I'm not much of a warmonger early game, so I tend to play the AI off one another to stay even in expansion and score. I keep a mostly defensive military, and inevitably the stronger AI will pick on me and declare war. Once this happens, it is a relatively easy matter to have the greedy neighbors of the offending civ to sign alliances against it. But this seems less and less viable on the later levels. Do I need to develop my ancient war game to be competitive in later levels? I've found playing huge with 16 on Monarch and above very difficult, perhaps for this reason?
For some background, I am a novice. I just got back into playing, and finished my first ever game on Regent with a humble 6117 (Space Race) playing Iroqouis. It was a huge pangea map with 16 civs and I found ancient warfare easy and enjoyable with Mounted Warriors, and eased diplomatic relations by either returning worthless jungle cities or eliminating enemies entirely. I finished up with about 40% of the map, and only about three or four remaining opponents, having eliminated most of them. I am aware of the basic aspects of warfare, such as combined arms, etc. but am having trouble with waging an effective ancient campaign. Is this totally necessary in the later difficulties? It seems to be impossible to remain both peaceful and competitive without an early war on the harder difficulties.
I think ancient war becomes increasingly desirable as the difficulty level rises. I find it is not needed at Chieftain and Warlord, desirable at Regent, highly desirable at Monarch, indispensable at Emperor (I will probably lose the game anyway but a successful early war helps immensely) and at Diety I just lose.
I'm just finishing up a tough monarch game myself, that I not only started passivist (not on purpose, I was used to my old strat for regent), I lost the race for the pyramids AND great library AND adams (many others too, but not nearly important). But I STILL played on. Despite ottoman HORSEMEN were taking out my knights on defense and offense... on at least a 1:1 ratio. I cringed at my casualities, I was agast to my imploded economy, and I was a half an era behind in tech. But I STILL played on. This was/is my first monarch game, so I'd be damned to let the comp beat me. SO, using some creative diplomacy, solidating my empire, and heavy use of railroads.... I brought myself back. I didn't get a tech lead until mid-industrial. All in all... ya its allot harder than regent, but keep at it, don't expect a cakewalk. (at least for people of my skill level) Remember, as long as you have cities to create units... the AI is already at a disadvantage.
You can even play at Emperor level and play a peaceful game. In my first game at Emperor, I never went to war, even once (I posted then the most stupid thread in 'poly called 'All Hail Mountain Sage the Magnificent' as a glory to myself).
My experience, since I like to play PP games (Perfect Peacenik), tells me that it is a lot easier if you play only 8-10 civs instead of 16 and on a huge map. Playing on archipelage with big islands/small continents also helps a lot.
I believe the 'secret' of it is to use the diplomatic screen very extensively, almost every turn. Trade everything except the tech which permits you to build a Wonder. Sell your world map every turn: often you get only 1 gp or another world/territory map in return, but do it. Out of 10 civs, 5 gold/turn make a lot of money after a while, and keeps the other civs broke, and the other civs wil be happy with you.
Try an industrious/commercial civ (French or Carthage) on Regent and let me know.
The Mountain Sage of the Swiss Alps
I've entered the Middle Ages in my second Monarch game (playing French), am about one tech ahead, and on the top of the power game, so I think I'm nearing the home stretch for a cavalry war--Sun Tzu's is in progress. I did switch to 8 civs on a standard map, and it is easier to keep everything going on. The micromanaging in huge with sixteen was unbelievable. It's a huge hassle when they don't all fit in the Foreign Adviser screen for turn-by-turn dealing. At any rate, I was successful in destroying the dominant Germans through playing weak (keeping units down) and allying all the other civs against Bismarck once he declared war. After accomplishing something similar versus Japan, I am the lone large power. Thanks everyone for the advice--I think I'm going to pull through. Everything but a culture win seems doable.
