 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
David Murray
|
|
Don't forget that the difficulty level is not the only thing that can make a dramatic difference to the overall difficulty of the game. I would say that beating the computer at Emperor on a small Pangaea with a half-decent start is much easier than beating it at Monarch level, huge map.
I have perfected my Emperor-beating skills on small maps, but find it much more difficult even on a standard map!
|
|
|  |
 |
|
eric2075
|
|
indiana, usa
Apr 2003 time: 05:29
|
|
Rhothaerill, which thread are you talking about? I would be interested in playing the same start as others and seeing the differences in play-styles. I've been playing at Monarch for a little while but there's all kinds of room for improvement.
A big part of my problem is that I get locked into a certain way of playing and it's hard for me to vary from it.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
eric2075
|
|
indiana, usa
Apr 2003 time: 05:29
|
|
Great, I'll have to try some of these. Hope they are for vanilla civ. I understand what to do with the .savs, but it looks like some of them are .bic and bix. How do those work?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
CerberusIV
|
|
Download the file and put it in the appropriate scenarios folder (Civ3 or PTW). Then click load scenario from the main screen. Choose the one you want and away you go.
bic files are civ3, bix files are PTW.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
gunkulator
|
|
Regent only so far. Standard sized worlds. Is the consensus that large are huge worlds are easier?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
TheArsenal
|
 |
Sunny Southern California
Mar 2002 time: 21:29
|
|
quote: Originally posted by gunkulator
Regent only so far. Standard sized worlds. Is the consensus that large are huge worlds are easier? |
I would say not necessarily.
My opinion - speaking to the differences between Huge and Large maps and speaking as a militarist: On a large map it is still possible to wield your military power globally, at a fairly reasonable point in the game, although with some great effort. With a huge map, this is not always desirable, or anywhere near possible, because clearing your continent is a time consuming full effort task. But necessary to keep big, nasty, annoyed AIs with lots of production centers off of your border. Stacks of 20-50 units marching into your territory is always an eye opener. Alliances between huge civs out get you are even nastier.
And as often as not, when left alone without the human to cripple it, an AI superpower emerges on the other side of the world after gobbling up weak civs. At my skill level, this AI remains competitive for quite some time in the game - because I can't get overseas with enough force early to cripple it, and I can't out research or out culture it. So there is none of this winning by 1600 A.D. stuff for me.
Also, I find that some of the most tried and true strategies on these boards are not always suited for the huge map. Take the archer rush. Depending on the map configuration, it is very difficult to take out an AI early with a single movement unit. It's too spread out. And, for me anyway, early wars over all are less desirable. You expend much energy warring across a vast area while the other civs race ahead of you in all categories. So even if you're on a single land mass, crippling your opponents early and gaining a lead that way, seems more difficult. So wars come later, bigger, and with more coordinated movement to deal with the size of the civ you are taking out and the number of units needed to do it.
Your mileage may vary.
Last edited by TheArsenal on 30-07-2003 at 03:55
|
|
|  |
 |
|
David Murray
|
|
quote: Originally posted by gunkulator
Regent only so far. Standard sized worlds. Is the consensus that large are huge worlds are easier? |
The easiest map type is definitely a tiny Pangaea. All you need to do on all difficulty levels is build lots of troops and raze all enemy cities. I think it's possible to get an early deity win on tiny (i.e. BC)
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Don K Hotay
|
|
Boston
Aug 2001 time: 00:29
|
|
I'm wondering if there'll ever be a way to make the AI more competitive without giving it bonus units or production advantages.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Theseus

|
 |
The warmonger formerly known as rpodos. Gathering Storm! Apolyton Spirit!!
Apr 2002 time: 00:29
|
|
quote: Originally posted by TheArsenal
I would say not necessarily.
My opinion - speaking to the differences between Huge and Large maps and speaking as a militarist: On a large map it is still possible to wield your military power globally, at a fairly reasonable point in the game, although with some great effort. With a huge map, this is not always desirable, or anywhere near possible, because clearing your continent is a time consuming full effort task. But necessary to keep big, nasty, annoyed AIs with lots of production centers off of your border. Stacks of 20-50 units marching into your territory is always an eye opener. Alliances between huge civs out get you are even nastier.
And as often as not, when left alone without the human to cripple it, an AI superpower emerges on the other side of the world after gobbling up weak civs. At my skill level, this AI remains competitive for quite some time in the game - because I can't get overseas with enough force early to cripple it, and I can't out research or out culture it. So there is none of this winning by 1600 A.D. stuff for me.
Also, I find that some of the most tried and true strategies on these boards are not always suited for the huge map. Take the archer rush. Depending on the map configuration, it is very difficult to take out an AI early with a single movement unit. It's too spread out. And, for me anyway, early wars over all are less desirable. You expend much energy warring across a vast area while the other civs race ahead of you in all categories. So even if you're on a single land mass, crippling your opponents early and gaining a lead that way, seems more difficult. So wars come later, bigger, and with more coordinated movement to deal with the size of the civ you are taking out and the number of units needed to do it.
Your mileage may vary. |
TA, your post just hit me in the head like a ton of bricks.
Has anyone noticed in the last several months, maybe more, that bigger games are better?
I think it's pretty much accepted that bigger maps are better... but what about the rest? I think back to my own early thoughts on conditions for the development of KAIs... makes sense to me.
A conundrum: Players' computers, and the general timeframe that it takes to play out the bigger games, versus the quality of what AI civs can achieve in anything less
|
|
|  |
 |
|
georges bonbon
|
|
Fed up with Monarch level, so going up to Emperor level.
Always playing on huge maps (continents or pangea; I hate the AI-seabombardements).
Depending on the starting position, I generally manage to end the game, though winning is maybe once out of 7.
But I am always way back in science development. For example my current game (huge, 15 civs, continents, PTW 1.21, slightly modified) I am researching Refining and Electricity whereas at least 5 AI's are building the Internet.
Oh yes, I do not have one Big Wonder.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
georges bonbon
|
|
I have an average of 8-10 minutes between turns.
So I am always reading the newspaper between turns.
Once the newspaper is finished, I start a reading a book.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:29. Apolyton Time is 00:29. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|