Jeff Long
Canada
Saskatoon
Saskatchewan
-
Except in very specific circumstances, every game of Civ will begin with researching a Level 1 technology at the end of the first turn.
In this post, I plan to outline some thoughts on partitioning the Level 1 technologies into two groups: techs that you *might* consider as your very first tech of the game, and techs that you should NEVER select as your first tech of the game. I think such a list is useful both as a fun intellectual exercise, and to help 'ease' new players into the game. Reading through the tech cards is definitely the most daunting thing about introducing a new player to Civ. Of course, it is easy to tell new players which techs are "generally" good and many will be happy to just go with some simple recommendations, but if they want to make their own decisions, it might be nice to at least rule out a few options that are never good ideas.
For now, we are talking base game only, without the Fame&Fortune expansion.
Let's establish the following general game-flow. In most games, you will not be able to research on Turn 2. It is relatively common to found your second city at the beginning of Turn 3 - the trade boost from this combined with your unspent trade from Turn 2 is often enough for a Level II tech. In this case, on Turn 4, you need to research a Level I as this is all you have space for on your tech pyramid. Of course, if you don't found the Turn 3 city, most likely your Turn 3 research will be a Level I tech. The upshot of this is that the latest you will be researching your second Level I tech is on Turn 4. Therefore, any tech that you will not actually use until Turn 4 can generally wait until then (unless of course there are TWO techs you want, both of which are useful as of turn 4 but NEITHER of which is useful before then - but I find this exceedingly unlikely).
So, first I will give what I consider to be the two lists, and then my reasoning for each choice.
Viable Turn 1 Techs
Metalworking
Code of Laws
Horseback Riding
Navigation
Animal Husbandry
Masonry
Unviable Turn 1 Techs
Currency
Writing
Philosophy
Pottery
Viable Turn 1 Techs
Metalworking: Not much needs to be said here. Barracks are amazing (overpowered in my opinion). You probably won't use the Iron ability in the first 4 turns but you'll want it eventually. Making the Colossus cheap isn't terrible, especially for Rome.
Code of Laws: Also doesn't take much argument. Definitely a tech that you'll want eventually, primarily for the coin ability. It's unlikely you'll fight any battles before turn 4 unless you're China, but switching to Republic on Turn 2 could speed up your expansion by a crucial turn.
Horseback Riding: The movement boost alone can be worth if it lets you found your second city 1 turn faster, which sometimes it will. The silk ability is useful to have and is pretty much the only way to get a Level II tech on Turn 2.
Navigation: This one is much more "niche" than the previous 3 techs. I (like most beginners I expect) used to think Harbors were great, now I think they're only ok. Basically, if you find your expansion and exploration totally cut off by water, then you probably need this right away. Otherwise, you will likely never need it.
Animal Husbandry: This tech makes the viable list basically for one reason only, and that's because of its discount for building the Hanging Gardens. You get this on Turn 1 and plan to build the Gardens on Turn 2, which in my opinion is a relatively strong opening with many different civilizations. I'm not a fan of the wheat ability, but the healing *is* useful to have in the long run, although you will definitely not need it before Turn 4.
Masonry: As apparently one of the least popular techs, this one may be somewhat controversial. However, I believe it fits in well with a very specific opening I've been toying with. You are getting this tech entirely for the Stacking Limit increase, which in my opinion is actually quite powerful. 3 flags together lets you bring in 7 troops, which is enough to defeat a city, whereas 5 troops are not. The general plan is to get Sailing as your first Level II and play very aggressively right from the get-go. To make this work, you may need to group up your flags before the end of Turn 4, making it necessary for Masonry to be your first tech.
Unviable Turn 1 Techs
Currency: Buildings are generally a relatively poor city action in the first place, and if I'm going to develop a tech to allow me to build buildings in the first 4 turns, it's going to be Metalworking. That leaves only the incense ability to consider, and in my opinion, 3 culture just isn't a big enough return on your precious incense, even if you should happen to have any in the first 4 turns. Better to wait until Metalcasting comes online I think.
Writing: Again, the Library is trumped by the Barracks; I don't think the slightly cheaper hammer cost (5 vs. 7) is enough to change that equation. That leaves only the spy ability, and you are extremely unlikely to even GET a spy in the first 4 turns. In the very rare circumstance where you flip a green hut on the very first turn and it's a spy, is it worth getting this tech just to play the spy immediately? I'm not sure - killing the other guy's city action is pretty valuable on Turn 2 just to slow down his expansion especially in a 2-player game. I'm open to opinions here.
