So lets compare this to another thing we teach new players, which at first hurts their game until they master it: luring boars. We never tell a noob to forget it because they'll screw it up and get their vils killed.
Its very hard to queue up 30 trade carts from 4 markets over 8 minutes with no mistakes. Im not saying vils die, but the micro skill aint nothing.
The trading analogy to that is some vague 3-4 markets maybe before your gold mines run out, something like 30 or 40 carts. Why not 50? Or 20? Does anyone know?
Wheres the good math and simulation example?
7. No your personal experience does not matter at all in this discussion. On low levels a fast castle knights is probably the strongest strategy on arabia 1v1. Yet it still is a terrible strategy on higher levels. Just as an example.
Most important point.5. Any argument considering 300 pop games does not matter at all, since the meta and the players experience only is for 200 pop games. It MIGHT be different for 300 pop games, i doubt it but no one can really say anything about it.. There hasn't been a single high level 300 pop teamgame in age history.
30 wololooooI'm just amused at how so many of you still think YOU'll be the one to convert him.
Most important point.
Anything aside 200 pop games is absolutely useless for any kind of meta discussion
I'm amused how many keep repeating the same easily disproved arguments, or the ones where I must be wrong cause meta, or that im noob. At least thehand showed up and we played a couple games. In neither game did trading pay off for him, and in both it was gg before it could. He only made 8 trade carts in one of the games. I challenge ANYONE to try to beat me in that scenario where they make 40 carts.I'm just amused at how so many of you still think YOU'll be the one to convert him.
Extra resources count, whether its extra units or extra resources. In the 2nd game where thehand and I tried to simulate this I had SO vs his Onagers. Thats the kind of extra power you get. Both games gg'd before his trade paid off. Youre all basically staring at a bad investment and saying "but it does pay off". He had 466 trade revenue in the 2nd game, on 8 carts with caravan and 2 markets. Do the math. Thats a loss. It would have been even worse with more carts because like any bad investment the more you put in the worse the loss.Can someone find me a pro game where a Mongol BF player has the castles to produce Mangudai and instead of making Mangudai make trade?
I am sure there are plenty where noobs do it, but that is because they aren't thinking, they are just thinking, oh, must make trade, oh, must make army.
You don't just get 40 Mangudai because you have the resources. Look at any of my games ever. I always have bundles of resources - I literally had Tatoh spec my game unbeknownst to me about 10 hours ago. He just sent me screenshots of thousands of resources a few times while I was in game for me to see when I got out the game.
We are now on page 5 million, so obviously you are not going to understand this at this point, it has been said over and over so why would this time make any difference?
BY THE TIME YOU ARE MAKING ELITE MANGUDAI AND TRADE AT THE SAME TIME YOU DO NOT STOP PRODUCING MANGUDAI TO MAKE TRADE. YOU MAKE TRADE WHEN YOUR CASTLES ARE QUEUED. THESE 40 MANGUDAI DO NOT EXIST, THEY CAN'T EXIST, IF YOU WANT TO DO THE MATHS SELL WOOD FOR STONE FIRST AND THEN CALCULATE THE TIME NEEDED FOR THOSE 40 MANGUDAI FROM ONE EXTRA CASTLE - SPOILER ALERT, IT IS MORE THAN 14 MINS.
If you want to do maths, do all the maths. I studied statistics at university, you can prove pretty much anything with "maths" if you want.
My analysis is pop neutral. Ie in my video you see me adding 4 choppers to wood at the exact time 4 trade carts get produced. What that means is that its the same for 200 or 250 or 300 pop.
Its also a hilariously disingenuous argument to aim at me, because frankly you dont get to have it both ways. The reddit thread where Pete removed my response was asking about 4v4 Michi. Dont even know what the pop is in that game, could easily be over 200. Not everyone plays hardcore 200 pop exclusively or in ranked competitive games. You know what they all do, from noobs to pros to 2v2 to 4v4 from 200 to 500 pop: they all trade by default. So your side has to defend on all these fronts is MY POINT. Where is the post where someone says NOT to trade if you have extra pop? Or to only start trading when you are at the pop cap? Or even that trading is much more intelligent from an ROI standpoint the lower the pop? Its nowhere: its just people like you throwing out "maybe its different for higher pops but i doubt it". Thats basically a 1/10 analysis. Zero math or proof provided. I have the decency not to respond like that. I showed my math. Trirem did his own calcs and it showed LONGER than 14 minutes ROI.
