Bad Habits

[Marid Audran]

What are yours in a Civilization II game?

Probably most of mine come from approaching CivII from an "intuitive," gestalt perspective more than a "sensory," detail-orientated one, checking your cities every turn with F4 and being zealous about caravan production and accruing beaker rates, and so forth. I play a common-sense game and follow general guidelines about what to build and when, probably akin to the average strong player (I play on Emperor level). This amounts to steady, piecemeal development, though I imagine not without inefficiency; examples such as hanging out in Monarchy a few decades longer than you should because I like supporting three units per city, ditto with Republic because dealing with a stagnant civ before the transition into Democracy several turns in late-game is a hassle, and building city improvements I probably don't need. I also can't help being egalitarian about my cities; they ALL need marketplaces/libraries/banks/universities/stock exchanges/research labs/superhighways! And building things like mass transits and recycling centers because I don't like the idea of promoting ultra-polluting city-scapes, even with scores of engineers sauntering around to clean up waste. My early game probably isn't all it should be, since there seems to be a billion things to do and not enough shields in the world to do it in. It's not uncommon in the 1600s for me to have nothing but barracks/granaries/temples/cathedrals in my cities because I've been too busy expanding into permanent nation boundries and building caravans to do much else (though usually the game really picks up by the time Industrialization is discovered). Usually my spaceship lands on AC in the late 20th or early 21th century.

Bad habits I no longer do:

Neglecting home defences: Just because one staves off war with the AI with the Great War/UN/bribes doesn't mean it's full-proof. Bad experiences of dealing with bellicose mid-game AI landing their cavalry/cannons/armor on my shores against cities defended by antiquated phalanxes/pikemen scared me straight. Now I update all my defenders when appropriate tech becomes available, I include "countertrike" fast units in critical cities (including fighters in the modern era), and city walls in border territories.

Neglecting counter-espionage forces in cities: Less crucial than standard defences but important nonetheless. Ultimately by late-game the point is moot however, as AI will steal any space-race tech they please with diplomats entering cities guarded by veteran spies.

Building the Manhattan Project: Another bad habit I conquered.

Not bringing down enemy city walls before sending in the troops: Speaks for itself. Middle Age/Rennisance wars are the worst, since I usually have to send 5-6 diplomats into a city I want to sack in order for the buggers to [/i]finally[i] target the city walls.

Neglecting creating trade routes: I no longer do this, despite the great nuisance in building three caravans a-piece in your major cities, loading them onto caravels/galleons, and then starting the often prolix journey overseas to a neighboring civ to dump them off. The long-term effects of trade are simply too much of a boon to write caravans off due to laziness.

So those are some of my current and past bad habits in a Civ game. What are yours?

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

A lot of the things you mention aren't bad habits.

Originally posted by Marid Audran

Probably most of mine come from approaching CivII from an "intuitive," gestalt perspective more than a "sensory," detail-orientated one, checking your cities every turn with F4 and being zealous about caravan production and accruing beaker rates, and so forth.

I do that too, but not out of a gestalt perspective, I'm impatient, and lazy. Micromanaging for 300 turns makes the game go very slowly.

I play a common-sense game and follow general guidelines about what to build and when, probably akin to the average strong player (I play on Emperor level).

Why not Deity? That'll cure some bad habits... it did for me.

This amounts to steady, piecemeal development, though I imagine not without inefficiency; examples such as hanging out in Monarchy a few decades longer than you should because I like supporting three units per city,

Not necessarily a bad thing. Celebrating Monarchy is a good thing - trade bonuses are as Republic and you have martial law to quell unrest. In very early Republic, I find my production is stunted, and maintaining Triremes/Caravels at sea is hard. Anyway, a lot of the warlike types go straight from Monarchy to Democracy... what I mean is they learn Democracy, build the Statue, and go Fundy

ditto with Republic because dealing with a stagnant civ before the transition into Democracy several turns in late-game is a hassle, and building city improvements I probably don't need.

My rule of thumb is that I won't go from Monarchy to Republic before getting Michelangelo. And hopefully, I have HG as well. I often wait for Bach or Suffrage to go to Democracy - unless I'm being very peaceful and my best ships are Galleons/Transports. If I don't have many of Mike's/HG/Bach/Suff, I often will just stay in Monarchy until Fundy.

