Scenarios: Conflicts in Civilization

[Marquis de Sodaq]

You've done much better than me. My Kentuckian time warp was from a save in mid 1862. I ought to restart from the beginning , but with a coherent strategy!

How did you manage to produce enough units to capture cities early? Also, how did you keep peace with one while fighting the other?

[La Fayette]

Originally posted by Marquis de Sodaq
How did you manage to produce enough units to capture cities early? Also, how did you keep peace with one while fighting the other?

I didn't capture cities early (not before the end of 1864).
I stayed in democracy and built 4 small cities close to the previous 4 (defenders = poor 'milices', then field artillery ASAP).
Tried to stay at peace and grow through WLTPD. As usual, the AI wasn't willing to let me grow so peacefully, but the field artillery did the job (not without losses, but this is war after all, even if it is civil).
Those cotton merchants are very cheap and travel quite fast, so I managed to get quite a lot of gold from trade, though being at war.
I knew from the start (a glance at civilopedia) that the right unit to attack with was advanced infantry (at least IMO), but of course couldn't start researching seriously the right tech before being somewhat safe and solid. Got the tech mid 64, then incremental rushbuilding at full speed and ATTACK!

I (almost) never managed to keep peace with one while fighting the other. I attacked one whilst defending against the other.
... and the right one to attack was definitely the Union (about 3 defenders/city on the average and almost no counter attack, compared with about 6 defenders/city, many rivered cities (very painful with the units available in this scenario) and harsh counter attacks by the Southerners.

[arii]

I am interested in playing some scenario and compare the strategies/outcome. What scenario are you guys playing now?
La fayette: c'est a cote de quelle ville albi?

[La Fayette]

Originally posted by arii
I am interested in playing some scenario and compare the strategies/outcome. What scenario are you guys playing now?
La fayette: c'est a cote de quelle ville albi?

Hello arii

Albi est à 80km au Nord-Est de Toulouse. C'est là que je travaille.
J'habite Saint-Sulpice, une petite ville de 6000 habitants à mi-chemin entre Toulouse et Albi.

You are welcome to the club of scenario players. There has been quite a high degree of competition and discussion about Rome and about ww2 played with smaller civs, then also about Alexandre.
Since then, most of the discussion has been between Marquis de Sodaq and myself.
If you read my threads 'Delenda sunt', 'Arriba',
'Napoléon...', 'Scenarios: Conflicts in civ', 'Scenarios: Fantastic Worlds' and 'Scenarios: Community', you will know everything.

The last one I played was 'Civil War' (played as Ken Turk, glorious leader of Kentucky).
The one I am playing now is 'Discover' (played as Consul Van Ribannah, glorious leader of the Dutch).


(La Fayette, ready to discuss anything about scenarios with anyone and especially with such an early lander as arii)

[arii]

Thanks!

Il n'y a pas beaucoup de francais par ici.

I've played multiplayer mostly lately but am just getting in some scenarios.
For the early landing, it has been quit some time and some players have done much better recently.

[arii]

I'll try to play the discover scenario as the dutch, deity level to compare. I like the human competition aspect. What is the objective?

[Marquis de Sodaq]

I've played Discover several times. The Dutch are fun because they start out so small. Even so, they are only at a small disadvantage. Bribing Stockholm is good, IIRC.

The basic plan is to capture settlements from the True Peoples, colonize, and get rich! Only Tenochtitlan has even a marginally good defense. Until the Portuguese trade the natives gunpowder, anyway. The Neutrals get to be tiresome with their endless attacks.

Besides trade and settling on the odd spice special, pile up gold by bribing Algiers (gold, harbor).

[La Fayette]

Originally posted by arii
What is the objective?

It is written in the book that the objective is world conquest before 1741. IMO this is exactly the kind of rule that provides what I call 'boring endgame', since the map is quite big and there are already more than 100 cities on the map in 1492.
My proposal for that sort of games (with no specific objective cities defined by the author) is to agree that one stops when one has conquered 1/2 of the cities on the map.
(IMO when you have achieved that, you are sure to win anyway, and this rule would spare us many hours of micromanaging numerous cities, one hour/turn or more, which I consider boring)

THEREFORE I SHALL PLAY THIS SCENARIO UNTIL I OWN ONE HALF OF THE WORLD + 1 CITY (please, tell me if you like the idea)

