 |
|
Aurelius
|
|
San Francisco
Dec 1999
time: 05:12
|
|
Mad Viking, I'm joking about Cheat mode and non-diety levels. I played a lot of King and prince level before Diety. And I probably should have played more warlord than I did. I think you just move on when you want more of a challenge. Eventually I got the hang of diety and now it makes more sense to discuss the game from a common perspective. Also, going from a small map to a large map is like going from easy to hard.
BTW, 200 cities! I think there is an upper limit of 250 cities or more built into the game. 200 cities is WORK!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Civ-wrecked
|
|
San Jose, CA, USA
Apr 1999
time: 05:12
|
|
Hawk,
Two comments:
1) Disbanding exploring warriors: since you get only 5 shields out of this, if the warrior runs into a unit which requires support and you don't want to pay for the support cost of the warrior any more, you may as well disband it right there if it takes more than 5 turns to get the warrior back to your city. Since the warrior is out exploring, 90% of the time it will take more than 5 turns to bring it back from my experience  .
2) You seem to start building the WOW a little late, only after building the THIRD settler from the capital. By that time, the HG has probably been snatched up by the AI at diety level. I like to put both the HG and the C in the same SSC so I can skip building libraries and universities in all the rest of the kingdom and still have a great research rate (it saves thousands of shields for the libs and units for caravans instead). To do that, I build a single warrior, a settler (sometimes I even skip the settler if the other starting settler has a good location), temple (buy it as soon as I can afford it), and then start the WoW. It can take quite a while for a small city producing between 5-10 shields to generate 400 shields for these two WoWs. It's worth it though. The game is more fun to play also as you mostly have to worry about your SSC only.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Hawkx9
|
|
Moorhead, MN, US
Jun 2000
time: 05:12
|
|
Civ-Wrecked,
Yeah, diety is going to be something different altogether. In King, I have no problem building my first wonder after producing 2 explorers, a phalanx, and 3 settlers from my capital. I won't get two waiting that long, but I'm trying to stay content with only one of the early, high-priority wonders. (The AI couldn't care less about Marco Polo.) And remember, usually you only get one starting settler on anything lower than diety.
Speaking of being content with a small number of wonders... does anyone play w/o wonders? I've been thinking of trying this just as an exercise.
Question about Republic for you Diety players...?
Is an early Republic even feasible with so much unhappiness? Let's say you can't get Hanging Gardens, (which doesn't seem to be a hugely popular wonder anyway), are you even going to bother trying Republic? I've always tried to move into the early representative gov't because, on the whole, especially early, I'm peaceful and don't have a lot of units. But in diety, where marital law must play a part incredibly early, the unhappiness will kill you. And if you take into account the support costs of that militia, you might as well forget Republic? 
Another question...?
Y'all talk about demanding tribute whilst being "supreme." How are you doing this, exactly? Whenever I'm rank supreme, the AI gangs up and beats down on me. The only way I can seem to hold decent relations is to appear weak, with a small number of units. For instance, the darn Vikings kept attacking my trade-triremes just because I was ranked supreme. (I had more phalanx than everyone else had units, apparently.) As soon as others started out-producing me militarily, they offered peace and left me alone. What the heck?
------------------
Peace 
[This message has been edited by Hawkx9 (edited June 20, 2000).]
|
|
| |
|
|
|
SCG
|
 |
of less than all that I see
Jun 2000
time: 00:12
|
|
quote:
Question about Republic for you Diety players...?
Is an early Republic even feasible with so much unhappiness? Let's say you can't get Hanging Gardens, (which doesn't seem to be a hugely popular wonder anyway), are you even going to bother trying Republic? I've always tried to move into the early representative gov't because, on the whole, especially early, I'm peaceful and don't have a lot of units. But in diety, where marital law must play a part incredibly early, the unhappiness will kill you. And if you take into account the support costs of that militia, you might as well forget Republic?
|
I tend to go directly to republic from despotism, although seeing how quickly some people make it to monarchy, I may try that route sometime. I usually have to bump up luxuries another 10% from the non-diety levels, but I have never set luxuries over 50% ever and can keep my people happy, even celebrating (have to admit i was very surprised that some people put luxuries at 80% or higher - it just doesn't seem worth it). 20-40% should be plenty depending on structures (temples, marketplaces etc) for simply maintaining order. As for support problems early on, I've mentioned before that I like diplomats/spies as a viable arm of my military and I can get plenty of NONE units if tensions seem to be a problem. chokepoint forts and moving units from inner cities to outer cities also allows for fewer supported armies. Just make sure you have enough units to thwart any attack at the forts, or to stall an enemy offensive until you can buy/produce support if it does break through.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Hawkx9
|
|
Moorhead, MN, US
Jun 2000
time: 05:12
|
|
Geez. Why didn't you guys tell me that Republic bites for levels higher than King?
For anyone who cares, this is what has seemed to work for me so far...
Now I know why everyone stays in Monarchy so long. As long as you have a decent SSC going, you can celebrate and get the same benefits all while keeping your martial law and not having to pay the support penalty. Lightblub flickers on... I wish I'd known about this eariler. Well, I knew of it in theory but never connected the thoughts.
