Because of my "near death," I missed out on the whole "hacking" and "droptricking" debate over at MFO. But there was an interesting sideline to the debate that I wanted to spend my two cents on. Clan AU has taken some heat over the misguided actions of AU_Kop which allegedly consist of both of the above mentioned activities. In defending his clan, our good buddy niDe had this to say:

Now, some remarks have been made about AU clan. If those people honestly think that one persons actions speaks for the whole clan, then they are easily deceived. AU doesn't condone hacking, drop tricking or excessive smack talking. Now we know kOp has had trouble with drop tricking and smack talking in the past and really these issues are rather trivial. A lot of people don't like kOp and are surely going to use this "hacking" incident as ammunition against him. But you cannot control a persons free will.

No, you can't control a person's free will, but you can control whether they are part of your clan or not. It's true that one person's actions don't speak for the clan, however, when a member violates the generally accepted standards of the community, the clan's response does. Whether we like it or not, in the RON community, clan tags are like brandnames, just like Ford, Apple, and Microsoft. Membership in a clan signifies something -- its reputation -- intended or not. Since there is generally some official or unofficial screening criteria to join a clan (e.g., skill level, location, etiquette, friends, etc.) you can generalize about the entire clan based on who gets accepted and how strictly they adhere to their criteria. And despite clan members' pleading to not diss the clan because of member x, people will naturally associate the behavior of member x with the expected behavior of members y and z. This is only natural. If Ford Tauruses all started randomly exploding, people would obviously stop buying Tauruses. But they would also think twice before buying any other Ford because all Fords would start to gain a bad reputation.

So while a clan may not be able to control the actions of a particular player, it can control its member roster. Clans with "problem" players need to consider whether they value having a certain member more than having a good reputation in the gaming community. The actions a clan takes to resolve breaches of community trust go a long way to cementing that reputation, whether for good or ill. Dissenting members are left with the decision whether to accept their new reputation or leave the clan.

On the specific incidents mentioned above we can't comment much, other than to wish good judgment on Clan AU.

UPDATE: Memento manages to publicly shame me, and he didn't even need to play Maya! Prior to me writing this post, AU had already taken action on this matter -- and I missed the post! D'oh! Well, at least it's good to see that Memento agrees with me :-)
posted by Tim at 11:14 PM

... or at least read this site (since we read 'em for ya). In a (boring) cheat accusation refutation thread, there's this interesting tidbit about building hitpoints. Rhonok posts:

... there are six reasons for a building's hitpoints to increase suddenly - temple built, religion researched, construction researched, age to III or VI, 5th/10th building completed, or temple of tikal built.

Nice tip.
posted by Tim at 9:26 PM

The winners of the MFO 2vs2 tourney were announced:

Offressor & PCA_Frogman took first place
2nd -- nydar & _Roosevelt_
3rd & 4th -- BC_Goofy_dk/BC_Karniv0r_swe -- TWC_GoOeYBaG_/TWC_Mulfar

Congrats to everyone. And thanks to MFO and BHG!
posted by Tim at 9:20 PM

niDe finally posted his version of the Spanish SCI2 starting strategy. This is worth looking at because: 1) niDe is one of the finest players around and 2) he has brutalized me (and many others) with this build before. To do this properly, you really have to follow his advice closely. It's easy to mismange your ruins and fall behind. He's got a sample game to download here.
posted by Tim at 8:50 PM

If you've noticed my absence from the "scene" you might have just assumed I've been on vacation. I am, but I'm not having a Merry Christmas. I got the flu and have been deathly sick all week. Haven't even gotten on the comp to read the news ... or see if Phunky posted any more new gripes.

Poor Blood.
posted by Tim at 8:48 PM

Here's an example game on why you oughta just keep plugging away. In this game I'm getting completely owned by KBS_Phunky, who does the obligatory smack talk during the game: "I bet you're not this good with any other civ." Actually, I'm better, but I just can't beat Mayans. So fuck it. Anyway, he doesn't seem to have any problems taking most of my cities. His army just mows through my cities at will. However, despite taking city after city, I keep popping them back up. Also, my counter-raiding keeps his economy down and after enlightenment age he stops expanding. For some reason he never does go for my capital, nor does he ever attack my fishing, which was what kept me in the game. After I make it to industrial and start: 1) shooting up his siege with planes, and 2) taking down his captial with commandos, He gives up with a "fucking Mayans."

Yea, I hate 'em too.

Anyway, he easily took and held 4 of my cities. FOUR! This is a good game to watch to see just how bad I am with Mayans, and how you can stay in the game if you just keep at it.

UPDATE: KBS_Phunky has come away really offended because I posted this game. To Phunky, I say: Get over yourself. If you think I posted this game to brag about beating you, then you have too high an opinion of yourself. I don't post games to "brag" about beating players. And if I were to do so, I certainly wouldn't post games where I beat a lower-ranked player. Or brag about winning with Mayans.

I posted the game because it was interesting.Which is the reason I post all of my games. And a majority of the games I have posted of mine are losses. Most of the games I've played have been pretty boring. Either boring wins or boring losess. This was an interesting game. There's no denying that. It was interesting for the following reasons:

• Mayans aren't invincible. Phunky was able to easily capture my cities. Maybe it took him 20 extra seconds because they were Mayan, but he took them nonetheless. In fact, he took a LOT of them. Phunky complains about the city spamming, but this is not a Mayan-specific tactic, it is just common sense. If you lose a city, make another one. Even if you are going to recapture it, use that opportunity to get up an extra city.


• Never give up, even when the other guy is completely kicking your ass. Until he takes your capital, eliminates all of your cities, or wins on territory or wonders, you still have a chance. Comebacks in RON are very rare, but when they do occur, they are valuable lessons. As in, I resigned in a game vs. niDe where he was marching through my frontlines, but as it turned out we were pretty evenly matched. I just gave up. That won't happen again.


• Finish off your opponent when you've got him reeling and on the run. Phunky had the means and opportunity to take my capitol and end the game, but he got distracted by the extra cities I was laying down and by the raiding I was doing -- I was basically attacking him on ALL fronts. Stay focused on your objective. You can win the game by sacking the capital and holding it for a few minutes.


• Which is another point. If you are losing on one front, fight somewhere else. If what you are doing isn't working, do something else. He was moving on my capital and I couldn't stop him, so I countered with some raiding. Almost all of his troops were at the front so he had to turn. In another battle, I caused him to fall back because I was attacking one of his towns with a small force of siege. All of these were attempts to sieze the initiative and confuse the enemy, rather than patiently wait out my doom. Yea, as EC pointed out, he could have esaily taken my capital, but he didn't. Main reason he didn't was because of these tactics. He felt more vulnerable than he really was.


• Don't talk smack during the game. And don't complain about opponent's civ choice in rated. It's rated play for crying out loud. And, if you're going to bitch about Mayan, then you've no business picking Spanish. Spanish are even worse for ownage, particularly on Outback. Mayans are the only ones who can even be competitive.

posted by Tim at 1:31 AM

Someone posted this flamebait thread in MFO. However, El_Capitan crafted such an extremely well-thought out response that I just had to link to it. I think he hit the nail on the head though with this comment:

Out4Blood - If there was an Einstein for RoN, this would be the guy. I guest-write for this guy's blog because he's so scientific, it scares me. I, on the other hand, am quite the opposite, and prefer trial by fire. Besides, I think his actual talent is being held in check by his wife, so it grieves me to not to see how good he could've been as a player.

To be fair - I am usually more seat of the pants, but when you can't play as often as you like you have to think about the game more. However, even if I were to play more often, I probably wouldn't be much better. I'm not sure my micro is up to par like it used to be. Too old. Besides, I've always been more of a "win by strategy" guy than a "win by micro" guy, anyway.
posted by Tim at 10:43 PM

They've been updated. Updated O4B rankings. Montana wanted everyone to know he's moved up a few notches.
posted by Tim at 10:00 AM

petachoks asks this question about Changing stances

Is there a hotkey to changing stances. It's really annoying to click on the screen a few times to the desired stance, especially with lag.

There's some good answer in the thread. Like EC, I only use Agressive (SHIFT + A), Defensive (SHIFT + E), and Raid (SHIFT + R). But I use the faster keys, I didn't even know the SHIFT + T hotkey! I hate cycling through them, because I never knew what was what and I'd always pass up the one I really wanted. BTW, My stance on new units is always Defensive. I set it when they come out based on the situation.
posted by Tim at 2:57 PM

The Spiderman 2 trailer. This is one of the better "teaser" trailers I've seen. Makes me wanna watch the movie without revealing all the good scenes. I was particularly pleased by the

2 . . . July . . . 2004

at the end. Nice touch.

It's the simple pleasures, really.
posted by Tim at 8:07 PM

RON Revolution is hosting a 1vs1 tourney on 12/20. I think there is a prize for the winner. Via Rohag.
posted by Tim at 9:22 AM

So, I've been playing quite a few rated games lately. I was excited to play with a (close to) "perfect" rating system. But after playing about 60 games or so, I'm having second thoughts. The ratings pretty accurately describe skill level. That has both good and bad connotations.

• The good news is that it tells you how good someone is. This makes it great for balancing games and picking teammates and predicting how tough they are going to be.
• The bad news is that it tells you how good someone is. This means that you are likely to beat someone rated below you and likely to lose to someone rated above you. With a few rare exceptions, I usually beat the guys below me and lose to guys above me.

This is how it is supposed to be; with mathematical precision, you can directly calculate the odds of winning, just by looking at the difference in ratings. You can pretty much tell how the game is going to turn out ahead of time. Which can be pretty discouraging if you are looking to win. It also explains some weird rated room behavior. People tend to "camp" out in the rated room (as if they were playing Everquest) rather than clicking the Find a game button. They usually try to negotiate games with people around their skill level, presumably because the QM function doesn't do a very good job of matching skills -- or perhaps because there are so few people. If people are looking to win games, then they will be looking for people at or below their rating.