Marquis
I have now played this game until 1690, with a strategy completely different from what you describe.
I built a small Dutch civ of 7 cities (where I managed to find 'lebensraum': namely Finnland, Scotland, Iceland and West Africa), then started taking the British Isles from the English (took Dublin and York in 1613, then Plymouth in 1618 and London in 1627), then went on taking Eastern Europe from the Neutrals (about 1 city every 5 years on the average).
Beating the English was very easy, but beating the Neutrals is not easy at all: they suffer HUGE losses (more than 7 times higher than mine), but always pour new dragoons and guns on the battlefield.
I think I made a huge strategical mistake when I started fighting the Neutrals instead of taking the rest of Western Europe from the French, the Spaniards and the Portuguese. OK I beat the Neutrals, but much too slowly.
We say in french: 'la nuit porte conseil'.
Therefore I go to bed and probably start a new game tomorrow.

[arii]

I agree that conquering all the cities seems tedious and not fun once the civ are thoroughly beaten. Capturing half+1 of the initial city sounds a lot more reasonable.
Inially the cities are as followed:
North& central america: 11
South Am: 7
Africa: 6
Asia: 17
Europe: 20
So 61 total initial cities
So capturing 31 of those cities sounds like a good goal.

[arii]

Started the game: just massive city building so far.
1521 13 cities
5 in europe, 3 in asia, 5 in north america.

[Marquis de Sodaq]

La Fayette, the basic plan I mention above is more a synopsis of what the intent of the scenario is. I agree with you that for our purposes, this will just not suffice!

I've restarted, but am only about 5 turns into the game. I bribed the spanish musketeer as soon as he was nearer Paris - NON unit for my city. Then my diplomat bribed Berlin as soon as I had the gold. Next up will be Stockholm and a new city or two in scandanavia. Greenland has a good spot or two to settle.

I remember playing as the Spanish and using the conquest of europe as a starting point. First Florence, and two musketeers and a cannon in Fortress Alps to keep the Neutrals at bay. The Portuguese fell to just a few cannon.

The purple cities are a cinch to capture, that is the one real incentive to send a boatload of dragoons across the sea early. Once they get gunpowder from an AI european, they become much harder to capture.

[La Fayette]

Originally posted by arii
Capturing half+1 of the initial city sounds a lot more reasonable.
Inially the cities are as followed:
North& central america: 11
South Am: 7
Africa: 6
Asia: 17
Europe: 20
So 61 total initial cities
So capturing 31 of those cities sounds like a good goal.

I didn't mean half+1 of the initial number of cities, but half+1 of the number of cities on the map when you stop playing, considering you have won (this last number is much higher in this scenario, since the Neutrals and the Natives build a lot of cities).

In fact I don't care which rule we choose.
But I would like it to ensure:
1) the certitude of having won when you stop playing,
2) the certitude tnat you avoid spending hours and hours chasing tiny enemy cities hidden faraway.

[arii]

I feel the same way: I don't like chasing those little cities. Not fun and a waste of time. I suggested the initial cities because otherwise it's hard to know when you have conquered half the cities. I would prefere a fairly precise objective for compatison purposes. Besides the initial cities are going to become the big cities later in the game, thus the more difficult to capture and the more valuable.
I stopped my initial attempt. My quick city building ran into happinness problem quickly since the game is at deity. Also the neutral built mike on the other side of the world so no hope to capture it anytime soon.
In my newer attempts I go for mike very early. I try to keep my number of cities around 12 while I build up my civ.
The neutrals are a pain in the ass. They declare war very early and send scores of musketers, dragon and canoons at you. So I invested heavily in defense, with barracs and city walls. Then they started to bribe my cities. Lost quite a bit of time and ressources bribing back 2-3 cities.
How are you guys doing?

[Marquis de Sodaq]

1525, the Dutch have four cities (A'dam, Berlin, Stockholm, N.V.L.), six NON-units, and a heap of gold. My seers told me there was a good city spot on Greenland. I sail off with a settler - the damned Portuguese already have a city there! So off the north america to settle Nieuwvondland (guess where that is ). Caravan deliveries to Tenochtitlan have so far reaped at least 330 gold per camel.

Meanwhile, Amsterdam is size 16. The english have declared war, but this actually looks beneficial. A'dam rolls out a diplomat every 2 turns. Once the eighth one is built, I plan to shuttle across the channel to destroy London's improvements until the harbor is gone. Or maybe until there's nothing at all left standing. They will hopefully free up those last 3 ocean squares for A'dam's use...

Two more settlers are sailing westward to colonize some specials. Then it will be time to roll out the bad guys and send them to england for holiday. Once the english are speaking Dutch, I will have to make a further plans.

Arii, building a wonder ahead of the Neutrals is hard. They finish them quickly.

[La Fayette]

arii
1) The number of cities on the map is given very precisely, civ by civ, on the 'diplomacy' screen, so this shouldn't be a problem.

2) But the limit I had in mind (half +1) is probably too low (just think of a remaining civ owning a number of big cities).

3) What would you think of 2/3 (= owning at least 2 cities out of 3 on the map when you are declared winner)?

This would mean that you have managed to grow your civ about twice as strong as the rest of the world, and I suppose that no one would deny that this is enough for a decisive victory.

[La Fayette]

Originally posted by Marquis de Sodaq
So off the north america to settle Nieuwvondland (guess where that is ). .

Nice idea to name it in dutch, since you are Dutch in this game.
The French name is 'Terre Neuve'.
BTW do you know that the 2 small islands, close to Nieuwvondland, named 'Saint Pierre et Miquelon' are French?

Back to the game:

Marquis
Your strategy heading West is much closer what happened in the real world than the one I chose. And I suppose you might be earning good money if you manage to grow a fat city in America.
Please, play on! It will be fun to compare.

arii
Yes, this is deity (I seem to remember a few posts by Markusf telling us that he was playing King against you - ...and seemed to be very happy with some fat cities he managed to grow
).
Anyway, I suppose that if you try to compete with the Neutrals in the early game, you are bound to lose. Nevertheless, Good luck!
(and feel free to start a game #3 if you are not satisfied with #2; we play for fun and for the pleasure of discussing and learning from our mistakes).

I have started a second game with the same general idea as the previous one: grow a small Dutch civ with help of WLTCD, then take the British Isles from the English, without bothering too much with exploring in the early game.

But I tried (and managed ) to start fighting much earlier:
1564 = York
1577 = Dublin
1584 = London + Plymouth
1608 = Paris
1614 = Nantes
1620 = Lyon
1628 = Valencia
1630 = Coruna
1633 = Lisbon
One Spanish city left and Western Europe is mine (despite hard fighting by the Neutrals who have already lost more than 250 units!).


(La Fayette, wondering whether Dutchmen are now going to attack the Neutrals or the Natives).

[La Fayette]

I chose to fight the Neutrals since they are so friendly and close to me.
1636: Florence + Naples
1641: Istambul
1645: Vienna

(I forgot to inform you that the guidebook states that changing government is impossible in this scenario, but in fact it is possible to change once, when you acquire the tech named 'Democracy', and I did it: I am now a democrat)


(La Fayette, facing the Republicans)

[arii]

I stopped at 1616.
I am also a democracy (since1563). I have gotten all the key techs (explosive, sanitation, democracy), the happy wonders: mike and JSB(capture from french). I have so far capture france, england and russia. Barely started NAm with 1 city captured.
I'm on a roll now: 600g/turn+1 city captured/turn.
I have now 6 cities in NAm 14 in europe 6 in asia.
I am focusing right now on finishing europe and conquering NAm

[La Fayette]

arii
It is clear that my strategy concentrating on Europe just as if the rest of the world didn't exist is:
1) against the historical reality
2) much less performing than the worldwide one that you chose
(I have a save from 1614: 14 cities in Europe and 450 gold/turn = not bad, but you did much better).
Therefore I stop where I am (1650, smashing the Neutrals), and start a new game with 'DISCOVER' in the back of my mind.

(La Fayette, with a greedy eye on America)

[Marquis de Sodaq]

I've only played to 1548 so far. I'd planned to go further, but got frustrated with the seige of Moscow. My cannon kept blasting away defenders, but the Neutrals never ran out! There were no reinforcements, as my dragoons kept them away. Six musketeers killed in two turns, but no victory! Then my vet musketeer in fortress and forest (def=13.5) was killed by a neutral dragoon (att=7.5) who hardly needed a bandage after the attack. Time to stop for the day.

The Dutch now have Groenland Oost and Groenland West to benefit from all the walrus. The Portuguese have mysteriously vanished from the northern reaches.

I'll spend the next 30 years or so building cannon, then march on England. I might as well capture Lisbon, too.

[arii]

Don't feel back marquis, I've had some setbacks too. My first attack on london fail. Attacked with 7 canons instead of waiting for more. Too impatient! Lost them all without capturing the city.
I also lost a couple cities to the neutral. 2 bribed (I bribed them back), 1 destroyed, 2 captured (build a city 2 squarre away from 1 of their city and 3 dragons showed up 3 turns later).

[arii]

Stopped in 1633. Captured all europe expcept florance and vienna, tenochtitlan and couple more true people cities (gouvernement keeps escaping) and am ready to take beijing.
I am about 25 cities away from the 2/3 objective. The true people have 26 cities left and the neutral 40. I am capturing 2-3 cities/turn so I should be done in 8-9 turns. Turns are really long now though moving about 50 canons a turn takes quite some time.
After capturing beijing I will go on a bribing rampage in africa.

[La Fayette]

arii
savegame in 1616, just to compare with yours: 16 cities and 700 gold/turn.
This 'worldwide' strategy is definitely more performing than the 'european' one I chose previously.
I built a Dutch civ of 12 cities spread from Canada to Siberia and didn't attack anyone before 1600.
It will be fun to notice whether I shall be able to compete with your 'Attila like' rythm of conquest.

Marquis
Have you not been attacking strong enemies a bit early?

(La Fayette, with 3 (!) greedy eyes, one towards Canada, one towards Spain and one towards Siberia)

[arii]

Stopped in 1646 and am not done yet. I have 75 cities and there is 50 left. I need 8 more, if they don't build anymore. The neutrals are building quite a lot. The french, english and spanish are no longer.
I now have all of europe, all north and central america, half south america, north and west africa and northen asia. It took me 2 attempts to capture cairo and beijing with many, many defenders in those.
Hopefully 3 more turns.

[La Fayette]

Originally posted by arii
Stopped in 1646 and am not done yet. I have 75 cities and there is 50 left
Hopefully 3 more turns.

arii
early lander = also early conqueror
It seems that you are on your way to manage conquering 2/3 of the cities before 1650!
Not easy to beat, I suppose.
Anyway I play until I own 2/3 and let you know.
(IMO this limit of 2/3 looks fine for all scenarios without specific objectives; what do you think?)

(La Fayette, looking at the timetable, so many cities left and so few years ahead)

[arii]

1647 and I have met the objective. I now have 85 cities. There are 42 cities left, thus 127 total cities. 2/3 = 84.7
Portuguese have 1 left (in south america), true people 5 (central africa), neutrals 36 (southern part of asia and middle east).
This last turn I got nanking (size 23) lost about 15 canons and bribed 4-5 cities.

[La Fayette]

arii
I name you Attila!
I promise I do my best to beat you, but it looks difficult, though I am now approaching the top of the powergraph and 1000gold/turn.
More news when I reach the thirties (1630ies I mean)

[La Fayette]

1647
I have 'only' 80 cities.
I would have loved to finish on the same turn as you, arii, ...
... and in fact I was about to manage it, but there was a very sneaky attack by the AI in 1644. Beijing (with HG and JSB inside!) taken back by the Neutrals and 90% of Dutch cities switch to civil disorder!

Well done, arii
Which one do we play next?

[arii]

I tried to play the beggining again and am doing much better in this 1. My strategy was simply to maintain peace with neutrals at all costs (exept tribute) and build an economic powerhouse to bribe the cities that are far from the capitols.
I am in 1586, 22 cities. 600g/turn @80%taxes. I have 8 cities of size 14+ that is my economic engine.
I have so far bribed the true people african empire, the french north american empire and started the south american portugese empire.
I don't think I'll play till the end though, just wanted to try a different strategy.
I'm ready for a new scenario too.

[La Fayette]

Originally posted by arii
I am in 1586, 22 cities. 600g/turn @80%taxes. I have 8 cities of size 14+ that is my economic engine.
I'm ready for a new scenario too.

Great!
Your second try shows clearly that economic power is the cornerstone.

I have started to play 'Rabid Rodent' (the comparison game that the SGs started in their thread 'Laugh at the SGs'), just for a change (since I have been playing almost only scenarios in 2001).

What would you think of playing 'Mongol' next?