Well Known Pikeman
- Jul 21, 2018
And yet despite all of that, you both cant answer my simple question about whether my proposed test or the one vs Memb is better.What I am saying is that there is no easier way. End of story. Thats not how science works. Thats how human guesswork and naivety works. That being said; you playing vs other good bf players is much better test than your proposed 1v1 resources challenge. 1v1 resources challenge is completely pointless as it ignores 1000 factors that become evident in a real tg.
As I said before. You are putting too much emphasis on a resource advantage. 3000 resources is practically nothing when you are with 200 pop min 38.
When I play BF I do a combination of using market and setting up trade and have a fully functional set up at approximately min 31. 3000 res is irrelevant if you can be upping to imp min 31 with a trade line set up and already building military buildings.
Out of experience I can say without a doubt that when my opponents put less emphasis on trade (theres always some game where people do a do or die with worse civs) I feel super confident about an easy win.
So again; the main problem is that in a good level BF tg many people will use the market. I don't know how to emphasise this more but you seem to forget that this factor alone breaks your build. Secondly; you put too much emphasis on 3000 res, which is a low percentage of net income eve at min 31!!
Doing experiments yourself to test out your theory is pointless; because I can already tell you that at min 31 when I have a half decent boom, I am upping to imp with at least 20 trade carts. (Dont need too much too early, just need to ensure you can keep building slowly as your miners work) And have plenty of time to mass before there is any danger whatsoever of opponents breaking through. (this being the case even vs some players who get trade way slower).
Maybe you are not taking into account that its not necessary to do a 40 cart trade boom. getting even 10 set up early is enough for your miners to provide gold for army, while trade gets the gold to slowly build up this number.
there is no rule to getting trade set up except that you need to be able to constantly produce your best combination of units. Usually there is a big deadlock which allows you to stack resources. So really this whole argument is useless. BF is too random.
Safest approach, once again, is to set up trade.
As ive said at least twice now. Your maths are pretty much pointless, because there are too many in built assumptions. Experience is the only thing that works in aoc. In game depending on how it goes, you improvise the rate at which you make trade or dont make trade.
I used 40 carts, trirem used 70 for his math. Arguing for less is fine and I would agree. As with any bad investment that might very well not payoff, the less you sink into it the better! It is very ironic that you would simultaneously disagree with my premise but then also argue for less carts. At what point does less carts become zero carts? Pick a number of carts you on average boom into and run the math. I could easily do it for you, either in my doc or trirems. Or if youve done the math Ill gladly take a look. Or did you just assume that since everyone else trades, you would do on blind faith? Note 20 carts will payoff sooner in trirems doc because he gets free 4 markets and Caravan for free and assumes despite lots of evidence to the contrary that the market is crashed by the time trade starts.
If you really think 3k gold is a low amount at 35 minutes, why are you unwilling to back that up in a simple 1v1 vs me? I assume you are a better player than me so why so reluctant? Is it because 1800hd or 2000 voobly realizes I would walk all over someone if you gifted me those resources?