undefended AI cities and settlers in the early game. When you think about the exponential growth potential of a single city, you can really hamper an AI by killing one early on. And usually, by the time the AI gets any troops over to my homeland, I can get a peace treaty.

[Arrian]

In defense of my no-granary decision: with a +4 food/turn city (my scout went north instead of east, so I didn't see the game), I figured the inefficiency, coupled with the 60 shield investment, wasn't worth it. I've fallen in love with the power of an early granary in the capitol too, but 60 shields to cut the growth time from 5 to 3? I dunno about that.

Dominae's game is different, of course, because of the game tile.

The build in Medina (barracks, 1 turn) could easily be switched to a granary. It's a +2 food city (could be brought up as high as +4), so it's not a pump, but combined with Mecca it could do good things.

Nor Me,

I did take you seriously. I know you're not a voting judge, but that doesn't make your analysis more or less valid.

I've explained my granary decision already, and I accept the possibility that I'm wrong.

My city spacing also deserves some mention. I initially intended to use 4-tile spacing, not 5. But then I got the settler from a hut, and saw an opportunity to put a city on the coast, on a river, with tons of bonus grass (medina), I took it. Later, I calculated the corruption and realized it was 5-tile... and so pushed my next cities out a bit to keep to a ring pattern.

Since we're not playing specifically for Domination, I figured "fine, I'll have a wide-spaced core of super-cities for the mid-game." Medina could be a wonder-building monster.

-Arrian

edit: having said all of that, I do realize now that the city I would eventually build SW of Mecca on the coast would be 4 tiles out, not 5. So the 5-tile Ring would all have #2 city corruption.

[alexman]

Originally posted by Theseus
alex, what do you mean about Dominae's initial scout move?

He found the game on the first turn, leading to a 4-turn factory. His move makes sense for early contacts, but if you're searching for a food bonus, it would make more sense to put the scout on the hill, which uncovers more tiles near the starting location.

[Dominae]

Originally posted by alexman
His move makes sense for early contacts, but if you're searching for a food bonus, it would make more sense to put the scout on the hill, which uncovers more tiles near the starting location.

Lucky (for me) that I did not consider that!

I agree with alexman's assessment of my game: I got lucky by spotting the Game tile on the first turn, then I got lucky again by getting a Settler from my second Hut. (I also agree that I played very well, but it's not very humble to say so ).

So, anyone who votes for me has to weigh the luck factor of my game versus the merits of my play choices. I agree that it is bad to load the dice, but you cannot fault someone for being lucky (just me!). On the other hand, my start is only superior to others' not with respect to my decisions, but to what the game served up (which is quite out of my control).


Dominae

[vmxa1]

Well luck is what happens to those who make good preparations. Is it luck if you get more huts, because you made more scouts? Is it luck to get a settler close by if you made sure you did not have a settler queued before popping that hut? Or if you held off a hut until the AI had a chance to get some rexing done? I would submit that you gave yourself a chance, it may or may not work, that is the luck part.

[Rhothaerill]

I would agree to that. Luck is often just that...luck. But if you prepare for it then you have a chance to influence the "luck" a bit. I'm reminded of a line from one of the few decent Steven Seagal movies..."chance favors the prepared mind".

[Theseus]

That actually cleared things up for me... regardless, I believe that Dominae's 2150 BC save provides the best and most opportunistic starting block for this team.

BUILD, PEOPLE, BUILD!!

(and, btw, I'd just like to say that this was a tough tough choice... kudos to all!)

[Konquest02]

I'll post this here in case I won't get the chance to do it tonight...

I want to cast my vote for Dominae... I'll explain my choice later this evening when I'll have some free time. I think you should build like mad and lurk in the shadows and kill the AIs when you get the chance.

Though choice, I'll explain more tonight!

--Kon--

[Master Zen]

Master Zen puts on his Ebert mask on and begins tearing each game to pieces

@Arrian:

Good city placement. All your city will without a doubt be powerhouses later on in the game and Medina will be good at cranking out 30 shield units in 4 turns once it reaches size 4. I don't like the fact you're planning a temple in Medina instead of an ultra early granary which in the long run might be more helpful, of course unless you decide for culture power but knowing you you're probably just waiting for a chance to kill kill kill! You also did a fine job of scouting. What I would do: probably fit in a camp city or two taking advantage of the three or four tiles between the cities. You also have a settler on route which means you'll have 5 cities pretty soon although I do cringe at the lack of granaries.