I also can't help being egalitarian about my cities; they ALL need marketplaces/libraries/banks/universities/stock exchanges/research labs/superhighways! And building things like mass transits and recycling centers because I don't like the idea of promoting ultra-polluting city-scapes, even with scores of engineers sauntering around to clean up waste.

Definitely bad habits, all of the above. I used to be that way, but now I try to not build improvements unless the situation completely cries out for them. The default is always Settlers/Caravans/attack units. For example, my SSC gets a library, but most of the others don't until they're, oh, about size 12 and have 30+ arrows.

My early game probably isn't all it should be, since there seems to be a billion things to do and not enough shields in the world to do it in.

Looks up DaveV's resource square usage article in the GL. It changed my life

Bad habits I no longer do:

Neglecting home defences: Just because one staves off war with the AI with the Great War/UN/bribes doesn't mean it's full-proof.

Lots of defenders IS a bad habit in the late game IMO. You should be able to defend yourself with diplomacy, a good reputation, and the odd gift. Failing that, it's cheaper generally to mount an offense and take out the AI that's bothering you, than to defend your myriad cities.

Building the Manhattan Project: Another bad habit I conquered.

Neglecting creating trade routes: I no longer do this, despite the great nuisance in building three caravans a-piece in your major cities, loading them onto caravels/galleons, and then starting the often prolix journey overseas to a neighboring civ to dump them off. The long-term effects of trade are simply too much of a boon to write caravans off due to laziness.

Yes, even I'm not so lazy as to neglect trade. Easiest way to win.

So those are some of my current and past bad habits in a Civ game. What are yours?

1. Sheer impatience/laziness. Example: I learn Monarchy in 2800BC. Just missed the oedo year. I regularly forget to revolt in 2700 and before I know it, it's 2600... and, repeat...

I often hit end of turn before checking things, because the interesting part of the game for me is what happens next turn, not what I should be doing this turn.

2. All others pale next to bad habit #1. I suppose my other major bad habit is not focusing on one of conquest or AC... I find myself expanding and attacking AIs while trying at the same time to get 1 turn/tech so as to land on AC. If I focused on one or the other, I'd win faster.

[Ben Kenobi]

My bad habits?

1.
I ignore the advice of the sage Oedo.

2.
Not big enough on trade. I usually try tactics to beat my enemies with very few units.

3.
I don't prework settlers and I sometimes allow cities to continue building what they have already built.

[rjmatsleepers]

I share with every one else the bad habit of missing several oedo years by forgetting to revolt. I like a celebrating monarchy and don't switch to republic until I have built Shakespear's Theatre and an aqueduct in my SC. I switch to democracy as soon as I have replaced my triremes and caravels with galleons.

The big fault I'm trying to cure at the moment is not setting up my ship chains properly. One ship gets out of position; I try to correct it and suddenly it's taking three turns to deliver a caravan that should have got there in a single turn. And I haven't got the hang of the wonder bread trick to open commodities in my SC.

Also I'm not very efficient at building spaceship parts. I probably need to put more effort in to building production in time for the end game. (I usually go for landing rather than conquest.)

I'd better stop there - if I listed all my faults we'd be here all night. Anyone who wants the full details is invited to look at the save after my next turn in the silly rules game.

RJM at Sleepers

[Marid Audran]

Originally posted by Six Thousand Year Old Man

Why not Deity? That'll cure some bad habits... it did for me.

I was a habitual King-level player years ago before SMAC was released. When SMAC hit the shelves I made the transition to Brian R's sci-fi epic and more or less permanently made my home on the SMAC boards. I occassionally return to CivII and this is one of these times. I've just become comfortable enough at Emperor level to consistently win, and have recently started my first Diety level game. Civil unrest in your cities (in SMAC we'd call this "extra drones" due to inefficiency with #of bases) and the slow accumulation of science is much more evident; beelining for Monarchy is much more important than it was at Emperor level it seems.

My rule of thumb is that I won't go from Monarchy to Republic before getting Michelangelo. And hopefully, I have HG as well. I often wait for Bach or Suffrage to go to Democracy - unless I'm being very peaceful and my best ships are Galleons/Transports. If I don't have many of Mike's/HG/Bach/Suff, I often will just stay in Monarchy until Fundy.