Philosophy: Most games you won't even get this at all. You're certainly not going to get it first. Temples are I think the worst building in the game, and you're unlikely to even have 3 resources before Turn 4.
Pottery: Unlike the other three techs on this list, Pottery is an *excellent* tech overall. Most games you will want it at some point, primarily for the coin ability, but the +1 Culture hand-size is excellent too. However, I don't see a circumstance where you would ever need this right away. Again, the Granary is trumped by the barracks for early buildings, and you're not likely to want to start giving up your resources before Turn 4. Neither are you likely to advance 4 times on the culture track before then and thus need the hand-size. It seems like it can always wait.
-
Sebastian Valmont
Germany
Berlin
Germ
-
I dsagree on Masonry. It is pretty useless. I would never ever sacrifice any of the other techs for masonry.
I think that we have 3 tiers: viable, specific and weak.
Viable:
Metalworking - Baracks
Code of Laws - Republic
Horseback Riding - generic
Specific:
Navigation - If blocked by water or Russian.
Animal Husbandry - for early barbs or Hanging Gardens
Pottery - Early coins or Russian with Engineering as first Lvl-2
Weak:
Masonry
Writing - nice, but not turn 1
Philosophy - I can only think of Egypts surrounded by non-agressive players to get Philo-> Temple on turn 2...
-
Ian Kelly
United States
Longmont
Colorado
Allow me to introduce myself. I am Hexachlorophene J. Goodfortune, Kidnapper-At-Large, and Devourer of Tortoises par Excellence, at your service.
If you can read this, then this sentence is false.
-
Regarding Philosophy, it's not hard to have 3 resources by your turn 3 city management -- in fact, you can guarantee it if you're willing to spend your first 3 turns harvesting. A somewhat saner approach though would be to build a second army on turn 1 and spend that turn exploring. After movement you will know how many huts you will be able to collect on turn 2. If you can get 2, great! Just harvest once on turn 3 and you're there. Otherwise, you may need to harvest twice to pull it off.
The real question is whether it's even worth it to pay 3 resources for a great person, especially if you're going to some trouble to get the resources. In the base game, probably not. With Fame and Fortune, though, you also get the powerful great person cards, and then I think first-turn Philosophy makes an interesting opening gambit.
Of particular note are the Arabs, who start the game with one of each resource. First turn Philosophy, second turn spend 3 resources for a great person and 2 culture cards is a pretty tempting opening play, especially as it requires no other preparation or commitment.
-
El-ad David Amir
United States
New York
New York
-
I completely agree with your analysis- or, at least, I agreed with it ... when the game came out. A dozen games or so later, I believe your priorities are incorrect. Here is my take on the first turn tech.
First, your Masonry idea. In order to have three flags and seven units by the end of your forth turn, you need to spend six city actions. Even assuming an optimal situation, where you set up your second city on the second turn, you will have seven actions by the end of your forth turn- very, very tight, and you still need to combine your flags before getting Sailing, which means they're going to be deep within your territory. This leaves your opponents ample time to prepare. Seven basic units and no military bonuses are not even enough to take a non-capital city, esp. if the owner got Metalworking or a unit upgrade.
(With that said, I would love to hear more details about Masonry and whether you actually managed to pull this off)
Here is my ranking:
Tier 1 technologies
Metalworking. As you stated, Barracks are amazing. They are not overpowered, but they are extremely viable, and probably the best starred building. Between them and the Colossus discount, you have a potent opening for the game. Furthermore, the Iron ability is a nice bonus.
Code of Laws. I don't know whether it's a tech you would want eventually, but it is very versatile: Desert Posts are a good Trade and Culture source; Republic gives you flexibility in establishing a second city and allows you to retain your Scout (crucial for civilizations with a low-hammer capital), and the coins ability is a nice bonus.
(Notice that Germany is also at a great position to fight an early village, as are Egypt with Hanging Gardens, Americans with Great General, a Russian player who builds a couple of units, or anyone who get Metalworking and Iron)
Horseback Riding. As you said, the movement boost is great for establishing a city; also for snatching huts if other players insist on ignoring Sailing. Silk serves to get a crucial Trade boost for wonder construction and level 2 tech, and also as a trading mechanism, getting stuff off other players.
Tier 2 technologies
Writing, Pottery. I am putting both of these on the same category, since they supply you with Libraries and Granaries, probably two of the most powerful buildings in the game. Both of these buildings allow you to tailor a city to a very specific strategy and set up a powerful upgrade with a level 2 tech. Pottery is the easiest source of early game coins, and Writing's spy ability is a game changer, especially when going for culture (since you will get more spies off Culture cards). We neglected grasslands-based strategies in our early games, but later on realized how powerful they can be.
(Notice that getting to seven hammers for Barracks is not always as trivial as people think, and much of the utility of Metalworking is diminished if you only get one Barracks; paying five for granary/library is a piece of cake, and you can usually set up a turn 5/6 upgrade to the level 2 equivalent)
Navigation. Harbors are a decent, albeit slightly expensive, building. And the ability to skip water early on could be a life saver in case of a troublesome starting location.
Animal Husbandry. With a starting hand of two 3s, Animal Husbandry could be useful in conquering a first village. Also, the grain ability is useful for some civilizations with a low hammer opening (Germany?). Next, the Hanging Gardens are probably the most powerful early game wonder, and I getting it on the second turn with Animal Husbandry is entirely viable.
Tier 3 technologies
Philosophy. In my opinion, the base game Great People are not worth three resources- there are better outlets to spend these precious huts. I've been toying with using Temples, but I think that Desert Outposts and Libraries are a more versatile source of early game Culture.
Currency. Markets are too all over the place and as you stated, the Incense ability is limited. I might get it as a second level 1 tech if I'm going for coins or if I got two Incense off Huts, but otherwise Currency is rarely researched in our group.
Masonry.I would rate Masonry at the bottom of the list, which again makes me very curious as to your strategy. I do not see how you can support a three flags army so early in the game (Russia gets this for free and I never saw a Russian player go for three early flags). The cost in city actions is prohibitive, and the loot you will get off villages will not be enough to make up for the hit in infrastructure.
-
El-ad David Amir
United States
New York
New York
-
pittpatt wrote: Navigation - If blocked by water or Russian.
Getting blocked by Russians suck 
-
Timothy Pride
Indonesia
Jakarta
DKI Jakarta
-
It's interesting you listed Masonry as 1st tech. I also would like to see a session report of it against other (not newbie) players.
As for writing, sometimes I took it first when I play Rome, and maybe American, if I want to go for Culture. Don't underestimate the 5 hammer. It enables culture player to set it up in a city with only 3 hammer (or even 1 hammer), which is common case if you look for city site with 2 or more grassland.
-
Sebastian Valmont
Germany
Berlin
Germ
-
Seems as if we all agree. Some minor points: Horseback Riding offers 9 trade for silk, which would be 3 prod for all civs except america (6 prod), this makes animal husbandry only viable if you want to get the gardens OR if need to kill barbs with only 1 flag.
Regarding Currency: I would love to play a game where markets give you two trade instead of one. This would somewhat reduce the weakness of markets vs. barracks and would make currency worthwile for culture players.
-
El-ad David Amir
United States
New York
New York
-
pittpatt wrote: Seems as if we all agree. Some minor points: Horseback Riding offers 9 trade for silk, which would be 3 prod for all civs except america (6 prod), this makes animal husbandry only viable if you want to get the gardens OR if need to kill barbs with only 1 flag.
I disagree. First, Horseback Riding requires you to give six trade to another player; often, you would like to avoid that (for example, if you have a high trade opening- Egypt comes to mind). Second, the healing ability on Animal Husbandry should not be ignored, especially if your opening includes two 3s, or if you go for a military Level 2 tech (both Democracy and Chivalry are very popular in our group). Third, sometimes you just don't have access to Silk (I know it's more common on starting tiles, but it could happen).
pittpatt wrote: Regarding Currency: I would love to play a game where markets give you two trade instead of one. This would somewhat reduce the weakness of markets vs. barracks and would make currency worthwile for culture players.
Interesting idea! We thought of adding a Coin to Currency, but I suspect that will make America's opening too strong. Adding a Trade to Markets and Temples might just do the trick. One could argue that Barracks has three and a half or even four icons on it (as the exchange rate between +1 Strength and other icons is not clear).
-
Jeff Long
Canada
Saskatoon
Saskatchewan
-
Thanks for the thoughts and replies. I will respond to several specific points separately.
