the highest "playable" difficulty

[gentle]

Luckily for us the new patch implemented 2 nice options:

No cheating
New random seed on reload

Both can be turned on at the same time^^
Nice implicature imho =P

*seeking cover*

[Tony]

Originally posted by gentle
I would really like to have a difficulty like noble without health boni etc, that would become my favourite one.

I agree, I wish the difficulty level bonuses and penalties were broken down into categories so you could pick and choose. I don't like the highest difficulty levels because they force you into rush warfare tactics. But as a builder, I like the challenge of balancing health and happiness that starts to really kick in at Emperor level. On the lower levels the health and happiness limits are so relaxed they are almost non-existent.

Tony

[mdbill]

Amen Tony,
You nailed it. Maybe if there was more "I" in the A.I., then Firaxis wouldn't have had to make Diety level so ridiculously unbalanced. Faster production and research and TWO starting settlers. Conquest seems impossible (except maybe on a Duel size map) and it's just not fun.

Although I did just win my first OCC on the Diety level, I'd say Diety is not playable.

gentle,
I think Prince is the even playing field, not Noble

Monarch or Emperor is probably the highest "playable" difficulty

[Quillan]

Noble is the "even playing field". Anything below noble, and the player gets bonuses. Anything above noble, and the AI gets bonuses. At noble, the player and the AI civs are following the same rules.

[gentle]

Originally posted by mdbill
gentle,
I think Prince is the even playing field, not Noble

Noble is the "even playing field". Anything below noble, and the player gets bonuses. Anything above noble, and the AI gets bonuses. At noble, the player and the AI civs are following the same rules.

bit lazy...it is before my first coffee

[mdbill]

Right, my bad. Prince is the first level you are handicapped. It was the first level I played and I got confused.

[Jaybe]

Quillan and mdbill, you are both "wrong". Both the player and AI get different bonuses at Noble. Check out the CIV4HandicapInfo.xml file (in Assets/XML/GameInfo).

Technically wrong, not necessarily in meaning.

[Sir Og]

I seem to suck at the new civ games (although I have not played Civ4 enough).
In civ 1 and 2 I used to be a pretty good player. I had no difficulty playing on the highest level.
I don't seem to do that good now, maybe I have to unlearn the old civ games.

[fed1943]

As I did in the previous games,I´m still replaying the same game(Cyrus,Noble)with different strategies each.
Then,I will go to the AU to play a non-creative,also Noble.
Then,I will play Deity.
Best regards,

[Saurus]

Originally posted by Sir Og
I seem to suck at the new civ games (although I have not played Civ4 enough).
In civ 1 and 2 I used to be a pretty good player. I had no difficulty playing on the highest level.
I don't seem to do that good now, maybe I have to unlearn the old civ games.

I don't think you suck
Civ 1 and 2 was WAY easier to beat at the hardest level.
In Civ 3 and 4 the highest level do not even seem to be meant to be a normal "Playable" level.
In Civ 3 and 4, Monarch level already is VERY much more difficult than the highest level in in Civ 1 and 2 was.

[Cadarn]

There seems to be quite a step up from Prince to Monarch. I like to play on huge maps with a total of 9 or 10 civs in play and I've tried several games up to (roughly) the Medieval era to see how things work in Civ 4.

My ideal playstyle is as an expansionist builder, staking out good city sites early to give me space behind my border and backfilling.

I've found the initial hordes of animals and barbarians to be very frustrating. Countering this by producing archers early to protect settlers and workers costs much-needed development time. Also, if I want a Holy Money-Spinning City, I have to beeline for Priesthood and then Writing to get the Oracle built and get Code of Laws free. This ties up my capital for 20 or so turns when I could be producing those escort units or a couple of workers.

The AI agression is hit & miss - I have found the Greeks to be very nasty neighbours - attacking me despite an open borders treaty and following "my" religion.

