11-05-2005 22:06									#91
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Aqualung71 Forget points.....I'd rather be behind in score for the whole game, compiling a tight compact empire that is no.1 in the 3 most important demographics, then build a killer military when it is most needed!

The thing about Sumeria is, you get lots of points and you get to build military. All due to the enormous, and easy REX (others will not have). Get my point?

	11-05-2005 22:10									#92
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

I've always been a proponent of Sumeria.......and Maya and Iroquois. But Sumeria probably gets my vote

	11-05-2005 23:16									#93
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Modo. One point. The only military you will be building is a defensive one, seeing as swords and horses cost the same as three enkidus...So if you start to build that enormous miliitary of yours, it is going to cost you.


Maybe you should set up some miltary camps? But then, that would slow down the REX...

	11-05-2005 23:32									#94
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by Krill Maybe you should set up some miltary camps? But then, that would slow down the REX...

You are right, it would. The thing is, you need those camps later (much later in some cases) if you play Sumeria. Basically, you make camps when you want to attack someone. The others will need them early, to ensure they do not get overrun. Just think of all the early Granaries we will be able to build undisturbed. I believe this is a rather important advantage, one really fitting an efficiency-based playing style.

	12-05-2005 00:01									#95
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

My thoughts:

UUs are great, but traits are better. Traits last the whole game. We should pick a civ primarily for its traits.

UUs can cause another nation to think twice about attacking you, but reputation, size, and alliances will do the same thing. It's unclear how valuable our Hoplites were in the past game. I think they helped to prevent a possible backstab, but I think that the biggest help to us was our reputation, which caused PAL to consider us in the first place.

Of course, having a strong rep can hurt you in a game where there can be only one winner. Eventually everyone is your enemy, and it's good to remove the most dangerous first. However, it has been my experience from demo games past that the strong seem to band together against the weak. No one likes to take a big risk in their first war. The first wars are the easy ones.

And while there's always talk of "attacking team X before they get their UU" how many of us actually have started a war for that reason? Typically, the war was started because you could get away with it ... the enemy was sufficiently weak and you were sufficiently strong.

Therefore, we should not be too concerned about late UUs. In my experience, the most important wars happen during the middle ages, and middle ages UUs are generally put to use (where early UUs sometimes grow obsolete before ever being used).

We are already agreed with the Ag trait. We should decide which of the other traits we most prefer. Which of those traits matches our playstyle the best?

IMO, we rarely use the Religious trait. I personally use it, but it doesn't seem to be a part of our Poly builder style. We also rarely use the Mil trait. When don't often rush to war, nor are we a conquest-first sort of civ. While science is nice, it has rarely figured into our gameplan nor has it played a vital role in our planning or any victory.

To me there are 3 choices: Industrious, Commercial, Seafaring.

I don't think Commercial gives us that much bang for our buck, but we are able to use it effectively. Industrious suits our builder style well, but so does Seafaring...

What I like best about Seafaring is the ability to make contact with other civs faster, and the superior scouting/mapmaking aspects of it. If we meet other civs first, we can make friends faster, and build alliances before other nations have a chance. Diplomacy is everything in a game like this. Also, it gives bonus commerce to sea-cities. Sort of like being commercial, but with better ships.

On top of that, the 4 defense UU is a monster in the middle ages. I don't think we'll need it, but it will certainly be treasured during the period of the game when the most conflict occurs.

I'd like to stick up for the Dutch.

--Togas

Last edited by Togas on 12-05-2005 at 01:49

	12-05-2005 00:07									#96
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Togas, what about Scientific? This game is for the long haul, so we'll definitely need libraries. I'm beginning to agree that Religious is not best suited to how we tend to play, though... I have yet to see poly government-hop as opposed to simply going straight to Religious, and temples are indeed not things we've built a lot early on. But Scientific would definitely be valuable, moreso now that we're out of the elimination round.

I agree Ind, Com, and Sea are the other main contenders; Mil just isn't a good enough trait. With Sea you usually have to go to the trouble of moving your palace, but that can be managed.

	12-05-2005 00:17									#97
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Well, The top three I think are obvious. Each have their different points.

Celts: Ag/Rel
Cheap temples. Quick Gov change incase the crap hits the fan. Quite possibly the most powerful ancient age UU in the Gallic Swordman. Draw back is reliance on Iron. We will be targeted if we don't have iron.