Monarch can be peacefully beaten without ever starting a war (and often not fighting one) with each of the original 16 civs. (standard, pangea/continents, 8 civs)
I started with the Egyptians, and developed a strat that I posted in this thread : Peace Dividend
Since then I've adapted it for any civ - maximising each trait for successful peace-play (including militaristic, and expansionist on standard maps). I intend to post details on this soon. I've not played much on bigger maps, but it's supposed to be easier to build peacefully on those, provided you don't have too many civs, and with experience you can win peacefully on emperor (bit tougher in PTW though).
For archipelago maps, I used a lighthouse-based strat that works OK on Monarch - Lighthouse REX
As Mountain Sage said, the key is constant and savvy use of the diplomacy screen - swinging deals for peace and profit.
I would definitely argue that if you plan on playing peacefully, the power of any early granary in your capitol to pump settlers is even greater.
Get that settler pump up & running and do well in the land grab, while playing nice with the neighborhood children (AI). Put a high priority on connecting road systems so you can trade luxuries. Small gifts may even be a good idea. Establish those embassies. Give in to demands. If you do end up in a war, get yourself alliances so you don't end up on the bottom of a pile-on.
-Arrian
grog want tank...Grog Want Tank... GROG WANT TANK!
The trick isn't to break some eggs to make an omelette, it's convincing the eggs to break themselves in order to aspire to omelettehood.
Other than production, what are the exact bonuses that the AI starts with on Monarch?
You can't fight in here! This is the WAR room!
From the always-helpful Civfanatics CivIII infocenter:
-ArrianFREE Units: The AIs receive FREE units as soon as they build their first city on Monarch, Emperor, and Deity levels.
On Monarch level, the AI usually gets a free Warrior unit.
On Emperor level, the AI usually gets 2 or 3 free units. In Sman's experiment, the AI got 2 warriors and 1 archer.
On Deity level, the AI usually gets 4 or 5 free units, such as 2 archers, 1 spearman, and 1 worker.
The free units the AI gets appear to be random ancient units.
Other effects:
Greater chance of getting goodies when you visit a goody hut on lower levels.
More units require no support on Chieftain and Warlord.
Corruption level is higher for higher levels.
Easier diplomatic opponents on lower levels.
grog want tank...Grog Want Tank... GROG WANT TANK!
The trick isn't to break some eggs to make an omelette, it's convincing the eggs to break themselves in order to aspire to omelettehood.
Originally posted by Arrian
I would definitely argue that if you plan on playing peacefully, the power of any early granary in your capitol to pump settlers is even greater.
-Arrian
The Americans are good for this - granaries off the bat and industrial workers for quick mines and roads to new city sites.
I was able to build the pyramids, but earlier had already built a granary in two major cities to help expansion. I have always been the largest civ, and will hopefully secure my lead after my first war, set up for late middle-age with Cavalry. France is good for pacifist expansion, since I believe Commercial entails bonus both for corruption and diplomacy, and Industrial is essential to me, since I don't wish to build twice as many workers.
Logically, go for the Pyramids (via a Colossus pre-build if necessary) with your second city and keep the first pumping out settlers. Then, if sensible according to your map, go with your 4th city for the GLibrary or GLighthouse. It's a standard build-up, but very effective.Originally posted by Arrian
I would definitely argue that if you plan on playing peacefully, the power of any early granary in your capitol to pump settlers is even greater.
-Arrian
The Mountain Sage of the Swiss Alps
Next time, sell the two granaries the turn befor you complete the Pyramids. Not much gold, but at this early stage it helps.Originally posted by JPGray
I was able to build the pyramids, but earlier had already built a granary in two major cities to help expansion. I have always been the largest civ, and will hopefully secure my lead after my first war, set up for late middle-age with Cavalry. France is good for pacifist expansion, since I believe Commercial entails bonus both for corruption and diplomacy, and Industrial is essential to me, since I don't wish to build twice as many workers.
The French are VERY GOOD if you wish to play peacefully.
