Civ3 for the Civ2 Apolyton vet

Rufus T. Firefly · October 22, 2002, 06:32

Hi all.

I've been hanging around Apolyton for a couple of years now, ever since I bought Civ2. On the Civ2 forums, one not only found winning strategies but also certain logics on how to play the game; those added to my enjoyment immensely.

Now I've picked up Civ3 -- and I don't hate it.

Though different from Civ2, it seems pretty cool. I'm reading the manual as I go, and I'm aware of the basic differences between the 2 games (I miss the camel; I don't miss the Senate one bit). But I do have a question. It's not, "how is Civ3 different from Civ2"; I can get that from the manual. My question is:

How does an Apolyton Civ2'er have to change his thinking in Civ3?

Take these two articles of faith from the Civ2 forums, ideas to which almost every poster (myself included) subscribed:

1) Priority 1 in every game is to get out of Despotism asap
2) The Great Library is not only a waste of shields, it's actually counter-productive

Are these still true, for example? Is there any common Civ2 wisdom that no longer holds? There seem to be other vets of the Civ2 boards here. Tell me: what do I have to relearn?

FrustratedPoet · October 22, 2002, 06:43

2) The Great Library is one of the best Great Wonders in Civ3.
On difficulty levels of Monarch or higher it is very hard (or impossible) to keep up with the AI in techs because of their advantages. It is possible to extort techs from them by quickly razing a couple of their cities and demanding peace, but it is almost always worth going for the Great Library. It is doubly useful if you intend to play the game as a Builder, as opposed to a Warmonger.
Get It!

alva · October 22, 2002, 06:49

start off in deity and get your b*t kicked a few times

. this will make you feel somewhat more humble

.

After that, start on chieftain to learn about the game mechanics and work your back up again.

Read the strategy board

alva · October 22, 2002, 06:50

start off here! to learn civ3

Rufus T. Firefly · October 22, 2002, 06:52

See, that's what most people would say about the GL in Civ2, too. But here on the boards, we all knew that in Civ2 every tech you acquired actually slowed down your research. Thus, if you needed, say, 100 beakers to get democracy, and then the GL gave you 6 new techs, you might now need 200 beakers to get democracy. If you didn't care when you got what tech, then that didn't matter, but I'm convinced that in Civ2 one of the keys to winning is being in total control of your movement through the tech tree. The GL takes that away. But Civ3 is a different game, so I don't know if my old assumptions hold.

FrustratedPoet · October 22, 2002, 06:53

About getting out of Despotism .... I don't think it is quite as important as it was in Civ2. You still don't want to be hanging around as a Despot for too long, but you shouldn't compromise other aspects of your Empire to change. I wouldn't research Republic or Monarchy yourself, if I were you, you can get them easily enough in peaceful trade, the Great Library or through war.
Change early, but don't rush to get there.

Other things to consider when changing from Civ2.
1) Civ traits
2) Unique Units

Both of these play a huge part in how you should develop your tactics. For example, if you play as an Industrious Civ you shouldn't waste time building any more Workers than strictly necessary, if you are Religious then you should take advantage of your cheap Temples by building them early (buildings generate more culture the older they are) and you can change governments as often as you like (Religious Civs only have 1 turn of Anarchy, non-Rel Civs have 3+).
I'm sure you'll develop your own ideas about what traits you like (most people here consider Industrious, Religious and Militaristic to be the best, depending on your style), but make sure you play to your strengths.

The same kind of thing applies to the Unique Unit. If you are playing as Rome or Persia, for example, it would often in your best interest to research up to Iron Working first, make sure you connect up the Iron deposit (assuming there is one in/near your territory), build some barracks and start pumping out your super-powerful Legions/Immortals. Again, play to your strengths.

Let's see ... what else?

Luxuries! If you are playing on Regent or above it is important that you have a couple of luxuries (at least, the more the better) connected up. Don't underestimate their power, even if your population is already happy you can sometime get an absolute fortune in trade for your spare luxuries.

Rufus T. Firefly · October 22, 2002, 06:56

Quote:

Originally posted by alva848
start off here! to learn civ3

Been there. It's great! But my questions about "Apolyton thinking" remain.

Alex · October 22, 2002, 07:59

Firaxis tried to counter the Civ2 ICS tactic making the settler cost 2 pop points instead of 1, as it is in Civ2. Apparently, this only works for the player, because the AI in Civ3 suffers from a "settler diarrhea" that can produce very large empires in the first stages of the game.

So the human player had to develop REX (some say it stands for "Rapid Early Expansion"), which consists in produce a great number of settlers in the shortest time possible. ICS, by any means. The difference is that now you need a "settler farm", a city which can grow very very fast in order to get your pop levels back as soon as you can after you build a settler.