I agree with this strategy. Happiness wonders are of supreme importance with transitions into Republic/Democracy, otherwise the resource strain and the revenues needed for luxuries just aren't worth it. I can't even remember the last time I built a regular cathedral actually...

Definitely bad habits, all of the above. I used to be that way, but now I try to not build improvements unless the situation completely cries out for them. The default is always Settlers/Caravans/attack units. For example, my SSC gets a library, but most of the others don't until they're, oh, about size 12 and have 30+ arrows.

I typically don't start building trade multipliers until I establish trade routes in that particular city. I have a hard time justifying building a marketplace in a city producing four coins. I agree with what you say however; I suppose the sentimental part of me that indulges in excess improvement construction likes to believe I'm building a "civilized" empire for my citizenry to live in.

[q]Bad habits I no longer do:

Lots of defenders IS a bad habit in the late game IMO. You should be able to defend yourself with diplomacy, a good reputation, and the odd gift. Failing that, it's cheaper generally to mount an offense and take out the AI that's bothering you, than to defend your myriad cities.

I have a hard time abiding by this; the animosity I encounter from the AI from year 1850 AD or so onwards is overwhelming, spotless rep or not, bribery with tech or tithes or not! They regularly break treaties/cease-fires both in and out of counsel and I just find it's too much risk. From the indulstrial era onwards none of the AI seem districtive to me any longer, the difference betwixt the Babylonians and the Mongols is moot as all the AI civs turn into one big jealous seething mob of perfidy.

1. Sheer impatience/laziness. Example: I learn Monarchy in 2800BC. Just missed the oedo year. I regularly forget to revolt in 2700 and before I know it, it's 2600... and, repeat...

All others pale next to bad habit #1. I suppose my other major bad habit is not focusing on one of conquest or AC... I find myself expanding and attacking AIs while trying at the same time to get 1 turn/tech so as to land on AC. If I focused on one or the other, I'd win faster.

I'm typically only aggressive early in game whilst carving out my boundries as a nation. Sharing islands is always a nuisance.

Thanks for your input 6000 YO Man.

[duke o' york]

I never go to Republic if I think that I'm close to discovering Democracy and so will often mess about in Monarchy for far too long. I prefer to have the happy wonders to be able to support a luxury-free democracy before changing and won't take risks so I often miss out on those lovely double trade arrows and can fall behind (well, slightly less ahead) in science.
I haven't lost to conquest (well, apart from OCC) for years so I often underestimate the strength of AI civs when I'm trying to conquer them. I aim for overwhelming force and far more troops then necessary, but occasionally will do something daft like not check the number of cities they have and end up with some howitzers in the open and not enough left to take the remaining few cities. This only tends to cost a few units and very seldom cities, but it is annoying. Oh, and I also have offensive troops defending captured cities, which is a complete waste, but I feel that if I'm going to send another transport across then I want it full to the brim with howies, and not with defenders!
I have never made a note of Oedo years either, so will often get lucky by having a general idea of when the next will be, but also sometimes **** up and spend 4 turns in anarchy.

[rah]

I sometimes overdo the defensive side instead of kicking out the extra settler early. It may save a city from barbs but the frequency of that occuring is not worth the minor stunting of expansion.

It seems a lot of people need to learn how to celebrate in Deity without happy wonders. Playing a few MP games will teach you quickly.

[-Jrabbit]

I agree that playing Deity is a must. Bad habits? I've got plenty. Off the top of my head...

1. Going for early Republic without enough trading power to make it worth the production sacrifice.

2. I suspect I'd be winning earlier if I would be more aggressive about building armies of Settlers/Engineers during WLTx growth in Dem/Rep.

3. Not enough early exploration. Once I get two cities down, I tend to stop aggressively exploring. (I keep hearing about these "armies of NONE units" that some seem to be able to generate. I'm hard-pressed to remember ever getting more than a couple early units...)

4. Beaker management. Just too many times when I "just miss" the advance and have to wait the extra turn.

Conquest or AC, I usually win somewhere in the 1800s. Frankly, I don't know if I'm willing to micromanage more than I already do (which, to me, seems like a lot). Sucks some of the fun out...