Irquois: Ag/Com
Get more from the same land with Com. Could be a BIG boon in the late Mideval Age and Industrial Age. Great UU in the Mounted Warrior. Plus gives us the ability to have a 3 attack unit with either Iron or Horses. Draw back is reliance on horses for UU. Also the Com trait doesn't really help much until later in the game.

Sumeria: Ag/Sci
Cheap lib. Great for culture. Helps us research faster. Possibility of a SGL (5% each tech we develope first). Cheap UU. Good defender for the price. Drawback would be ultra-early GA as the UU replaces both the warrior and Spearman. Full production Swordmen.

The trick is picking between these three I think.

	12-05-2005 02:02									#98
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

Let's Add Dutch (Agri, Sea) onto this, too. I like the Arguments that Togas Presented.

Can someone Organize a Poll to atleast See what everyone thinks about having Agriculture as one of the 2 traits that we will be using during the next game.

E_T

	12-05-2005 02:47									#99
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

I actually found Apolyton's low priority for temples rubbing off on my own single player games. I used to build them very early everywhere. Now my cities have free cultural expansions from other cities instead and I only build them for happiness / cultural defense reasons.

	12-05-2005 08:30									#100
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by joncnunn I actually found Apolyton's low priority for temples rubbing off on my own single player games. I used to build them very early everywhere. Now my cities have free cultural expansions from other cities instead and I only build them for happiness / cultural defense reasons.

For the record, I only build Temples when I am using a Religious civ. And paired with an Agricultural trait, you can pop rush a Temple after only 10 shields without much harm done. This will also be a great move for getting culture to 1spt border cities.

And whether anyone wants to hear it or not, we will get attacked this game. So we may want to think about having a strong cultural border at our perimeter; one we can set up with roads and defend.

If there's anything I can bring to this game, it's the act of paranoid defense measures. Unfortunately, I bugged out of Game 1 too early to be of much help to CFC.

This team obviously has the diplo and builder skills down better than anyone out there, but we cannot depend on that alone. Let's add that third leg to the 3-legged stool and surprise them all with our military might! We may catch some folks off guard if we surprise them with an aggressive policy, especially if we use our diplomatic acumen to soothe them into guarding their other border. At the very least, we will be adequately defended.

So.....what was the original point of my post? Oh yes. The power of the Religious trait. It's not as fancy as the new ones, but can still provide some meaningful benefit if used creatively.

	12-05-2005 08:36									#101
	Inflate your Upload Space

But DZ, why go rel when you can get the same thing with sci, plus have numerical superority by having TONS of 10 shield spears?

	12-05-2005 08:48									#102
	Inflate your Upload Space

Having an expanded Cultual border only gives you a tile or 2 more distance of view. Having Strategic Scouts out to watch your opponent is better, as they can be placed on Favorable terrain to help prevent them from being removed. F-P had a very good Thread about this in the Strat Forum and I definately look for PAL to agressively use that in favor of expanded borders due to increased Culture.

Also, your outlying cities are going to be fairly corrupt that it would be better (in the long run) to build other things besided Culture Improvements. Granted, with Sci Trait, you get 40 shield Libs that give you 3 Culture per turn (compared to Rel's 30 shield Templed that give you 2 Culture per turn). Overall, the Sci Trait, in compairison to the Religios Trait is better, espeiclly with the increased chance of a SGL and a Free Tech every new Era.

E_T

	12-05-2005 09:03									#103
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Donegeal But DZ, why go rel when you can get the same thing with sci, plus have numerical superority by having TONS of 10 shield spears?

Larger cities via happiness from now-attainable Cathedrals, which would eventually allow our cities enough wealth to pay for all your unit support!

I also like the quick government switch factor, but only because CFC was burned by not having it in Game1. I'll admit that in some of my posts here, you may find me troubleshooting the last game. Some of it may prove useful, some not.

Finally, we should not be caught without a decisive offensive UU.

But as I said before, I can see the case for Sumeria or the Scientific trait. I also like Seafaring for the diplomatic benefits. I have also posed a question in the Ag trait poll: are we sure we just want to limit our choices to Ag civs?

	12-05-2005 09:12									#104
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by E_T Having an expanded Cultual border only gives you a tile or 2 more distance of view. Having Strategic Scouts out to watch your opponent is better, as they can be placed on Favorable terrain to help prevent them from being removed. F-P had a very good Thread about this in the Strat Forum and I definately look for PAL to agressively use that in favor of expanded borders due to increased Culture.

E_T, you may have missed my point. Roaded cultural borders are vital for a nation under attack, as we would be able to move at a 3-to-1 ratio over our univited guest. I didn't even think about its use for eliminating Fog of War. In that case, I prefer well-placed scouts too, especially to remove barb threats.

