FoA Interview #6: Xin-Yu

DanQ · March 12, 2002, 19:26

The sixth edition of the "Faces of Apolyton" interview series, spearheaded by Apolyton staff member and interviewer Solver, is here. Today, we sport a two-page article with <A HREF="http://apolyton.net/misc/interviews/foa_6xin-yu.shtml">Xin-Yu</A>, athe master analyst of Civ games. You are welcome and encouraged to post your comments on this interview in this thread.

When is the next "FoA" coming? It`s just around the corner. Next Tuesday, March 19th, 2002, will feature a one-on-one conversation with Ming, everyone's favorite moderator, 'Man with a Thousand Guns', of the Off-Topic and CivII forums fame. For past "FoA" and other interviews, <A HREF="http://apolyton.net/misc/interviews">click here</A>.

----------------
Dan; Apolyton CS

Xin Yu · March 12, 2002, 20:14

Thanks. It's an honor. (Scratch head) but when did I become famous in the "off topic" forum?

Ming · March 12, 2002, 20:19

Quote:

Originally posted by Xin Yu
but when did I become famous in the "off topic" forum?

I was thinking the exact same thing

Good to hear things are going good for you Xin...

DanQ · March 12, 2002, 20:40

Opps.

Corrected.

-----------------
Dan; Apolyton CS

DarkCloud · March 12, 2002, 21:13

...A Good interview- but it seemed far too short... oh well, sadly I can't think of any other questions- but it only took me 2 minutes to read it

It was interesting, however

Good picture

faded glory · March 13, 2002, 01:10

notyoueither · March 13, 2002, 02:05

From the master of cutting to the crux of the matter: *In my opinion Sid Meier stands for Sid and his men. He'll no longer be the brightest if he loses his men. It seems to me that he lost some of them.*

I think the new men are doing well (and improving), but I had to chuckle when I read that.

Salve

Alexander's Horse · March 13, 2002, 02:23

I would have preferred Yin26.

Xin Yu · March 13, 2002, 02:28

Quote:

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
I would have preferred Yin26.

Was that a comment on the question of whether Yin26 was Sid himself?

Xin Yu · March 13, 2002, 02:33

Quote:

Originally posted by notyoueither
I think the new men are doing well (and improving)
Salve

Except that they created two outstanding features of Civ3 in order to make multiplayer impossible.

Solver · March 13, 2002, 06:52

As for the interview being too short, well, I can't force Xin Yu to type a lot. I think that his answers, though short, are good and informative.

Skanky Burns · March 13, 2002, 08:11

Nice interview. Allowed us to see Xin Yu's personality.
Of course, it was a bit too short

Where's part 2??

Lancer · March 13, 2002, 09:28

I don't think it was too short. He said what he wanted to say and that's fine. Xin seems like a scientist to me because of it. It's nice that they interview people once in a while who don't blither on forever like that last guy.

Good interview

Skanky Burns · March 13, 2002, 09:45

Scientist schmientist!!
I'm around programmers most days, I actually like people with personality!! Makes a change from people I talk to

Quote:

It's nice that they interview people once in a while who don't blither on forever like that last guy.

Thats not a very nice thing to say, Lancer. How would you feel if you were that other guy??

Oh...

rah · March 13, 2002, 10:03

A good typical Xin read....to the point, concise, and left me wanting more. Congrats XIN. I still want to know just how you figured out a few more of those really obscure things.

RAH

Ming · March 13, 2002, 13:17

I'd still like to know how he figured out how to terraform a square in one turn with ten engineers... The exact order of action needed is obscure to say the least.

I just want to thank Xin for the amount of information that he has provided us with on the inner works of Civ II.

Some of it was simply amazing

Xin Yu · March 13, 2002, 14:41

Thanks folks. I'll give some extras here. Ming, I don't know how many parts I'll write but your question will be addressed in the second part

Strategic Thinking (how did I discover them), part I

OK, lets start with 'changing all citizens to specialists'. This was discovered in those crazy days of trying to maximize my score. Here's the analysis:

Objective: maximize score
Score components(in order of importance):
a)population(remember to make them happy at the last turn),
b)space ship,
c)wonder,
d)future tech,
e)turns of world peace,
f)other.

