02-06-2002 13:15									#1
	Game Year and techs Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Scattered throughout different posts, I see people saying "I didnt finnish by 2050" or "I was doing this in 1920" etc. How do you get that far? Ive hit the industrial age in monarch before by 600ad or so (along with the AI) and have had tanks by 1200 or 1300 or so. Maybe even ealier. Usually I can win by 1600 or 1700. sometimes I like torturing the AI by having my ship 9/10 built and just capturing their capitals right before they can build their space ship, and ill conquer the world or launch when I get tired. I dont want this to sound like a brag post, but im just wondering what difficulty and style of play people use to get past like 1850ad? Only way I can see it happening is with domination only on a large or huge map. In my last few games ive doubled and even tripled tech cost in the editor to make each age last longer.

On that note, I think they should make techs harder to research and space stuff out more... for example, I never build frigates unless im under direct naval threat because ill just have iron clads in a few turns anyway. As soon as ive built an army of knights and taken a few cities, its already time to upgrade to cavalry. There should be more inbetwen techs, like stirrups before chivaly, rifled barrels before being able to build riflemen, etc. Research just goes way too fast, ive found making the cost higher in the editor makes it much more fun. You get to play longer in each age and have to use each ages units for a longer period of time.

	02-06-2002 13:43									#2
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

Rather than making techs more expensive, I think that there should be more techs so yopu get a more gradual progression.

	02-06-2002 13:53									#3
	Full PM-box? Change here!

Well, would not like it so much because especially in Modern Age I find it frustrating that it lasts so long to get all Space-Ship Parts available.
When fighting a huge, longlasting war tech is is slowed down and I use the available units for a long playtime... If there aint war, what do I care if an unit is never used because it is obsolete before built. For what can I upgrade em...
On my only 2 Monarch games I had very bad starting positions and had problems to keep up in research.

	02-06-2002 18:49									#4
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by VetteroX Usually I can win by 1600 or 1700.

I agree. Plus this only speeds up when you advance in level, in the few games I've played so far on emperor, I was always trying to catch up for the first part of the game, and still finished each time before 1600.

quote: On that note, I think they should make techs harder to research and space stuff out more...

At least they should make the cost of techs level-dependent. As the AIs get more bonusses on higher levels, it's normal that research is speeded up. Certainly because there is so much trading in CivIII. Adding extra cost on higher levels would ensure that the end date would be more or less the same, you only have more difficulties getting the techs.
After all, when you play at higher levels, you expect to finish later, not sooner.

DeepO
PS: I too would love a deeper tree, with more techs / units. But, I guess Firaxis was aiming at a bigger market than with their previous games, not a more specialised public. A pity...

	02-06-2002 22:08									#5
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Assuming you haven't played with the values in the editor, then it has been my experience that 4 factors substantially influence the rate of progress (and therefore a diplo or spaceship victory): 1) Difficulty level; 2) Number of AI opponents; 3) Relative strength of AI civs throughout the game; and 4) amount of warfare / peace throughout the game.

The higher the difficulty, the faster the research. The more AI opponents, the more potentially different tech research choices by AIs, which combined with tech trading, means faster research. Having 3, 4 or 5 strong AI civs magnifies the effects of #2 -- in other words, faster research in a world with 8 AI civs of roughly equal power / size than with 8 AI civs, 6 of which are essentially small vassals. Prolonged warfare slows research.

I've recently played a Monarch game on a tiny map with 3 opponents. One was vassalized and then destroyed by me pretty early. One was vassalized and allowed its tiny empire by the dominant AI. I built the spaceship in 20XX, going about as fast as I could (have also built a spaceship on tiny map on Monarch in the 1700s).

Compare that to a recent Diety game on a standard map with 7 opponents. Got my a$$ handed to me, but 4 - 5 AI civs all maintained a rough equilibrium in terms of power. Suprisingly limited warfare among AI - less than I normally see. Saw my first rifleman in 150 AD. Russia was building bombers in 600s AD. Greece launched their spaceship in 1340 AD (and had defintiely researched "non-essential" techs such as Free Artistry, Military Tradition, Genetics, etc. all of which are off the path for spaceship construction and therefore slowed the potential launch).

Catt

EDIT: Originally said Russia building bombers in 500s AD; corrected to 600s AD.

Last edited by Catt on 02-06-2002 at 22:35

	02-06-2002 22:16									#6
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by zulu9812 Rather than making techs more expensive, I think that there should be more techs so yopu get a more gradual progression.

they should allow us to add ages. the "colonial" age would greatly change the game if placed between mideval and industrial.

	02-06-2002 23:30									#7
	Suffering from ads?

Tech progression would better be modeled IMO if after 1950 game speed was changed to 2 turns/year. I hate the modern age taking 100-200 years.