One improvement I would suggest for this is to eliminate the list of names and ratings from the lobby. People should be matching up with whoever is there, not waiting for the "right" person. Maybe something for the expansion pack?

Oh, and did I mention that Maya sucks to play against?
posted by Tim at 6:33 AM

Black Watch asks What's a good civilisation for a Beginner?

I'm a 'newbie' to this game, as I've been constantly hooked on AoK since it came out, and I really am not good at choosing civs to play, I can't stand random, just not reliable if I don't like a civ and it randomly selects it.

I'd just like to know 1 or 2 civs to try out in the beginning, so I can get better. ie: the Mongols in AoK:TC were considered an Expert civ (last time I checked) and I just want to ease into the game, no hard-to-manage civs, I mean.

Any help is appreciated.

Before we answer that question, it's good to think about what would make a good civilization for a beginner. When learning a game I like to use a nation that requires little micro and has minor bonuses, so it plays conventionally. To learn RON, it's a good idea to play initial games against an AI with nation bonuses turned off, this way, when you do have bonuses, you'll notice their impact.

I'd recommend several civs to learn with:

• British. They require little micro to be effective and their bonuses make it easier to play. Two of the difficulties beginners face is dealing with the commerce cap and maintaining good gold income. Also, there natural development is more in line with the commerce cap increases. 1 city = about 60, 2 cities = 120, 3 cities = 180. These increases step nicely with the +125 and +187 commerce caps.


• Mayan -- Mayan require very little micro, even at the expert level. They have good defensive bonuses and make a good starter civ for folks.


• Japanese -- my best advice for people who really want to improve their game is to play Japs and rush every game. Rushing is pretty straight forward and easy. Through rushing, players will see: 1) how deadly it can be, and 2) how to stop it. They can then move on to +100 attack and +150 attacks, improving their repetoire as they get better at managing their economy. They will also gradually learn important micro skills as they get better.

Nations I didn't mention are also playable, but for raw beginners, I'd stick with the top 3.

Nations I would avoid are:

• Spanish -- require intense micro and sophisticated manipulation of ruins. However, the revealed map is very good for beginners, but you can toggle that in the settings so that any nation plays with reveal map.


• Greeks -- they require a completely differetn approach from the "normal" civs. It's difficult to get adjusted to them. They can be very powerful if used in the right situation, but not for beginners.


• Nubians -- a fun civ to play, particularly in large map team games. Nubians great economy relies on rare resources, somethign that new players might have difficulty taken full advantage of.


• Aztecs -- these guys require aggressive play to make use of their bonus.


• Bantu, Chinese, and Koreans -- these guys all have "weird" bonuses that require substantially different play. I'd save them for later.

posted by Tim at 1:12 AM

Coming down to the final two, I would have expected Lill to beat Sandra in a head-to-head vote. However, it probably would have been smarter for her to instead pick Johnny Rotten. Her dislike of him took over, though, and she picked Sandra instead. But instead of winning the vote, it was a landslide the other way 6-1 and Sandra won the $1,000,000. At the reunion show, Probst asked the jury members how they would have voted if had been Lill-Johnny. 4-3 in Lill's favor. Oh well. She says she doesn't regret her decision -- but what else is she gonna say? "You're right, Jeff, I am soooo stupid." Probst pointed out an interesting statistic. In 7 Survivor seasons, the winner of of the final immunity challenge has lost the game 5 times. That's a pretty compelling statisitc given that the winner gets to choose who they'll go into the final with. So why does the immunity winner have such trouble?
posted by Tim at 12:42 AM

Errr ... on closer reading it appears that it's just Saddam. Sorry, but he's a close second, right? Yahoo! News - U.S. Forces Capture Saddam in Iraq Pit.
posted by Tim at 5:55 PM

They've been updated. Updated O4B rankings. I've made some changes. I'm using the top 200 from the BHG list. Active means a player has played rated int he last 30 days and established means they played at least 25 rated games.
posted by Tim at 5:54 PM

Can't ever beat your best buddy? Can't defeat the AI on toughest? Try co-oping with a buddy (not the buddy you want to beat). 2 players playing one civ can do 2x the micro and might have a chance of keeping up with that buddy or that AI. As refresher, co-op is where 2 players manage one civilization. You can do co-op against one player. The film will appear to be just a normal 1on1.

When we were testing game screws for AOK, Helegator and I would often team up to play The Sheriff. He would still win (usually). (The Sheriff was Microsoft's top playtester for AOK back then. He got paid to play AOK 10-12 hours a day. Ouch.) By playing co-op, you don't receive any innate ability to cheat, just the ability to do things simultaneously. It's a lot easier for a player to play against a co-op team than it is to play against 2 different civs because of the resource gatehring and the pop cap problem.

But it requires excellent teamwork and cooperative skills. Much more so than a 2on2 game. You can't give units conflicting orders and your economic and military strategies have to be in sync. You can't have one player research MIL1 off the bat and build a barracks while the other player is trying to get a fast classical.

Co-op is great fun and is ideally suited to a game like RON that requires some excessive amounts of micro ability.
posted by Tim at 10:12 AM

HalfLotus posts yet another great strategy over at RON Universe. This time it is a German +200 Medieval-Gunpowder attack.

This strat uses the insane German economy to get to +200 cap quickly and with only two cities. You will avoid getting Civics 2, a third city, and Science 3. The resources saved will be spent reaching for the +200 cap and launching a furious Medieval/Gunpowder attack.

Germany can build smelters and get the granary/mill resource upgrades with just SCI 2, and the resource upgrades are cheaper. They can reach +200 in short order; it's an ultra-boom of sorts.

I haven't tried a strategy like this yet, but coming HL it's gotta be good. One point I'd like to make about this and other strategies like it. The key to winning with these strategies is having the right mindset. To be most effective you have to plan ahead and say to yourself, I am attacking in this age with this force and not spend resources that don't contribute to that goal. In other words, you have to play differently than if you were just progressing through the ages.

This seems like a blindingly obvious insight, but it's not so obvious watching most people play. This is easiest to see if you think about an ancient rush. With an ancient rush you research MIL1 (or maybe SCI1 first) and that's it. The rest of your production goes toward making troops, and you attack. Wasting even the 80 wood on a market could mean the difference between winning and losing.

HL's strategies are different only in that they wait longer to attack, but the principle of the lean build still applies. As an example, you don't want to waste a lot of wealth on scholars. You want to get knowledge early, but you only need a set amount to get to your age to start attacking. After that, extra knowledge just helps you keep up with the enemy in case your attack fails, and the wealth would probably have been better spent on troops rather than those sickly scholars.

My advice when refining your play to perform these is to choose what economy and force size you want to attack with and then practice practice practice to get your initial attack start time down as low as possible.
posted by Tim at 9:45 AM

Blogger was down for a bit -- so therefore we were, too! Sorry for the inconvenience.
posted by Tim at 10:17 PM

We are honored to have El_Capitan as a guest blogger. He has joined the team to help bring you the finest in RON Strategy.
posted by Tim at 6:21 PM

Blogging and playing will be lighter than usual for a bit. I picked up Call Of Duty to satisfy my occasional desire for some FPS action. It's a pretty cool game, and since HalfLife hasn't come out yet, this will have to do. Nice thing is I finally have a system where I can run these games at full blast.
posted by Tim at 3:03 PM

Okay, Survivor is off topic, but not entirely. It's now down to the Final 4: Sandra, Darrah, Lil, and Johnny Rotten. It looks like Rotten will be the next to go... or will he? Lil knows she's really playing for 3rd with the other two girls -- no one wants to go to the Final 2 against her. So there is the tiniest of opening for Jonny Rotten to eel his way through.

But now we're down to the endgame, and all the players have to be thinking their endgame strategies. This is where Richard Hatch was way ahead of everyone else. Remember how he purposely lost the immunity challenge because both of the other players would have to pick him?

So, of the 4, who should each of them want to be paired with in the Final 2? e.g., Lil might be okay paired with anyone, but she'd likely get Burton's vote if Rotten were not one of them. Besides, Rotten probably won't vote for Sandra, so there's another vote at least. On the other hand, Darrah probably loses in a vote with Lil and Sandra-Darrah looks like it could be a toss up, so her best alternative is having Darrah-Johnny. One bad thing about "flying under the radar" is that some of the other players might not think you "deserved" to win it.
posted by Tim at 11:41 PM

They've been updated. Updated O4B rankings. I've made some changes. I'm using the top 200 from the BHG list. Active means a player has played rated int he last 30 days and established means they played at least 25 rated games.
posted by Tim at 7:52 AM

War posts a A few tips on defense.

1) Always build your military/forts/towers just behind your cities, not in front.

2) Build watch towers by shooty buildings (towers/forts)

3) Spies can really save you in defence, taking the siege away.

...

Read 'em all.

UPDATE: Beware of his urging to use decays at all times. Decoys count against unit count for purposes of ramping costs. So unless you are 1) already at ramping cap, or 2) need the decoys urgently, be careful about abusing this general's ability.
posted by Tim at 8:46 PM

El_Capitan finally reveals the details of his Kamikaze style.

I've recently been playing a very aggressive style, and it seems to be working well, if not great. Of course, it doesn't work on Maya, doesn't need to work on Russia, and on most other nations, you just have to play a different way if you want to win, but...

The Kamikaze style is all about attack.