Now THINK REVERSELY, start from your objective, work backwards to know what you need to do.
A) If by the end of the game you want a lot of population points, then you must use WLTKD under Democracy. (Note: Republic may work but not as well. Another way is to use food caravans but I did not know about it at that time).
B) From A): You must get the tech Democracy ASAP.
C) Before Invention the quickest way to get a tech is from goody huts, so we narrow down to how to get to Democracy quickly after getting Invention, this makes only one tech (democracy) if you have banking (Note: at that time I was still doing resetting hut results).
D) The first civ to discover Philosophy will be granted a free tech.
E) So the quickest way to Democracy is to set science to zero (so that the free tech from Philosophy won't be wasted), and reset goody hut results till you get philosophy (must be the first civ to discover), banking then invention, and then hire one scientist or set science rate to 10%. You then get democracy as a free gift immediately.

Put the plan into action and found that sometimes democracy could not be picked immediately after invention. (Note: Oedo found out that, unless you are playing a scenario, 1/3 of the techs won't be available each time you get to pick a tech. His discovery was way to late for me so I had to deal with this difficulty by myself. BTW at that time I did not know caravans give science bonus, otherwise I'd definitely use them).

Hence the only question left is to find a SHORT TERM solution of maximizing science so that democracy can be discovered faster. It does not take a genius to figure out that you should rush build libraries and change all citizens in big cities (size >=5) to scientists. Since this is a short term solution, you can afford to have food deficit in those cities. Put this plan into action and it worked! So the next step was to fine tune the strategy to achieve its maximum potential (like, grow all cities to size 5, store enough food, etc.). The 'dancing' technique (i.e., citizens as workers and specialists in alternate turns) was formed during this fine tune process. Then later on the 'size 5' strategy was born out of this, mainly to free the player from relying on goody huts before invention.

klesh · March 13, 2002, 15:59

This is absolutely outstanding!

No other interview could've grabbed my attention any more than this one. Xin Yu has ceased to amaze me over at SLeague on countless occasions. Always the master.

Only recently did he post that he has a Phd. in Mathematics... that revealed much about his playing style. But it still left me wondering many things about you Xin, truly an enigma!

When I first got to this board, I didn't like the way Xin 'took the fun' out of playing civ. But as I got to kow him, I developed a deep appriciation for all that he does.

Right now he is making utilities for Civ that I can't even help him with because I dont understand it!

I am just not at his level of comprehension.

But this interview asked many things about him that I never was able to (or felt comfortable) asking. Personal stuff about family, age, etc. Now I have my answers!

And Xin does still post alot, over at the SLeague. Since Civ2's challenges have been overcome, he now works on destroying our scenarios in 1 turn.

Put it this way... even my friends who wouldn't touch civ with a 10 foot pole know who Xin Yu is... form me telling them. That is the level of admiration I have for you Xin. Really.

His answers were fine. Short and sweet. Perfect Xin style... the same way he'll rock you in a PBEM.

And a pic of him to boot! What more could I have asked for?
Excellent interview! I give it a 10.

-FMK.

rah · March 13, 2002, 17:49

My favorite Xin story was in one of our early arena games. He and I were partners vs Ming and MWHC. We were sharing maps every turn so I could watch what he was doing. Using the location "Closest to city" feature, he triangulated where one of Ming's cities was. "Boston" He dropped a city right by it and named it "Boston". Since this was right after MP came out and no one had posted this strat yet, I'll give XIN credit for being the first to do it.

Ming was very confused when he knew one of his units was closer to another of his cities but it still showed boston.

Around this time, xin had triangulated (black clicking wasn't used yet) where phily was and sent multiple units there. they all kind of showed up on surprise.

Ming was now not just confused but pissed. He figured the only way Xin could have done it was by map loading to peek. (mwhc had already introduced that one to us

)

It took him a while to figure out that what Xin had done was legit, but until he did, the feathers were flying. XIN and I almost busted a gut laughing.

AHHHHHH, those early games of discovery.

RAH

Velociryx · March 13, 2002, 18:02

Yet another outstanding interview about a poster whom I previously knew little about...MOST excellent!