[Old n Slow]

Bless me Father for I have sinned…

I road my way to new cities (penny -wise perfection);

Too few settlers; too few cities; slow expansion outward;

Too much concern about building Wonders;

Plus many instances of similar infractions of the above folks.

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

Originally posted by rah

It seems a lot of people need to learn how to celebrate in Deity without happy wonders. Playing a few MP games will teach you quickly.

Tease.




C'mon, tell us the secret. Lots of trade is involved, I'm sure.

[atawa]

Originally posted by Six Thousand Year Old Man


Tease.




C'mon, tell us the secret. Lots of trade is involved, I'm sure.

Just change to 2x production

[rah]

Yeah, 2x helps a bit
But trade routes, markets and harbors can help immensely even in 1x.
Building on trade specials can work wonders also.
and sending settlers from your finished celebrating cities to your smaller cities to get them above three. and jumping the even/odd trick, is real useful.

[Mercator]

My bad habits?

I just can't get around to actually implementing any of the strategies, tips, tricks or formulas I've read here.

I pretty much run a perfectionist empire. I expand slowly, try to avoid all enemy contact until I've grown to full power and got everything the way I want (as far as my own empire is concerned). Which means I play defensive, until about the 20th century when I start taking over the enemy with hordes of spies, or simply by building a spaceship.

I rarely trade.

And somehow, I thoroughly enjoy the end-game micromanagement. I've been known to continue playing games until well after I've conquered everybody or launched my spaceship, just to get the entire continent covered with a farmlanded and railroaded swath of fully developed cities with stable populations of over 40...

Not to mention my OCC-gone-wrong. The Greeks have conquered (almost) all of the (swamp-covered, due to excessive use of nukes) world. It's now almost 3000AD and I have 4 cities (still doing OCC, but I find capturing and starving cities acceptible), the Greeks still have 60+.

And I can't seem to be able to properly plan a war either. I usually end up sending an invasion force that's only half sufficient and then wasting production on driveling in backup until I realise that isn't gonna cut it. I then abandon the war until I can send in my spies centuries later.

Maybe that's why I've kind of lost interest in playing civ2 (even though I'm as active as ever in just about every other imaginable aspect of civ2).

[rah]

Originally posted by Mercator
I rarely trade.

That's the Cardinal Sin.

[-Jrabbit]

Agreed. In SP deity, Trade is the difference between "I can win" and "I can win early and easily."

[rah]

When I first started playing, I didn't understand just how helpful it was. I could still win, but it took a heck of a lot longer. Now I know better.

[My Wife Hates CIV]

bad habits??

being the best player here should pretty much tell you I dont have any. Savage has a few... but that makes it fun!

[Mercator]

Originally posted by rah
That's the Cardinal Sin.

I know!

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

Originally posted by My Wife Hates CIV
bad habits??

being the best player here should pretty much tell you I dont have any. Savage has a few... but that makes it fun!

Please, someone tell me that EyesOfSunshine isn't going to respond to this one.

[Specialist290]

My principal errors:

1. No trading (or only minimal, at least).

2. I try to build every improvement in every city with no real thought to the pros or cons.

3. I just build new cities in any location I think is good, not giving a thought about 4-special locations, building cities on isthmuses, etc.

This might explain why any game above Warlord is too tough for me (Right now I'm playing a Prince-level game to see if my desire to win can overcome my desire to do these dumb things.)

Habits that I no longer have:

1. Irrigating every Plains and Forest tile around every future city site before actually founding the city (including my first one).

2. Roading to every new city site (again, before I found the city).

3. Railroading every square because I had nothing left to do (though in the only game I got high enough to actually get Railroad, I had conquered most of the world and reduced all of my enemies to 2-3 cities).

4. Not having a coherent war strategy i.e. waging war like the AI.

5. Not building artillery units of any form (Catapult, Cannon, etc.; in fact, I usually built exclusively mounted units).

6. Always signing a peace treaty with AI civs and sticking to it through the rest of the game out of a sense of "honor" even though it makes me miserable.

[rah]

Originally posted by My Wife Hates CIV
bad habits??

being the best player here should pretty much tell you I dont have any. Savage has a few... but that makes it fun!

Who have you been practicing with.