This is similar to the Expansion Rush we explored a while back. I found this to be very successful, even against good players. However, EC has tweaked it a bit, getting SCI1 first. Also, he builds city #2 before capturing whereas our goal was to capture their city #2 and use it for our own purposes. Both styles are good to try. However, I am wondering if this is weakened by the small map setting of Quickmatch.
posted by Tim at 3:26 PM

HL posts some good info on successfully conducting a Medieval attack. In response to a Astronomical's question on Launching a Medievil Attack. HL has done some good research on this topic and has won his share of games against good opponents doing these attacks. Notice that Astronomical misspelled Medieval. That might be a good brand name for HL's version of the Medieval attack.

The Mid-EVIL attack!

It's EVIL, but not like the DEVIL. It's only mid-EVIL.
posted by Tim at 10:15 AM

G0dSpiral poses this question: How is 2v2 different from 1v1?

How does strategy differ in 2v2 games? Is it fair to sy that strategy is still more similar to 1v1 than to 3v3? After all shouldn't your primary concern be to take care of your closest opponent?

Well with regard to published strategy: NO, not really.
However, there are differences.

• Position is more important so that you can combine forces and provide mutual protection.
• Rares are important to get because there are a lot more of them (except on maps like African Watering Hole) -- the map is bigger (so there are more) but you also have double scouting (so you find them faster) From the beginning of the game you can sometimes see up to 3-4 rares right away.
• Risk for rushing increases. It's more difficult to successfully rush, because his ally can send reinforcements or gold to help fend you off, and that might put you behind. And even if you completely take him out, you still haven't won the game. You'll have another opponent to deal with. If both of you are economically weak from a rush, then a good boomer might be able to defeat your side.
• Civ choice makes a difference because certain civs can complement others.
• Teamwork is an important factor to consider. Communicating key terrain, enemy movements, locating rares, sharing advice. All of these things are importnat and are non-existent in 1on1.

posted by Tim at 9:58 AM

What I'd like to see are more co-op games -- where 2 players manage one civilzation competing against another two players doing the same. Part of what makes RON difficult is the complexity. There are SO many things to manage. What if you had help? One guy manages econ, one guy micros the military. When a big battle comes along, one guy manages the spy and CI battle. I think you'd see some real improvement in solo strategies because the pure difference in micro skills between players would be reduced. Thus the raiding battle may get more elaborate and wouldn't drain the econ management as much. It would be easier for one player to focus on keeping the econ capped. I think you'd see some amazing battles. Also, you could then incorporate your favorite Matrix quotations: "We are getting aggravated." "Yes we are."
posted by Tim at 9:53 AM

Following the discussion of the British on Med map setting, I've spent the past couple days playing Med map on rated. With mixed results. With British, I was able to defeat just about all comers. Except Spanish. Spanish get the early trireme, which hampers fishing, the revealed map, which gives them strategic advantage, and the scout bonus, which means they clear up the resources. With those bonus resources, they can drop city #2 and still beat (or at least tie) you to the island with city #3. Also, they can keep an age ahead of British in COM, so the British econ advantage never really materializes. That's if Spanish boom.

Alternatively, the Spanish can do a very early Classical and hit you with raiders. This is clearly an area of my game which I need to improve. As I said in my new mantra: Raid! and Scout! Both of those things require micro. Neither of those things I do well. However, it is harder to raid on Med maps, the extra distance does play a factor. I found that when I raided my opponents had good defenses, but I was always vulnerable. Maybe I should try making defenses?

Of course, some of my losses are due to just being stupid. One game I forgot to make scholars. Another game, I forgot to make and research the granary and lumber mill upgrades. A third game, I left triremes infinite queued at my dock and they sucked up all my wood and metal. D'oh!

I guess I am getting old. (36 is pretty old for a gamer.) Your reaction time and micro skills definitely get weaker as you get older. But, I was hoping it didn't happen until like 50 or so...

So some takeaways from this series of games:

• Raid! And Scout!
• Practice and improve my micro for raiding and defending raids
• Have a checklist of things I need to do at certain milestones -- e.g., make stable, make universities, make granary and lumber mill, etc.


• Improve my big battle micro, don't just win by having the bigger army
• Determine optimum economy levels for various civs -- how many choppers should I have, how many farmers and miners, and scholars? I tend to make too many, and then when I get the upgrades, they exceed my econ cap by too much. Wasting resources.

posted by Tim at 9:28 AM

MFO and BHG are teaming up for yet another tournament -- this time a 2vs2 tournament. MFO/BHG Alliances: Terra Incognita.

Dying for some hot 2vs2 action against some of the world's top teams at Rise of Nations? This Christmas, be prepared to face off against rival teams with a buddy in a strange land, a land which nobody recognizes. Sponsored by BHG, with over $1400 in prizes, two companions will tame this secret land and make it theirs to rule, at least, until the next time...

Looks like it will be fun. I'll be on vacation -- good luck guys.
posted by Tim at 10:40 PM

Calpundit has a suggestion regarding Veep running mates. In his comments thread, he asks for other good Veep running mates for Dean. Hillary gets mentioned, but if I were Hillary, I'd turn it down. She promised NY voters she's serve her term - this costs her credibility points. Also, I think the election will be close but GWB will win in the end. If you're Hillary, why get tagged as a "loser."

I think it's wiser to enter in 2008 when you're likely to not be running against a sitting President. Instead there'll be a new Republican candidate, and it probably won't be Dick Cheney. Which brings up another question: who's the likely Rep candidate for 2008?
posted by Tim at 12:49 PM

We've moved up to #2 on Google for Google Search: rise of nations strategy. Not too shabby, just from doing what we love. (Google is still weird, though.)
posted by Tim at 4:25 PM

EC has posted another Tip of the Week at RON Heaven. The subject this time is manipulating your economy to choose what you get from ruins.

Ruins are a very important part of the game. For that reason, I always research Sci 1 at the very start of a game, even when doing an Ancient Age rush or raid strategy. You get more out of ruins because of it. Finding them is one thing, but manipulating them to what you want out of them is key.

This is very similar to somethign we've already heard from EC on ruins.
posted by Tim at 4:19 PM

kAbt asks this question and then asserts that Versailles is the best wonder.

The wonder that has the largest effect overall is in my opinion Versailles. This wonder radically increases the strength and resiliance of your army by allowing your supply wagons to heal your troops. You eliminate the tedious, time consuming and often forgotten task of sending your slightly (or heavily) injured troops back to garrison and heal. When two armies clash (and all others things are equal) the battle and game will invariably go to the side with Versailles. Because after the skirmish when each side has taken serious damage the side with Versialles can continue to push forward, healing as they go. The other has to send troops back to garrison or make the large expenditure of time and resources training many new troops.

If I am not constantly fighting, I usually make Colossus and Pyramids. Both of these wodners are cheap and pay for themsselves quickly. Yea, most wonders pay for themselves, but the earlier you get your resources back the better. Colossus' pop cap increase can be pretty huge sometimes. Particularly in FFA, or team games. In FFA or diplo games I ALWAYS try to get Colossus. Pyramids give you the extra food, and extra wealth cap. And they give you an extra city, which is great for border pushing, and for putting up an extra univiersity. It's pretty much the closest thing for having a wonder that helps with knowledge production.
Later on the other wonders have their uses.

Just watch the tourney games to see how valuable TCA is in the hands of a good player. Over the course of game, you get 25+ units. That's roughly 3500 in resources you didn't have to spend.

Porcelain tower is good if you are in team games and have lots of rares.

Colosseum for Russians is pretty impressive. I've won territory victories as Russians using this - even when down on military and economy,

Angkor Wat and Eiffel Tower are must haves for the games that go to Industrial and beyond. The extra oil and metal cap is a huge plus (until Global Prosperity).

I still like SOL, but it's situational. If you are doing constant fighting, you can't afford to NOT upgrade your troops once you both hit Industrial. If you can hit Industrial well before him, it might be worth it. But otherwise a smart opponent will upgrade and roll you with tanks before you get it completed.

Of course, we saw that the Super Collider is a game winner all by itself. EC won the BHS with this wonder in both games in the final.

Wonders I almost never make: Temple of Tikal, Taj Mahal, Space Program.
posted by Tim at 11:11 AM

They've been updated. Updated O4B rankings.
posted by Tim at 4:56 PM

Got my butt handed to me my Commnader_Biggun in a rated game - he was British and the map was Mediterranean. I have a "no preference" setting but I think that is bad strategy form the start. Clearly if you are choosing British and sea maps, then you'll have a distinct advantage over land map civs. Maya is not over-powered on sea maps. In fact, in this case they are severely outclassed. You can view the game here. But it is over early. Med maps are too tough to raid on and British easily control the sea. GG.

BTW, this game demonstrates just about the perfect strategy to play British on this map. SCI1, COM1, then fish boom and grab the center island. You win! Raiding is easily fended off because of the narrow access and once you control the sea and the center, you can strike anywhere on the map.
posted by Tim at 12:52 AM

HalfLotus posts a good article on Rush type vs. Boom type attacks

This is an extension of the basic relationship between booming and rushing (pure rush defeats pure boom). When developing an attack strategy, its strengths and weaknesses are based on the relative emphasis of economic vs military spending.

...

With a 'rush type' attack, you build only enough economy/tech to get to the target age and create a decent sized army. Examples would be a Mil first HI rush, French 150, a 10-11 minute Medieval attack, and Frogman's Spanish gunpowder attack (he attacks with GP army before getting Civ 3 and Commerce 3).

...

In a 'boom type' attack, you build your economy/tech 'as normal' while creating an army concurrently. Examples would be the Sci1/Mil1 HI rush (El capitan style), and Gooey's Medieval attack. The boom type is delayed so your attack has a lower chance of succes, but if it fails, your economy is in better shape.