-=Vel=-
PS: Hey...I didn't think that last guy rattled on....you shoulda seen how long winded that FIRST guy was....

Alexander's Horse · March 13, 2002, 19:04

Quote:

Originally posted by Skanky Burns

Nice interview. Allowed us to see Xin Yu's personality.
Of course, it was a bit too short

Are you saying Xin Yu is short on personality

Skanky Burns · March 13, 2002, 20:35

Nah, I don't think any of us could claim that.
Just commenting that the interview was a little on the short side, but its seemed to have spilled over into this thread, so we're getting more information!!

Xin Yu · March 13, 2002, 20:50

Hi folks. Thanks a lot for paying a visit here. It's a pleasure to have you guys. I know soon my thread will be buried deeply and forgotten (when Ming's interview is out, that is), so I'm trying to use this 'short' time to leave some impressions

Some of you guys are great strategist (Vel especially) so maybe you will be interested in my articles.

Strategic Thinking (how did I discover them), part II

In this part I'll talk about how I found the X-pack. Before that, I fulfill my promise to Ming and reveal how I found the trick of using multiple engineers to finish work in one turn.

One day, by accident, I had 3 engineers irrigating a forest square and turned the square into plain in one turn. From past experience this would not be possible, so I was fascinated and wanted to repeat the result. So I did some logical thinking:

Under ordinary situations, only the first 2 engineers' work are counted;
This time, the 3rd engineer's work counts;
Hence, it is very likely that, I did something to make the 3rd engineer BECAME the 2nd.

So I tried to dismiss the first engineer from work before the 3rd one was committed to the job -- Walla!

Now back to the X-pack. A while ago a discussion of "which unit is the best" drew my attention (don't ask me when since the same question was asked a million times). I found the topic interesting and decided to do some research on it:

Objective: find the best unit
Problem of the definition: there are many functions for a unit and team work may enhance performance (analogy: the Olympic Games). Hence the objective has to be broken down to functions and single/double/team play.

Break down of objective:
Single: find the best unit for
a)attack
b)momentum (the ability to attack continuously)
c)defense
d)move
e)martial law
f)assist
g)reckon
h)residual value (disbanding, lowering rush cost, no support cost)
NOTE: the spying ability of diplomat/spy, trading ability of caravan/freight and settling ability of settler/engineer are not considered, since that's what they are there for.

Double: find the best pair of units for
a)attack and defense
b)attack and momentum

All-round:
a)find the best all-round single unit
b)find the best all-round team consists of multiple units

Now, my answer to the questions:
Best Single:
a)attack -- Spy (can take a whole city with improvements intact/can plant nukes)
Runner Up: Nuke, Howitzer, Stealth Bomber, Cruise Missile
(Cruise Missile after Stealth Bomber since you can't make vet missiles)
b)momentum -Stealth Fighter (can attack a lot of rounds per turn)
Runner Up: Armor (can recover from injury by taking an enemy city)
c)defense -- Bomber/Stealth Bomber (only fighters can attack them)
Runner Up: Mech. Inf. (against non-air) /AEGIS Cruiser (against air)
d)move -- Nuke (long range, can ride on both carriers and subs)
Runner Up: Stealth Fighter (more useful when you want to put off a fire)
e)martial law -- Warrior (undisputed champion, dirty cheap)
f)assist -- Engineer (build roads, airbases, etc. to assist attack and defense)
Runner Up: Transport (increase movement of units), any missile/plane unit(cover ground to reduce partisan problem, assist land units bypassing ZOC), Spy/Freight(ZOC), Partisan/Explorer(counter-partisan, ZOC)
g)reckon -- Nuke
Runner Up: Any plane/missile unit
h)residual value -- Warrior (can be upgraded to riflemen and disband for 20 shields, the ability to build warrior lowers other units and improvements' rush buying cost)
Runner Up: Pikemen, Fanatics(no supporting cost)

Best Double:
a)attack and defense -- Stealth bomber/AEGIS Cruiser (unbreakable, but only works on ocean squares)
Runner Up: howitzer/bomber (just watch out for stealth fighters)
b)attack and momentum -- Stealth Fighter/Carrier
Runner Up: Armor/Transport

Best All-round Single: There is no single all-round champion, so I split the functions into domestic and combat.
Domestic: Warrior
Combat: Stealth Bomber (great attack, defense move, assist and reckon, just lack of momentum)

Best All-round Team: Since warriors can take care of domestic matters single handed, we only need to find the best combat team. We should build up our team on top of our all-round combat champion, the Stealth Bomber. The Stealth Bomber has two drawbacks: low momentum and lack of resistance against fighters. So I thought about ways to counter them.

I figured out a way to double the momentum: I flew the bomber next to its target, then used two engineers to build an airbase underneath the bomber before ordering it to attack. As I expected the bomber could go out for another round of bombing the very next turn. Thus, I saved the turn for the bomber to back to a city.

As for the other drawback, a lot of people knew the answer: put a Mech. Inf. underneath the bomber to absorb fighter attacks. I enhanced the defense further by building a fortress on the spot and adding more Mech. Inf.s to the team.

Think one step further: can we get the benefits of both? The first measure requires to build an airbase, the second requires to build a fortress. If we first build an airbase then switch to fortress, we may be able to get both. After tests showing the trick really worked, I added several Stealth Fighters to increase momentum and replaced the stealth bomber by bomber to reduce cost. That's the final version of the X-pack -- the best all-round team.

DarkCloud · March 13, 2002, 22:09

Quote:

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
I would have preferred Yin26.

bleh. We already interviewed him

(not bleh at Yin, but bleh at you.)

Lancer · March 14, 2002, 00:17

I have learned however that I should never, never play him.

Ming · March 14, 2002, 01:39

Quote:

Originally posted by Lancer
I have learned however that I should never, never play him.

So true... So true...
I've been his partner, and his opponent... and it easier to be his partner.
The game that he mentioned where Rah, Xin, and I played three minor powers in the WWII scenario, and then took on the real nations was one of my favorite games. It took awhile, be we destroyed the Allies... and the Axis forces. Xin is simply amazing.

I'll never forget another game where MWHC and I were paired off against Rah and Xin. We were getting slaughtered. And in the game, that's where MWHC first figured out that you could load a world map on a second computer and bypass the passwords by using the scenario editor. I'm sure somebody must have figured it out before... but he was the first to post it here.

Even looking at the total map, and knowing just where the attacks were coming from, and what was coming... we were still toast. Just watching what they were doing was simply amazing.

So it is far better to be with Xin... then against him

Alexander's Horse · March 14, 2002, 03:21

You guys play a far more serious game that the Australian group - except for Deity, who tries too hard

ravagon · March 14, 2002, 05:02

Quote:

Originally posted by Lancer
I have learned however that I should never, never play him.

Not if you're worried about that little "winning" thing anyway...

Lancer · March 14, 2002, 08:57

AH, it's a serious game certainly. However the sort of game that Ming, Rah and Xin describe seems to be playing both against people and the game system. I don't know if I like it, and not simply because I don't know it. To seek an advantage over an oponent w/ wise play IS the game, to seek an advantage over an oponent using technicalities... You might not find out who is the best player, just who is the most technical. Perhaps if you think those are the same thing well then ok...

Here's a question for Ming, Rah and Xin...certainly you guys aren't breaking the rules, but is it the right way to play? Starting a city near an enemy city and naming it the same seems...tricky. Using the mechanics of the game in a manner not intended...hmmm. Perhaps I'm not stating my case very well. I can tell you that Napoleon never started a small French city in the heart of Russia and called it Moscow...

Do you guys use such unorthidox strategies whenever you play?

Certainly to each their own...

Ming · March 14, 2002, 09:59

We only played that way in the beginning... as we were experimenting with the game. Every time a new "cheat" was found, the person would for use it for a while during the game, and once they totally understood it, they would alert the other players in the game, and we would experiment with it some more.

Over time, we determinded what was a cheat... and what should and what shouldn't be done.

Now, it's not even an issue... The group we play with has "standard rules" to live by... This saves the normal hour or two of arguments about what's a cheat, and allows us to start games in a matter of minutes.