Going to cop out and start as Frederick (Cre/Phi). Shame, as I wanted to see what damage I could have done with a rampaging army of Conquistadores

[Saurus]

Originally posted by Cadarn
My ideal playstyle is as an expansionist builder, staking out good city sites early to give me space behind my border and backfilling.

I've found the initial hordes of animals and barbarians to be very frustrating. Countering this by producing archers early to protect settlers and workers costs much-needed development time. Also, if I want a Holy Money-Spinning City, I have to beeline for Priesthood and then Writing to get the Oracle built and get Code of Laws free. This ties up my capital for 20 or so turns when I could be producing those escort units or a couple of workers.

Barbarians and Animals are really annoying since they purely exists only to slow down the human player, not A.I players witch get huge bonuses. I think both animals and barbarians have been put in place simply to "force" the human to concentrate on building troops while giving the A.I is time to expand.
In truth, however, I think this concept has failed.
This is because they appear too early - at that early point, during the most cricital first turns of the game, you simply cannot stall to long regradless of risk! I mean...what's the worst thing that could happen? Should they manage to destroy your first settler (a Bear will do this almost regardless of escort) the game is lost and you will probably restart anyway, you will lose only 5 minutes in the process. But the next time you take the risk you may be luckier and have a good game going because of this. I call this the early game "lottery"

[Dominae]

It's only a lottery if you do not scout enough.

Within a given "area", there will be at most 2-3 Animals in the early-game - most often only 1. Animal population stays relatively constant: you have to kill one for another to spawn.

What this means is that with enough scouting units you can spot and tag the Animals in the area that you're planning to settle in. Then you can set a couple of Warriors in advance to stand on some hills and defend the area preemptively. Even if the Animals go back into the fog of war, you can guess with relative success where the might be. Try not to kill any during this process, as they might spawn anywhere in the FoW and mess up your plans.

With the Settler's two moves, it's very difficult for Animals to get the jump on you with an appropriate advance escort. Wolves and Panthers, with their own two moves, are a particular annoyance, but something that can definitely be dealt with.

Remember that if you "catch" an Animal within your cultural boundaries it will beeline to get out. It will not attack your units, be they Workers, Warriors or whatever, while within your city radii. So a Settler can walk right up to a lazy Bear, found a city, and be safe from attack - all without an escort.

To make scouting easier, it's best to found your first couple of cities relatively close to your capital. This way you can "see" more tiles thanks to your capital's cultural boundary (which may be quite large due if you found a Religion) and you also minimize the dangerous transit time when Animals can get the jump on you. If you really want to settle that sweet spot 10 or more tiles away (perhaps to deny it to the AI), you will need to bring some troops.

I consider scouting, settlement and Animals a fun "sub-game": you want to found cities as quickly as possible, but you have to avoid the baddies in the mist. If you think if it this way you might find it more enjoyable.

Barbarians are another matter. They are a lot smarter about messing up your plans, and are stronger to boot. Not to mention the fact that they are not afraid of your cultural boundaries. Thankfully they appear much later. You can use the same scouting tactics to deal with Barbs as with Animals, but you need to bring more/stronger troops.
Back to the topic of this thread: if you think Animals and Barbs are annoying on Monarch and below, you should try it on Immortal! Ugh.

[Dominae]

Oh, and the AI has it's fair share of troubles dealing with Animals and Barbs, despite its "huge bonuses".

True, on Immortal it's almost immune to Animal activity, but Barbs can still hurt the AI. On any difficulty below that a simple RNG roll can set it back quite a bit.

[Chemical Ollie]

I've only played less than a dozen games to the end, and I found the step from Noble to Prince hard at first. I quit a lot of games after failing even before middle ages, but with a good starting spot and an early plan, I got many of the early wonders and all of the late ones, and was eventually able to win by culture and double my high score.

I believe the level difficulty is similar to CIV3, so after 1-2 years of playing I will probably prefer Monarch for casual games and Emperor for challenge. But now I'm still learning the tech tree, the wonder benefits and the AI behavior, so Noble is casual and Prince is a challenge,