I'm not sure if I agree with his distinctions. I'd categorize a Gunpowder age attack more of a boom attack than an ancient rush with SCI1 thrown in (there's a reason we call it a "rush"). There's also "rushing" to merely raid, such as the Mongol horse archer rush strategy. However, his point brings up some interesting considerations so it is worth pondering.
posted by Tim at 11:49 AM

EC posted his Ancient Age Heavy Infantry technique

Queue up 3 villies, put them on timber. While doing that, research Sci 1 and then Mil 1. The 3rd villie that is queued, don't put him on timber, but have him move towards the furthest area in your land to build your barracks when your timber reaches 120. With your scout, scout the nearest corner (don't pick up any ruins yet!). When you build your barracks, then pick up a ruin. Then build 2 farms, and queue up 2 more villies or however many until you have 5 farms and at least 5 villies on timber.

...

Just about everyone I've played, I've pretty much rushed. I've certainly won more than I lost (but lost more than I won vs. good players), but finding out their strengths and weaknesses will come in handy for future games.

There's a lot more so read the whole thing.

When I picked up playing more frequently on-line, I used to rush just about every single game. Even against Mayan, and I definitely won more than I lost. Losing was rare. Nowadays, I prefer to keep my options open. I'm better at the economy management anyway and it's easier to discover and defend a rush than it is to pull off a surprise rush.

Anyway it's nice to have independent corroboration that rushing is viable, given the arguments that occurred not too long ago with "experts" saying rushing was not viable against good players.
posted by Tim at 11:36 AM

The Sunday Dilbert from 11/16.
posted by Tim at 10:16 AM

Games are starting to be taken seriously now as educational tools. In this article at Governing.com, it explains how games are being used to simulate governmental decision-making

Computer games offer citizens the chance to see how government works and the trade-offs involved in policy making.

posted by Tim at 10:12 AM

I've posted updated O4B rankings as of 12/5/03. From now on these will be posted in their own section so they don't clutter up the main page. My focus is supposed to be on strategy, not ratings, so I've moved them. We'll continue to update them regularly, however, but you'll need to click through to view them.

Also, I've increased the dataset to include the top 200 players on the BHG list. There are 68 active established players in the top 200.
posted by Tim at 8:56 AM

Buried in the post about scouting technique, El_Capitan offers some great insight into his game that you won't get from viewing the recorded games.

I always time my ruins whenever I spot one before either my scout or villie gets it. Many people think it's lack of macro, but it's not. I'm waiting. Waiting for a certain resource to become the lowest... either by manipulating the city by queuing up villies, or by building a farm or researching something that takes up timber, etc. Everything is planned for how I want to start my game.

Fast Classical raid or rush... I need at least 2 or 3 Ruins, and always food.
Ancient Age Heavy Infantry rush... I need usually 4 or 5 Ruins, and either food or timber, but most of the time, food.
Booming start 1/2/2/2 before Classical, I need around 6 or 7 Ruins in order to get to Classical around 5 minutes. I need Food or Timber, and never Wealth.

The only time I need Wealth from Ruins is when I'm doing my Greek fast 2/1/2/2 Medieval... which I can usually get in around 5 minutes, and with a few heavy cavalry ready for raiding.

posted by Tim at 8:07 AM

WhiskeyPete asks yet another great question. Or rather a set of questions. What is it with this guy?!

Let us assume for the questions below that you are not going to rush, you are not looking to perform and all out border push, you are not looking to perform very large amounts of raiding as quickly as possible. For the questions below assume you will do a standard build with small variations as needed. Nothing extreme. Even if you see your enemy build 2 wonders before classical you will not jump on them with an army.

1. Is the current list of functions of scouting I have complete?

Scouting for Ruins

Scouting to see what your opponent is doing

Scouting for 2nd city placement

Scouting for rares
2. Is the priority of these functions correct?
3. Is the use of villagers to scout economical?
4. Is there a pattern of scouting that you believe will net more ruins than others when on a random land map?
5. Are there set patterns to where ruins are located based on map type (i.e. do you do a circle pattern on old world but in the med you zig zag, or is it more specific than this?)?
6. Assuming you place your second city badly because of poor scouting doesn't it still hold a certain amount of strategic value (as in most forward position) so how large of a loss is that?
7. Is there a set time to cut-off ruin gathering and just focus on scouting the enemy? When is it?
8. Is searching your opponents side of the map first a good strat?
9. How many ruins are needed to recomp getting sci2 right out of the gate?
10. How many ruins are needed to find to justify building an early barrack and second scout?
11. Is the benefit of any rare worth putting off scouting your opponent? If so, what rares?

As a quick answer: 1 & 2 - it depends, 3 - yes, 4 - yes, 5 - yes, 6 - it depends, 7 - no, but it depends, 8 - it depends, 9 - none, 10 - it depends, 11 - doesn't make sense, scouting and rares are not mutually exclusive.

UPDATE: As a long answer...

1. Is the current list of functions of scouting I have complete? No. On island maps you want to be sure to scout out the islands, for the rares, but also so you can get to them to them quickly. Also on land maps, you want to just plain uncover certain portions of the map so you can see where the key terrain is. Key terrain is terrain that gives an advantage to the side that controls it. It could be a rocky area where your infantry gain a bonus, it could be high ground on SW Mesa, etc.

2. Is the priority of these functions correct? It depends on your goals, your civ, and the map. If you are Spanish, ruins are more important. If you are Bantu, you want to find a good place to lay your 2nd and 3rd cities. On African Watering Hole, you just want to push on the center, so no real city scouting is needed, but on Himalayan, you need to find a good source of trees as soon as possible to either build forward or backward, depending on your strategy. Find what works for you in various circumstances. It also depends on your opponent. If he is Mayan, stay out of his area, or be very careful.

3. Is the use of villagers to scout economical? Yes. It requires significant micro, but it is useful. There always comes a point where you will stop making villagers for a moment, so it is sufficient to only account for food costs for the villager(s) in question. Example: I (sort of) played a co-op game with El_Capitan, and asked him to make me a villager for scouting. Prior to Medieval Age, I managed to collect 4 ruins worth a total of 250 resources, paying for the villager cost almost 10 times over. Doing this requires good micro to avoid making errors on your city management.

4. Is there a pattern of scouting that you believe will net more ruins than others when on a random land map? Yes. Do not cross your path, avoid slow terrain, avoid being too close to mountains, forests or the edge, which limits your LOS.

5. Are there set patterns to where ruins are located based on map type (i.e. do you do a circle pattern on old world but in the med you zig zag, or is it more specific than this?) Yes. Use the all visible feature and generate a bunch of maps, you can see the patterns that ruins are laid out in. On some maps, like old world it's random, but even there, you can generally always find a ruin in the corner. Worth a villager if you can manage the micro. On other maps, there are specific layouts, e.g., colonial powers has NO ruins on the mainlaind. You can do the research on your own.

6. Assuming you place your second city badly because of poor scouting doesn't it still hold a certain amount of strategic value (as in most forward position) so how large of a loss is that? It depends. If the enemy is likely to raid you, you will want to ensure your cities are close by the resource gathering areas (e.g., wood, mountains) and you will want to build towers in those exposed areas. 90% of the time I just build toward the center to gain maximum territory, but that's just me.

7. Is there a set time to cut-off ruin gathering and just focus on scouting the enemy? When is it? No. I constantly scout out the map, ruins are still valuable, even in the later ages, and scouts are cheap. If you feel the need to scout the enemy, make an extra scout. After raiding, Light cav make great scout units as well, although they will not detour to pick up ruins. However, if you feel they are going to rush you, you will definitely want to scout them out early. If they are Mayan, you'll want to scout the terrain around them so you have better intel later when its difficult to enter their territory.

8. Is searching your opponents side of the map first a good strat? It depends on opponent, civs, and the map. If your opponent is going to scout you first, you might wanna get your ruins and then scout his place to get his as well. If they are Mayan, stick to your area. Just figure it out on a case by case basis.

9. How many ruins are needed to recomp getting sci2 right out of the gate? None. You're going to get it anyway and the real problem is getting enough wealth. This usually prevents all but Chinese or Spanish from getting it quickly. If you can get it without delaying - get it. But don't wait too long.

10. How many ruins are needed to find to justify building an early barrack and second scout? It depends on your strategy, when would you otherwise make a barracks? If you make one at 4 min, making one at 3 is not such a big deal. But waiting too long means there will be fewer rares to get. Personally, I never get a second scout early, but that's just me.

11. Is the benefit of any rare worth putting off scouting your opponent? If so, what rares? Scout can't get rares, so I'm not sure about the question. It doesn't seem relevant. You won't know what you've got for rares until you've scouted them and after you've scouted them, you can move on. Scouting and rares are not mutually exclusive. Your merchant will go to the rares later.

Of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong.

posted by Tim at 7:39 PM

This is an old, old newbie tip sheet written by AoR_Bremidon and posted over at RON Heaven. Rohag had linked to it recently, and so I thought it a good idea to dredge it up. However, I'd recommend you ignore the first comment:

Don't Rush to the second age unless you really have a reason. Getting the second level of each of the library techs before going to the 2nd age seems to be a pretty good idea. I sometimes skimp on the 2nd science and 2nd military depending on my civ.

As you know, I've stressed gettign to Classical as EARLY as possible to get going on the knowledge and to facilitate raiding.
posted by Tim at 10:03 AM

<soapbox>
I think that all tournaments (with normal starting conditions) should be played in the rated room. Tournaments don't allow you to pick your opponents and therefore end up producing more accurate ratings. Ratings should reflect current skill, which is the result of playing real games, not the games you "pick." Of course, that would be difficult (but not impossible) to do. It would require participants to be in the QM lobby and to synchronize their "FIND A GAME" launching.
</soapbox>
posted by Tim at 6:34 AM

Okay, we weren't sure about taxation when we said this but it turns out we were right anyway, at least the most part. I did some research this evening and here's how taxation works:

1. Taxation research does two things (and only two things): 1) generates wealth intrinsically based on your territory, and 2) increases the value of all rare resources (including fishing).