To Mr. Kelly: I agree that Fame&Fortune likely changes several dynamics, particularly regarding Philosophy - thus why I restricted my analysis to the base game for now (although I am a little confused on how the Arabs get 2 culture cards AND a great person just by getting Philosophy on Turn 1...?). I did take it for granted that spending 3 city actions (ie. 3 harvests) to effectively build one random building was a terrible idea, so the question was more of whether you are likely to have 3 spare (i.e. green huts) resources before turn 4, which I deemed unlikely. As you say, even if you did, spending those resources on a GP is a pretty bad deal.
Regarding Markets/Barracks: I called Barracks "overpowered" because in my opinion they so vastly overshadow the other starred buildings - markets and temples - that there's just no comparison. Temples are bad enough on their own that I am unsure when they'd ever be worth the city action - but costing a city action AND preventing you from building a barracks seems outrageous. Markets are slightly better only because they turn into banks and therefore win you the game, but they are awfully marginal in the meantime. Temple would definitely be good with +1 Trade icon; I don't know if that would be too strong for Markets. Possibly not, especially since the Incense ability on Currency is so bad.
Regarding Masonry: Indeed, I did expect this to be my most controversial comment, as I have read elsewhere on how unpopular this tech is. And let me be clear: my initial list was not supposed to be a partitioning of what will COMMONLY be selected as your very first tech. Rather, it was which techs should NEVER be selected as your first turn tech. My appreciation of Masonry is based on the following observation: if you want to play very early aggression (which does NOT necessarily mean do-or-die military victory, but rather constant pressure on the opponent(s)), you MUST increase both your stacking limit and your moving speed. These things are MUCH more important than having +1 strength on one or two of your troops (ie. a troop upgrade). And from that, it's clear that getting Masonry+Sailing is a more efficient way to do that than PrintingPress+Horseback Riding (although this latter has better 'long-term' potential, in the short-term the extra stacking of 4 is overkill since you will have neither the flags nor the troops and the mobility is much much worse since you lack the ability to cross or stand in water).
Here is a rough outline of the scenario I'm envisioning, which illustrates why Masonry has to be the first tech (and speaks to some of Mr. Amir's concerns)
Turn 1: Build a flag. Push up to one of your borders and explore it, pushing onto the tile with a flag and scout if possible. Research Masonry.
Turn 2: Assume no lucky 2nd-turn city. Capital builds scout (likely first scout is standing on forest or mountain to make this possible). Move your scout into position for a turn 3 city. Use the forward flag to clear out a hut if necessary for city-building. No research.
Turn 3: Found city. Capital pulls troop (4), second city builds flag. All flags push towards nearest enemy tile - likely the "new" flag can group up with your forward flag, but not the one that had to pay MP on turn 1 to explore the tile. Research Sailing.
Turn 4. Both cities pull troops (6). Using the Sailing movement, all flags group up - it should be possible to form this group on the "enemy" tile, perhaps 1 or two spaces in from the edge. Note that Masonry NEEDED to be the first tech to permit grouping NOW, as we have not yet researched a 2nd Level I tech. Research Code of Laws or Metalworking depending on circumstances (CoL for stomping enemy flags, Metalworking for barracks/Iron attack on cities).
Turn 5. One city pulls troop (7), other...builds barracks? Picks up iron? Builds 2nd scout? Who knows. The troops are pre-stacked and ought to be able to hit any target on the "enemy's" tile. If there are none (because they've been scared off by the big stack) you can either split and grab multiple huts or stay grouped and keeping pressing - highly dependent on the tactical position where to go from here.
I think that the ability to bring 7 troops to bear is extremely powerful. Indeed it cannot take a city (immediately anyway) if the enemy is well prepared, but it can *threaten* to do so if they're not, which is something that 5 troops cannot do. If the enemy doesn't get sailing as well, you easily chase down his flags/scouts and stomp them. You guard the huts - especially the red Villages - and if anyone takes them but you, you stomp them. Guarding the barbarian huts is VERY powerful - typically they make the biggest difference for putting coins on Code of Laws, which is almost always the most variable factor in how quickly you can accumulate coins.
Indeed, the Russians start with this ability of the extra stacking limit. If they are not using it aggressively, then in my opinion they should be. Likely this is an under-used and under-appreciated facet of their Civ abilities (which are already quite strong).