@BRC

Nice and tight, taking advantage of RCP in all your cities. I would feel very confortable playing your save since I enjoy close placement also. Good chunk of the map also uncovered. What worries me is that you seem to be planning for an archer attack when no cities have barracks yet. Reg archers, unless you promote them against barbs, have less than a 50% chance against reg fortified spearmen. However, this is not so much of a problem as they can simply be switched at no cost. Mecca also has a granary which is good since it is a great spot for a settler pump.

@Dominae

What can I say... a free settler makes everything so much easier. Five cities, on great spots means that this game will have a huge degree of flexibility which is the key to being an "opportunist". I would've probably built a few more units but then again, you are safe from your rivals and all you really need to worry about are barbs. There's not really much else I can say that hasn't been said already about this game, all in all very well played. Luck, in your case, doesn't make the game what it is, rather, it complements extroardinary skill.

@GodKing

I see you built your temple pretty quickly in Mecca since it's already producing 4 culture per turn. I would suggest you make Mecca a super culture city to take advantage of this, the downside is that this sacrifices a naturally amazing settler pump. Your settler production, however, has been rather low with only once city built and a settler apparently on the spot for another one. What strikes me as odd is that you did a fantastic job of exploring (you're the only one I've seen that uncovered ALL of the Americans' land). With that you should have realized the huge amount of expansion potential so growth should have been a priority. I would suggest you built two quick granaries and catch up in this regard. And watch out for those barbs, you'll need to move your spear from Mecca but that'll cause unhappyness.

@Nor Me

Talk about packed! A bit too packed if you ask me but then again if it's your style you'll probably make the best of it. However, five cities and a settler next turn, amazing! You also have two granaries already and building a third. I have a feeling you'd probably fill up the continent with cities faster than anyone around. Two barracks in the closest cities means that you'll also have a good stream of units being churned out to defend that hectic expansion.

@Platfuss

Interesting that you went for the furs pretty quick. On emperor on deity that would have been a really smart move since you start getting unhappines on size 2 but on monarch perhaps you could have gone for a different spot. Mecca has a granary which is good, but if I were you I'd switch Medina to a granary instead. Great job destroying an American city! That will undoubtedly set them back a bit and give you more room for expansion. You're at peace with them which also means you don't have to worry about any lone warrior or archer jumping up on you.


Damn, this is a tough one. I am split between Arrian, BRC, Dom and Nor Me. There's something about Arrian's looking at the big picture that lacks in every other game so far played and is a sign of a superb grand strategist. BRC's game, by switching the archer builds also has huge potential. Finally Dominae and Nor Me have huge building potential with their five cities (especially Nor Me with his soon-to-be three granaries). In the end it comes down to see who has less things I would criticize about their game. The final decision is between Dominae and Nor Me. And it goes to...

Nor Me. But just barely! Huge continent, lots of room, two granaries and a third on the way, and two cities with barracks soon. I would have tried a looser placement style but I am really anxious to see what can be accomplished with this game.

[vmxa1]

Rhothaerill where is the running score located?

[Rhothaerill]

Originally posted by vmxa1
Rhothaerill where is the running score located?

First post of each of the DAR threads.

[vmxa1]

Thanks, um this one is close.

[Rhothaerill]

They're all close so far. Unless someone breaks away with the last few votes I might have to exercise my tie-breaking skills.

It's good though, because that means people are playing games the games differently, even within the teams, so we'll get a wide array of things happening.

[charlie_six]

Thanks for discussing the hows and whys Dominae and Nor Me. No doubt I have gained alot of insight from your discussions and argument.

Dominae you're right, I play too much emperor and diety games heh.

When all the dust settles, tho, my interpretation of "opportunist" is planning and reacting to opportunities. (why do I feel like a supreme court judge here? lol)

and in my opinion Arrian has done that the best. Maybe I'm looking at it from a purist point of view, (I didn't ask for this job ya know )

Excellent debate tho, and my Diety games are definately improving.

My decision still stands tho, Arrian

[Taian]

Arrian:

Solid block of turns. From one of your posts, I'm assuming you're thinking of switching the build in Mecca to a barracks..I like that thought. I wasn't sure what the benefit of the temple in Mecca at this point would be. Same thing with Damascus. While the border expansion would help and the culture would be nice, it doesn't really net you anymore useful tiles for that city. A barracks might be more beneficial up there to help in the archer rush.
I like the idea of cutting off the Japs and grabbing that furs tile..go for it However, from what I see of your save, the Japs only have two cities at this point. That means they likely have another settler wandering towards a third city site and I'm willing to put some good money down that it's either by the iron south of Kyoto or to the furs. I think it might be a gamble to go for the furs, but it's a good one to make. One of the indications that this might be the case is that the Americans are sitting on 3 cities, as are the Carthaginians. At this point in the game, the AI civs tend to keep fairly close in city numbers.
Overall, you're in a pretty sweet position though. Leader on your continent in cities and have the potential to get 3 barracks up and running shortly.

