Going for 1000 AD without huts

[solo]

I was curious to see how early a landing could be made in a game without huts and without sources of income other than taxes or trade. I just finished my first attempt using the following rules to eliminate as much “luck” as possible from the game:

1) No tipping of huts allowed by the human player. If a hut falls within the radius of any city, it can be eliminated by placing a citizen on the hut. (The hut disappears without producing any benefits when doing this.)
2) Barb leaders may not be ransomed for gold.
3) No asking for tribute or gifts from the AI is allowed, although tech trades or gifts of tech can be made.

So a meaningful comparison could be made, I used the start also used in the last game of my “Going for 500 AD …” thread, where a landing of 421 AD was attained.

In this subsequent game, without huts and other sources of income based on chance, I managed a launch in 1080 with a landing ETA of 1116 AD. I think it is possible to do better, hence the title of this thread “Going for 1000 AD …”.

I will be trying again soon, and find it more enjoyable to play this way, where luck is much less of a factor, and invite others who might want to take a crack at beating the 1000 AD barrier first, to participate.

For now, I’ll post a log of my first attempt.

BC years

4000 Washington founded
3900 revolution
3850 government to Monarchy
3800 Was – warrior, New York founded
3650 Mysticism
3250 NY – settlers, Mathematics
3200 Was – settlers
2950 Boston founded
2850 Philadelphia founded
2800 Map Making, Bos – warrior
2750 NY – temple
2650 contact English, give tech, peace, share maps
2500 Astronomy, Was – temple
2350 Bos – temple
2300 Phi – settlers, NY – trireme
2200 Currency
2150 Atlanta founded
2050 contact Romans, give tech, peace, share maps
1950 Bos – settlers
1900 NY – settlers
1850 Construction
1750 Phi – temple, Chicago (SSC) founded

Things start off much more slowly without huts, since a settler had to be produced to found each new city. It took until 1750 to get 6 cities down in this game. In the previous game with huts, this was finished by 3000 AD. Discovering Trade is a priority, since taxes are producing very little income.

1650 Atl – settlers
1550 Trade, Was – settlers
1500 Romans – trade for Literacy

They had to get this by trade, since they did not have Writing!

1400 Bos – gems
1350 NY – trireme, Romans – trade for Republic!, contact Indians – peace, give tech, share maps, English – give tech, share maps
1300 Phi – beads
1200 Atl – temple
1150 contact French – trade for Writing, peace, share maps

It was odd to get Writing after Republic and Literacy. Since I was not tipping any huts, more were left for the AI. I was hoping they would tip a lot of useful techs, and it seemed like this was going to happen early on, but I ended up acquiring no more techs from the AI than in previous games, so more huts for them was not a big factor in the outcome.

1100 Was – silver, revolution
1050 government to Republic

The switch was made to Republic in 2250 AD in the previous game. I am already falling way behind in the acquisition of techs in the early part of the game.

1000 Chi – temple, Philosophy, Medicine as a freebie, San Francisco founded, the first colony
925 Bos – beads
900 Phi – copper, NY – hides, Romans – trade for Wheel
850 Banking, gems(d) to Veii, 205g, French – trade for Pottery

Finally, a little bit of gold to work with!

825 Atl – copper, Engineering
800 SF – temple, beads(d) to SF, 112g
750 Chi – beads, Was – copper, NY – diplomat
725 Chi – Shakespeare’s Theater, celebration begins, Bos – trireme, attacking barb archer bribed, 61g, contact Japanese – War!

It took until 725 to get the SSC to start growing. By 850 in the previous game, it was already size 21!

700 Seafaring, English, French, Indians, give tech, share maps
675 Chi – aqueduct, Atl – settlers
650 Phi – dye, Japanese – peace, give tech, share maps
525 contact Eqypt, last AI, peace, give tech, share maps

There were not any more wars after this, so I will not mention any further AI contacts, unless they involved a tech trade. Other contacts were to gift tech to keep them happy and to lower my tech costs.