2. Wealth generated from territory is based solely on the percentage territory you control, and not on any other factors.
   At level 1, you get +0.5 wealth per 1% of territory. (Thus the 50% rate it advertises). British get +1.
   At level 2, you get +1 wealth per 1% of territory. British get +2.
   At level 3, you get +2 wealth per 1% of territory. British get +4.
   At level 4, you get +3 wealth per 1% of territory. British get +6.


3. For each level of taxation the income from all rare resources increases. However, for fishing, only the non-food portion of the fisherman's income is increased. Also, only the base amount is used for the bonus calculation. (i.e., Nubians do not get extra bonuses from researching taxation.)
   At level 1, you get a 20% increase in the rare resource (+10 becomes +12).
   At level 2, you get a 50% increase in the rare resource (+12 becomes +15).
   At level 3, you get a 100% increase in the rare resource (+15 becomes +20).
   At level 4, you get a 200% increase in the rare resource (+20 becomes +30).


4. For Nubians, the taxation bonus is additive, not multiplicative.
   At level 0, you get a 50% nation bonus for the rare resource (+10 becomes +15).
   At level 1, you get a 50% nation bonus + 20% increase (+15 becomes +17).
   At level 2, you get a 50% nation bonus + 50% increase (+17 becomes +20).
   At level 3, you get a 50% nation bonus + 100% increase (+20 becomes +25).
   At level 4, you get a 50% nation bonus + 200% increase (+25 becomes +35).
   That's kinda lame :-(


5. While we're on the subject of rare resources, the Porcelain Tower increases the (base) income from rares by 200% (again this is additive, not multiplicative). So that juicy Nubian rare which is netting +35 does not go up to +105, which is what would make sense: 35 + 2*35 = 105. Instead, the base of +10 is what is used, so an additional +20 is added. Capped out, with the tower, for a Nubian, a +10 rare brings in +55. For mere mortals, it would bring in +50.

One correction to the earlier post, Nubians do not receive any kind of bonus from fishing.

UPDATE: Ummmm, nm - Brits are correct.
posted by Tim at 10:29 PM

From the Big Huge Ratings page -- updated O4B rankings. Still only 34 players in top 100 are established and active, although the number of non-established actives decreased to 31

Out4Blood dropped out of The List -- oops!

Anyway, here are the latest:

O4BRank	Rank	Player                   	Rating	W	L	#	Date

1	1	I_aM_AnDy                	2690	76	20	96	11/21

2	4	PCA_Frogman              	2302	35	0	35	11/29

3	6	TWC_Mulfar               	2234	40	7	47	12/3

4	7	AS_REVENGER              	2220	19	2	21	12/1

5	13	Apolonius                	2200	27	2	29	11/23

6	16	TuF_Astator              	2158	52	13	65	12/2

7	17	PCA_newty                	2156	51	18	69	11/30

8	18	ESPerItou                	2155	10	0	10	11/18

9	21	TWC_ShaDowZ              	2148	35	8	43	11/30

10	22	Udon_Bomber              	2148	31	5	36	11/10

11	25	PCA_NE_O                 	2140	10	0	10	12/3

12	28	TuF_Owns_The_Top100      	2132	26	8	34	11/28

13	32	Offressor                	2124	17	5	22	12/3

14	33	Astator_I_loVe_you       	2122	24	2	26	11/14

15	37	PCA_mayupu               	2115	9	1	10	11/19

16	39	DaRq_Vorfidus            	2111	18	7	25	11/18

17	42	PCA_konkon               	2107	16	4	20	12/3

18	47	Silvery_Dragon[ms]       	2103	16	5	21	12/2

19	48	TuF_PoWer                	2103	15	5	20	11/28

20	52	DaRq_xYz                 	2095	11	2	13	11/21

21	53	yadayada                 	2094	25	5	30	12/3

22	58	camel                    	2086	9	4	13	11/16

23	62	AKoH_NiGhtMaRe_          	2079	14	2	16	11/24

24	66	Gigi                     	2075	19	5	24	12/1

25	68	PCA_yuu_rerise           	2075	22	3	25	11/20

26	79	PCA_Mell                 	2061	25	6	31	12/1

27	80	TuF__wown                	2060	11	2	13	12/2

28	81	UD_Renegade              	2056	34	16	50	11/21

29	82	El_Capitan               	2054	78	17	95	12/2

30	87	AU_MeMeNTo               	2051	33	10	43	11/29

31	94	SolituS                  	2037	13	1	14	11/27

32	95	TuF_Rox_You_Baby         	2036	19	5	24	11/30

33	96	GM_KouTousoV             	2036	9	2	11	11/24

34	98	PCA_MATUURA_AYA          	2032	35	10	45	11/25

posted by Tim at 3:17 PM

WhiskeyPete asks an "easy" question about taxation.

The temple upgrade taxation at classical gives you merchant bonus of 120%. Does this apply to both the resource gathering and "special" ability?

HL states/asks (you decide) an even more interesting question.

... taxation increases resources gathered from fishing?

I'm pretty sure that taxation increases ONLY the wealth component of fishing and that granary upgrades ONLY increase the food component of fishing. Examples:

Fishing is 10F/ 10W. After first granary upgrade (+50%) it should be +15F/+10W. After first Taxation upgrade (+20%) it should be +10F/+12W. After both upgrades it should be +15F/+12W. When both upgrades are maxed, I would expect it to be +30F/+30W.
I can't currently confirm this, but I'll check it later.

I think the Nubian bonus to rares applies in this manner also. So Nubian base fishing is +10F/+15W. The +10 food acts the same as a farm, so no extra bonus. The wealth acts as a rare, so you get the extra rare bonus. I think.

UPDATE: Nubians do not receive any kind of bonus from fishing.
posted by Tim at 2:45 PM

EC has posted his inaugural Tip of the Week at RON Heaven.

The biggest flaw I see from all players, from beginner to expert, is that they never seem to trade at the market. I'll see players have over 1,000 Food accumulating, and they're not spending it, when they can sell it to buy another resource, or make scholars with that wealth! So, the tip for this week is...

TRADE AT THE MARKET!

Be sure to read the whole the thing.

HL even stopped by to give his two cents.

My contribution for all you newbies out there is to ensure you've opened the tab at the top left of your screen that shows the current market prices. By clicking on the boxes you can quickly buy and sell resources without leaving the battle area. You can also SHIFT+click which buys and sells 5x the normal amount. Having the window up also lets you see how the market is moving, so you might wait to let it go up or down to try and time your buys and sells.
posted by Tim at 2:00 PM

Playing a rare rated game, and against a low-rated (~1800) opponent, my cable decided to blow out 5 minutes into the game. GRRR.

UPDATE: That little adventure cost me a few dozen points.
posted by Tim at 7:24 AM

Note: for those with too much time on their hands, here is the expurgated version of my half of the annual Christmas newsletter. Read at your own peril.

This is O4B. Wifey and I always go through a struggle when it comes to putting together a Christmas newsletter. She's the driving force behind this exercise, and so naturally the focus is on her and, now recently, the kids. Things that I do don't usually merit inclusion in the newsletter unless I:

1) move, or
2) change jobs.

This year was no exception. Wifey asked me to read the most recent newsletter and add my comments. After the fourth page of hearing about her stay in the hospital, my comment was this: "This is about you having a baby, not a Christmas newsletter." This unfortunate remark resulted in me having to actually contribute to this year's letter, as opposed to hastily editing -- which is much more my style. With that, I bring you my list of major events for your Christmas cheer.

1. We had a baby. (Of course, we didn't have one, Wifey had one. But there's usually a lot of patient effort the father has to go through as well. It's just not as painful.) This time around it was a boy, and things went smoother than the First Time. But I'll leave the details to Wifey and the other 90% of the newsletter.

2. We moved. Yes, the builders finally finished and we were able to move in on April 10th. As usual, I am already nitpicking about the builder's poor quality – rounded walls, unfinished paint jobs, mangled spackling, nail pops, stupid architecture, lack of follow up, unreturned phone calls, improper drainage... GRRRR. Okay I am stopping here before I start to get angry all over again. Anyway, Wifey likes the house, so I try to ignore the rest of it.

3. We survived a hurricane. Hurricane Isabel hit September 18th. Its eye passed within 20 some miles of our new location. The damage was less than I expected. We lost several big trees on our property but by God's grace they didn't hit our house, although one came 6 feet from crushing the O4B-mobile. The only house in our neighborhood that was hit was an unsold property, so only the builder suffered. I had dashed out to visit Wal-Mart and it was eerie, like a scene from a disaster movie. There were no cars on the road at all, and the Wal-Mart was nearly deserted, except for a handful of hardy employees who remained to inform prospective buyers that "NO! WE HAVE NO MORE BATTERIES!" The neat stuff happened on Friday as everyone in the neighborhood mingled to inspect the damage and compare war stories. On a sad note: the husband of someone I knew from work was seriously injured by a falling tree. Coincidently, someone else at church worked with the husband and requested prayers. It's a small world.

4. I traveled a lot. I made my first trip to Spain. Madrid is my new favorite European city (edging out the former favorite: Prague). I spent the better part of two months (May & June) jetting to and from Virginia, Madrid, and our offices in the UK. It was hard work, but it was fun. Unfortunately, this came right after the baby was born. However, we had planned ahead and arranged for our parents to visit contiguously for the entire period. So Wifey had plenty of help. When I finished with that, I had to go to Mexico for some other work. This occupied most of July. No, I don't speak Spanish yet, but I did enjoy some of the best food I've ever had. Mexican food rocks! Spanish food on the other hand... As a side note, but not worth its own bullet: I saw the Matrix Reloaded 7 times in the theater in 3 different countries.

