Originally posted by: Martimus
Originally posted by: Dorkenstein
I disagree that needing a guide means you're playing wrong. I can play most semi-complex games pretty easily, but the variables in Civ IV (and the expansions/mods for it) continue to vex and thwart me.
I was able to play it without a guide. Although I must admit that the game mechanics are not all intuitive, and as such difficult to figure out. But most of the base strategies are the same as with most 4X games. If you focus on building a great economy and good manufacturing capability, you can mostly walk all over the competition, as you will be able to build better armies quicker than anyone else when you need to, but only need to keep a small inexpensive army on standby when you are not at war. It is this flexibility that makes it a good strategy, and has thus far worked well for me in Civ and Gal Civ games. (Also Speed kills, even in Civ. If you can get from one city to the next very quickly, you can cut down even more on your standing army, which in turn decreases your logistics costs.)
EDIT: I know that I likened the strategy to a military victory, but it really goes with anything. You can build more research facilities quicker if you have to increase research at some point, or increase trade facilities, or any game mechanic with a strong manufacturing base (with a strong economic base to pay for it).
Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer
Originally posted by: Martimus
Originally posted by: Dorkenstein
I disagree that needing a guide means you're playing wrong. I can play most semi-complex games pretty easily, but the variables in Civ IV (and the expansions/mods for it) continue to vex and thwart me.
I was able to play it without a guide. Although I must admit that the game mechanics are not all intuitive, and as such difficult to figure out. But most of the base strategies are the same as with most 4X games. If you focus on building a great economy and good manufacturing capability, you can mostly walk all over the competition, as you will be able to build better armies quicker than anyone else when you need to, but only need to keep a small inexpensive army on standby when you are not at war. It is this flexibility that makes it a good strategy, and has thus far worked well for me in Civ and Gal Civ games. (Also Speed kills, even in Civ. If you can get from one city to the next very quickly, you can cut down even more on your standing army, which in turn decreases your logistics costs.)
EDIT: I know that I likened the strategy to a military victory, but it really goes with anything. You can build more research facilities quicker if you have to increase research at some point, or increase trade facilities, or any game mechanic with a strong manufacturing base (with a strong economic base to pay for it).
What difficulty do you play on? I'd reckon no higher than Prince.
Originally posted by: you2
I'm trying to win warlord (3rd level from bottom) but haven't yet. So I won't go higher until I figure out this level. Settler I could win most of the time.
Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer
Originally posted by: Martimus
Originally posted by: Dorkenstein
I disagree that needing a guide means you're playing wrong. I can play most semi-complex games pretty easily, but the variables in Civ IV (and the expansions/mods for it) continue to vex and thwart me.
I was able to play it without a guide. Although I must admit that the game mechanics are not all intuitive, and as such difficult to figure out. But most of the base strategies are the same as with most 4X games. If you focus on building a great economy and good manufacturing capability, you can mostly walk all over the competition, as you will be able to build better armies quicker than anyone else when you need to, but only need to keep a small inexpensive army on standby when you are not at war. It is this flexibility that makes it a good strategy, and has thus far worked well for me in Civ and Gal Civ games. (Also Speed kills, even in Civ. If you can get from one city to the next very quickly, you can cut down even more on your standing army, which in turn decreases your logistics costs.)
EDIT: I know that I likened the strategy to a military victory, but it really goes with anything. You can build more research facilities quicker if you have to increase research at some point, or increase trade facilities, or any game mechanic with a strong manufacturing base (with a strong economic base to pay for it).
What difficulty do you play on? I'd reckon no higher than Prince.
Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer
Originally posted by: you2
I'm trying to win warlord (3rd level from bottom) but haven't yet. So I won't go higher until I figure out this level. Settler I could win most of the time.
Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer
Originally posted by: Martimus
Originally posted by: Dorkenstein
I disagree that needing a guide means you're playing wrong. I can play most semi-complex games pretty easily, but the variables in Civ IV (and the expansions/mods for it) continue to vex and thwart me.
I was able to play it without a guide. Although I must admit that the game mechanics are not all intuitive, and as such difficult to figure out. But most of the base strategies are the same as with most 4X games. If you focus on building a great economy and good manufacturing capability, you can mostly walk all over the competition, as you will be able to build better armies quicker than anyone else when you need to, but only need to keep a small inexpensive army on standby when you are not at war. It is this flexibility that makes it a good strategy, and has thus far worked well for me in Civ and Gal Civ games. (Also Speed kills, even in Civ. If you can get from one city to the next very quickly, you can cut down even more on your standing army, which in turn decreases your logistics costs.)
EDIT: I know that I likened the strategy to a military victory, but it really goes with anything. You can build more research facilities quicker if you have to increase research at some point, or increase trade facilities, or any game mechanic with a strong manufacturing base (with a strong economic base to pay for it).
What difficulty do you play on? I'd reckon no higher than Prince.
I'm talking about all these people who claim/brag that they don't need a guide.
The game is easy on Prince and below. Monarch is when the huge jump in difficulty comes. I believe Monarch is the first difficulty where the AI has a significant advantage over you. They produce faster, they research faster, things are cheaper for them, they have better relations with each other by default, etc. I believe Prince is an even playing field, and anything below Prince gives the numbers advantage to the human player.
Originally posted by: you2
Well I admitted already that I suck at this game and that's why i started the thread
Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer
Originally posted by: you2
I'm trying to win warlord (3rd level from bottom) but haven't yet. So I won't go higher until I figure out this level. Settler I could win most of the time.
Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer
Originally posted by: Martimus
Originally posted by: Dorkenstein
I disagree that needing a guide means you're playing wrong. I can play most semi-complex games pretty easily, but the variables in Civ IV (and the expansions/mods for it) continue to vex and thwart me.
I was able to play it without a guide. Although I must admit that the game mechanics are not all intuitive, and as such difficult to figure out. But most of the base strategies are the same as with most 4X games. If you focus on building a great economy and good manufacturing capability, you can mostly walk all over the competition, as you will be able to build better armies quicker than anyone else when you need to, but only need to keep a small inexpensive army on standby when you are not at war. It is this flexibility that makes it a good strategy, and has thus far worked well for me in Civ and Gal Civ games. (Also Speed kills, even in Civ. If you can get from one city to the next very quickly, you can cut down even more on your standing army, which in turn decreases your logistics costs.)
EDIT: I know that I likened the strategy to a military victory, but it really goes with anything. You can build more research facilities quicker if you have to increase research at some point, or increase trade facilities, or any game mechanic with a strong manufacturing base (with a strong economic base to pay for it).
What difficulty do you play on? I'd reckon no higher than Prince.
I'm talking about all these people who claim/brag that they don't need a guide.
The game is easy on Prince and below. Monarch is when the huge jump in difficulty comes. I believe Monarch is the first difficulty where the AI has a significant advantage over you. They produce faster, they research faster, things are cheaper for them, they have better relations with each other by default, etc. I believe Prince is an even playing field, and anything below Prince gives the numbers advantage to the human player.
You cannot just "outproduce" the AI on Monarch or higher. They will just beat you because the numbers are stacked in their favor. You need to use complex strategies to consistently win on Monarch and higher, hence the need for guides and CivFanatics.
Anyone who claims that they play/win on Monarch or higher and never used a guide or read CivFanatics is full of it.
Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer
Originally posted by: you2
I'm trying to win warlord (3rd level from bottom) but haven't yet. So I won't go higher until I figure out this level. Settler I could win most of the time.
Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer
Originally posted by: Martimus
Originally posted by: Dorkenstein
I disagree that needing a guide means you're playing wrong. I can play most semi-complex games pretty easily, but the variables in Civ IV (and the expansions/mods for it) continue to vex and thwart me.
I was able to play it without a guide. Although I must admit that the game mechanics are not all intuitive, and as such difficult to figure out. But most of the base strategies are the same as with most 4X games. If you focus on building a great economy and good manufacturing capability, you can mostly walk all over the competition, as you will be able to build better armies quicker than anyone else when you need to, but only need to keep a small inexpensive army on standby when you are not at war. It is this flexibility that makes it a good strategy, and has thus far worked well for me in Civ and Gal Civ games. (Also Speed kills, even in Civ. If you can get from one city to the next very quickly, you can cut down even more on your standing army, which in turn decreases your logistics costs.)
EDIT: I know that I likened the strategy to a military victory, but it really goes with anything. You can build more research facilities quicker if you have to increase research at some point, or increase trade facilities, or any game mechanic with a strong manufacturing base (with a strong economic base to pay for it).
What difficulty do you play on? I'd reckon no higher than Prince.
I'm talking about all these people who claim/brag that they don't need a guide.
The game is easy on Prince and below. Monarch is when the huge jump in difficulty comes. I believe Monarch is the first difficulty where the AI has a significant advantage over you. They produce faster, they research faster, things are cheaper for them, they have better relations with each other by default, etc. I believe Prince is an even playing field, and anything below Prince gives the numbers advantage to the human player.
You cannot just "outproduce" the AI on Monarch or higher. They will just beat you because the numbers are stacked in their favor. You need to use complex strategies to consistently win on Monarch and higher, hence the need for guides and CivFanatics.
Anyone who claims that they play/win on Monarch or higher and never used a guide or read CivFanatics is full of it.
Originally posted by: Dorkenstein
I notice that almost every AI uses slavery as soon as it's available. Should I use it too? Also, should my first city be geared towards food production?
Originally posted by: AyashiKaibutsu
I didn't need a guide... I do fine on monarch either wonderspamming with a philosophy leader (requires a decent start with marble/stone within reach of my first couple of cities) or making everyone my bitch with an aggresive leader. The only outside advice I ever got was how important chop rushing is. I played a ton of Civ2/MoO/Alpha Centauri and others though. I learned the ropes on noble and then moved up to monarch. The games still pretty easy on monarch; I just hate playing against AI when the only thing that makes them hard is them cheating to a rediculus degree so I stick with monarch for fun.
Going off the tooltip descriptions I think noble is where everyones on a even playing field.
Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer
Originally posted by: AyashiKaibutsu
I didn't need a guide... I do fine on monarch either wonderspamming with a philosophy leader (requires a decent start with marble/stone within reach of my first couple of cities) or making everyone my bitch with an aggresive leader. The only outside advice I ever got was how important chop rushing is. I played a ton of Civ2/MoO/Alpha Centauri and others though. I learned the ropes on noble and then moved up to monarch. The games still pretty easy on monarch; I just hate playing against AI when the only thing that makes them hard is them cheating to a rediculus degree so I stick with monarch for fun.
Going off the tooltip descriptions I think noble is where everyones on a even playing field.
Are you playing BtS or vanilla? Because BtS had significant AI improvements...I think it even incorporated a fan-made "Better AI" patch.