Would ancient Civ II strategy threads interest you?

Carolus Rex · November 12, 2003, 10:12

Just curious.

During Apolyton's first year (and later as well) the Civ II strategy forum ruled. It was, in fact, almost as lively as the off-topic forum today... Imagine the same buzz, but all about Civ II strategy...

New threads by the minute, posts quickly building up within them... Tips, questions, debate... This was before "the scientific approach" to analyzing the game had fully developed... Most advice was experience-based (as opposed to experiment-based, even though much testing was conducted concerning, for example, the Civ II battle engine) and discussions were lively and fun...

I guess many printed the threads and archived them, at least that's what I did. The collection quickly grew out of control and started to take up lots of space in my small student room...

So a few years later, when my Civ and Apolyton addiction had losened their grip somewhat (and the old strategies were hopelessly outdated), I decided to throw it all away, something I regret today...

My question is this: would it interest you to read the old strategy threads?

Carolus

Ming · November 12, 2003, 10:44

You can find threads going back to Nov of 99 just by selecting view all threads from the beginning in the Civ II Strategy Forum

Carolus Rex · November 12, 2003, 11:02

True, but that's post - OCC as well as after MP was released, both changing strategy a lot. The first year (and more) is gone...

Carolus

DrSpike · November 12, 2003, 14:44

Did they get deleted in an upgrade?

Locutus · November 12, 2003, 14:49

I think they were part of the UBB archives, which IIRC were never converted to vBB.

Ming · November 12, 2003, 16:20

That is correct

rah · November 12, 2003, 17:04

Yes, the real early ones would be more good for amusement than good stratagy advice. Our early ignorance of the game made for some entertaining advice.

Brundlefly · November 12, 2003, 17:11

Quote:

Originally posted by Carolus Rex

My question is this: would it interest you to read the old strategy threads?

Carolus

Only if they contain pictures of large-breasted women...

-Jrabbit · November 12, 2003, 17:12

Actually, I must confess it would be amusing to read some of the early false steps and strategic musings of today's acclaimed Civ2 masters...

vmxa1 · November 12, 2003, 18:29

Did anyone pull all the stats together in one place for CivII? Anything like what Vel did for SMAC? That would be worth reading.
I never looked at any of the CivII threads as I had already stopped play it by the time I found this site.

Asmodean · November 12, 2003, 18:47

I would have liked to see that. Post in the Civ 2 forum by the minute. Amazing

On a side note, Carolus: Why post this, when your transcripts are clearly not available? To taunt us ??

Asmodean

Ben Kenobi · November 12, 2003, 20:09

I would be interested, just to see people's thought processes.

Carolus Rex · November 13, 2003, 05:22

Quote:

Originally posted by Feephi

Only if they contain pictures of large-breasted women...

That's a no then...

Carolus

Carolus Rex · November 13, 2003, 05:28

Quote:

Originally posted by -Jrabbit
Actually, I must confess it would be amusing to read some of the early false steps and strategic musings of today's acclaimed Civ2 masters...

Exactly my thought! Not only that, but to feel the novelty of the game again...

Carolus

Carolus Rex · November 13, 2003, 05:33

Quote:

Originally posted by Asmodean

On a side note, Carolus: Why post this, when your transcripts are clearly not available? To taunt us ??

Heh, heh.

No, I just felt a tad of nostalgia yesterday and wanted to know if someone else occasionally long to the days when the Civ II fora were the core of Apolyton...

Carolus

-Jrabbit · November 13, 2003, 09:43

...****ing tease...

Skanky Burns · November 13, 2003, 10:57

Errr, 3 posts in a row were needed?

Asmodean · November 13, 2003, 13:13

Quote:

Originally posted by Skanky Burns
Errr, 3 posts in a row were needed?

Probably not, but a convenient +3 for him nonetheless

Asmodean

vmxa1 · November 13, 2003, 17:07

To be fair it is a lot easier to go the way he did when quoting from three different posters.

DarkCloud · November 13, 2003, 21:41

Well, I think that the Great Library by Scouse Gits has some old stuff in it.

And I'll just cut and paste some old stuff that I found (In a thread from July 4,2000 that may or may not have been deleted in the UBBboard move): (Is this what you want? or are you looking for pre 1999 posts in particular?... I assume you are, but this still seemed interesting.)

Quote:

patriot
Settler

Jul 2000 posted July 09, 2000 00:57

When we are talking about trade and expansion going hand in hand, can anyone elaborate on a balance between them? Maybe a fictional timeline...like building 1 caravan, then settler, then 2nd caravan, ...
Any ideas? How many cities does everyone typically have by the time they have their first caravan built?

Scouse Gits
Prince
Liverpool, United Kingdom
Nov 1999 posted July 09, 2000 10:08

The conditions of the game dictate when the first caravan arrives. Even on a large map you can find yourself on a small continent sharing it with the Mongols. If this is the case, then the elimination of the neighbours takes priority!
Early caravans are "food" for wonder building, however I try and stick a couple for trade on a trireme as early as possible. This is usually in the BC years. If you like trading early then MPE is useful as you can locate where civs are situated. Always try and trade with those powers which have gone to republic early - as they have more arrows.

------------
SG (2)

William Keenan
SLeague Reviews Editor
Garfield, NJ, USA
Sep 1999 posted July 09, 2000 20:17

I have been working on the formula for trade lately, in preparation for a tip on the topic.
Trade Revenue = ((combined trade of both cities + 4) / 16) * Modifiers

Transport Modifier is the best ONE of the following three:

x150% if both cities have Airports

x150% if both cities are connected by roads

x200% if both cities are connected by railroad
Superhighway Modifier
x150% if city has Superhighways (effects only the city with the improvement)

Foreign Trade Modifier
x200% Trade is with another civilization

The formula for the Trade Revenue done by Robert Lancaster, which can be found in the scrolls of wisdom link above, was pretty close to accurate and formed the basis of my work on the topic.