5. We bought a new car. The lease on the O4B-mobile expired in November, so we needed a back up. Wifey's embarrassed to reveal what we bought, but I'll say this: we did buy used, but we still spent more than we really wanted to, or should have.

6. I built a new computer from scratch. Tired of the 5 year old clunker that wouldn't run Windows XP, but unwilling to pay the $$$ to buy a new one, I decided to build a computer of my own. It's sleek and black and super fast. Can you say 2 Gigs of RAM? Of course, Wifey doesn't want me playing games anymore, so it's going to shameful waste. ;-) However, my real goal is to do some video editing and DVD-authoring. I hooked up the DV camcorder and KK enjoyed making some mini-movies. We'll see what comes of that.

7. KK has a new best friend. Her name is Emily, she lives across the street, and they seem to get along really well. They love to play with each other. Emily has a big dog, which KK is afraid of, so they mostly play over here. Which is fine. KK has this great playroom with fun, colorful, padded flooring (the dining room). It's loaded with all her toys. A LOT of toys. Most of the other interesting news is all about KK, but I'm sure Wifey will relay all of that.

8. We gave up our dog. Jenna is gone. I don't wanna talk about it.

9. I still don't have a piano. My Beethoven is coming along nicely. I can now play the second movement of the Pathetique pretty well and am working on the second movement of quasi una Fantasia (Moonlight). Since we spent too much on the car, we decided to hold off on this for awhile. So I'll be sticking with the ol' Casio for awhile. Just as well. I know that as soon as I get a real piano, Wifey won't let me play it. "It's too loud!" she'll say.

Okay, well that about wraps up my contribution. There's other minor stuff that happened: KK's great birthday party, my Grand Punkin Pie Experiment, the great shelf-making exercise, etc. If you wanna know more about this stuff, call and ask.

posted by Tim at 6:08 PM

In this thread at RON Heaven, Polly posts a bunch of tips. These are mostly newbie tips, but as Polly himself mentions, it's good to hear this stuff over and over again, "as I frequently do not follow my own advice due to laziness or forgetfullness."

Ain't that the truth. Every 1on1 game, I now have this mantra I recite as the game loads:

Scout! And raid!
Scout! And raid!
Raid!
And Scout!
Scout! And Raid!
posted by Tim at 6:01 PM

{BLuT}KrebS is unhappy with the BHG ratings.

I can make a nick and play 4-5 games and get a 2.1k rating. Now think about the 30-40 best players doing that. The result will be that the top 500 ranks will be covered by just a few smurfs (greetings from AOM). Imo this cannot be the aim of a rating system. It is defenitely too easy to get high rated nicks. BHG has to change this if they don't want smurfing to destroy the rating system.

Actually I think the point of the rating system is to accurately display your rating -- as quickly as possible. It shouldn't take more than 20 games to establish where you are supposed to be -- in BHG's case it is 8 games, but that's another matter. A system that requires you to play 200 games before your rating is "accurate" isn't a true rating system, but a play for points system. Where you are not measuring skillas much as you are measuring time invested.

Richter says to "just stick with the O4B rankings" ;-) I appreciate the plug, but even the O4B rankings would be subject to this manipulation.

However, I could just increase the threshold for appearance to 50 or even 100 games. That won't stop serious smurfs, but it would clean out 95% of them (all except the Spam .. err... TuF clan :-)

Their rating system is excellent, however, the biggest flaw is the ability to create an unlimited number of nicks. They oughta just make it one per CD key. "But what about my brother?" yada yada yada Buy your own game! Until they make it so you can only have ONE (or at least limit it to a small number) nick per CD, then they'll always be subject to this (you'd also need to allow for changing your nick to allow clan turnover and the like). You WANT to be able to get to 2100 in 4-5 games if that's where you belong.
posted by Tim at 3:44 PM

One of the glaring holes in RON theory is the entire subject of team strategies. There's very little if anything published about team strategies. There's a few forum posts here and there and there are several recorded games of high quality players playing a team game, but there's not much other than that. And most of those examples are merely reaction to rushing or booming by one or more players. No what we're talking about goes much deeper than that.

There are several categories of strategy in team games that are worth exploring:

1. Strategies for complementary civs


2. Strategies based on map type


3. Strategies based on opponents' nation choices


4. Strategies based on victory conditions

As an example of a strategy for complementary civs, you can test out the combo of Turks and Mongols. This comes from the imagination of El_Capitan. Both of these civs have good rushes, but they are usually not that threatening in team games. The Mongols can't reduce a town, so they are reduced to merely fearsome raiding. They are good at it, but you can defend against raiding. The Turks have the power of siege, but need an army to bring it safely to bear on the enemy towns. However, together they have a synergy that has the potential to be devastating. An early classic by both players followed by Mongol stables and Turk Siege factories results in an immediate and free army. By hitting one player early with the siege, the Mongol mounted troops can reach the battle quickly, guard the siege, and capture the reduced city. Meanwhile, one of the free horse archers can harass the other player forcing him to react to the raiding, keeping him from booming hard. Once the first player has been taken out, the game becomes 2on1.

Another potential strategy is to use Bantu and Mayans together to establish an early and impregnable foothold in the center, particularly effective on certain map types where there are an abundance of resources in the center, such as African Watering Hole, and Great Sahara. This strategy is both based on complementary civs and map types.

As you can see, there are a lot of interesting options. This is but a tiny sample. I'm hoping to spark dsicussion and practice of more and better team strategies. However, most team games seem to be random teams, so coordinated activities (such as civ selection) never seem to happen properly; there is plenty of work to be done in that area of the game. Of course, this might require changing the culture of only RANDOM TEAM games among high-level players, and a harkening back to clan vs. clan matches.
posted by Tim at 3:31 PM

From the PCA website, here are games #1 & #2 from the finals of the Big Huge Smackckdown, featuring PCA_Frogman vs. El_Capitan. Thanks to HL for the tip.
posted by Tim at 12:52 PM

ReadyMan reposted some stuff Brian Reynolds wrote up a long time ago on the Skill Handicap and how it works

In a multiplayer game, if one or more players uses the skill column to announce a higher skill level (e.g. Skill + 5), then other players in that game with a lower skill level (or no announced skill level) will normally receive a handicap.

Handicaps range from level 0 to level 20. Once a player’s handicap level is determined for a game, the player receives the following advantages...

Read the rest of it to find out how it works.
posted by Tim at 12:42 PM

On the Rise of Nations Heaven Forum, jedianakinsolo asks a great question: When to research taxation?

When is a good time to do it? I usually research it about early medieval. But I'm trying to squeeze it in before classical so I can have that much more gold for the knowlege boom.

For the immediate growth in wealth income, it's not worth it. It's usually better to build another market, until you have more territory. However... it also improves your income from rare resources. Which could be a pretty big deal depending on how many you have. So yea, get it as soon as you can afford it.

On the other hand, you don't want it to slow down your raiding when you are playing 1on1. So, do not get it before classical, and do not get it before researching MIL2 and putting up a stable. After that, you can afford the food because horse archers don't need it.

HL points out that it's not good to be predictable, so sometimes you'll want to skip the raiding.

He's right of course. Don't be predictable. Not every game involves raiding. However, I have yet to see someone raid effectively and lose the game. So if I were teaching someone to play, or giving someone advice, I'd say it's better to raid than to get taxation. In general.

UPDATE: Be sure and check out the comments. El_Capitan has posted some good stuff.
posted by Tim at 11:17 PM

From the Big Huge Ratings page -- updated O4B rankings. Only 34 players in top 100 are established and active. This does NOT mean people are not playing, as there are 35 players who are active but have not yet played at least 10 games. As we mentioned last time, the current system has some flaws which are highlighted by the list below. One player has (at least) 3 different active nicks in the top 100. Also you can see the spam clan ... errr ... TuF clan is doing their level best to ensure the rating system is as meaningless as possible -- do they even have 5 total members who play RON?

On a good note: Out4Blood has finally broken into The List! Just goes to show what you can do by only playing newbies.

Anyway, here are the latest:

O4B Rank	Rank	Name               	Rating	Win	Loss	Games	Date

1	1	I_aM_AnDy          	2690	76	20	96	11/21

2	4	PCA_Frogman        	2302	35	0	35	11/29

3	6	AS_REVENGER        	2220	19	2	21	11/29

4	9	TWC_Mulfar         	2215	33	6	39	11/29

5	13	Apolonius          	2200	27	2	29	11/23

6	16	TuF_Astator        	2158	52	13	65	11/29

7	17	PCA_newty          	2156	51	18	69	11/29

8	18	ESPerItou          	2155	10	0	10	11/18

9	21	TWC_ShaDowZ        	2148	35	8	43	11/29

10	22	Udon_Bomber        	2148	31	5	36	11/10

11	26	TuF_Owns_The_Top100	2132	26	8	34	11/28

12	32	Astator_I_loVe_you 	2122	24	2	26	11/14

13	36	PCA_mayupu         	2115	9	1	10	11/19

14	38	DaRq_Vorfidus      	2111	18	7	25	11/18

15	44	TuF_PoWer          	2103	15	5	20	11/28

16	47	_RedruM_           	2096	21	4	25	11/26

17	48	DaRq_xYz           	2095	11	2	13	11/21

18	52	TuF_for_President  	2087	23	5	28	11/15

19	53	PCA_konkon         	2087	14	4	18	11/26

20	55	camel              	2086	9	4	13	11/16

21	59	AKoH_NiGhtMaRe_    	2079	14	2	16	11/24

22	61	Silvery_Dragon[ms] 	2079	14	5	19	11/25

23	64	PCA_Mell           	2075	25	5	30	11/29

24	65	Gigi               	2075	19	5	24	11/29

25	67	PCA_yuu_rerise     	2075	22	3	25	11/20

26	79	wown               	2059	10	2	12	11/28

27	80	El_Capitan         	2058	77	15	92	11/29

28	81	UD_Renegade        	2056	34	16	50	11/21

29	86	AU_MeMeNTo         	2051	33	10	43	11/29

30	88	Out4Blood          	2043	13	1	14	11/29

31	93	SolituS            	2037	13	1	14	11/27

32	94	GM_KouTousoV       	2036	9	2	11	11/24

33	96	PCA_MATUURA_AYA    	2032	35	10	45	11/25

34	100	smurfkiller        	2030	13	2	15	11/23

posted by Tim at 10:56 PM

At the Rise of Nations Heaven Forum, Rohag posted this tidbit about airbases.