In short: as usual, build a lot of settlers (and, thus, a lot of cities) but get yourself a good city site, with plenty of food available (cattle and/or wheat are invaluable). This is why a lot of players restart if they don't get a good starting location.

Another consideration is related to culture. It is an important strategic element now, considering that a good city placement can give you some advantage over your opponent, especially considering how important strategic resources (iron, horses etc.) are -- and how colonies are useless.

SanPellegrino · October 22, 2002, 11:48

As a long-time civ2 player, I had one thing to learn the hard way: Take the AI seriously!

In Civ 2 I didn't even communicated with them anymore, just killed them. They always ganged up on the player anyway (you know) and had tiny weak empires, even on Deity.

Now they are MUCH stronger. In Civ 3 you must carefully pick your fight, trade for techs, make alliances. I like it really much, and it increases the replayability a lot.

lockstep · October 22, 2002, 12:36

Quote:

Originally posted by Rufus T.
in Civ2 every tech you acquired actually slowed down your research. Thus, if you needed, say, 100 beakers to get democracy, and then the GL gave you 6 new techs, you might now need 200 beakers to get democracy.

In Civ3, every tech has its individual 'base' cost of beakers, which is modified by map size and difficulty level, but independend of the no. of techs you already own. IMO, this is clearly superior to Civ2's system.

SpencerH · October 22, 2002, 12:47

1) The AI is much better at everything: fighting, trading, alliances etc
2) The use and abuse of culture is the biggest change in terms of concepts and gameplay.
3) Its much harder to get the wonders than in civ2.
4) Resources can mean the difference between winning and losing and in how you play.
5) Combat sucks
6) Leaders-a good but an unfinished idea-tilt the game strongly for the warmongers and trigger wars in a game where warfare is "frowned upon" by other rules

vmxa1 · October 22, 2002, 13:18

The biggest change to me is the growth. In civ3 it is emphazied. The GL is dependant on the level. As you move up it becomes more useful. On the lowest levels, it really does not matter much, you will soon be ahead in tech anyway. Cities defense is a different ball game, no more park one good unit behind walls and relax. Small aspect, but spying is much less of a factor in III, not so easy to bribe cities to revolt. In short, forget how you played CivII, it will not help.

Arrian · October 22, 2002, 14:01

To go back to the relative usefulness of the GL, Firefly, I understand what you're saying about tech cost in CivII, but CivIII does not work that way. Each tech has its set cost, and the only variables are how may civs you have contact with have the tech already (for instance, if all of the civs you know have a tech you don't, you will get a serious discount when going to research or buy that tech).

The GL is, as Frustrated Poet said, really good to have on the upper levels. It can catch you up, or, if you're already solid in tech, it can be an absolute monster money making machine. Set research to 0%, and ride the GL to education while rushbuying all sorts of goodies and/or upgrading a powerful military. It isn't as crucial for the warmonger as it is for the builder, and below Regent, due to the crippling penalties imposed on the AI, it isn't really worthwhile.

Ok, to the main question: a veteran CivII player really has to unlearn some key aspects of gameplay. If memory serves, for me, this meant:

1) Take the AI seriously (at least once the shackles come off - Regent and up). You can no longer hold them off for thousands of years with a single phalanx on a mountain fort.
2) Rapid Early Expansion (REX) is important, because if you don't gobble up the land, the AI will.
3) Early war pays. In CivII, one could out-expand and out-research the AI on Deity. In CivIII, most would be hard-pressed to do that on Monarch.
4) Corruption is an issue to be understood and managed - this includes understanding the optimal Palace/FP placement and how best to get it.
5) UU's, civ traits and golden ages are not just window dressing. Deciding which civ to play is actually more than "which color do I want to be?"
6) Strategic and Luxury resources are extremely important.

I started on chieftain and worked my way up. CivII-esq. strategy worked until I hit Regent. Regent forced a change, and then Monarch forced another. Emperor isn't so much a change as it is a more extreme version of what I learned on Monarch.

-Arrian

Jon Shafer · October 22, 2002, 14:28

You don't 'play' Civ 3 after you get to Emperor and beyond. Once you get there, then you can't play the game like you would regularly, you have to use every exploit you can to pound the AI incessantly with war, from start to finish. It's possible to beat the AI on diety, but it's not as much fun as a game on monarch or regent, IMO.

metalhead · October 22, 2002, 16:52

As far as your original 2 axioms, here is a response:

1) Do NOT attempt to switch to Monarchy ASAP! You may beeline for it on the tech tree for other reasons, but do NOT switch as soon as you get it! Because of the different way that Civ3 handles unit support as compared to Civ2, switching out of Despotism too soon will cause MAJOR problems. I cannot really give a hard and fast rule as to when switching is advantageous, but I do know that this is a major change over Civ2.