His Trade Payoff formula is not accurate, however. In fact, there are two ratically different formulas for the Payoff. One for small trade routes (under 255 gold) and another for large Payoffs (over 255 gold).

DarkCloud · November 13, 2003, 21:43

Quote:

Scouse Gits
Prince
Liverpool, United Kingdom
Nov 1999 posted August 09, 2000 15:19

The whole trade scene is an enigma. One game (2.42) I was Communist and started to send food caravans to increase the population of my capital. The contributing city never showed any loss of food!
--------------
SG (2)

AND ANOTHER THREAD where people were advising Alexander's Horse:

Quote:

inca911
Chieftain
Minneapolis, MN
Jan 2000 posted July 28, 2000 10:41

Well, here's my assessment of your situation along with tips and recommendations:
1. Establish a good defensive position. Forts on mountains with stacked units (no bribery then) along transportation lines are best. Realize and accept that you might have to sacrifice one city (sell all improvements before you abandon it!) and fall back to a defensively better city to accomplish this goal. Pillage your own roads to make his unit movement more difficult. This way some offensive units in your city can lash out at his cavalry units before he can attack. If you can establish or if you have 2 movement terrain on the assault edge of the city, then even his dips can't jump in (build forests on all 1 movement terrain if you can before you fall back to your defensive city). You may even want to quickly build a new city and rush buy the walls because of the terrain benefits offered by the location--even if it is only a few squares away from your abandoned city. You must prevent his staging of units next to the city and disrupt his lines of supply and transportation!

2. Use the production benefits of Fundy to establish military parity. You should curtail your own science rate and build up your treasury to prevent bribery. You will also be able to incrementally rush buy units with the increased gold. If you feel you might lose 1 or 2 cities before you can catch up, then you certainly don't want to give him free tech advances especially when he has cut back his own science rate! You want to go Industrial when you have the cash to rush build factories. By setting your science high, and losing cities, you are doing his science work for him. You want scientific parity in this game and a good gold surplus. If he gets a tech, use a fast moving (via Magellans) transport and a few diplos to get it from him. Your gold input from cutting your science will allow you to rushbuy enough diplos to steal any tech he gets.

3. Ensure you can use Leo's upgrade ability when you have a good amount of units to benefit. It won't help much at sea offensively, since Ironclads and Destroyers are only different in movement points. But Leo's will upgrade your Musketeers to Riflemen at Conscription and will upgrade your Galleon to Transport at Industrialization (and your Ironclads to Destroyers at Electricity, but who cares about that). Your units will lose their Vet status (if they are Vets), but build your Army up before you discover Conscription to help a bit defensively.

4. Use the increased movement of Magellan's and the upgrade of all Galleons to Transport at Industrialization to quickly transport a strike force back into his civ (if possible). This could mean dips to steal any tech advance he gets, or it could mean a force of Riflemen with engineers to build forts on his lines of transportation, making reinforcement of the front lines difficult or even impossible. Don't let him use his roads freely! Roads give him too much trade, and too much mobilization potential. If you can slightly isolate the front lines, your increased production capabilty and your large treasury should allow you to counterattack.

5. Use Democracy against him. Ask every turn for a peace treaty and hope the Senate forces him into one. It is hard to declare war in Democracy so if you can get a peace, it will likely give you time to catch up. Also, if you can fund enough diplos you can attempt to make a city go into disorder two turns in a row via industrial sabotage. Often you destroy a Market/Temple and the city goes into disorder. He will then adjust to make it happy, but hopefully he is too conservative. You then bring the second main diplo assault and blow all the other happy improvements (Colloseum, Bank, Courthouse, etc.) to get the second turn of disorder. If you can pull it off, he's in Anarchy for multiple turns and if your treasury is large enough, you can buy back what you've lost so far!

7. If this isn't a duel, give the AIs whatever they want to go to war against him. They will likely leave you alone for a while and they may be able to bleed him just enough to make a difference!

Good luck and keep us informed!
[This message has been edited by inca911 (edited July 28, 2000).]
[This message has been edited by inca911 (edited July 28, 2000).]

Panag · November 15, 2003, 19:00

hi ,

" My question is this: would it interest you to read the old strategy threads? "

in short ; " yes "

it can be hard to remember each thing , ....

have a nice day

Carolus Rex · November 17, 2003, 09:04

Quote:

Originally posted by Asmodean

Probably not, but a convenient +3 for him nonetheless

Asmodean

Not too mention the +1's for you and Skanky Burns, eh?

Carolus

Carolus Rex · November 17, 2003, 09:05

Quote:

Originally posted by vmxa1
To be fair it is a lot easier to go the way he did when quoting from three different posters.

Exactly!

Carolus

Skanky Burns · November 17, 2003, 09:09

rah · November 17, 2003, 09:20

Yep, anymore of that, and I'll close down this thread.

Let's keep it back on topic.

The most glaring shortcoming in most of the early strategy discussions, was the lack of focus on trade. Fortunately, that was soon corrected.

Carolus Rex · November 17, 2003, 09:35

Quote:

Originally posted by rah

The most glaring shortcoming in most of the early strategy discussions, was the lack of focus on trade.

For sure! While the threads on which military forces that are best piled up quickly (like Army, Navy, or Air Force? and its sequels).

Another thing that is quite astonishing and almost naive (in hindsight), is the feeling that almost everything profond about the game was known... When the surface had barely been scratched (OCC, really early landings, MP strategy, Oedo years etc etc were still to be discovered)...

Carolus