When you build planes (fighters/bombers) at an airfield they remain inside the airfield until you give orders. You have your choice of issuing orders to individual aircraft assigned to an airbase or to the airbase as a whole – in fact, you can give orders to the airbase even before the construction of any aircraft and they will go to the spot or on the assigned mission once they are created. One tricky thing is the “repeat orders” stance button for airbases; you’ll find it in the options box in the lower left of the user interface – the default is ‘on’ and can be toggled ‘on/off.’ While ‘on’ the aircraft to which it applies (individual or base group) will automatically return time and again to the mission or spot to which you’ve ordered it after each refueling. For a poor micromanager like me, ‘on’ is good. ‘Off’ makes the aircraft perform the one mission and then it's back for refueling and waiting on your next orders.

Useful info. Be sure to read his entire post.

I must add that I have gone from making mostly helicopters, to now making fighters. Helicopters were weakened in patch 3, while fighters are more difficult for ground troops to handle. Also, fighters tear up helos, so if your enemy makes helos, you'll want fighters, and if they make bombers, you'll want fighters, and if they make fighters, you'll want more fighters. Looks like a dominant strategy to me. So just make fighters first! Also, most people don't make enough mobile air defense (whereas the AI makes too much).
posted by Tim at 9:10 PM

The brackets for the Big Huge Smackdown are up. Looking at the brackets - they did some good seeding, and it looks like we'll have some good matchups to look forward to. I'm hoping that all the matches will get posted for viewing.

UPDATE: It's El_Capitan (winner of the recent BLuT Gangbang Tourney) vs. PCA_Frogman (currently #2 on the O4B rankings and #4 on the BHG rating list). We haven't seen any final results yet, but I'll note them once the post comes up. Remember folks, this was a money tournament, so most of the best players competed. (Yours truly could not, of course, because of Wifey.)

UPDATE 2: Tann informed me that El_Capitan won. Congrats!
posted by Tim at 12:15 PM

Happy Thanksgiving everybody! Enjoy the holidays. :-)
posted by Tim at 10:09 AM

Intersting read - gaming industry stuff from the perspective of a female: game girl advance
posted by Tim at 7:39 PM

From the Big Huge Ratings page -- updated O4B rankings. Only 33 players in top 100 are established and active. This does NOT mean people are not playing, as there are 42 players who are active but have not yet played at least 10 games. One player has a 2200+ rating after only 3 games. This exposes one of the weaknesses of the BHG system: it's really easy to get an established high rating. Unlike the U.S. Chess system, after which this is modeled, you can never smurf or play as an "unrated" once you've established a rating. So the system has no need to prevent smurfing. But this system doesn't translate well to an on-line environment where smurfing is common.

One suggestion for BHG: make it more difficult to create an established rating, not easier. Right now it's 8 games. Chess uses 20. BHG ought to use 25 or more, just to reduce the incentive players might have to flood the board with high-level nicks. If you're a 2300 rated player. You're a 2300 rated player. All the nicks you creat will quickly get to that high level. So if you were to smurf and play 8 games with 10 different accounts, you could easily have the top 10 listings. Another option they have is to screen names using IP addresses, or at least identify which names might be common IPs. These don't solve the problem, but they make it slightly tougher.

Anyway, here are the latest:

O4BRank	Rank	Player                   	Rating	W	L	#	Date

1	1	I_aM_AnDy                	2690	76	20	96	11/21

2	4	PCA_Frogman              	2302	35	0	35	11/22

3	6	AS_REVENGER              	2220	19	2	21	11/23

4	11	Apolonius                	2200	27	2	29	11/23

5	13	Mulfar                   	2179	22	4	26	11/26

6	15	PCA_newty                	2156	51	18	69	11/25

7	16	ESPerItou                	2155	10	0	10	11/18

8	20	TWC_ShaDowZ              	2148	35	8	43	11/25

9	21	Udon_Bomber              	2148	31	5	36	11/10

10	22	TuF_Astator              	2146	51	12	63	11/25

11	30	Ma_ARes_rS               	2122	24	2	26	11/14

12	31	#ICON40Strife            	2122	25	8	33	11/25

13	35	PCA_mayupu               	2115	9	1	10	11/19

14	37	DaRq_Vorfidus            	2111	18	7	25	11/18

15	44	_RedruM_                 	2096	21	4	25	11/25

16	45	DaRq_xYz                 	2095	11	2	13	11/21

17	48	PCA_Mell                 	2087	25	4	29	11/25

18	49	G_DoG_                   	2087	23	5	28	11/15

19	50	PCA_konkon               	2087	14	4	18	11/26

20	52	camel                    	2086	9	4	13	11/16

21	55	AKoH_NiGhtMaRe_          	2079	14	2	16	11/24

22	57	Silvery_Dragon[ms]       	2079	14	5	19	11/25

23	60	Gigi                     	2075	19	5	24	11/24

24	62	PCA_yuu_rerise           	2075	22	3	25	11/20

25	63	NaturalCoCaiNe           	2073	8	4	12	11/25

26	74	UD_Renegade              	2056	34	16	50	11/21

27	80	AU_MeMeNTo               	2051	33	10	43	11/25

28	83	I_HoSt_1oN1              	2040	77	20	97	10/26

29	87	SolituS                  	2037	13	1	14	11/17

30	88	GM_KouTousoV             	2036	9	2	11	11/24

31	89	PCA_MATUURA_AYA          	2032	35	10	45	11/25

32	91	El_Capitan               	2031	57	13	70	11/23

33	94	smurfkiller              	2030	13	2	15	11/23

posted by Tim at 7:53 AM

As most of you are aware, expert level rated games tend to be dominated by Mayans. Or, to a lesser extent, Spain. One feature that would exceedingly cool would be a setting that would enable you to prohibit your opponent playing with certain civs, perhaps 1, 3 or 5. Of course, both players would have this feature and it would be an optional mix in just like the other settings. Now, this isn't just newbie whining about "over-powered civs" or "boring games." This would actually enable another level of strategy.

Suppose you wanted to play Mayans. You would then prohibit the civs that might be competitive against them: Turks, French, Koreans. But of course, your opponent might prohibit Mayans, which would mean you'd end up as a different civ anyway. Or if you wanted to play Nubians, but wanted to reduce the chance of your opponent getting a raiding civ. If you picked a civ and that one was prohibited by your opponent, then the computer would select you as random. So there would be some strategic choosing and picking right from the start. This might improve the chances that someone would be pick random econ or random offensive, because they are likely to still get something they'll be good at, but maybe not have the single most dominant civ.

This would make rated games have a bit more variety as you couldn't climb the ladder just by playing once civ.
posted by Tim at 7:27 AM

WhiskeyPete asks some good questions over at the Rise of Nations Heaven Forum.

Ok, so lately I've been seeing some variants of early classical raiding. Normally I expect a couple CA'(Cavalry Archer)s to come tearing through and causing some havoc. Lately, I've been seeing a few more HC's doing the raiding or one Cavalry archer with one Heavy Cavalry for support. Or the 1HC, 1LC, 1HA raid. So I have a couple questions:

1. Is it better to raid with one or two CA's if you decide to raid with CA's?
2. What are the Pros/Cons of using HC vs CA for early classical raiding?

ceohammer responds with:

Whiskey, there is only one counter to the early Horse Archer raid - and that is to get to classical just as fast as you can. Without classical and your opponent is already there you are doomed. The ranged cav can just sit outside your cities firing radius and bring your economy to a complete halt.

I generally agree. If your economy is compact, archers are an excellent stationary counter to horse archers. Which is one reason why heavy cav is usually the next unit to show up. You could make some pikes to guard against HC, but then you've gotta have both archers AND pikes there JUST IN CASE they show up. That means you've gotta have 2-3 units for every one of theirs, because you can't be everywhere at once and you don't know which type of unit he'll hit you with.

So even though you can make counters from the barracks, speed kills, so stable units are much better for responding to raids. Light cav is the best option, but then that is the main reason heavy cav is the next unit to show up. Heavy cav beats light cav 1on1.

As G0dSpiral added:

LC is definitely what you want against HAs. The point of bringing along HCs isn't for additional raiding, but to deal with the LCs that pop up against your HAs. 3 LCs will beat 2 HCs, so if you can't match opponent HCs right away, some supporting LCs can help. HCs don't do any real damage so if there are no HAs left you can tuck your LCs away for healing.

posted by Tim at 11:08 AM

Having apparently given up on the Romans, the French are now HL's favorite nation. Here he has written up an excellent strategy article that takes advantage of the French bonuses to conduct an early attack. French 150 Attack.

This is a strategy for my new favorite nation, the French. I like all of the French bonuses, they allow for aggressive play from the start. Lumber bonuses are awesome, great for booming, and you can go offensive early with raiding or siege and still have plenty of lumber for Unis, Mines, Markets, etc. Their siege bonuses (cheaper, faster, faster to build), free early wagon, and UUs are great. And the free general, what a fun nation. This is basically a modified 150...there are dozens of ways to do a 150 and this is one of them.