[Elephant]

1. JOMT (Just One More Turn)...

2. Playing past 1am...

3. Neglecting family...

4. Thinking about Civ games during boring meetings...

5. Sucking fun out of Civ with late-game perfectionist micro-management...

That the kind of thing you were thinking about?

[-Jrabbit]

We all do those things...

[Elephant]

...doesn't make them GOOD habits...

[-Jrabbit]

I think the thread is meant to address matters of lazy or thoughtless playing style despite knowing better.

But your self-flagellation over game obsession and ignoring job and family for Civ is duly noted.

[Specialist290]

Another error I managed to come up with about my play style...

I often sadly neglect micromanaging my empire when I get to more than 20 cities. Sometimes in a game where I have around 60 cities (which has only actually happened once, mind you), I often will begin to WLTPD, then a few turns later wonder why my biggest city is on the brink of starvation when 6-7 turns ago it had a surplus of 11 food.

OOC: I think JOMT is common in all of us here (even the guy who's too young to drive, who happens to be posting this).

[rah]

Originally posted by Elephant
5. Sucking fun out of Civ with late-game perfectionist micro-management...

Try for a record points game and truely learn how to suck the fun out of the late game.

[Zedd]

1. I don't create three trade routes per city, i generally will not have much luck with trade, the largest bonus i have gotten is 300G and 5 beakers /turn. So I just stick to checking whats demanded and finding the largest city that will produce it.

2. I allways mess up ship chains.
3. I will loose intrest in the game about 1700-1800 just before My AC landing or military conquest, Iknow i am going to win so I stop playing for a while and next thing you know I have forgotten what I was dong in the game. I suppose i prefer the first 1500 years.
4. I don't make enough caravans to finish a wonder, I just use them to speed up the process.
5. I usually limit diplomacy to signing peace agreements, no tech trading, unless I want something

[Marid Audran]

Just finished my first Diety level game. Early game was the most difficult stage before it stream-lined into more familiar terrain during mid-game, and ipso facto felt more like an average Emperor game. I've actually had some Emperor games give me more trouble than this one.

I played the Japanese and was bequethed no special favors; started with NO technology. I was located on a medium-sized island with two neighbors, the Spanish and Sioux. Space tended to be at a premium and everyone wanted to infringe on everyone else's borders. Luckily I constricted my rivals and forged a larger bronze-age empire. War soon followed in the iron age though my rivals lacked weapons and numbers so they were muscled into the history books.

Taming unhappy citizens was a signifigant challenge in this game, even with the assistance of the wonders I had (Oracle, Michaelangelo's Chapel, J. S. Bach's Cathedral). Citizens started to become unhappy from pop one so quickly it was pointless to found a city without an accompanying military unit willing to stay there, and quickly rush-build a temple or phalanx before the city grew! Technology also came at a snail's pace. I b-lined to Monarchy, was able to trade along neglected tech lines with my short-lived neighbors, and snatch up the Great Library to appease all this.

Sometime in the 18th century I went straight to Democracy from Monarchy and never looked back; didn't even bother with Republic (felt like the old days of Civ I). I hate dealing with intermediary unrest and corruption whilst "waiting" for your government to re-form.

My only real rivals were the Celts a continent over with their own comprable empire. They become the standard enraged idiots you expect of the AI in the 20th century but other than that behaved themselves for the majority of the game.

A nice finish; my 40,000 colonist spaceship landed in 1958, I finished with a pop just shy of 40 million, and had a civ score of 167%, my highest to date!

[duke o' york]

At Deity the percentage score is much higher than at other levels. I can't remember exactly how the percentage is calculated from the Civ score you get, but the information will be on the site somewhere. There is a different modifier for each level so that a big score on Chieftain will get a percentage rating of much less than the same score on a higher level.

I think that in your next game then you should definitely go for the Hanging Gardens. This is the mainstay of most people's deity strategy, and avoids the problem whereby you have to stop founding cities because of the unhappiness. It'd be better to build the Gardens than the Library. You're right to go straight for Monarchy, but then Trade ought to be your next target.
These are just guidelines that can and should be adopted and amended depending upon each different game, but you'll find that they will set you up for a great chance of winning the game earlier and earlier. Then you can start to set yourself challenges....