500 NY – dye
475 Bos – beads, copper(d) to Paris, 200g, English – trade for Iron Working
450 SF – salt, Sanitation
425 Atl – hides
400 Chi – gems, Phi – copper, Was – silver
275 Buffalo founded, second colony
250 Chi – beads, University, NY – wine, dye(d) to Thebes, 208g
225 Chi – Copernicus, Bos – beads

Since the French were also building this wonder, I could not build the Colossus first, as desired.

175 Chi – salt, Atl – hides
150 Theory of Gravity, Phi – copper
125 Chi – harbor, Was – coal
75 Buf – temple
50 gems to Paris, 260g
25 Bridge Building, Chi – sewer system, celebration resumes, NY – cloth

Just to compare, I was on the verge of learning Automobile by this time in the first game.

AD years

1 SF – harbor, Chi – Colossus, beads(d) to Orleans, 368g
20 Bos – beads
40 Chi – marketplace, Economics
60 Atl – hides
80 Chi – bank, Phi – hides, Was – coal
100 wine(d) to Veii, 260g
120 Chemistry, Chi – library, salt(d) to Veii, 400g
140 Invention, NY – coal
160 Chi – university, size 21
200 SF – settlers, Democracy, revolution
220 govt. to Democracy
240 Buf – harbor, Chi –food, Atl – hides, Bos – cloth
260 Chi – stock exchange, Gunpowder
280 Chi – Sir Isaac Newton’s College, Explosives, Phi – copper, St. Louis founded, the third colony and 9th city
300 Navigation, Was – silver
320 Physics, Ny – coal
340 Steam Engine, Chi – food
380 Railroad, silver(d) to Was – 67g
400 Chi – food, Atl – hides, Bos – beads, Industrialization

This was the launch turn in the first game, but Industrialization is not all that bad by now in this one, when the slower start is considered.

420 Phi – cloth
440 Buf – engineers, Magnetism, Chi – transport
460 Chi – Darwin’s Voyage, Corporation, Atomic Theory
480 Chi – dye, Refining
500 Chi – oil
520 Metallurgy, Was – harbor
540 Buf – silk, Chi – courthouse
560 Combustion, NY – harbor, dye(d) to Orleans, 552g
580 StL – oil, Buf – colosseum, SF – colosseum, Electricity, Bos – beads
600 Phi – coal, NY – colosseum, silk(d) to Chi, 151g
620 Buf – coal, Chi – dye, Electronics, Bos – harbor, Atl, SF – transports, oil(d) to Paris, 276g, celebration started for helpers and colonies

640 Chi – gold, Phi – harbor
660 Atl – harbor, Was – coal, gold(d) to Paris, 672g, coal(d) to Chi – 136g

680 StL – cloth, Steel, Buf, Chi – gold, Phi, Bos – oil, NY – cloth, gold(d) to Paris, 745g, coal(d) to Paris, 235g

700 Automobile, Bos – colosseum, Was – gems, dye(d) to Neapolis, 392g, coal(d) to Orleans, 250g

720 StL, Atl, Phi – colosseums, Chi – superhighways, Mass Production, cloth(d) to Chi, 202g, oil(d) to Chi, 714g, beads(d) to Buf, 180g

740 Conscription, Buf – copper, SF – wine, Chi – gold, NY – dye, Was – colosseum, Nuclear Fission, gold(d) to Orleans, 768g, cloth(d) to Buf, 165g, Indians – trade for Warrior Code, Detroit founded, the 4th colony and final city

760 StL – wine, Buf – oil, Atl – coal, Phi – hides, Bos – library, Nuclear Power, gold(d) to Elephatine, 318g, hides to Chi – 51g, Indians – trade for Horseback Riding

780 Det – spice, Chi – gold, Laser, NY, Was – libraries, gold(d) to Orleans, 816g, copper to Chi – 262g, coal(d) to Orleans, 290g

800 Feudalism, StL – dye, Buf – wool, SF, Bos – universities, Chi gold, Atl – spice, Phi – library, Chivalry, dye(d) to Rheims, 244g, wine(d) to London, 290g, dye(d) to Bangalore, 184g, oil(d) to Bos, 315g, Japanese – trade for Polytheism

