What a mean Silk Road denial! ;) Good clutch. Sneaky intro, you usually give away a little bit by your leaders and wonders comments, but it was the potential Shakespeare, not actual, this time.
What an odd game! 2 players have 1 strength till last of Age II. Your opponent play Michelangelo and you build theatres early to chase culture with him. I have never chased culture with michelangelo, but it success in this game. i always think Michelangelo have advantage in culture race, If my opponent play Michelangelo, i will go strength + politic in age I +II, my opponent must go strength too and waste his skills, or i can raid free.
How come you are eager to go into consumption here? Your blue tokens look very healthy and you don't really waste your CA, as having Swordsman is completely fine when your opponent can deny the other copy and then only knights would be left. Is the +3 from Nostradamus so strong that you don't worry at all about age I military techs? Or is the development of religion/warfare so likely that you really want to have the population for it?
I think there is a point in this game where investment in military is just not worth it for either player due to the diminished returns and risk of being futile/unsuccessful. Even if said player can win an aggression or strong event the benefit would be similar to the cost of the investment. Meanwhile investments in other areas have guarantied returns and remain during the following turns.
I'd say e5 didn't have strong production yet, and wasn't threatening to increase military strength quickly a lot. If he had e.g. Jan Žižka or potential for early Napoleon - it would be a different story.
I think in 2 player games I often tend more towards increasing my population earlier instead of saving up more food with staying out of consumption. One reason for that is that I think the development of religion is more valuable in 2 player games because culture production and early culture often play a more important part than in the other player counts. Another reason is that in 2 player games it can be more important to stay flexible to react to the card row. In 3 and especially 4 player games you can just concentrate on yourself and if you use a turn to just increase population a bunch of time after having saved up some food, then that can be very fine. In 2 player however there will sometimes be cards coming down the row that you don´t want to see in the hands of your opponent, then it is important to have some free CA´s for that. In this specific example increasing my population allowed me to go for the Silk Road denial at the next turn, which I think was quite important. Also I am indeed often not that much concerned about age I military techs in 2 player. Of course it as always depends on the situation, but being greedy is often the key in 2 player games, and with having the additional strength from Nostradamus, I think I can allow myself the luxury to not be concerned about age I military techs at all and rather save myself the CA for more important stuff. Also there is still a copy of knights left and another copy of swordsmen coming down the row (if e5 decides to deny me the swordsmen by paying an additional CA I would be happy to see it), so if the situation should become dangerous over the next turns, for example with e5 going for Zizka, then there is the chance that I can still grab a military tech. If swordsmen would be the last military tech, taking it could become more interesting though I still might skip them at the end.
![WSOP Main Event 2024 FINAL TABLE - A Champion is Crowned [$10,000,000 FIRST PRIZE]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/b6SWIax-yyk/mqdefault.jpg)
What a mean Silk Road denial! ;) Good clutch. Sneaky intro, you usually give away a little bit by your leaders and wonders comments, but it was the potential Shakespeare, not actual, this time.
Hehe, I wanted to write that first time I see a game finished with a single warrior in military - and you disbanded it as well, lol
Nice play.
What an odd game! 2 players have 1 strength till last of Age II. Your opponent play Michelangelo and you build theatres early to chase culture with him. I have never chased culture with michelangelo, but it success in this game. i always think Michelangelo have advantage in culture race, If my opponent play Michelangelo, i will go strength + politic in age I +II, my opponent must go strength too and waste his skills, or i can raid free.
How come you are eager to go into consumption here? Your blue tokens look very healthy and you don't really waste your CA, as having Swordsman is completely fine when your opponent can deny the other copy and then only knights would be left. Is the +3 from Nostradamus so strong that you don't worry at all about age I military techs? Or is the development of religion/warfare so likely that you really want to have the population for it?
I think there is a point in this game where investment in military is just not worth it for either player due to the diminished returns and risk of being futile/unsuccessful. Even if said player can win an aggression or strong event the benefit would be similar to the cost of the investment. Meanwhile investments in other areas have guarantied returns and remain during the following turns.
I'd say e5 didn't have strong production yet, and wasn't threatening to increase military strength quickly a lot. If he had e.g. Jan Žižka or potential for early Napoleon - it would be a different story.
I think in 2 player games I often tend more towards increasing my population earlier instead of saving up more food with staying out of consumption. One reason for that is that I think the development of religion is more valuable in 2 player games because culture production and early culture often play a more important part than in the other player counts.
Another reason is that in 2 player games it can be more important to stay flexible to react to the card row. In 3 and especially 4 player games you can just concentrate on yourself and if you use a turn to just increase population a bunch of time after having saved up some food, then that can be very fine. In 2 player however there will sometimes be cards coming down the row that you don´t want to see in the hands of your opponent, then it is important to have some free CA´s for that. In this specific example increasing my population allowed me to go for the Silk Road denial at the next turn, which I think was quite important.
Also I am indeed often not that much concerned about age I military techs in 2 player. Of course it as always depends on the situation, but being greedy is often the key in 2 player games, and with having the additional strength from Nostradamus, I think I can allow myself the luxury to not be concerned about age I military techs at all and rather save myself the CA for more important stuff. Also there is still a copy of knights left and another copy of swordsmen coming down the row (if e5 decides to deny me the swordsmen by paying an additional CA I would be happy to see it), so if the situation should become dangerous over the next turns, for example with e5 going for Zizka, then there is the chance that I can still grab a military tech. If swordsmen would be the last military tech, taking it could become more interesting though I still might skip them at the end.