HL has a recorded game of the basic strategy here. Richter syas, "Good strat, but don't try it on maya." So HL later goes on to post a recorded game of him doing this strategy against a 2000+ rated Mayan player. (That'll show him!) He includes some good analysis of the game from his perspective.

Regarding the game vs Mayan opponent, he didn't handle the rush particularly well, and I made several mistakes too. This isn't an ideal game for knowing how to defeat maya, but we'll analyze what happened and what could have happened.

posted by Tim at 11:00 AM

Along the lines of ramping costs, someone posted at the TWC this article awhile back on the best time to upgrade units.

If i decide to attack with 20 light inf in my army it will cost me approximately 1550 food and wood for the units themselves and 740 food 520 wood for the upgrade if i build before i upgrade.. total cost will be 2290 food and 1970 wood. Now if I upgrade and then build it will cost me 2620 food and 2250 wood for the units and 140 food and 120 wood for the upgrades. so 2740 food and 2370 wood. total these up to make it 1 number and you are looking at 4260 total resources if you wait on upgrades and 4870 if you upgrade first. you save 610 resources by waiting.

How important is that? I dunno. that's 30-45 seconds worth of food/wood at that point in the game. also the more you make the more you would save obviously. not going to run the #'s on that though. If you are uber booming and no one is touching you, it's definetly better to wait until right before you attack.

I really should devote some time to test all this ramping stuff out in more detail. I've noticed that the cost to upgrade units changes rather dramatically. I've also noticed that it sure seems cheaper to upgrade in enlightenment age than in gunpowder age. I'm wondering if that's because I tend not to make too many archers (why, when I can make fire lances instead?) Since the enlightenment age upgrade also upgrades the archer line, it may have a reduced cost if you don't have any archers. Anyway, more research to do :-(
posted by Tim at 12:24 PM

Spad posted 2v2 game over at RON Universe featuring 3 top 25 players. This was a rated game so more than just braggin rights were on the line.

Great game, Montana holds off Momento just long enough for me to finish off Mulfar with my French medieval attack - that i had tweaked to fit the raiding style of RoN, the original strat was developed by TWC_Strata_G_. Lots of action from start to finish, constant fighting. BTW, this game was meant to be Mulfar and me vs the AU's(Momento and Montana), but apparently when you try to do a 2v2 in quickmatch it always randomizes the teams, you can only decide who plays in the group, not who's on who's team.

posted by Tim at 11:55 AM

At this Monty Python fansite, I stumbled across an MP3 of I like Chinese. This is what I was referring to in this previous post.
posted by Tim at 11:08 AM

WhiskeyPete brings up an issue on how team games get organized. Do you play team games for the challenge or the ego boost?

You see a 3v3 or a 4v4 game advertised. You enter the game, all the settings look fine and sit back and read a book till the required number of players are in the staging area. While waiting for the host to click in, the first 3 or 4 players all switch to team 1. They then proceed to whup up on the opposing team.

I've encountered this - here are my thoughts:

• Random teams are cool if everyone is a random entrant. Everyone has equal chances of being on a the good or bad team. However random teams don't ensure fairness in a particular game, they just ensure some equal distribution of unfairness over a longer period.


• Use ratings to help balance out the teams. Take the top two rated guys and put them on opposite teams. Put the rest of the players on random.


• You could also pick teams, which might be a useful even if people don't know each other. The rating and number of games played woul dtend to give some additional information about skill level. I mean if the guy has played over 100 games he's probably not a newbie. If he's rated over 2000, he's probably pretty good. This is a better method for ensuring you have fair teams in a particular game.


• Offer skill points to balance out against set teams. If some folks absolutely want to play set teams, particularly against random opponents, then they should offer up some skill level points to the opposing players. BUD_Fustercluck and I played a set team 2on2 where we gave a +10 skill handicap. (Even though we won, +10 is probably a little too much.) I don't see enough usage of the skill handicap, and I think that team balancing is exactly what this is useful for. And I don't think this would get abused. I mean, who wants to brag about beating someone who had a +5 handicap.


• I think team strategy would be improved if clans played more clan vs. clan matches. Too often I see pick up games where it's random teams and random nations. This does not inspire good team coordination and good development of team strategy. There's a lot left untouched in the game of RON, particularly with regard to team play. Example: Team strategy using Bantu + Mayan partners. The Bantu spams toward the center, where the Mayan drops an early heavily fortified city. Taking vital space away from their opponents. You don't see stuff like this because there hasn't been much call for good team play.

posted by Tim at 10:37 AM

There are a couple new members of the top 5: Apolonius & Mulfar, and there are now 34 "established actives" in the top 100. (O4B is sitting at #35, but I'm not yet in the top 100, so it doesn't get shown here.) PCA has a whopping 7 members in the top 34. No other clan has more than 2. Of course, smurfs don't count, unless I know about them.

O4BRank	Rank	Player                   	Rating	W	L	#	Date

1	1	I_aM_AnDy                	2690	76	20	96	11/21

2	4	PCA_Frogman              	2302	35	0	35	11/22

3	6	AS_REVENGER              	2220	19	2	21	11/23

4	11	Apolonius                	2200	27	2	29	11/23

5	14	Mulfar                   	2164	15	2	17	11/24

6	15	PCA_newty                	2163	51	17	68	11/23

7	16	ESPerItou                	2155	10	0	10	11/18

8	19	TWC_ShaDowZ              	2148	35	8	43	11/23

9	20	Udon_Bomber              	2148	31	5	36	11/10

10	21	TuF_Astator              	2146	51	12	63	11/23

11	28	Ma_ARes_rS               	2122	24	2	26	11/14

12	32	PCA_mayupu               	2115	9	1	10	11/19

13	33	DaRq_Vorfidus            	2111	18	7	25	11/18

14	39	_RedruM_                 	2096	21	4	25	11/13

15	40	DaRq_xYz                 	2095	11	2	13	11/21

16	41	PCA_Mell                 	2093	24	3	27	11/24

17	43	G_DoG_                   	2087	23	5	28	11/15

18	44	PCA_konkon               	2087	14	4	18	11/22

19	46	camel                    	2086	9	4	13	11/16

20	54	Gigi                     	2075	19	5	24	11/23

21	56	PCA_yuu_rerise           	2075	22	3	25	11/20

22	57	AU_MeMeNTo               	2073	30	8	38	11/24

23	66	AU_MoNTaNa               	2060	17	6	23	11/24

24	67	UD_Renegade              	2056	34	16	50	11/21

25	72	Silvery_Dragon[ms]       	2048	9	4	13	11/13

26	76	I_HoSt_1oN1              	2040	77	20	97	10/26

27	80	SolituS                  	2037	13	1	14	11/17

28	81	TWC_LoKatZiS             	2036	15	10	25	11/23

29	82	PCA_MATUURA_AYA          	2032	35	10	45	11/21

30	84	El_Capitan               	2031	57	13	70	11/23

31	87	smurfkiller              	2030	13	2	15	11/23

32	93	UWF--FoLeY--UWF          	2021	13	2	15	11/23

33	94	zunko                    	2021	20	5	25	11/21

34	96	ert                      	2017	50	6	56	11/23

posted by Tim at 8:47 AM

Polly pointed out a potential bug where decoy units impact ramping cost calculations. Spad comments:

When i tested with with polly i had 4 muskets, then used the general and made 4 decoys. The price to make a 5th musket with 4 muskets already made was around, 76/66. After i decoyed the price jumped up to 96/88. Decoys count as units as far as price, so beware!!!

When I tested this, there was no impact, but Polly says:

You may be at price cap when you used them. Try again. (after a certain about of units produced the price does not increase).

LOL. I never noticed that there was a cap on ramping costs after a certain number of units. So what is the cap number for each unit type? Might be worth knowing. Looks like we have some additional testing to do on a couple of topics.
posted by Tim at 8:30 AM

Tann posted a link to this old article on the TWC boards On Caravans.

In team games if players trade with their allies, the caravan that is trading between them will do double bonus: it will give the gold income to that person's caravan who is trading and to the ally who is being traded to. Basically, it doubles the gold for the ally one is trading to.

Good stuff! Thanks for the link.
posted by Tim at 9:55 PM

You can add comments to each of these posts. If you don't like what I've written, you can make a rebuttal. If you have a different take, add your perspective. Just click the comments link at the bottom of each post.
posted by Tim at 10:53 AM

Note: I've edited this post to leave out the details of an ugly incident which hopefully will be put behind us. .

Some rude behavior.

I think a general rule of thumb should be to not smack talk when you're playing a 3 against 2 AND you got forward city taken from you AND your ally has to come defend your ass. Strat_gladiator decided to break this general rule of thumb. But that's his choice. Although, I'm not sure what drives people to be so rude to complete strangers.

UPDATE: Strat_gladiator posted an apology and a well-reasoned explanation (frustration and psychological warfare). Taken in that context his comments are less inflammatory, so perhaps I went a little overboard in my response.

One of his comments then might be close to the truth:

Was the reason ... the fact that even though you put forth your best effort, you, sir, are frustrated at the situation getting turned around?

He ends with:

I hope we meet again on more friendly terms and I again apologize for the use of that tactic to achieve the ultimate goal, winning.

To that, I accept your apology and consider bygones to be bygones; if you ever wanna play in the future, I'll be more than happy to.

Which brings us to this question. Normally, "all is fair in love and war" and "war is hell" so his "phsycological warfare" tactic would generally be in order, but as he rightly mentioned -- this is just a game. So is rude behavior ever justified in a game? And yes - you can discuss this here in the comments section.

UPDATE 2: Since gladiator has responded maturely, I've honored his request to reword the content of this post. But let us all remember and try to act civilly toward our fellow gamers.
posted by Tim at 10:06 PM