820 Det, Chi – dye, Leadership, NY, Was – universities, cloth(d) to Calcutta, 95g, gold(d) to Orleans, 880g, spice(d) to Chi, 470g

840 Tactics, StL – library, Buf –food, SF, Chi – gold, Atl – copper, Phi – university, Bos –wine, Refrigeration, dye(d) to Paris, 912g, gems(d) to Osaka, 108g, spice(d) to Buffalo, 216g, cloth(d) to Calcutta, 95g

860 Det – oil, StL – University, Buf – library, Machine Tools, Chi – food, Atl – silver, Bos, NY – courthouses, Was – gems, Mobile Warfare, gold(d) to Paris, 944g, oil(d) to Paris, 441g, wool(d) to Kyoto, 196g, wine to Chi, 73g

880 Miniaturization, SF – wine, Chi – dye, Phi, Bos – beads, NY – oil, Computers, copper(d) to StL – 130g, silver(d) to Lyon, 385g, oil(d) to Paris, 560g

900 Det – food, StL, Chi, Was – research labs, Buf – university, Flight, Atl – library, dye(d) to Rome, 524g, wine to Chi, 141g

920 SF, Phi, NY – food, Chi – oil, Bos – salt, Radio, beads(d) to Orleans, 182g, gems to Chi, 43g, beads(d) to Orleans, 134g

940 Det, Atl – food, StL – wine, Buf – wool, Chi –gold, Was – cloth, Advanced Flight, oil(d) to Paris, 910g, gold(d) to Paris, 780g, salt to Chi – 34g

960 Amphibious Warfare, SF, Phi, Bos, NY – food, Chi – gold, Rocketry

980 Det, StL, Buf, Atl, Was – food, Space Flight, gold(d) to Paris, 780g, oil(d) to Paris, 248g

1000 Chi – oil, Plastics, Phi – Apollo Program, Bos, NY – food, gold(d) to Elephantine, 268g

1020 Det, StL, Buf, Atl – food, SF, Bos, NY – SS structurals, Chi, Phi – SS Components, oil(d) to Paris, 910g

1040 Phi, NY, Was – SS Structurals, Superconductor

1060 Det, StL, Buf – SS Modules, SF, Chi, Atl, Bos, NY, Was – food, Phi – SS Structural

1080 StL, Buf, SF, Atl, Phi, Bos, NY, Was – SS Structurals, Fusion Power, Launch 15-1-1-1-1-1, ETA 1116

The save of this turn is attached below

[ottok]

Ceeeeeeeeeeeeeghhhhhh No more Americans!

[Smash]

Well look who is has appeared.Hi ottok

1116 eh?..darn close.

I guess AIs will make or break this one.How much tech can they be counted on and manipulated for

[DrSpike]

Hehe good luck.......something tells me you will make it this try.

[Scouse Gits]

Welcome back ottok

SG[1]

[Scouse Gits]

I endorse the Doc's optimism - go for it solo

SG[1]

[solo]

Thanks for the encouragement, but try #2 actually went a little worse, due to a hard to develop SSC. There wasn't enough time for it to reach its full potential.

In these games I've found it beneficial to do more early trading, even if this defers Shakespeare's a bit, since my main problem has been lack of gold in the early game.

In the second attempt, the AI were a bit more helpful with tech, but hardly more than in a game where I tip huts. I guess when they tip a hut for a tech, odds are likely it will NOT be one that I lack. They do end up with more cities due to incresed tribes, though, which helps them learn a bit faster.

The third attempt is underway and going well, except for the fact that the best SSC site I could find only has 3 fish and a buffalo, which are not my favorite SSC specials! I hope to make up for this by many citizens working trade on every city tile, since I have extra food. Time will tell.