I'm just amused at how so many of you still think YOU'll be the one to convert him.
I challenge ANYONE to try to beat me in that scenario where they make 40 carts.
My analysis is pop neutral. Ie in my video you see me adding 4 choppers to wood at the exact time 4 trade carts get produced. What that means is that its the same for 200 or 250 or 300 pop.
Its also a hilariously disingenuous argument to aim at me, because frankly you dont get to have it both ways. The reddit thread where Pete removed my response was asking about 4v4 Michi. Dont even know what the pop is in that game, could easily be over 200. Not everyone plays hardcore 200 pop exclusively or in ranked competitive games. You know what they all do, from noobs to pros to 2v2 to 4v4 from 200 to 500 pop: they all trade by default. So your side has to defend on all these fronts is MY POINT. Where is the post where someone says NOT to trade if you have extra pop? Or to only start trading when you are at the pop cap? Or even that trading is much more intelligent from an ROI standpoint the lower the pop? Its nowhere: its just people like you throwing out "maybe its different for higher pops but i doubt it". Thats basically a 1/10 analysis. Zero math or proof provided. I have the decency not to respond like that. I showed my math. Trirem did his own calcs and it showed LONGER than 14 minutes ROI.
I was really watching this video after 1 year and I saw that you start building trade but your AI allies have all already 20. so the first carts should be way faster when there is no trade cart around.
Thanks for taking the time to look at the spreadsheet and yes thats the one.Hey,
For the sake of the argument I had a look at your spreadsheet.
It is this one: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...eymocimrQIhtpGwQ5_LcBOyrDE/edit#gid=800164813 right?
I haven't checked "the math" yet because I am not sure I agree with the "number of mangudai worth" being the proper measurement but assuming it is correct I have two main points that I think are very questionable:
- From what I see your assumption is that the person queues 40 trade carts all at once. This is higly unrealistic as in typical situations when you hit the imperial age, you need to do a lot of things at the same time that will cost gold: as a pocket player on Arabia for instance, researching Cavalier, Plate Barding Armor... as a Mongols player, the Elite Mangudai upgrade, Bracer, Chemistry, Parthian Tactics, etc. The leftover gold is then invested in trade carts.
Queuing trade carts in imp when setting up trade is similar to booming on 3 TC at the beginning of the castle age. You circle through them and queue vills (or trade carts), and you need to do it pretty often to make sure you don't idle your markets (or TCs).
- You assume a 89% time penalty on trade carts due to bumping and turning, yet you assume perfect efficiency for your lumberjacks? Lumberjacks are only perfectly efficient when you are in Dark Age and can position them right next to the lumbercamp. When in imp, especially if you have a lot of woodcutters to be able to afford selling to produce your gold units, you will be much more likely to have "long distance" and "crowded" lumbercamps.
You also translate the gold directly into mangudai numbers, without factoring in the time it takes to produce the said mangudai, and without factoring population space. These are two very important variables into the problem, as very often around early imp, players will have fully boomed economies of 130+ villagers and leftover armies from the castle age. Not to mention this is a moment in the game where players tend to be more conservative with their units since they are waiting on upgrades (hence making the "one time big push" less effective).
I think it is an interesting question on a theoretical point of view, but I think you oversimplified it which makes your argument look good. If you wanted to do a proper simulation you would have to come up with a better model for trade cart efficiency (some fluid dynamics equations), same for lumberjacks. Factor in castles, time for reproduction of units, etc.
41 Knights vs 41 Paladins as you would guess is a massacre and 34 or 41 survive. The extra 9 arent even included but safe to say this a steamroll. Does anyone still view 3000 extra resources as small, and an amount an equal player can easily overcome 8 minutes later assuming no trade line disruption?
Dude just ****ing stop. Not a single decent player on this planet is going to be delaying their army upgrades by 8 minutes so they can make trade. Yea, selling wood is nice when it costs like 30-70 gold. Very soon after that trade becomes so much better.