BRC:

I couldn't get your savefile and I'm having a bit of a tough time making out your screenshot, but here goes

Nicely done to get 5 cities up and running so far. You guys on the Opportunistic must have paid off the RNG to get those free settlers Your cities are a little closely spaced for my taste, but I do see the benefit of the layout. I don't think you built a barracks, which is a bit of a knock, but looks like you're set up the best of anyone for an archer rush on Japan. You have 3 trained and 3 more coming out within 5 turns. Bonus! Japan could find themselves in a world of hurt.
Judging from your current build orders, however, it appears your expansion has stalled. This early in the game, you should probably still have one city going settler-happy and continuing to colonize (most notably, the isthmus south and the land to your north) to grab more land.
You and Arrian are both raking in the coin. Without being able to check out your save, I can't confirm, but I would guess that by increasing your tax rate you could research Polytheism quicker (I know Arrian could...just checked ). Since the archers don't upgrade to Swordsmen (correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think they do..) that extra gold you have at the moment really isn't doing much. I'd suggest bumping up the tax rate to rip through Polytheism quicker. But since you just started researching it, no biggie. All in all, a very good run.

Dominae:

Interesting gambit to start off with. Happened to work out. Often the difference between a good start and a great start is defined by a little gamble. Hmm...so out of you first 3, all 3 of you got a free settler..dumb, dumb RNG You definitely have a nice start tech and economy-wise, but those barbs could prove rather pesky, given the relatively small military you have. City spacing is good, but it doesn't look like Najran will be that productive since I'm guessing that Medina is working that bonus grassland and the two cows are being worked by Mecca (your save doesn't seem to be in the zip file..). Your workers are in the area though, so some irrigation to help out can't be far away.
From your log, I see the 3 temples are in Mecca, Medina and Damascus. I guessing you built them mainly to control happiness since you don't have any MP around. However, given the production spent on getting the temples, you could have produced enough MP to equal the effect of the temple, plus had 10 to spare.. As with Arrian, those temples, outside of helping happiness aren't really grabbing you any tiles to use that are more useful than the ones currently around your cities.
Overall, a very good block. You guys are making it tough to choose between you...

Nor Me:

Same as the first 3...a very good opening. As you say yourself though, your army will need augmenting fast. You're quite susceptible at the moment if any barbs happen to pop up. I like your aggressive research campaign though..nicely done to get so close to monarchy this soon. You went the granary route, which I like since it allows very rapid expansion to grab the land in your immediate area. I'd guess that you might even be able to get another ring up and running before the other civs know what hit them. Then it's game over..
Really, I can't find much to fault other than the relatively small military at this point. Although, to be consistent with previous posts, I must say that those cities are a little too close for my taste I really got to start playing around with RCP..

plattfuss:

Decent start. I probably would have moved Damascus beside the river, but you still built it to take advantage of the game and since it acts as a partial block on the isthmus, it comes out about even. Nice work and amazingly lucky to be able to get rid of an American city by this point. That should trip them up quite a bit. Your builds look pretty good, but I don't think a Temple in Damascus is worth it since it won't grab you any additional land at this point. It would likely be more effective to either churn out more warriors, workers or a barracks. Techwise, you're very similar to your teammates and in terms of military stability, you're probably ahead of them. Good round of turns.

Godking:

A playable position. Interesting thought to go for the temple early instead of the Granary. I'm thinking you might have found yourself in a better position if you had gone for a warrior to control the happiness and then put the Granary in place. Settlers would have come out earlier and if necessary, you could have filled in production while waiting for growth with the temple. Seems the barbs wouldn't leave you alone either. I guess the bad RNG converged on you to make up for all those free settlers your teammates got I know exactly how much that micro-management forgetfulness sucks...I've been known to forget to check from time to time too..
Overall, it's not a bad start, but probably could have come out a touch better.

Hmm...so time to vote. I'd have to go for BRC. First cut was down to Arrian, Nor Me, Dominae and BRC. All 4 were really close even though it seems they went for different openings (builder/rusher). Nor Me and Dominae, the relatively small military was what kept me from voting for you guys. I have no doubt that both would be excellent saves to play from, but judging from the position at the moment, both in terms of potential and current stability, I'd have to say Arrian and BRC are in a slightly better position.
I found it really hard to pick between Arrian and BRC. Arrian is sitting in a better position to cutoff the Japanese, but BRC could conceiveably launch an archer rush on the Japanese within 5-10 turns. That's just as good as bottling them up since, with those 6 archers, you should be able to at least take down 1 of their cities.

Good set of starts, everyone.