[Elephant]

In following your Early Landing attempts I had also been feeling that chance elements were very strong, hence many games that have not been completed because the early part of the game went against us (mostly with huts). It also was strongly dependent on getting just the right setup, particularly with starting techs and favorable choices of opponent civs. The way I pictured emphasizing skill over luck was setting rules similar to yours:

1. All huts are removed from the map before start.
2. No starting techs for the human player.
3. Random map, no retries of same map once other civs starting location known. Exchange of starting games allowed only if no info on identities or locations of opponent civs given.
4. Random opponent civs, human only choses own civ/color.
5. Barb Leader ransom and Barb Farms permitted, as these are mostly dependent on skillful trapping and exploitation.
6. Full AI tribute/gifting permitted, as this is dependent on wise human trading, timing and alliance/attitude maintenence.
7. Normal map, Deity, 7 civs, Raging Hordes, 2 starting settlers.

I'm wondering how you would compare your starting rules to the above, and whether you thought the complete lack of huts and starting techs would be made up for with greater tribute/gifting and Barb exploitation to still allow a 1000AD landing.

[solo]

Elephant,

Your list of rules would not be a problem for me, and I would be happy to play under those conditions.

I have some comments about each of your points:

1. I do not know of a way of removing huts when using a random start and believe that this can only be done when creating a scenario. One problem with scenarios is that they allow one to pick the tech research order, elimnating the need to plan an optimal path through the tech tree.

2. No starting techs for the human would be okay and would make it easier to find starts to make early landing attempts, but having no free techs would probably lengthen games more than you suspect. Since it's now customary to share all starts, luck would not be a factor, since the position is identical for any player when the game begins. Different starts without human starting techs can vary quite a bit in AI tech distribution, making luck more of a factor, right?

3. These are the settings I use for my random map starts. To eliminate some more luck, it might be best to use the minimum setting for barbarians, though, since the timing of their appearances and who they attack are based on chance.

4. Random civs is fine, which is the way I always play. However, I do not think it really makes much difference if they are random or not.

5. There certainly are skills involved in dealing with and exploiting the presence of barbarians in the game, but the element of chance also plays a major role, too, especially early in the game. Barbs first appear at random on the 16th turn of the game, but who they go after is a matter of chance. A player in one game may net an early 150 gold, another may lose a city, and a third may have nothing happen in 3250 BC. The possible outcomes differ dramatically, and I think this can be due more to luck than skill.

6. AI tribute and gifting is fine by me, as this depends mostly on diplomatic skills. I eliminated this in my games for this thread because I wanted to limit all income to what the human player could tax or trade for, but this was just an arbitrary decision on my part.

7. A normal map is fine with me too, although I have no problems with a customized one. Using an edited map is a different thing altogether, though, but would be okay with me as long as the player using one acknowledges the fact.

In summary, I believe that omission of huts is the major factor in controlling how much luck there is in any game, and would be agreeable to any set of rules that would omit them. I am on my third game now, without using them, and am enjoying these games a lot more, even though the earliest landings are probably out of reach without their use.

My third hutless game is going better so far, and with Automobile coming in 460 AD, I think I have a good chance to land before 1000 AD.

[Scouse Gits]

A quick 2 hapeth - I do feel that the decision to disallow tribute/gift seeking is an unecessary handicap - particularly as it is skill based - but you're the expert.
Keep up the good work

SG[1]

[ottok]

Dont listen them!

Deffenders and trade is way to win,not lot of legions!!

[Elephant]

Your observation about wiping huts only available in Scenario mode was something I'd overlooked. I was trying to eliminate the "luck" factor of huts for both the human and AI, but did not consider the tech path consequences. Leaving them there still allows the AI to use its crazy logic about openning them, giving possible extra early techs. I like your trick about putting a citizen to work on a hut to wipe it!

The number of starting techs for the human can heavily influence the Early Landing date, both by saving time on the tech path and by allowing a more favorable Tech Number comparison to the KeyCiv. Perhaps we should really compare landing dates by saying "I landed in 1116AD with 6 starting techs" versus "I landed in 1425AD with 1 starting tech". Could you imagine Samson deriving a formula for how many years benefit each starting tech would be worth? That could be interesting...