The Commercial trait helps you with corruption (=bigger empires) but not for diplomacy (you have to trust your own skills).
The Industrious trait makes workers , well, work twice as fast (=less workers = gold saved). As a rule, build 1 worker per city.
Both Commercial and Industrious boost commerce and shield production with larger cities.
Keep us posted.
The Mountain Sage of the Swiss Alps
The war is going very well. I have eliminated the Germans and the Persians in about ten turns. I did decide to sacrifice the sure-thing combined arms approach for an en masse cavalry charge, but I suffered slight losses, since Persia and Germany only recently acquired iron. Once cavalry is the mainstay cannons are surprisingly worthless for offensive war against a weaker foe. I only had an opportunity to use it on defense. For England, though, it may just be necessary.
The English and Indians have formed a sort of tech combine and are competing well, receiving funds from China and Russia, large civs with little tech but much money. I am still ahead, and they wasted turns on Free Artistry, but they are both now in the Industrial age, and I was forced to hedge and get Nationalism in case a war happened before I could consolidate my gains. I am bee-lining to Mobile Transport, but may attack soon since the Industrial worker increases potential success for a blitz, and England does not yet have riflemen everywhere. Their packed cities with complete road coverage look very inviting. Moreover, they have not yet signed a MPP with anyone.
The Diplomatic blowback for this has been about what I expected. Luxuries cost exhorbitant sums now, although whether the reason is my aggression or the size of my empire is anyone's guess. Civs are a little less likely to give all their gold for a ROP, which is a dent to my economy. More greivous was the plummeting of my tech's perceived worth. Either because I am winning or have been aggressive, the deals are lousy. Since the musketeer ushered in a GA, I was able to obtain Adam Smith's, JS bach's, and the Sistine Chapel. Despite having several elites, the quick nature of the war precluded any GL production, and I have yet to move my palace to a more efficient location. My FP will soon be built in a convenient spot anticipating victory in England.
I am a good 300 points ahead in power and score, ahead in culture, and leading in tech. I think I will build an army of 4-6 cavalry for each English city and attack. My first goals will be resource cities, and after weathering their counterattack, England probably will be out as a military power. If it goes better than expected, I will wipe Elizabeth out in 4-6 turns.
Hmmm, I thought this thread was about 'Pacifist strategy on Monarch', yet here we are, "building 4-6 cav per English city, and attack" (after wiping out 2 civs). I must have misunderstood what you meant by the word 'Pacifist'.
Expensive luxuries are the price of a large empire, not of aggression, though reluctance to part company with cash for ROPs might be a response to your aggression or treaty-violations. Allies never pay cash for ROPs.
If the tech-deals are lousy, it's not because of decreasing value, it's either because they're skint, or are about to complete research on it anyway. Raise the GPT by 1 above their offer and if your advisor screws up his face and says "they'd never accept such a deal", you've found their cash limit.
You said that you didn't get any GL, but will soon build an FP in ex-England. Are you sure? It's easier to build FP's by hand if you're a commercial civ, but not easy if you already have a large empire and FP distance is considerable.
Well, i try to expand untill a choke point then i stop and build some fortresses or very defensive based citys.
Then i basicly ride out any wars the AI declares, they keep on chucking units at my citys and i nock'em down. I'd really like to know how to stop the ai from declaring war on me, i'm dead friendly to the AI untill i'm big enough to invade and conquor/destroy.
You are not the only one wondering why a 'pacific' thread goes downhill after a few postings....Originally posted by Cort Haus
Hmmm, I thought this thread was about 'Pacifist strategy on Monarch', yet here we are, "building 4-6 cav per English city, and attack" (after wiping out 2 civs). I must have misunderstood what you meant by the word 'Pacifist'.
I'm starting to believe the English meaning and 'poly's are not exactly the same.