I have in fact used this Masonry/Sailing build once (and won easily with it) but in that game the Masonry component of it wasn't critical, it was more the opponent not properly responding to my early pressure.
On Libraries/Granaries: My current general mantra to this game is "buildings are for suckers." I certainly never seem to need more than a couple of barracks to keep up an excellent tech pace. Because the barracks are limited in supply, they are the building most worth racing for. Therefore, if I am spending one of my precious early city actions on a building, I cannot *imagine* wanting to build a library instead of a barracks. Under this argument, I will *always* choose Metalworking over Writing/Pottery if building access is the primary concern. Libraries may or may not be okay, but they can wait until turn 4. I suppose since the Germans START with Metalworking, perhaps they might consider having the access to build both, but if I recall correctly they don't have an abundance of Grasslands around their capital (does anybody, actually?), making something like an early Granary highly marginal.
-
El-ad David Amir
United States
New York
New York
-
The_Immortal wrote: Regarding Markets/Barracks: I called Barracks "overpowered" because in my opinion they so vastly overshadow the other starred buildings - markets and temples - that there's just no comparison.
I wholeheartedly agree. In fact, I cannot recall the last time we saw Markets and Temples built...
The_Immortal wrote: If you want to play very early aggression (which does NOT necessarily mean do-or-die military victory, but rather constant pressure on the opponent(s)), you MUST increase both your stacking limit and your moving speed.
I disagree with the first half of your statement. You definitely need not increase your stacking limit; if anything, you need to increase your military bonus. Three separate flags with a +6 bonus each are strictly superior to one stack of three flags with a +0 bonus, especially from a harassment perspective- which is the point of view you're trying to sell. Three flags serve several purposes:
1) You can still take Villages while harassing other players. This cannot be done if you put all of your eggs in one basket.
2) You are less vulnerable to flag killers, flag movers and Communism. Following the scenario you outlined below, by turn 5, your opponents are bound to have a lethal combination of these.
3) Before unit upgrades kick in, each +2 bonus is equivalent (on average) to a single unit. Your three separate flags with a +6 bonus are worth "six" units each, while your stack of three with no bonus is worth seven units (plus you spent four city actions on getting the units and only three on getting the bonus, and the bonus also gives you trade and furthers your economy). Even if my calculation is biased, I would say the one flag with +^ bonus is worth at least "five" units.
4) You can target multiple players. While you're busy demolishing one player with your three flags, the other two players are winning the game. Even worse, they're advancing with their flags on your cities- and you're defenseless.
The_Immortal wrote: Here is a rough outline of the scenario I'm envisioning, which illustrates why Masonry has to be the first tech (and speaks to some of Mr. Amir's concerns)
Putting the theorycrafting aside, have you ever played out this scenario...? Since I doubt you'll get very far with our play group. This could be an issue of groupthink- we know our group has a tendency to do certain things which might not be optimal, just because they "work" in our little bubble. With that said, by turn 5 someone is going to have one of the tools I mentioned above, leaving you far behind.
The_Immortal wrote: ...typically they make the biggest difference for putting coins on Code of Laws, which is almost always the most variable factor in how quickly you can accumulate coins.
Again, this could be an issue of groupthink, but we've observed economic victories with no Code of Laws (in fact, if you plan correctly CoL is a wasted tech- you want Democracy as a form of government and have no use for Desert Posts).
The_Immortal wrote: I have in fact used this Masonry/Sailing build once (and won easily with it) but in that game the Masonry component of it wasn't critical, it was more the opponent not properly responding to my early pressure.
You can destroy an unprepared opponent with two flags (check out Civ PBF #25, which I'm running now). The question is whether you can hold in front of someone who understand Civilization is a military game...
The_Immortal wrote: On Libraries/Granaries: My current general mantra to this game is "buildings are for suckers."
This (brave) statement has convinced me beyond all doubt that our perspective of the game is fundamentally different. Buildings (along side great people, units, figures, etc.) are crucial for winning with either of the four victory conditions. They provide you with an infrastructure that allows you to achieve goals that are simply unattainable through technology and barebones military alone. I wish we could meet and play someday and test these different ideas against each other; I would love to be wrong on this (though I doubt it ;-)).
-
Ian Kelly
United States
Longmont
Colorado
Allow me to introduce myself. I am Hexachlorophene J. Goodfortune, Kidnapper-At-Large, and Devourer of Tortoises par Excellence, at your service.