Replaying the same start (ourselves, not someone elses), though it might be interesting to compare different strategies side by side, should not be counted for records since we remember who we faced and where they were, which is a big advantage to the random start where you have no clue who is nearby and whether they are civilized or militaristic. I have replayed several favorite starts over about a year and still found the situations coming back to me fairly easily. It does help to hone strategies and tactics, though.

I like the idea of setting the Barbs to a lower setting than Raging. Normal at least would not penalize the final score. Does this also lower the frequency of appearance and size of bands?

I think it does make a difference which AI civs are chosen. I have noticed a significant difference in early research between the Mongols and the Babylonians, and I hate having to Tech Gift the Mongols! Then again, a Random setting for AI civs could predispose a game to being easier or harder. Perhaps coming up with a Standard AI Civ list for record attempts?

[patrickwl]

I like the idea of setting the Barbs to a lower setting than Raging. Normal at least would not penalize the final score. Does this also lower the frequency of appearance and size of bands?

Elephant,

There is an excellent paper on the effects of changing barb settings at

http://sleague.apolyton.net/Guides/sldt_barbtechs.shtml

[Scouse Gits]

If a true comparison of skill for early landing is required then a game could be played with huts ... so the tech tree isn't open...but allow each hut visited to give 50 gold every time. You would have to reload a bit but not much different from OCC to avoid the advanced tribe.

A detailed log would need to accompany each game ... like the old OCC challenges.

I would welcome the chance to improve my landing skills, and if solo would be prepared to make the comparisons and comment like Paul did for OCC it would make the challenge all the more interesting.

---------------------

SG(2)

[ottok]

lear mee!

1870, waht go?

[solo]

Elephant,

Even though an open tech tree would be the result of wiping huts, this might be the best way to go, since there is still skill involved in deciding what is best to research next.

I have always agreed that games using numerous starting techs or those replayed from a known start should not "count" as records. They only show what is possible when starting with such advantages. I hope no one has been misled into believing otherwise.

A lower barb setting may be best. 150 gold for leaders is inordinately huge in the early stages of the game, and is one reason why I researched how to increase my chances for nabbing leaders in previous games.

Your points about AI differences are well taken, as this would become more of a factor in hutless games.


SG(1),

50g from every hut is a not a bad idea and would be one way to help equalize results. You could take this a step further, by letting all players reload until they get the result they desire the most. No two players would agree what is best! This would require judgment, rather than luck, and would eliminate any doubt about how huts were used.

I very much agree that detailed logs are the way to go in formal comparison games, such as the OCC fortnightly contests organized by Paul.

Perhaps we might get something like this going again, if enough players are interested in participating on a regular basis. If so, we can start off by drafting a set of rules the majority of us agree upon. Afterwards, I would be willing to write up an Early Landing Guide we could use for comparison games, similar to what Paul did with OCC.


Ottok,

Exactly! We see eye to eye on everything!

[Scouse Gits]

solo - The Early Landing Guide would be appreciated by both rookie and vet players. Instead of the Paulicy perhaps Solo Success (so low - as in date) ... OK that's awful

Please start a comparison game along the lines of the OCC challenges. I think the One City competitions hosted by Paul always had the Barb level at Raging Hordes and I don't see a convincing argument for changing this factor. Yes, 150 gold is big money during the early years but so is the impact if the bad guys destroy your capital. In the middle stages of play the sudden barb attacks from a frigate stuffed with dragoons is the best confrontation the AI can offer and it would be ironic to stifle this aspect in a workshop designed to learn the finer points of strategy!

Your idea about any desired result from a hut is intriguing. It could turn out to be a triumph of patience over play. (the civ community up all night ripping apart a hut ... Republic must be in there somewhere ) However, I agree it would eliminate any suggestion of convenient luck.

------------------------

SG(2)

[Ben Kenobi]

Yeah, it can be a pain to get Republic from a hut. It always seems like I'll get Literacy, and immediately afterwards, Invention.

As a n00b, I'll second SG [1]'s suggestion. I do appreciate your turnlogs and find them very informative.