Come to think of it, the Expansionist trait is pretty good too if we pop several huts! Or does that benefit get watered down in C3C?

	12-05-2005 10:57									#105
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Expansionist is a gamble. It can pay off with a settler (sometimes two!) that you wouldn't have gotten without the better chances offered. That said, it is a gamble. And if we're playing at Emperor again, I don't think our chances at a settler would be too good anyway.

I must admit I'm biased against Expansionist due to a dislike of the fact that the trait does not provide game-long benefits; but I don't think it's good compared to some of the others.

Also, if we do pick an Ag civ, that would mean the Inca and their Chasqui Scout. Ugh.

	12-05-2005 19:09									#106
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

I'm thinking that actualy, you don't need military camps as Sumeria because they'd be so late and really increasing corruption for all cities past them, and instead you'd just switch many of your permenant cities over into producing the military units for war build up / during the war, and switch them back to inferstructure later.

quote: Originally posted by Modo44 You are right, it would. The thing is, you need those camps later (much later in some cases) if you play Sumeria. Basically, you make camps when you want to attack someone. The others will need them early, to ensure they do not get overrun. Just think of all the early Granaries we will be able to build undisturbed. I believe this is a rather important advantage, one really fitting an efficiency-based playing style.

	12-05-2005 19:20									#107
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

The long term benifit of the expansionstic traight is the compounding of the fast starts it makes possible.

Think of the C Scout as a scout that has some defense if attacked by a barb. (From barb camps and also from other civs poping huts and getting barbs) In addition, C Scout has no extra cost traveling on hills.

That said, they are much better for Single Player games than Multi player.

quote: Originally posted by Kloreep Expansionist is a gamble. It can pay off with a settler (sometimes two!) that you wouldn't have gotten without the better chances offered. That said, it is a gamble. And if we're playing at Emperor again, I don't think our chances at a settler would be too good anyway. I must admit I'm biased against Expansionist due to a dislike of the fact that the trait does not provide game-long benefits; but I don't think it's good compared to some of the others. Also, if we do pick an Ag civ, that would mean the Inca and their Chasqui Scout. Ugh.

	12-05-2005 21:02									#108
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by E_T Granted, with Sci Trait, you get 40 shield Libs that give you 3 Culture per turn (compared to Rel's 30 shield Templed that give you 2 Culture per turn). Overall, the Sci Trait, in compairison to the Religios Trait is better, espeiclly with the increased chance of a SGL and a Free Tech every new Era.

Both science and religion offer cheaper cultural buildings. The other advantage of religion is quick government changes, something we never have needed and likely would not need. The other advantage of science is the SGL and Free Tech. I agree, science is a better trait than religion.

But back on my current favorite trait, Seafaring.

Thinking back to our previous ISDGs, that extra ship movement and reduced chance of sinking would have allowed us to make contact with overseas nations sooner, and also given us an advantage with overseas invasions. It seems that these ISDGs always boil down to one major sea invasion of a distant enemy. If we have the range to attack when our enemy does not, we have a very distinct advantage over them. A game breaking advantage in some situations.

With regards to diplomacy, being first is everything. The first contacts make the first tech and trade deals, and set up a foundation of friendship that will create strong alliances, which we will need to survive and win this game. I want us to be the one who makes contact with the most nations the fastest, and the one who brokers the big multi-civ trade deals. If we arrive after our rivals, they will have already traded and sold the techs we wanted, and sealed up the NAPs and also had the opportunity to spread rumors and schemes against us.

IMO, our top three choices should be:

Dutch
Sumarians
Iriquois

--Togas

	12-05-2005 22:09									#109
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Yes, being first is nice, but it does not always mean you get all the deals. Look at game one here for an example. We met up with CDG fairly early and made buddies with them. But then they made contact with PAL followed by us. What happened then? We switched sides and teamed up with PAL to crush the weaker CDG.

Being first is nice, but it is not the end all to relationships.

	13-05-2005 01:54									#110
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by joncnunn Think of the C Scout as a scout that has some defense if attacked by a barb. (From barb camps and also from other civs poping huts and getting barbs) In addition, C Scout has no extra cost traveling on hills.

But they cost twenty shields. That alone makes it a horrible UU (of course, my opinion).

	13-05-2005 02:15									#111
	Support Apolyton

It's a non-standard UU. Only humans and barbs use the sneak attack exploring units tactic, so it's only subject to the unwanted ultra-early GA in multiplayer games.

Instead of building lots of C Scouts, you only build one as the starting build, probably a warrior next. And then only if you think your probably on pangena (or if the normal one has already been whacked by barbs) do you build a second one. Part of the exploration plan with the first scout is to ignore the direction that there are hills and let the C Scout handle them.

Once done exploring your land mass, the C Scout can be used for MP duty if needed, (unlike normal scouts.) It can also be used to attack barbs on flat terriagn on a low enough difficulty level.

Also in the event of no horse resource in your territory, the C Scouts could be built in masse as a fast attacker [a better Chariot] Or they could be used as pillagers.

quote: Originally posted by RegentMan But they cost twenty shields. That alone makes it a horrible UU (of course, my opinion).

	23-05-2005 04:46									#112
	Inflate your Upload Space

This thread has been quit for a while, so we need to get some more discussion going here.


o.k., I've been looking at this a bit closer and this is what I surmize:

Of the Agi top choices (not saying that we should go with that, but it seems that it is forgone conclucion), we have:

Celts - Agi, Rel
Sumerians - Agi, Sci
Iroquios - Agi, Comm
Dutch - Agi, Sea

This is what I think. Based on what the difficulty settings were before (Emporer - 1 Content Pop), I would say that we should go with Sumerians. With the 10su UU (a cheap spearman) this looks to be the best overall bet. Granted, it could leave us open for an early GA, but then, that very much might happen with both Celts and Iroquois. It's nice to have a good mobile UU, but then, we need 3 techs and Horses and they are still 30su.

Also, the cost of upgrading Warriors to Swordsmen is prohibative, especially during the early game. And the Summerians don't even get the regular Warrior, but you have to wait until IW and getting the Iron connected before you can even build the first Swordsman. BUT, with a cheap defensive unit, we can build them very fast to help keep pace with out expansion and still keep our cities as happy as possible and not have to use Lux slider and Specialists as much.

And when it comes to survivability VS Poping a Barb Hut, these units fair much better than the regular Warrior. We know from other games, how fragile a Reg Warrior is against a Barb hut, it's most likey that you'll lose that one scout and have to take the time to send out another one. That can mean the difference in getting some other choice Huts and finding the other Civs faster (and the top in Diplomatic relations, too).

Granted, having the seafaring trait, with the Dutch would be good, it still might be a long time before we get contact with another continent. And having that Middleages UU is good, but we would also be a target, as the Dutch are a powerful civ.

And having cheap Libs & Uni's are good, as well as the free tech from the new ages.

After using them for a few test games, they look to be the best for what we want to try for this next round. If not, I then say Dutch and Iroquios as my next choices.

E_T

	24-05-2005 21:18									#113
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

Been thinking. I sill prefer the Maya as our #1, as their traits are the best combination for early growth and production. The problem is that their UU is little more than a barb hunter, and an expensive one at that, is hard to overcome, but I know we can do so.

#1 Maya
#2 Sumaria
#3 Dutch (best UU of the bunch, but the seafaring is hit or miss)
#4 Iroquois

	24-05-2005 21:45									#114
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

i think most of us will not get persuaded anymore...

we should vote soon. i'd say the vote should look like this:

-the options are the 7 agri civs and each gets three slots. with first, second or third choice.

-everybody has three votes (multichoice, but limited. dunno if this is possible in this forum but we can write it into the header that everybody has exactly three votes)

-everybody can vote for each position (1st,2nd,3rd) once

-one abstain-option (if you vote this you must not vote anything else)

-make the vote public so if somebody accidently votes wrong we can find it and correct it...

in the end we will easyly see if everybody voted correct, as the number of 1st, 2nd and 3rd votes have to equal.
now every 1st vote gives the civ 3 points, 2nd gives 2p and 3rd gives 1p.
in the end we will have a nice ranking.

	25-05-2005 06:03									#115
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

@ Poly-Akryll

But I would include any civ that was mentioned in this thread.

	25-05-2005 10:41									#116
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

Sumerians or Celts

	25-05-2005 10:43									#117
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

1st: Sumeria
2nd: Maya
3rd: abstain

	25-05-2005 11:50									#118
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

I'd like to know the map settings. Is it for sure they will be the same as game 1?

	25-05-2005 13:05									#119
	Suffering from ads?

have they been decided yet?

	26-05-2005 08:59									#120
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither I'd like to know the map settings. Is it for sure they will be the same as game 1?

It's loking tike it.

If we want something different, e need to discuss and deside very, vert soon.

E_T