Moderators should ensure that some people should be automatically banned from posting on some threads, they really have a bad influence, specially when they talk about 'pacifism'
The Mountain Sage of the Swiss Alps
I am inept at warfare in the Ancient age, so I wanted to know some strategies to remain competitive. I do not play pacifist the whole game, however, since just trading and building sometimes limits the victory options. Also, since I am going for a high score, many high population cities are important, as is maintaining a tech lead and a monopoly of wonders.
With England in a position of economic power, the tech race became more difficult, so I had to either take a few cities or just eliminate the civ and double my empire while getting a big geographic defensive bonus.
I was able to expand and become the largest civ in the early game, but I wanted to totally dominate and try to be as competitive as possible, since this is my first Monarch game. Sorry if the thread title is misleading.
Not misleading but a little bit unaccurate perhaps
Seriously, I like to have a wide array of strategies to choose from in any game. To me, periods of peace is just another tool to make sure I win in the end. The peaceniks OTH were obviously a bit disappointed with the direction this thread were going.
Don't eat the yellow snow.
No offence taken, of course.Originally posted by JPGray
I was able to expand and become the largest civ in the early game, but I wanted to totally dominate and try to be as competitive as possible, since this is my first Monarch game. Sorry if the thread title is misleading.
I just want to point out that you can also 'dominate' a game (see my thread about 'Pragmatic Ultimate Power') with a more peaceful strategy. You can do this either in the early game (peaceful Rexing) or later on, after early conquests.
Just remember that the gold, shields and turns invested in military units can also be spent on city improvements, often with dramatic results in terms of 'competitiveness'.
Look at the postings in the AU207 game and compare the different strategies. I will also post some screenshots late this week or early next week on my PUP thread, and Arrian will give then his feedback of his playing style.
The Mountain Sage of the Swiss Alps
I've been planning a full peace strategy, perhaps to get a Diplomatic Victory without bribing or to get a culture victory on a difficult level (it seems to happen automatically on < Regent). I believe I have read the thread you mention, and I plan on trying something similar. As the French on a standard map, building 8 - 12 cities and intrenching would be interesting to try. Hopefully an AI would engage in an aggressive war so a musketeer gets attacked, or maybe wonder production will supply a GA at a good time. City defense is easy, but maintaining a tech parity and economical soundness is a potential problem. Fortunately there are many threads here that address this.
Wonder combos for a French (Industrious/Commercial)GA that I'm sure of:
Colossus + Pyramids, Great Wall, Hanging Gardens or Hoover.
Pyramids/GW/HG + Adam Smith
As far as I know, none of the medieval wonders are "industrious."
Not sure about Universal Suffrage or ToE, but clearly Hoover is "industrious."
So French actually has some really good flexibility for the GA. In the ancient age, you have several wonder combos available. You also can swing a late medieval or early industrial GA with wonders. If you want an early/mid-medieval GA, you have your musketeers.
-Arrian
grog want tank...Grog Want Tank... GROG WANT TANK!
The trick isn't to break some eggs to make an omelette, it's convincing the eggs to break themselves in order to aspire to omelettehood.
Early game: the GLighthouse is commercial.Originally posted by Arrian
Wonder combos for a French (Industrious/Commercial)GA that I'm sure of:
Colossus + Pyramids, Great Wall, Hanging Gardens or Hoover.
Pyramids/GW/HG + Adam Smith
As far as I know, none of the medieval wonders are "industrious."
Not sure about Universal Suffrage or ToE, but clearly Hoover is "industrious."
So French actually has some really good flexibility for the GA. In the ancient age, you have several wonder combos available. You also can swing a late medieval or early industrial GA with wonders. If you want an early/mid-medieval GA, you have your musketeers.
-Arrian
Commercial medieval: Magellan's Voyage.
Universal Suffrage: militaristic
ToE: scientific
Yep, the French have good flexibility. This is why I play them from time to time
The Mountain Sage of the Swiss Alps
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks