Vel's Strategy Thread - Part Two

[Gamer at heart]

It is my experience so far (I admit this experience is somewhat limited to around 7-10 full games. I an TRYING to fight the addiction right now... ) that defensive wars take a lot longer to affect your population's morale. If you don't have any troops in the enemy territory, war weariness might as well take 10 or more turns to show up. But, becoming the aggressor, even in wars that were declared TO you and not BY you, will speed the rising of unhappiness.

Great call on the late-game AI weaknesses. I would add the war tactics to the tech catching problem. I've always had a whole different kind o' success in my late wars, even when not having a tech lead. The AI tactics are very well designed for ancien wars, not so bad for middle ages wars and downright not good in the modern warfare (maybe that has to do with the lack of artillery use).

I admit that my urge to play all the time is somewhat reduced by the lack of ambiance in the game. I mean, the whole "feel like the leader" spirit is really there, but not the hatred for rival civs or twisted feeling resulting of using twisted strategies...hard to explain, but not too hard to understand, I hope!

see you later guys, happy civing!

[Arrian]

Fitz,

Ok, so catapults are not completely useless. I just tend to like an extra attack unit instead. That's just impatience, I think.

I just realized that using bombard units early on may have an added bonus I hadn't thought about when I decided against catapults. The reduction of defenders to 1 or 2 hp prior to attack obviously makes things easier on your attack units, but I hadn't really considered the added survivability of your Elite units in particular. I have lost elite units in situations where a catapult softening defenders may have altered the outcome. EDIT: to explain, I used to try to "soften" defenders with non-elite units first, but they often WIN, killing the defender and leaving my elite unit nothing to kill. So I ended up hitting with elites first, and thus losing some.

Given the INCREDIBLE power of leaders, perhaps I should bring some catapults along next time I fight an ancient war.

-Arrian

[Arrian]

Gamer,

Yeah, the AI gets worse and worse at war as the game progresses. This is due to the increasing complexity of war. In the ancient era, it's pretty straightforward, and thus the AI doesn't have to be all that adept.

Build large stack of swordsmen (or your UU, or whatever). Kill.

Fast-forward to the Modern Era. Build large stack of Tanks. Charge! I will chew those Tanks up and spit them out, because I understand how to use all of the Modern Era weapons, whereas the AI does not. Artillery is the best example, but I maintain that it also misuses Bombers and Ships, not to mention its mobile units. Yes, it can be annoying when an AI ship/bomber breaks a road. But it would be much more annoying if the AI ship/bomber (or rather shipS/BomberS) beat the hell out of my defenders and then used their mobile attack units to take cities away from me - if only for a turn or two before I retake them...it would still hurt me.

I don't bring these things up to whine and complain. I do not expect the AI to equal me in strategic or even tactical thinking - it's a computer program. This is why the higher difficulty levels give the AI production bonuses. However, there are some relatively glaring things that maybe, just maybe can be patched or modified in a later version of the game (hey, they did make the CIV II AI nastier in the MPG edition... though not smarter). The use of artillery would be one, and it could be major. Imagine having to deal with enemy bombardment of your cities... breaking your 1000 year old temples and beating up your defenders. Oooh, I'd be mad.

-Arrian

[Fitz]

Actually, I forgot to mention that Arrian, even though I certainly intended to. I was experiencing the same problem, although I have yet to get a leader from an elite.

However, another key point of artillery is the overrun. If you are trying for a quick push through several cities to your objective, or even just a fast moving military campiagn, with swordsmen/longbowmen (infantry based units) catapults help. With horsemen, they may not. Example:
Turn 1, catapults advance on the city, along with infantry.
Turn 2, 1/2 catapults pound the city. Infantry attacks, taking minimal damage. Unharmed infantry advance into the city capturing it. After the first unit captures it, the rest move through the city, alon with the other half of the unused catapults towards the next city.

Now, the you can do the same thing with infantry alone, but you will potentially take many more losses, and certainly have much more healing to do. The number of infantry who advance through the city will be much less, since more were damaged in the assault.

Compared to my first game, in which I never used catapults for attacking, my advances into enemy territory have been lighting fast in this game.

Enough catapults garuntee you won't lose any of your attacking force. I don't think that extra infantry will do the same. Basically, if I start with 20 swordsmen & ten catapults, I'll probably end with the same (assuming early game opponent). If I start with 30 swordsmen, I may or may not end with even 20 swordsmen.

[vmxa1]

Speaking of MPP's, in Civ2 you could agree to enter a war for your friends and then never do anything and they did not object, does that work in Civ3? If I have an MPP with a civ that is not on my land mass and they get me into a war with a foe that is not on my land mass, what happens if I never send troops? Will they take note? I normally do not agree to sing MPP's, I will ask for them, but not join.

[Gamer at heart]

I agree with Fitz on that subject. They DO make offensive wars easier and minimize casualties. And for a really small cost also! That 20 shields make them a worthy investment, plus they can later be upgraded to cannons. I will usually build them in small cities that produce one shield/turn so they at least BUILD something. I like the 1catapult/20 turns more than the 1swordman/30 turns in those cities. The other great thing about catapults is they can help on defence. Of course, you have to make sure your city is well defended enough so you won't give 'em to your opponent, but they will insure minimal losses on the defender side. That makes me fortify one or two in cities that are more at risk of being attacked, and sometimes more when at war.

Arrian, I'm with you 'bout the AI! I really think Soren and al. did an excellent job overall, but it would be foolish to think the AI perfect. I was just trying to point out a few things that could be made better. I've never played civ2 in MP, but if the AI was indeed improved, I hope they'll make a MP for civ3! I admit it might be a little scary tho'...

[pchang]

If war exists between you and an AI, they WILL attack you. Sure, you can sit back and do nothing if you like, but in a few turns the AI WILL come to you. So, if you are in a war, be prepared to fight. If not on his ground, then at least on your own. Also, the AI is much less inclined to get a peace treaty if the war is going on in your territory, even if you are pasting him.

[cousLee]

Something I noticed about catapult defenders. I had a stack of units with 2 of them in it. the AI attacked the stack, and when the first AI unit attacked, one catapult took it's free shot, the second one did nothing. when the second unit attacked, then the other one fired it's shot. The third ai attack, neither of them did anything. I didn't lose any of the 3 battles, but it is something to keep in mind when deciding on a catapult defense strategy.

Mid game defensive strategy idea: I recently came to this conclusion, but havn't tried it out yet in full swing. In my current game, I can build musketmen, but they are shield expensive. I put an island town down and of course it was not connected to the strategic resources. I am able to build spearmen in that town. Since cash is easier to come by than fighting corruption, I was thinking of using that as a cheap unit base, and haul them suckers back to a "good" base and upgrade them. Now because this is mid-game and the isalnd is killed by corruption, it won't work as well as I want, but what if... Mid game you found a city near your capitol or FP, and leave that sucker NOT road connected. build cheap, upgrade. rinse, repeat. Of course you would have to keep that in mind when building your core cities, to keep a reserve area set aside. (thinks of a mountain base with that extra iron on it). If your not cash-strapped, it could work real well.

[Arrian]

Gamer - The AI in CIV II Multiplayer Gold Edition wasn't really improved. It was just meaner than the original CIV II. It hated you. If you were strong, it HATED you. Diplomacy was non-existent (except - maybe - for first contact). None of that mattered, because the AI was inept (again, not bad for 1995) and easily beaten once you understood it. Diety became at matter of "can I break 1000% in this game?"

What I meant was that Firaxis will probably make a Multiplayer Gold CIV III at some point, and maybe they can tweak some relatively minor things in the AI. Maybe, maybe not.

Anyway, we're supposed to be discussing strategy for beating the AI as it is now. It seems to me, if you don't want to use despotic rush/base pairing/ics - type strategies to overcome the AI bonuses above regent level, you must take advantage of the AI when trading. This means, of course, that you need to somehow get a bunch of luxury resources so that you can trade them for money and tech. That involves carefully planned expansion and a certain amount of luck, or a war... or all three. Also, it means finding that other continent asap (obviously not the case if you're playing pangea maps) so that you can trade with the civs over there. It may be worth it to risk a galley or two to get over there and make contact.

Tech trading is tricky - usually I don't want to give up a tech that will give the AI a nasty unit or allow it to build a wonder you're working on. However, there are several techs that I love to trade to the AI, if I get them first (on the higher levels this is tough, of course). Ecology is my favorite. Harmless (well, it is on the way to Modern Armor, but in and of itself it's harmless) and the AI will pay through the nose for it. Music theory is another, since I never build Shakespeare (although I wouldn't waste time researching this on Monarch or higher, so I wouldn't have it before the AI anyway).

More to come on upper-level strategy once I've gotten some more games under my belt.

-Arrian

[Velociryx]

I decided to take a break from the serious testing and have what I refer to as one of my "Yahoo!" games, where I don't really think much....no deep strategy (well...okay, some), and mostly spin out a good story.

I started a story from one of my really early games, but scrapped it when I realized that I really didn't know enough about the game at that point to make it a good one....heh...this one should kick....

-=Vel=-

[arborman]

In my current game I selected two cities to be whipped, and the rest to be builders etc, for the most part. It's now almost 4000 years later, and 2000 years after I stopped using the population rush and left despotery behind me, and they still can't forget the tyranny I wrought upon them back in 3000 BC. I try to tell them the Iroquois were invading and we needed the swordsmen, but they are still angry, after all the temples etc. Ive built for them. I try to tell them we are an enlightened democracy, that I ve changed my ways, but they still harbour a grudge. So... there is a downside to pop-rushing, if you do it too much. However, the upside is I survived the invasion and managed to kill the Iroquois and take their cities.
This minor effect may not be a big deal in maps where you can build an unlimited number of cities. However, I like to click that random button and see what happens, and in this case it's almost 85% water, and the largest civ has maybe ten cities. I have nine, but they are well connected. Also, only one civ has any freshwater, which meant we all had slower growth. Maybe in the huge tracts of land games the whip effects are less important, but I need those cities to produce.

[Quurgoth]

I don't think the gold/turn trades for tech are broken.

Later in the game, if I want to buy a tech straight up from the AI, it costs ~1000-2000. If I want to sell a tech to the AI, they usually offer 50ish gold/turn... which comes out at 1000 total. Seems fair, no?

Then again, I sell the tech to everyone else, too, getting quite a bit more out of it than the combined AI benefits from the 1000gp purchase I make when THEY hold the tech.

[Arrian]

Man, this Monarch game I've got going is taking me forever. It would probably have ended last night (I'm building the Spaceship) if Joan of Arc wasn't such a wench.

As I've mentioned, I'm a democracy, everyone else is communist. At this point, the English have ceased to be, and the Aztecs have two cities on an island. That leaves me, Shaka, Catherine and Joan. I have cities on the Franco-Russian continent, for resources (silk, rubber, aluminum). These are either captured Aztecs towns or raze/rebuild jobs on top of old Aztec towns.

Joan moved a stack of riflemen/infantry onto my land. Now, she DID have a coastal city that was surrounded by three of my Aztec protectorates (thus giving her no way to get troops there, except through me). She was, I think, at war w/the Aztecs, who as I mentioned were on an island off the coast. Still, I didn't trust her and ordered her to leave. Guess what she did.

Luckily, I had been airlifting 4 units per turn over there, so I had a substantial army of tanks/mech inf. lying about, not to mention the bulk of my bomber force. Joan convinced Cathy to join her against me (maybe it had something to do with that spy I tried to plant in Moscow ). I signed up Shaka for my side of things. This, I later decided, was a mistake. I was unwilling to "betray" Shaka by making peace before our alliance was up. That meant 20 turns of war. 20 turns of war in a democracy, shortly after finishing a different (longer) war, is brutal. Absolutely brutal. First off, I had been selling all sorts of things to Russia, so my budget get REALLY tight. Second, I had been importing a luxury from France, the loss of which hurt even more. Further, as we have been told, war weariness is harsher if you enter the AI's territory to fight. But if you remain defensive, the AI won't make peace with you. This is a catch 22. So I bombed the hell out of Joan's tanks (a stack of 8 showed up at the gates of what was formerly Tenochticlan) and mopped them and the Russkie Cossacks up with my Tanks. I then set about creating a "no-man's land" between my cities and theirs, by bombarding all the connecting roads and razing a couple of cities. Then I hunkered down and tried to wait out the 20 turn alliance thing. Ouch, did it hurt. We're talkin' 40% luxury spending, no science, barely in the black (+100/turn, and that's with several high-production cities producing "wealth"). This, with 5 native luxuries (not to mention Univ. Sufferage and police stations). I eventually built a city where a Russian one had been to snag dyes, which upped my luxury count to 6, and helped a bit. I also, just before the war ended, grabbed the only uranium deposits on that continent, along with the former English city of Coventry, which had Leo's - not that I need that now. Thank GOD I got the uranium, since Joan built the Manhattan Project during the war. I tried to sabotage it, but it would have cost me:

low chance of success - $5000
medium - $10000
high - $20000

Um, yeah. So anyway, it appears that war weariness accumulates kinda like the "cruel oppression" of the whip, and takes some time to dissipate. If you get into another war after 1 turn of peace, you're right back where you were. This is a good thing, but tough to deal with as a democracy. If you're religious, a switch to Communism may be worth it. One thing I don't like is the fact that other people's oppression becomes your problem when you capture cities. An example of a french town that was unhappy (1 citizen, temple, 5 luxuries, 20% luxury spending at the time):

33% Stop the agression toward our mother country!
33% Give peace a chance!
33% Hell No! We won't go! Stop the draft!

Guess who did the drafting? Not me, I assure you.

Think long and hard before you enlist an ally to help you with a war. This locks you in for 20 turns, unless you're willing to take the reputation hit that comes with making peace early and "betraying" your ally. I decided to stick it out, as that ally shared a continent with me, and I like him "gracious." This did, however, cost me half the population of my capitol, as I had a nuclear meltdown on turn 17 of the war. Curiously, the nuclear plant is STILL THERE. All it did was create a ton of pollution (which I cleaned in 2 turns) and kill some population. The city then went into "We love the Emperor day." I didn't find that particluarly amusing at the time.

-Arrian

[eMarkM]

Yeah, I've had my first real taste of how bad war weariness can be in my current Monarch/Egypt game. I'm in "MPP hell". No, I don't have MPP w/ anyone, it's everyone else who has MPP against me.

In this game I own about half the world's resources. I have everything, have drained everyone's treasury selling to them, and have dominated the game. So I'm getting ganged up on by the remaining powers in modern era. I want to stay Dems to keep ahead in tech, but I'm being forced to go Commie.

Here's the situation. France has MPP with Iroq & America. America declares war on me. I take an island city of theirs, so France is dragged into war. France and Iroq sign alliance against me, so I'm fighting against 3. They're all on other continents, so it's one of these "bombard my roads constantly" type wars. Occasionally they send a transport full of their outdated Archers. No biggie. My army outclasses all of them combined, but the civil disorder becomes a real problem.

So I'm kinda desperate for peace, not because they're a threat, I just want to go back to Dems. I sue w/ France finally after taking a city on their continent. So I want to do this to the others so my citizens will be happy again. But I make the mistake of attacking America and France's MPP is triggered all over again. Eventually I get peace w/ America and France, but Iroq continues to be a thorn. But now I can't attack them directly because that will trigger the France MPP. I have to play defensive only. Arrrrggh! Very frustrating not being able to sail an armada to the very weak Iroq land and teaching them a lesson.

It's taken decades, but I finally have peace w/ all of them. It was very difficult to juggle w/ this when you're trying to make peace, but can't attack aggressors to force them to the table. They go on and on refusing my envoy. If you attack, you bring the other AIs right back into the fight. OTOH, it's made for some challenge in an otherwise won game.

e

[Arrian]

Mark,

Pretty similar to my situation, except that you sound a bit stronger. My enemies did eventually come up with Tanks and Bombers, which is annoying. If I was willing to put in the effort, however (my Power takes up about 1/2 the histograph), I could wipe France and Russia (France first) off the map, but I want to build the Spaceship. Conquest gets boring after a while. I can't build the damn spaceship during the war b/c I can't affort to continue research (I have a 3-5 tech lead on the opposition, but not all the spaceship techs). War weariness is really bad after a while - my capitol that blew up had 5 entertainers to go along with the 5 luxuries, 40% lux. rate, Univ. Suffrage and police station. Wow. War, particularly late in the game, is a pandora's box of problems.

A suggestion for those of you who, like me, want to win via the spaceship: Stay out of MPP's and alliances, and always keep a strong army available, complete with navy and transports. This way, if you do get into a war, you can end it as quickly as possible, with overwhelming force. My problem wasn't the force bit, it was the alliance. I didn't need Shaka's help... it's just that initial French strike force (turned out to be just about all Joan had) kinda worried me. My mistake.

-Arrian

[Kinjiru]

I have seen a few people make remarks about saving their leaders to create armies with Mech Infantry. In my experience, a far more potent army consists of two tanks and one mech inf.

The tank hits harder than the mech inf so the punch delivered is quite a bit higher and adding in one mech inf ups the defensive value to a level where I have never lost an army. I have been tempted to wait just a bit longer and build using all Modern Armor, but have never been able to make myself resist...

In last night's game I saw a serious weakness in the AI strategy. Mother Russia and I were allied in a war against Hammurabi. Cathy was getting leaders about every three turns, whilst I got none. But, they battles were far away from Russian land so as soon as she produced a leader she formed an army with whatever was at hand. End result: every third turn Russia had a new army, every second turn beyond that said army was killed. And this was in the medevial and industrial periods, not modern.

[Arrian]

Kinjiru,

I agree with you about army composition. I made one last night with 1 mech inf. and 2 modern armor (MA defends at 16, Mech Inf. at 18... not much difference, but hey). That way, it can hit and defend. The problem is that MA normally gets 3 moves, and multiple attacks. The 2 MA I put in the army were kinda hamstrung by the 1 less move of the Mech Inf, and the Army's inexplicable inability to attack more than once. Still, any one unit I wanted dead, died.

The AI (Russians, as a matter of fact) made an army with 2 Cossacks and a Rifleman. That struck me as dumb. At least the MA/Mech combo still gets 2 moves. The Rifleman slowed Cathy's army to 1 move. She should have used 3 Cossacks and just brought some groundpounders along to help. That army died badly - bombarded by my flying fortresses and then finished off by a Tank.

-Arrian

p.s. Firaxis just posted the changes/additions/fixes in the patch. Mostly good, from what I can tell, but a couple of things strike me as odd. IFE appears to be gone, btw.

[eMarkM]

I'm gaining a new respect for armies, at least in modern era. I use leaders for wonders for the most part. But if I already have major wonders, especially UN, in late game and get a leader, I'll make a vetern Mech Infantry army. I make MI army since this comes a long time before modern tanks and I don't want to wait that long or put regular tanks in it.

This army is used solely to protect siege stacks. Just plop next to city you want to attack, put every attacking unit on top of it and you have an impregnable stack. I find the AI just never attacks my stack for fear of losing units to the MI army. I make sure the army wins at least one battle and then can build military academy (if I didn't do it earlier). From there I can crank out an army or two of modern tanks once I get Synthetics for ultra-attack armies.

e

[Velociryx]

Babylon (Religious/Scientific)
Starting Tech: Ceremonial Burial/Bronze Working
Special Unit: Bowmen (2/2/1) Archers with extra defense (requires warrior code to build).

The Goods:
If you’re going to talk about the Babylonians, you’re going to talk culture. Period. Sure, they can hold their own in a fight, but what makes them strong is infrastructure. There’s just no stopping a determined Babylonian player from running away with the culture game. You get temples, libraries, cathedrals, universities, and research centers on the cheap…half price what the other civs have to pay! That’s just a crushing advantage. Add to that the raw power of your scientific trait (one step from iron working, spearmen from game start, free tech advances), and the advantages of religious civs (temples from game start, one turn anarchy), and you come away with a group that has all the important advantages on its side. Especially on the higher levels of play, where your half price city builds enable you to keep pace with the AI, “The Babs” are awfully hard to beat.

Your special unit is a bit of an odd bird, requiring a tech you don’t have at game start to build it (no big deal there, and not terribly uncommon), but what you get for your money is a unit with a VERY short offensive shelf life (though for the shield-cost, it’s the best value in terms of defensive units till Pikemen). Consider that the required tech (Warrior Code) is probably not high on your wish list in any case (quite likely you’ll want to run for Iron Working as a first choice, given the strength of your scientific trait, and the ability to lock down as many sources of iron as you can, denying your near neighbors one of the twin sources of Ancient Era power (Iron and Horses)). And of course, by the time your first swordsmen hits the table, the Bowman begins to fade in importance as an offensive unit. Not to say that the Bowman can’t be used to good effect (see below), just understand that it’ll take a bit to set that up. In short, a good rule of thumb to use with regards to your Bowmen…think of them as a handy “escape hatch” in case you get stuck someplace without iron.


Strategies From One End of the Spectrum to the Other

General
Whether you take the path of the conqueror, the statesman, or anywhere in between, the veritable HORDE of cheap infrastructure builds you have available to you will make ramping up stellar research and/or controlling newly conquered cities really, really easy. Cultural warfare makes a strong addition to the Warrior-King’s bag of tricks, and of course, it’s entirely possible with the Babylonians to rip a deep wound indeed into a rival civ’s Empire on the strength of culture alone. Why bother to build much more than a token (defensive) army when rival cities are flocking to you like bees to honey!

The overriding question to ask yourself as the Babylonians is: When do I want my Golden Age? With the Aztecs, there’s no choice or question….the Jaguars are simply too good to pass on, but your special unit is of the “take it or leave it” variety…you can work with it if you choose, and have an early Golden Age, or….not. The point is, as the Babylonians, you have an almost exquisite amount of control over when and where your Golden Age happens. Use that to your maximum benefit.

Battling: When doing battle as Babylon, take the strength of your culture into account, and make it work for you! On one side of that equation, you can rely on the fact that your enemies will have a very difficult time actually keeping any city of yours that they capture. Most likely, you’ll see rapid cultural reversion (so in MP, don’t be surprised if your opponents simply burn your cities, rather than risk trying to keep them and failing), and on the other side of that same equation, it means that you can capture enemy cities, and worry relatively less about losing them back to the other guy’s culture.

Also, it allows you to set up fairly linear attack forces when designing a force to capture an enemy city. Odds are good that your borders will be pushing hard against your enemy’s borders, and that one tile all around the city you’ve targeted for capture is all he’ll have available. That being the case, and considering what an extremely good value swordsmen are, you can actually get away with constructing an all swordsmen force. Step over the border, and you’re adjacent to the target city. Doesn’t matter if you’re slow or not! Of course, when facing units in the field from other civs, a balanced approach is still superior (read on to find out more!).


Pure Builder
This is easy. Found a number of cities fast, and if you’re idling, waiting for your population to build up so you can pump out another settler, build a temple. Do that with every city you build that doesn’t have insane food production (wheat on a flood plain), and you’ll pull ahead in the culture game by default. Repeat that, making liberal use of the Despotic Whip to rush in your cheap infrastructure, and the cities of your rivals will soon be flocking to your banner!

Played in this way, you take on the Mantle of the Merchant Prince, plying what luxury and strategic resources you have in abundance, and parlaying those things into an unbeatable tech lead, with your army kept small but serviceable (another good use for your versatile Bowmen!), in case anyone wants to spoil your good time.

If you’re looking for an early Golden Age, use the exceedingly well-balanced Bowmen as Garrisons and drop a trade embargo or two on a near neighbor. Soon enough, he’ll come demanding satisfaction, and the Golden Age you requested is yours! Use it to snag your choice of early Wonders. Of course, there are a few that make a better “fit” than others, and some of those would include: Pyramids (rapid growth = more rushing improvements = more culture), Great Library (free tech is always nice, and you can use your trade goods to bleed your rivals of cash), and the Great Wall (enhanced defense, makes your bowmen/spearmen almost unbeatable in the Ancient Age).

On the other hand, if you’d rather wait, then skip everything in the Ancient Age and snag both Copernicus’s and Newton’s. If one doesn’t get you started the other will, and it will serve to enhance your tech lead in any case (or, if you’re looking for a little bit later, go for Newton’s /Theory of Everything, which should put you in the thick of your Golden Age while you’re building The Hoover Dam….nice!

Tech-wise: Hands down, Banking! You have to be able to pay for all those cheap buildings you rushed in during the ancient age! In fact, that’s the biggest risk you run…not paying enough attention to your finances can get you into trouble very quickly, and with this faction, your ability to produce culture FAR outstrips your ability to pay for it. Banking is your best friend!


Momentum
Think two-front war. Your goal…your objective is to take on two (or more!) opponents at once. Culturally on one front, and militarily on the other. You are the Civ they had in mind when they thought of Culture Bombing. Build a city in the face of your rivals and pop-rush in every (cheap!) culture-producing enhancement you can.

And, where colonization is concerned, you should probably give some serious consideration to simply leaving the territory in and around your capitol completely open and available. Let your rivals build cities for you and leave them space to do it….free cities are always nice. Of course, if you don’t want to go to quite that extreme, colonize normally…you’ll still wind up with quite a take.

Tech-Wise: Iron Working is a much stronger choice for you than Warrior Code, simply because the swordsman tends to be better at taking cities than your special unit, but after that, you too, are going to be almost magnetically drawn toward banking whether you want to or not, and perhaps even more strongly than your Builder cousin….after all, you’re fielding a vast Babylonian army AND paying for all those wonderful culture boosters….that gets expensive very quickly!

Note though, that if you get boxed in, and are denied a source of iron (which shouldn’t happen! You’re a scientific Civ, damnit!), you can still swarm reasonably well with Bowmen. Don’t expect to conquer an Empire, and in fact, don’t even try for a WALLED city, but you should get by well enough to snag a city with iron in its production radius.

Your Nearest Neighbors
Your nearest, most likely neighbors are the Zulu, Egyptians, Persians, and (oddly), the Aztec. Tech Wise, this limits your options, as three of the four share a trait (and a tech) in common with you. You have Two civs with Warrior Code (your special unit pre-requisite), two with Masonry, and one with Pottery.

Zulu: These guys are a pain to fight, but not terribly difficult. Their Impis are annoying but not dangerous to you. Still, they are a 2-move unit, and should be treated with a bit of care. Their 1-attack means that you should let them come to you, break themselves against your ranks of spearmen, and then let your horsemen hunt down the wounded.

Egyptians: Have what amounts to a cheap horseman, who needs roads to get through nasty terrain. Use terrain to your advantage when fighting them, to minimize the advantage of their special unit. You’ll want to make a balanced swordsman/horseman force, and probably make it larger than you think you’ll need (to counter attrition attacks, with horsemen again hunting down the wounded). Still, keeping their captured cities should not be a problem.

Persians: Yes….the Immortals are an awesome unit. No, you don’t have anything that compares, but…the Persian forces are only awesome if they attack! If you attack them, they’re just “regular” swordsmen. You’ll need horses to beat these guys, and you’re just insane if you send an Infantry-based assault team against them and expect favorable results. The AI is smart enough to use terrain to its advantage, and will eat your initial assault, then dismantle your army. Horsemen. It’s the only way to keep those pesky Immortals at bay!

Aztecs: Not really sure why the Babylonians start near these guys with great frequency, but if you are a fan of the Civ, you’ll certainly find yourself with Aztec neighbors more often than no. In any case, they’re certainly a civ to watch out for! Rapid expansion toward them to choke off growth, and acquisition of horses to compete with the Jaguar movement rate. Standard Anti-Aztec tactics apply, with a slight twist. Odds are good that you’ll not actually LOSE any captured cities, so don’t bother to burn them down, simply bring enough troops to fend off the predicted counter assault, and include liberal numbers of horsemen in your attack force to pin those Jags down! (again, try to arrange it so that the Jaguars cannot actually reach your horsemen, and use them to clean up against the wounded).

Drawbacks
Your special unit is a good value for the money, but works somewhat against the natural flow of your faction, requiring a tech to build that is somewhat off the beaten path from techs you’d likely be interested in, and making it somewhat difficult or unnatural to use. This weakness though, pales in comparison to the strengths that show through with this faction. In MP, give this Civ to your best micro-managing Builder and he'll make it shine like few factions can.

-=Vel=-
(back to work on the Chinese, AFTER I take a look at the patch readme!)

[eMarkM]

Firaxis just posted the changes/additions/fixes in the patch

Here are the things I identified as effecting strategy the most (my comments in parens):

* Added "Culturally Linked Starting Locations" (civs are placed on maps in close proximity to other civs of the same culture; please note that not using this pref can lead to sub-optimal arrangements of civ colors) -- (this is nice for some variety)
* The cost of building a Palace is now based on the number of cities in your civilization (what's this designed to prevent?)
* Once the sun displays, the brighter it is, the greater the impact of global warming. (better clean up that pollution, asap)
* It's slightly easier to culturally acquire cities. (what is meant by "slightly easier". Probably means it will be even tougher to hold conquered cities)
* Corruption effects have been reduced (what everyone's been crying about. Personally, I hope they didn't dumb it down too much. We'll have to test this)
* Cultural priority of AI has been reduced (not sure what they mean by this)
* Submarine and Nuclear Submarine now have an offense value of 8 (ok, now subs aren't completely useless)
* Shield bonus from clearing forest can only be received once per game. (say bye-bye to IFE, huh)
* Palaces and spaceship parts can only be built in one city (limiting Palace-to-wonder switchero)
* Improved City Governor Performance (we'll see)
* The maximum number of cities permitted in a game is 512 (was there a limit before. Not like I even approached this or this would limit an ICS strat)
* The maximum number of turns it can take to research an advance has been increased from 32 to 40 (could effect that cash setting in early game)
* Precision Bombing now works as intended (Yeah!)
* Fixed AI exploit with regards to giving cities away in diplomacy (is this the one where you give them an empty city and retake it?)
* Air superiority missions work as intended (Yeah! My biggest gripe, personally. Hate being able to do nothing as bombers scorch my coasts)
* Fixed AI bug allowing the user to infinitely postpone invasions by shuffling units around (a minor exploit fixed)

Any others that effects some of the strategies developed here?

e

[Arrian]

Yeah, there are a number of things in there that will effect game balance, and thus strategy.

The two that worry me are the "easier to take cities via culture" and "culture priority of AI reduced." It already seems that I pay more attention to culture than the AI.

The 40-turn tech cap is definitely gonna effect things, PARTICULARLY on the higher levels. The AI, with its bonuses, will do fine, but you will lag even more.

Corruption - I'm with Mark, here, I hope they didn't do much more than tweak it. The Police Station thing is good.

Privateers *may* be useful now, and maybe the AI will use them against you.

IFE is dead! Good, I think, depending on how corruption works now. Thing is, I did end up using IFE (late in the game, a lot of times for lack of other uses for my slaves) but it got tedious.

Palace/Wonder thingy... if I understand correctly, this could really hurt your ability to snag Wonders from the AI on the higher levels. Of course, it was an exploit...

All in all, seems like good stuff, but I do want to see exactly how the corruption works and how the culture changes work before passing judgement. I really hope the patch isn't HUGE, because I have a terrible (b/c of the phone line) modem connection which maxxes out at 26000.

VEL - Great work on the Babylonian write-up. I would add one negative re: Bowmen - non-upgradeable (edit: ok, Longbowmen, but they suck). I find that I build a couple, but actually build spearmen most of the time so that I can later upgrade to Mech Infs.

-Arrian

[padillah]

Arrian -- I'm with you. I don't see how the UU's can be as useful as normal units wiyth no upgrade path.
I don't see how this would unbalance the game any, you would upgrade your UU Bowmen to normal MusketMen. Now you're the same as everyone else. By the time you want to upgrade the UU is outdated anyway

Also, where did you find the Firaxsis info? I looked on Civ3.com and the Firaxsis Support site and found nothing.

Seriously cheesy tactic folows.
This was something I tried to see if it would work and... sure enough it did.
I'm on a continental shelf that looks like the Americas tiped on their sides (Large mass on two sides of a three block land bridge).

On my side of the bridge are the Iroqois. They have the last two dyes on the continent. I was heading there with a settler when they settled first! They couldn't settle in the optimum spot because my warrior was there guarding the spot for me, but they got the square next to it. So I found my city right next to theirs, just outside their culture (my settler was already there and I didn't want to spend time going somewhere else). I thought about absorbing the Iroq city but then something happened, my borders expanded and I was pusshed right up against the other city. I thought "What if I found a city right next to the other city and rush as much culture as I can to that city?" So I tried it, and it works!
My city was only three or four strong but already had temple, library, uiversity, etc. The rival city fell rather rapidly and then I simply disbanded the rival city and joined the resulting settler to my "temp" city which also helped get rid of the whole "other civ's people in my city" thing.

And I got a city where I wanted it in the first place.

So, is this cheese or not?

[Sauron07]

Did anyone else notice that the patch changes the Great Lighthouse to only allow your galleys to travel in sea squares(not ocean)??

I did not realize this was a bug or that the Lighthouse currently worked other than intended. This change will definately affect gameplay on island and high water% maps. As I understand it, post-patch you will have to research navigation or magnetism before you can cross the ocean safely - this will seriously delay your ability to contact other civs and colonize additional islands/continents as much of the map is settled before the late middle ages.

For example, if you start on an isolated island or small continent, I think that having to research navigation on your own will leave you so far behind in the tech race due to ai trading that you will have a very hard time catching up(they would be well into the modern age before you researched all the way to navigation or magnetism). Maybe the removal of the 4 turn tech limit will help this and maybe I shoud just look forward to more of a challenge from the ai.

[Soren Johnson]

Originally posted by padillah
Arrian -- I'm with you. I don't see how the UU's can be as useful as normal units wiyth no upgrade path.
I don't see how this would unbalance the game any, you would upgrade your UU Bowmen to normal MusketMen. Now you're the same as everyone else. By the time you want to upgrade the UU is outdated anyway

Also, where did you find the Firaxsis info? I looked on Civ3.com and the Firaxsis Support site and found nothing.

Seriously cheesy tactic folows.
This was something I tried to see if it would work and... sure enough it did.
I'm on a continental shelf that looks like the Americas tiped on their sides (Large mass on two sides of a three block land bridge).

On my side of the bridge are the Iroqois. They have the last two dyes on the continent. I was heading there with a settler when they settled first! They couldn't settle in the optimum spot because my warrior was there guarding the spot for me, but they got the square next to it. So I found my city right next to theirs, just outside their culture (my settler was already there and I didn't want to spend time going somewhere else). I thought about absorbing the Iroq city but then something happened, my borders expanded and I was pusshed right up against the other city. I thought "What if I found a city right next to the other city and rush as much culture as I can to that city?" So I tried it, and it works!
My city was only three or four strong but already had temple, library, uiversity, etc. The rival city fell rather rapidly and then I simply disbanded the rival city and joined the resulting settler to my "temp" city which also helped get rid of the whole "other civ's people in my city" thing.

And I got a city where I wanted it in the first place.

So, is this cheese or not?

Officially Not Cheese (TM)

[Arrian]

What Soren said! Yeah, I don't see how that could be considered cheese, especially since you have to go to some serious effort in order to do that. I've done similar things to snag important resources.

FINALLY - Xerxes the Wise (3047) Spaceship victory in 1856. Joan d'Arc never did build any nukes *thanks his lucky stars*

As for the UU thing, it's kinda fitting that the Babs don't have a very good unit, because if they did, they'd be overpowered for sure. I've just learned to build spearmen.

Soren - Having read the patch update, I'm curious about the changes to culture and corruption. Most of the other stuff is either editor related, or actual bugs, such as air superiority. Corruption and Culture, however, are gameplay balance issues.

Culture:

It seems to me that the AI lags in culture as it stands now, so why reduce the emphasis? EDIT: I just saw your explanation in the General Forum thread... so this is to stop the I MUST BUILD ON THE ONE OPEN SQUARE OF LAND EVEN THOUGH THE CITY WILL ONLY GET ASSIMILATED!! syndrome the AI has now.

Second, is making conquest harder the idea behind making city defection easier?

Corruption:

# of Cities or Distance from Cap. or both? Small tweak or major change? The police station bit is great, since you have to wait for that and pay upkeep and all.

Thanks a bunch.

-Arrian

[Velociryx]

And there you have it! Straight from Master Soren!

What you described is what I've taken to calling a "Culture Bomb," and from the sounds of it, you executed it perfectly. Zap! No more problem....very cool!

Sauron: I noticed that as well...eek! Gonna make Archipelago games a lot more intense....LOTS of galley attrition as you desperately seek for a safe passage along the coasts of neighboring islands.

One interesting thing I've been discovering with Swordsmen-based UU's (Immortals, Legionaries), is that you can't upgrade warriors to swordsmen cos you can't build swordsmen! This has radically altered by playstyle and build order with the Persians and Romans so far....

Other stuff:

This is nuts and bolts stuff, intuitive to a good number of players, but it still is worth a mention for brand new players, especially.

If you more or less follow the advice in this thread, then when your "land grab" is all done, you'll have a goodish number of cities established, with roads connecting most, and your workers workin' on connecting the rest.

So....what next?

Well...two things.

First, you're still running Despotism, so irrigating tiles won't net you any immediate benefit (unless it's a bonus tile - floodplain irrigation nets you +1 under despotism...stuff like that). Spiking your shield counts is always a good thing, but in general, you wanna confine that to the cities that you know will be working on wonders or slow growth cities that you've set aside for non-pop-rush troop building.

Okay....so that'll keep a few workers busy, but you've got something more important for the rest of those guys to do.

Namely, constructing a good Military Road Network. That's a very different beast from a road network that simply connects your cities together for luxury purposes.

A Military Road Network is constructed with one goal in mind, and one goal only: Rapidly getting your troops where you want them.

Note too, that in the Ancient Era, this does NOT always mean road-building along the shortest path! Why not?

Rivers.

They stall your movement for the turn when you cross them, in the Ancient Era, and this MUST be taken into account when planning your MRN. It also must be taken into consideration when determining which cities you want to have Barracks (ie - KNOWING the effect of rivers on movement, it's probably not a good idea to build Barracks in cities you have founded along rivers, especially if they'd have to cross said river to get moving toward that rival civ over yonder).

How big a deal is this, in game terms?

Huge. Trust me.

Consider two civs of more or less equal size and productive capacity. One has a willy-nilly road network, and a unit from his Barracks city can reach that city and get to "the front" (wherever that is at present) in about 5 turns.

The other guy has a cunningly constructed road network which shaves three turns off of the travel time (2 turns).

Both of these guys start cranking out swordsmen and massing them.

Thirty turns later, guess who's got more goods? (by a wide enough margin to *really* be telling!)

So...plan the matter carefully! If you have your Swordsmen crossing three rivers as they make their way to the front, it'll take you forever to get organized! A bit of advance planning will eliminate this as a problem and enhance your game.

-=Vel=-

[eMarkM]

Yeah, the culture bomb is a nice "non cheesy" tactic. Me, I would have done it the old fashioned way. Take that warrior you had nearby and just attack them. But a good one if you want to remain non-aggressive.

e

[padillah]

...what about the patch info?

Where'd that come from?


I'm looking everywhere!

Hank P.

[sophist]

The Chinese have quickly become my favorite civ. I view Industrious as a little bit of a benefit of Commercial, Religious, and Scientific, because (when played properly), you can leverage this trait into building everything more cheaply. Random thoughts on the Chinese:

The Rider: too bad it's not 4/4/3 like it's stated on the website. As it is, 4/3/3 is a nice bonus, but nothing great. The major advantage I see is its timing. Usually when my Riders start kicking around, I'm ready for my second war. I'm also probably building the Sistine Chapel at the time. This makes for a well-timed Golden Age (as compared to, say, the Zulus or Aztecs). The first war is the one where I establish that I'm not a whipping boy and catch up a little to the AIs, but the second war is where I try to make some serious conquests to get near the top of the charts. One more thing to bear in mind is that with a well-designed road network (see the Military Road Network post above), the 3 move can be a 9 move. This is especially potent when combined with Industrious (below). The extra point means two things:
1) you need fewer units within your borders because they can a) get where they're going faster b) generally stronger because you're Militaristic
2) you can blitz your enemies. This is handy against a culturally strong civ with deep borders. Generally, at the point in the game where Riders are most useful, enemy civs will not have cities with borders further out than three squares. So you stage in the chopped off corner (if there is one), and can usually attack the city in the next turn. This will almost definitely be the case for the border towns that you will strike first. Finally, the extra speed means you can wreak havoc behind enemy lines by going after key resources that might be deep within the borders.

Unfortunately, you cannot upgrade Horsemen to Riders, but you can upgrade Riders to Cavalry.

Industrious: This is key for my style of play. It allows your single worker early on to develop around your capital resulting in increased production and food, and therefore a city that can pump out more sooner. Admittedly, you cannot leverage these improved squares much as a despotism, but it does help. I generally head for Republic after getting Literature, Iron Working, and the Wheel. The opportunity cost of building workers ("lost" production, one less population point) is an issue into the medieval period, while you can switch to a republic while still in the ancient period. You can also get a serious road network going earlier, which will help with your early wars. It's been previously stated that Industrious workers are like twice the worker. You have one worker doing the same work as two workers that 1) cost twice as much 2) take twice as long to build 3) take twice as much population.

Militaristic: the advantages of this trait are clear; easier leaders and more experienced units. This is especially handy since the Riders are a mobile unit and can retreat, so when using the UU you have a better chance of scoring a leader. Cheaper barracks mean it's easier to place them in distant cities with high corruption, which is probably where they'd be most useful for healing.

Starting techs: Warrior Code and Masonry. There's not so much to work with here. Masonry means you can get a jump on the Pyramids, but by the time you're ready to start those (either for themselves or as a placeholder till you get Literature), you could have easily traded for them anyway. It puts you closer to Mathematics, in case you believe catapults are useful (slightly). Warrior Code in and of itself isn't great, but it puts you a step closer to both Horseback Writing and Monarchy. Plus exploring with Archers in the early game is clearly better than exploring with Warriors (assuming you're willing to wait a couple more turns) because you can generally overpower escorted settlers and will just about always win when attacking barbarians as opposed to just most of the time.

Other stuff: Since you don't have the ability to create happiness wonders as easily, despot pop-rushing seems a less viable strategy in your primary cities. However, the training camp idea is gold. And your Industrious workers mean better production earlier (to hammer that point again).

It seems you'll always start near the Japanese. The other civs in the game tend to be a bit more random, from what I've seen, though the Indians and the French also seem to appear frequently.

[Arrian]

Timing one's golden age is not always an option. Sometimes, you trigger one by building a wonder you really want. Sometimes, you get attacked and you need to use your UU to win. But to the extent that it's possible, I personally think that the best time to have a golden age is the Middle Ages. Why? Wonders:

Sistine Chapel - To me, the most important wonder in the game.
Copernicus - Helps boost your science output, so that you can maybe lower the science rate to pay for all those cathedrals you're building.
Newton - See above
Sun Tzu - For some, this is a critical wonder. For me, it's a really, really nice wonder. Any way you cut it, whether you're a largely peaceful builder or warmonger, having a barracks in every city is a beautiful thing.
Leo's - Cheaper upgrades probably aren't gonna make the difference between victory and defeat, but they help.
Adam Smith's - Mo money, mo money. Allows you to max out that science rate, or support a larger army.
Bach - Happiness is soooo important (which is why the Sistine is #1 in my book), especially on higher levels. If you're a democracy (if you're not... I'm not the guy to talk with about strategy as I can't even imagine running in a different form of gov't) and you have to fight, this will help out with that brutal war weariness.

What's my point? The middle ages have a TON of really nice wonders, most (all?) of which do not expire. A golden age will allow you to get the jump on building them.

Example: Last night (and a goodly portion of this morning *yawn*) I finally got a really good start as the Babs on Monarch. Babylon had a river, 2 cows and a game, and I was able to secure 4 lux. resources during the land grab. I built the Great Library! I couldn't believe it. I have a theory on why that happened, but I'll come back to that. I also built the Colossus, which triggered a golden age right at the beginning of the middle ages. My "free" tech was monotheism, so the first one I researched was theology. I started the Sistine.

At this point, I had jumped ahead of the opposition, so I did something I normally don't do, which was research feudalism. I started Sun Tzu. I also began my forbidden palace. I then made a beeline for Astronomy, and started Cop's (in the Colossus city).

I nailed them all. Sistine, Cop's, Sun Tzu (not to mention Bach, Leo's and Newton too). Now THAT was a golden age. The Sun Tzu/Leo's combo really, really helped me when Tokagawa decided to throw WAVES of Samurai at me. Ouch, that hurt. But when I counterattacked, with WAVES of Cavalry, the Empire of the Rising Sun ceased to be.

Anyway, I think ancient golden ages, though they can set you up for a great game if they happen just right, are largely wasted b/c of despotism, or the lack of infrastructure in a young republic. An industrial age or modern age GA could be immensely powerful (I seem to recall Vel discussing that a while back), but if you've missed some of the key Middle Age wonders... I dunno, I'm going with the Middle Ages. That's my story and I'm stickin' to it.

Ok, my theory on why I was able to actually build the GL: I started next to: Japanese, Chinese, Zulu, Persians. Only the Persians are scientific. The others are militarists who are less likely to research the proper techs for the GL.

-Arrian