If you can read this, then this sentence is false.
-
The_Immortal wrote: To Mr. Kelly: I agree that Fame&Fortune likely changes several dynamics, particularly regarding Philosophy - thus why I restricted my analysis to the base game for now (although I am a little confused on how the Arabs get 2 culture cards AND a great person just by getting Philosophy on Turn 1...?).
The Arabs also get 2 culture for every resource token they spend. Dumping 3 tokens on Philosophy gets them 6 culture, the cost of two culture cards.
-
El-ad David Amir
United States
New York
New York
-
Peristarkawan wrote: The Arabs also get 2 culture for every resource token they spend. Dumping 3 tokens on Philosophy gets them 6 culture, the cost of two culture cards.
And, of course, they start with one of each resource from the market.
Arabs are sooooo good *drool*      
-
Sebastian Valmont
Germany
Berlin
Germ
-
We just had a cool game of 3s and the game analysis led us to the following ideas:
Markets / Banks each +1 Trade.
Philosophy: 3 Ressources let you choose a GP you don't already have.
Masonry: upon inventing masonry all your cities are walled (Walls can be destroyed by Gunpowder, Combustion, Sabotage et al.). Masonry reads: for the remainder of the game enemies attacking your city have to play their units first.
EDITED
-
Ian Kelly
United States
Longmont
Colorado
Allow me to introduce myself. I am Hexachlorophene J. Goodfortune, Kidnapper-At-Large, and Devourer of Tortoises par Excellence, at your service.
If you can read this, then this sentence is false.
-
pittpatt wrote: Masonry reads: for the remainder of the game enemys attacking a walled city have to play their units first. (Or just "attacking your city").
Isn't that the normal rule for walls? What is this meant to change?
-
Sebastian Valmont
Germany
Berlin
Germ
-
You are right. The idea was to make this a permanent advantage linked to Masonry and not to the walls itself. So it should read on Masonry: "For the remainder of the game enemies attacking your cities have to play their units first."
-
-
I guess, depending on the board, Masonry-Sailing could be a powerfull tactic for Rome. Some quick pressure on an opponent, best one that has several villages around, could be crucial here.
-
El-ad David Amir
United States
New York
New York
-
Chris_Wiesbaden wrote: I guess, depending on the board, Masonry-Sailing could be a powerfull tactic for Rome. Some quick pressure on an opponent, best one that has several villages around, could be crucial here.
The point I'm trying to make is that Masonry does not help you one bit. You do not need the stacking limit; in fact, you cannot even support it (you don't have enough early game actions to sustain a three flags army). Furthermore, a three flag army is very vulnerable to one of the many tools the game provides non-military civilizations with.
-
Jeff Long
Canada
Saskatoon
Saskatchewan
-
Peristarkawan wrote:
The Arabs also get 2 culture for every resource token they spend. Dumping 3 tokens on Philosophy gets them 6 culture, the cost of two culture cards.
Ah I had forgotten that about the Arabs' abilities - haven't played much with the expansion. They seemed good enough to me WITHOUT that!
-
Jeff Long
Canada
Saskatoon
Saskatchewan
-
Mr. Amir evidently has quite a lot to say, particularly on the subject of the masonry opening I've presented. Such analysis can quickly get out of hand, and since I will address several points in greater detail, we'll need to frame things a little more precisely. So for the following analysis let's assume we are talking about the 2-player game (the form of the game most amenable to deep analysis) and then state explicitly where things might change or break when that assumption doesn't hold.
IirionClaus wrote:
I disagree with the first half of your statement. You definitely need not increase your stacking limit; if anything, you need to increase your military bonus. Three separate flags with a +6 bonus each are strictly superior to one stack of three flags with a +0 bonus, especially from a harassment perspective- which is the point of view you're trying to sell.
I'm sure you didn't intend the term "strictly superior" to be taken literally here, but it seems to me this claim is untrue in even the loosest sense. 1 flag even with a +6 bonus is minimal threat even to a VANILLA city (one with no combat bonus and no extra troops built beyond the starting 3). A 3 flag stack with no bonus will cream a vanilla city. The fact that the opponent will not have a vanilla city is beside the point - the 3-flag stack FORCES the opponent to respond or else lose the city, whereas the 1 flag with +6 forces absolutely nothing. 1 flag with a +6 bonus will also lose if you throw it against the 3-flag stack. In fact, even if you have 3 flags with a +6 bonus come in one at a time against the 3-flag stack, the big stack will win all 3 fights (assuming equal numbers of city actions to prepare of course).