Also, as far as the number of cities thing... 6 really isn't enough. This game was made for expansion. 10-12 is more like it (for a perfectionist). Building more pays off - the caravans really come rollin' in. I still think grabbing the SoL as fast as possible is the way to go. It gets you into the serious gov'ts in which you can make some real progress whether it be toward world domination or AC. I think I'm starting to understand why Ming is so much in favor of Communism. Simply celebrate and your SSC rakes in the beakers. Who needs Senate interference and support costs? Everything else, like vet Spys, is icing on the cake. Fundamentalism is great for those pure-of-heart warmongers, but the science hit is too much for me. I know it can be overcome by timely frieght delivery, but I'm not quite that good yet.
...an aside...
I noticed this little bit of strat somewhere and decided to try it out. It works nicely... don't tip any huts until you've researched Monarchy. The "useless" techs only raise the beaker requirement for the next tech, extending your stay in Despotism. Although, you have to give up the possibility of a positive tip for a while, in my book, it's worth it. My rule of thumb is... if I've already laid down my first city, don't tip until Monarchy. Try it and notice how much faster you get into Monarchy.
Waiting to tip a hut has other benifits as well. For example, if you wait to tip a hut until it's within a city radius, it will never release barbarians. Waiting can get you Philosophy, Medicine, or some other non-basic tech... much better than a bottom-rung tech IMO. And waiting resolves early "support problems" when units assign themselves to your cities. If you've waited until you've, say, 4 cities up before the tip, you've many more opitions to work with.
...nice things to know. 
If you couldn't already tell, apparently I like to type.
------------------
Peace
[This message has been edited by Hawkx9 (edited June 20, 2000).]
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Hawkx9
|
|
Moorhead, MN, US
Jun 2000
time: 05:12
|
|
Civ-wrecked,
You stay in a rep. gov't? What I meant to say was that I don't stay in Republic anymore. I do use it for the pop boom but only periodically... when my cities are ready. For instance, after Mike's Chapel goes up. Once that happens, I switch to Republic, max out the luxuries for a few turns, wait for my SSC to hit 12 and all my supporter cities to hit 8, then switch back to Monarchy and only celebrate in the SSC once again. (20% lux is usually sufficient for this) This is in the eariler stages of the game of course, before SoL. I suppose with more micromanagement of my supporter cities I could get them to give me a decent arrow return, but I haven't gotten that far(good) yet. I simply use them to cater for the SSC... no improvements are built.
------------------
Peace
[This message has been edited by Hawkx9 (edited June 20, 2000).]
|
|
| |
|
|
|
East Street Trader
|
 |
London, United Kingdom
Jun 2000
time: 05:12
|
|
Often stay in Monarchy a long time - especially when the early game has gone well. Because of the free unit support you can build infrastructure easily. I don't limit number of cities and, on a big map, go on expanding almost throughout the game.
Agree with Wrecked tho', I get faster wins when I wean myself off the good production in Monarchy crutch and go to higher form of gov.t earlier. Often get to go straight to democracy, missing out republic. Simple fact is, shields don't yield research. In democracy, and even in republic, the extra gold soon makes up for the reduction in the number of usable shields.
Realised a while back that just cause I'd found a hut didn't mean I had to tip it. So now (large maps again) I often have untipped huts lieing about waiting for the right moment to be tipped. Knowing when that right moment might be was an aspect of my game I was working on when I bumped into Apolyton, got seduced by OCC and also discovered that I, too, like typing.
Haven't tried the no wonder challenges but had started to think I build too many WoW before tried OCC. Now certain of it. Plan to focus strategy and try being more selective (unless MP turns out to be the way to go). Downside is I'll lose to the A1 when the strategy turns out not to be well enough thought out.
Wrecked. If you can get the Theatre and build it in a coastal city then you can run your navy and merchant marine out of there. I often try to plan ahead from quite near the start of a game so as to keep this as an option. You can also run an army out of this city w/o unhappiness problems. Some people want such a city to have many shields. Because I haven't been going in for offense much I like one with good agriculture (unhapiness doesn't constrain this city's growth so it grows real quick).
Xen Yu. Thanks. I've written that down and put it in a safe place.
Aurelius. Try an Aussie Cabernet Sauvignon. Depending on circumstances (mainly how much of it you drink yourself) two bottles might be needed. Gin and tonic also good. Bollinger best of all but hard on the wallet. Good luck.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Aurelius
|
|
San Francisco
Dec 1999
time: 05:12
|
|
I find republic very helpful after monarchy. You really need the extra income to afford city improvements. But if you're a warmonger, republic is probably a liability.
ESTrader--I guess I've always known what a demon drink was...for me it's beer before liquor--never sicker. I'm too smart to repeat that mistake many more times.... (oh, I like Aussie wines!)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Aurelius
|
|
San Francisco
Dec 1999
time: 05:12
|
|
Californians have great beers akin to Belgian stuff. I love stouts and porters. I just don't know the English affinity for Boddingtons--creamy smooth and tastless. Maybe it's the tap in SF--
Oh, drinking can definately change the level of civ you play....micromanagement is useless after a few pints (some silly attempt to be thread context.)
I'm not a heavy hitter since college days (151 rum--awful stuff)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sten Sture
|
 |
SF, CA don't call it frisco... Striker!!
Mar 1999
time: 21:12
|
|
I also like Aussie reds - Shiraz (Syrah) and Cabs - very nice.
Basic civing - like alcohol - is best when you pick a particular type and stay with it. Expansionist = Beers, Perfectionist = Wines. Don't mix them or your belly will hurt!
I am usually a perfectionist because I don't like having to micromanage a ton of cities, but I recently played a scenario (Labrynth)where I had a lot of land to cover, so I decided to try a modified ICS using communism. (there were no goody huts)
By focusing your reseach target you are more likely to get what you want. Against the AI this is especially so.
My primary research goal was Democracy for the Statue of Liberty and the ability to go Commie. I went bee-line for Monarchy like usual - but then pottery for the HG to allow continued small city expansion in Monarchy. I used 4 cities as primary cities/wonder cities, but built all the wonders with caravans from supporting cities - those primary cities I allowed to grow toward size 8, but other cities were size 2, 3 or 4. Mostly I just expanded and built warriors, some horsemen and settlers with roads everywhere, then caravans for internal trade routes, with my cities two or three squares apart.
I picked up the Great Wall for the first time in ages as I trundled through and then Leos and then the SoL. Switched to commie, was still able to go and get Mikes next. Then I went after techs that would upgrade my units and give me the sea strength that I needed. I think I got Democracy as my 20th technology and with commie and those roads and internal trade routes I was getting techs every 3 or 4 turns.
I think this is an excellent strategy to try to use if you are having some difficulty with the game against the AI - with just four wonders and twenty technologies you should be able to dictate the rest of the game.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Hawkx9
|
|
Moorhead, MN, US
Jun 2000
time: 05:12
|
|
Somehow this thread slipped into a drunken stuper...?
Question...
What units do you like to race for before starting to conquer? I've found that Catapults and Legion rule early, especially if the terrain is harsh. You simply cannot stop them with the defensive units of the time. I used to put a lot of weight into Phalanx, relying on them for early protection, but in my last game I was forced into an early two front war and got spanked because I relied too heavily upon them. Especially early, a good offense seems to be the ONLY good defense. I was forced to research Mathematics just so I could station a Cat within my cities to ward off all of those opposing Legion. Until Gunpowder, defensive units are lack without walls... and walls seem so... counterproductive... reactive instead of proactive. I've never built the Great Wall and may experiment to see its benefits.
Getting back to my initial question... I really prefer to advance all the way to Tactics before switching to a miliary stance... and Espionage if possible. It seems like a long time but Cavalry, Alpine, and Spys are just too good. Anything less produces lack-luster results, being too slow (1-mov't units) or wield insufficient firepower (my Knights always seem to run up against Pikemen w/ Walls). I want a crushingly decisive victory. Besides, once you get the science ball rolling, the tech really pours in, allowing you to advance far above the opposition... but before modern units hit the scene. I'm just not all about Tanks and Howies for some reason.
With which unit(s) do you enjoy massacring?
------------------
~work like you don't need the money~
~love like you've never been hurt~
~dance like nobody's watchin'~
~live like there's no tomorrow~
[This message has been edited by Hawkx9 (edited June 27, 2000).]
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ming
|
|
In MP games, if I go the happiness wonders path, I wait until I get vet crusaders. If the opposition doesn't have pikeman yet, you can just blow them away. And even if they do, you send a diplo or two along to take down any city walls, and you can still take cities.
If I'm behind in the happiness race, I will switch to the real military path and work my way to vet knights. If you can get there first, you have a window of opportunity to take some cities. Yeah, you will lose a bunch of them, but they do work well.
If either of these paths doesn't work, I'll just wait for iron clads. Before costal fortresses, you can take most cities.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
geofelt
|
|
Neptune Beach,Florida,USA
Jan 1970
time: 00:12
|
|
Against the AI, my early conquest is by bribery. I demand tribute, collecting gold, and when they declare war, I bribe away their cities. From a military point of view, it is MUCH easier if the target city has no city walls. The key is to use enough vet units to get the job done in one turn.
After walls, I must want the city badly to expend the effort to take it militarily before artillery is available.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
I just recently started playing Civ, and have now moved up to King level. Thanks to everyone for the great strategy tips.
I noticed that one wonder no one seems to mention is the Pyramids. In my earlier games, I always used to build this to avoid paying the maintenance on granaries while getting the population boost. Is this wonder worth building?
I seem to have no luck at all attacking AI units unless my units are veterans on this level. Many times I've lost musketeers attacking phalanxes. Do you build barracks in most of your cities?
I'm a big fan of using spies in my military - it seems like when I use the diplomat to sabatoge a city, they always go after the unit under production. I can never get at the city walls with them.
By the way, what is SSC???
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:12.
Apolyton Time is 00:12. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
20-06-2000 05:07
.
|