I think the hut results should be taken out or left alone. If we let people deconstruct huts, this will remove the possibility of barbarians. Huts were never meant to be completely benign.

[DrSpike]

I prefer the sound of the 50 gold plan to the desired outcome plan.

[ottok]

Originally posted by Scouse Gits
I endorse the Doc's optimism - go for it solo

SG[1]

i think that you know that but anyway:

in played 50. game in tha Finland national team
men make goal at 50 min!?

Who?

Australia Beaten English

This will a same that Janne Holmen wins Munchen maraton ?

[Scouse Gits]

The Finns have a National Civ Team?

SG[1]

[DrSpike]

Regretably I think he was talking about football.

[Scouse Gits]

Drat - an interesting concept however...

SG[1]

[Elephant]

What else is there to do up there during those long winter nights?

I'd go for Barbs at Restless, Hut reloads for 50g only. I'd also go for a wiped-huts scenario. Maybe start as the Romans, with minimal starting techs?

[DaveV]

I think that huts can be wiped via cheat mode without converting to a scenario. If you don't mind being branded with the scarlet letter(s), that seems a lot easier than reloading huts.

[solo]

I have been quite busy the last few days, so apologize for taking time to respond.

Please correct me if I am wrong, and all others are welcome to add your name to the list of those who might be interested in participating in Early Landing comparison games. So far, I’ve seen posts from SG(1), obiwan, Dr. Spike, ottok, Elephant, and DaveV, and count them as possible participants.

I’m encouraged enough to start work on writing a guide, but as for a brief set of rules, I’ll summarize what we have so far:

1. Each player will keep a detailed chronological log, listing significant events for each turn where something happened. Feel free to add more details or comments about your game, as this adds interest.

2. So far the best compromise for huts is probably SG(1)’s 50g idea. When I thought it might be a good idea to let players choose their results, I am afraid I did not consider the lengths to which this could be taken … “drat, only 50g again, maybe I’ll get that 100g on try #969”. Huts can be wiped in cheat mode, as noted by DaveV, but this Pandora’s box is probably better left unlocked.

3. Not many thought much of removing barbarian risks and/or rewards, so raging hordes is probably best, since this is consistent with how OCC was played. Also AI tribute and gifts will be allowed.

4. Since the game attempts to prohibit the caravan rehoming exploit, it will not be allowed. Any other ploy or exploit, within the rules, will be allowed.

5. I like the idea of using favorable starts, since this is also consistent with the way OCC games were set up. Paul almost always provided an excellent SSC site for each game, and if it was not visible at the start, provided directions to it. After all, we ARE trying to see how early we can launch and land, so why not give ourselves the best odds of doing well when starting the games. Maybe later on, we may want to challenge ourselves further with no free techs and polar starts.

6. The time limit for each game will be two weeks, as it was for OCC. This is a long enough period to accommodate players with busy lives, yet not too long to discourage those who want quick results.


Meanwhile, while the ELG is being written, it might be best to just start a game. If you all agree to this, I can set one up in a new thread. Please let me know.

Finally, in my third nohut attempt, I did a little better …

[Elephant]

Just trying to get through a careful GOTM over at CFC takes me more than two weeks, but I'll see if I can keep up (or bump the next one). Rules sound fine (no Airbase rule?). No large map please...

[Scouse Gits]

Go for it solo! I would like to improve in this area of play. 956 and no huts. Congratulations

BTW: SG[1] and SG{3} are father and daughter. I am SG(2) who lives down the road. (Not SG(1) ... sorry this really confuses posters)

------------------------------

SG(2)

[Scouse Gits]

Originally posted by Elephant
No large map please...

Large Maps are fun

-------------------

SG(2)

[Ben Kenobi]

Solo, I don't know how valuable my contributions would be, I've just managed to beat OCC on a large, medium and small map on MGE.

I've not landed a spaceship even close to the dates that you have.

I don't mind participating, it's just, as I said, I'm a n00b at this stuff and I have much to learn.