2) The Great Library is useful, but not overly so. It is NOT required to keep up in techs on higher levels, as many claim, so if you work up to higher levels, don't look at it as a game-breaker - a skillful player can dominate Emperor and Deity without it. It won't hurt your research a la Civ2, but on a higher level, your shields are probably better spent elsewhere.

A couple things to know:

1) Research does NOT carry over - you can switch research mid-swing, but your beakers do not carry over. Same happens when you get techs from Theory of Evolution (new name for Darwin's Voyage - same effect.)

2) If you build the Theory of Evolution, ALWAYS select Atomic Theory and Electronics as your free techs. n.b. you will have to set your research to Atomic Theory the turn before you finish ToE. Time it so you finish whatever research you are working on 1 turn before completing ToE to save yourself max. research time.

3) Walls are practically useless.

Arrian · October 22, 2002, 17:03

metalhead,

Actually, since human research completes just before human production, you can time your tech discover for the SAME TURN that ToE completes. Example: time the discovery of replaceable parts for the same turn as ToE, you will discover RP, select AT, and THEN ToE will complete, granting you AT and asking for #2, which is clearly going to be Electronics.

Good point about switching out of despotism. If playing a religious civ, I will switch to Monarchy ASAP, and later to Republic. If playing non-religious, I will only switch to Republic unless I envision a long period of warfare. I did once play an entire game as a Monarchy (China, Monarch level, and WOW did things go well). It's a question of balancing the benifits of: 1) military police happiness bonus, 2) unit upkeep, 3) corruption level (negligable between Mon & Rep), 4) trade bonus (huge, but does it make up for the loss of 1 & 2), 5) war weariness or lack thereof.

The Great Library certainly isn't crucial, especially if you are beating tech out of the AI. But it is nice to have/deny to the AI.

-Arrian

vmxa1 · October 22, 2002, 17:21

Staying Despot is less useful if you are not a warmonger as you will have fewer unit to pay upkeep on. If you are not going to pop rush or war it is a painful form of government.

Rufus T. Firefly · October 23, 2002, 01:25

Wow! Thanks for the input (and please, keep it coming if you like). It's all very helpful (especially the 6-point list for the Civ2 vet -- thanks Arrian). I look forward to gleaning more wisdom from these fora -- though not as much as I look forward to my next game.

Rufus T. Firefly · October 23, 2002, 06:04

After posting those last thoughts, I played the start of a game, and have a follow-up question about despotism. Given the need to have a REX, and given the inability to extract more than 2 food from a normal square (even if irrigated) under despotism, doesn't despotism actually work against having a REX? If not, why not?

vondrack · October 23, 2002, 06:58

Quote:

Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly
After posting those last thoughts, I played the start of a game, and have a follow-up question about despotism. Given the need to have a REX, and given the inability to extract more than 2 food from a normal square (even if irrigated) under despotism, doesn't despotism actually work against having a REX? If not, why not?

Yes, it somewhat helps to slow the REX down... but not very much (read: not enough)... Look for cattle and wheat tiles, they will give you more than two food even under despotism. By the time Monarchy is available, this (lack of food productivity) is not your biggest problem. Balancing the happiness, early rushes, and choosing the proper time for anarchy is much more important.

SpencerH · October 23, 2002, 08:44

Quote:

Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly
After posting those last thoughts, I played the start of a game, and have a follow-up question about despotism. Given the need to have a REX, and given the inability to extract more than 2 food from a normal square (even if irrigated) under despotism, doesn't despotism actually work against having a REX? If not, why not?

In a way you're missing the point, by the time you get to monarchy, even if you made a beeline for it, you should already be fairly well REXed anyway (on a regular map regent/monarch and up).

FrustratedPoet · October 23, 2002, 08:49

Exactly, almost by definition REX has to be carried out in Despotism.
If you wait until Monarchy then your Rapid eXpansion is no longer Early.

Rufus T. Firefly · October 23, 2002, 12:14

Okay, that makes sense; I forgot that it takes so long to get into monarchy in this game (another big difference from Civ2). Many thanks again.

Inverse Icarus · October 23, 2002, 12:20

the GL is ESSENTIAL on the higher levels... the AI just whores it's tech so fast you'll get left behind easily.

in multiplayer, it might be a waste of shields... but we'll see.