The 3 distributed flags have other advantages of course but it seems to me they are not even close to strictly superior.
I'll also point out that the quoted +6 bonus here is somewhat irrelevant in our example here, since it assumes your first Lvl II tech was Irrigation. This means you don't have Sailing or even Horseback Riding unless you're Germany, which means you're not aggressively pushing in or harassing in the first place. Realistically, the best bonus you could have and still do something "comparable" with the Masonry push I outlined is only +4.
IirionClaus wrote:
1) You can still take Villages while harassing other players. This cannot be done if you put all of your eggs in one basket.
Do you mean clean up your own "close-to-home" villages or snatch the opponent's villages? In the former case, that's true, but those resources aren't going anywhere. Building another flag at home later can clean them up quickly at your leisure (since you have Sailing under this plan). For stealing enemy huts, 1-flag vs. 1-flag duels (assuming you have ignored masonry and thus both have the same combat bonus) come down to turn order, since attacker advantage will give the win in a close fight. The 3-stack lets you safely move deep into enemy territory REGARDLESS of turn order (in fact, you can do it on your "off-turn" in order to potentially then split up and hunt down the opponent's flags and scouts with double-moves).
IirionClaus wrote:
2) You are less vulnerable to flag killers, flag movers and Communism. Following the scenario you outlined below, by turn 5, your opponents are bound to have a lethal combination of these.
Of those potential threats, I agree Communism is very effective against a "big stack" strategy. Against anyone but the Russians, it is impossible for them to even have Communism at the time this push is occurring on Turn 5 movement. It is unlikely they will even have it on Turn 6. On top of that, if in a 2-player game I can make a play (such as this one) that forces the other guy's first Lvl III tech to be Communism (rather than the generally much more powerful Metalcasting), then I'd consider that a big win.
For the culture cards, it's certainly true that Defection (flag killer) is a very powerful card, as is the flag mover. In a 2-player game, it's just going to be bad news for you if your opponent gets them. I'm not sure how the Masonry 3-stack is particularly more vulnerable to them than any other form of early aggression. If anything, it seems slightly less so to me, since otherwise the flag-mover can be used to pull an unsuspecting singleton flag into range and then stomp it using attacker advantage. Since the 3-stack is safe from attack, at least it's safe from that troublesome maneuver.
But regardless, those are a small number of cards in a big deck.
IirionClaus wrote:
3) Before unit upgrades kick in, each +2 bonus is equivalent (on average) to a single unit. Your three separate flags with a +6 bonus are worth "six" units each, while your stack of three with no bonus is worth seven units (plus you spent four city actions on getting the units and only three on getting the bonus, and the bonus also gives you trade and furthers your economy). Even if my calculation is biased, I would say the one flag with +^ bonus is worth at least "five" units.
Again, I don't think this is really an apt comparison. The +6 is worth zero units if you are losing the fight anyway. It doesn't help save your units and it doesn't help kill enemy units. It can only really be compared to number of units in terms of winning a single battle, not multiple battles. Solving battles in this game isn't trivial, but as a "general" rule, I think each play that you have AFTER the other guy is completely done placing his units is worth much more than just the strength of the unit you are placing. Roughly 2X where X is the average unit strength is probably a good enough heuristic.
IirionClaus wrote:
4) You can target multiple players. While you're busy demolishing one player with your three flags, the other two players are winning the game. Even worse, they're advancing with their flags on your cities- and you're defenceless.
I think the multiplayer issue is too much to tackle for now. Perhaps we can address it at a later time.
IirionClaus wrote:
Putting the theorycrafting aside, have you ever played out this scenario...? Since I doubt you'll get very far with our play group. This could be an issue of groupthink- we know our group has a tendency to do certain things which might not be optimal, just because they "work" in our little bubble. With that said, by turn 5 someone is going to have one of the tools I mentioned above, leaving you far behind.
It's tough for me to find players that give me a sufficient challenge. As I said, I tried it once and won, but acknowledged that I didn't think the Masonry bit was important that time. If we limit the debate to 2-player for now, then we don't have to worry about "play-style" or groupthink.
IirionClaus wrote: The_Immortal wrote: On Libraries/Granaries: My current general mantra to this game is "buildings are for suckers." This (brave) statement has convinced me beyond all doubt that our perspective of the game is fundamentally different. Buildings (along side great people, units, figures, etc.) are crucial for winning with either of the four victory conditions. They provide you with an infrastructure that allows you to achieve goals that are simply unattainable through technology and barebones military alone. I wish we could meet and play someday and test these different ideas against each other; I would love to be wrong on this (though I doubt it ;-)).
Perhaps my case has come off as overstated on this point. I certainly don't mean buildings are worthless - I've already expressed the view that Barracks in particular are "overpowered."  I state this as my 'mantra' because I think it is easy in this game, particularly for new players, to fall into the trap of overbuilding. So when I say "buildings are for suckers," it's more to mean that as a rule-of-thumb, 'when in doubt, build a building' is a terrible way to play. 'When in doubt, pull a troop,' for example, is much, much better as a simple rule. But if say you have a plan where you absolutely need that harbour to research a Lvl II tech next turn, by all means do it. I just think that, much like in the video game where it's so tempting just to "build everything," the psychological tendency is to go overboard here.
-
Mark B
United States
Connecticut
-
pittpatt wrote: You are right. The idea was to make this a permanent advantage linked to Masonry and not to the walls itself. So it should read on Masonry: "For the remainder of the game enemies attacking your cities have to play their units first."
This is correct. Attackers must play their units first. Unless the attackers has combustion then that rule is ignored forcing the defending city player to play their unit(s) first.
In most games, researching horseback riding first tends to allow you to gather resources quickly. For Spain(expansion pack), a focus on your chosen victory path is a wise choice. The standard game, an economic victory tends to be one of choice followed by military (if a 2 player game). The expansion allows culture boosting and ways to neutralize an opponent's economic victory now w/out having to sack cities.
-
Sebastian Valmont
Germany
Berlin
Germ
-
Well the idea is to give the walls a defensive bonus, but not the ability to have the other player play first. That would be linked to the tech itself, so even if someone would destroy the walls, they still would have to play first. It's a minor updgrade(and walls more readily available with the FaF Wonder).
I still don't think that I would choose Masonry over any other lvl1 Tech in the good and mediocre tier. It is simply not worth it compared to the other bonuses.
-
Ian Kelly
United States
Longmont
Colorado
Allow me to introduce myself. I am Hexachlorophene J. Goodfortune, Kidnapper-At-Large, and Devourer of Tortoises par Excellence, at your service.
If you can read this, then this sentence is false.
-
Maarek Stele wrote: Attackers must play their units first. Unless the attackers has combustion then that rule is ignored forcing the defending city player to play their unit(s) first.
A minor quibble, that should read: ...unless the attacker has combustion and has not already destroyed a building with it that turn...
-
El-ad David Amir
United States
New York
New York
-
Peristarkawan wrote: A minor quibble, that should read: ...unless the attacker has combustion and has not already destroyed a building with it that turn...
I'm not sure all of this wording is worth it; plus, it's not very interesting and I doubt it will fix Masonry. Here's another idea: How about adding a Great Wall like ability? When you lose a battle defending one of your cities, your opponent gains one less loot.
-
Ian Kelly
United States
Longmont
Colorado
Allow me to introduce myself. I am Hexachlorophene J. Goodfortune, Kidnapper-At-Large, and Devourer of Tortoises par Excellence, at your service.
If you can read this, then this sentence is false.
-
IirionClaus wrote: Peristarkawan wrote: A minor quibble, that should read: ...unless the attacker has combustion and has not already destroyed a building with it that turn... I'm not sure all of this wording is worth it; plus, it's not very interesting and I doubt it will fix Masonry.
That had nothing to do with fixing Masonry. That's the way Combustion already works.
-
El-ad David Amir
United States
New York
New York
-
Peristarkawan wrote: IirionClaus wrote: Peristarkawan wrote: A minor quibble, that should read: ...unless the attacker has combustion and has not already destroyed a building with it that turn... I'm not sure all of this wording is worth it; plus, it's not very interesting and I doubt it will fix Masonry. That had nothing to do with fixing Masonry. That's the way Combustion already works.
Oh, yes, I know; I'm just saying that implementing the attacker-plays-first addition on the masonry tech itself will require adding an exception for combustion (the exception you outlined), and that's a lot of text.
-
|
|
Posted Tue Feb 7, 2012 6:16 pm
