OCC (One City Challenge) at Monarch and Above (Part Two)

[VetLegion]

Informative thread guys

I'm not particularly attracted to OCC, but I might try one some time to fine tune my city managment skills.

One thing I share with solo is frustration with "good mood" AI declaring war on me. I think the game would loose nothing if AI at Pleased and/or Friendly was guaranteed not to attack the player. Make it sufficiently difficult to achieve good relations, but make them rewarding too. The way it is it seems a pure gamble and I don't like that at all.

[solo]

Originally posted by VetLegion
One thing I share with solo is frustration with "good mood" AI declaring war on me. I think the game would loose nothing if AI at Pleased and/or Friendly was guaranteed not to attack the player. Make it sufficiently difficult to achieve good relations, but make them rewarding too. The way it is it seems a pure gamble and I don't like that at all.

I think a guarantee would be too much, because human players are probably the worst backstabbers!

However, I think the odds of "pleased" AI doing this should be decreased, or that their decisions to attack should be based more upon their opinions of the others.

If they are "pleased" with me and at least "annoyed" with another civ, then I think there should be a guarantee about who is selected for the attack.

Too much weight is now placed on finding a weaker opponent. This hurts the OCC player in higher level games, by taking away his or her diplomatic options, since that player can not help but be the weakest militarily.

There should some way of using diplomacy to avoid attacks in OCC, or a way of bargaining for peace before being overwhelmed by huge AI armies.

Either that or there should be a certain attainable threshold of defensive strength that will guarantee no backstabbing attacks.

[korn469]

Well I played a number of games tonight trying to get a victory OCC conquest or domination victory on a tiny map against two AI's. I was playing with the following setting, tiny balanced map, high water, marathon speed, raging barbarians, aggressive ai, no tech trading, no cheating. I played several games with kublai khan thinking that agg/cre would be a good warmongering combination. However, after several games, I started one with Huayna Capac. I think after playing both that the Inca might be the better civ. You start out with Quechua's which have a 100% bonus against archers. I've found that two fortified warriors makes you almost invulnerable to barbarians (though only hving one will result in defeat). My problem was I wasn't getting any river starts, and without the gold I had a horrible tech rate.

I'll try to play some more tommorrow with the Inca.

[Blake]

These are the leaders I consider most viable for OCC conquest, at least if the conquering is intended to be done in the earlyish game. And a crude thumbs ranking for the traits and UU respectively.

Alexander. Agg/Phi, Phalnax. (Fishing/Mining)
Genghis Khan. Agg/Exp, Kehisk. (Hunting/Wheel)
Montezuma. Agg/Spi, Jaguar. (Myst/Hunting)
Huayna Capac. Agg/Fin, Quecha. (Agri/Myst)
Mansa Musa. Spi/Fin, Skirmisher. (Wheel/Mining)
Cyrus. Exp/Cre, Immortal. (Agri/Hunting)
Julius Caesar. Exp/Org, Praetorian. (Fishing/Mining)
Napoleon. Agg/Ind, Musketeer. (Wheel/Agri)


One thing to note is that it isn't really viable to perform throw-away attacks at higher difficulty levels. You need your armies to win with very few losses. Hence delaying the genocide until Construction (for Catapults) is probably important. The Praetorian is probably the very best early UU because it is very good at surviving. The Skirmisher and Immortal are only really useful for harrassment and defense.

To use the Jaguar or Quecha you'd have to attack very (relatively) early because losses will be very high. You could take out one civ, but you'd have little momentum to move on to the next civ. Using them on faster game speeds would be good too, because on slower game speeds surviving and healing (as Praets are good at doign) is a much more valuable strategy than building replacement units.

More random thoughts on settings... you could have a tiny or small map and add lots of Civs, so the other civs will pretty much be playing OCC too .

[korn469]

I'm not sure if you can play OCC in multiplayer, but if you can, how does this sound. A four human, four AI diety OCC pbem on a standard size map. We will determine all of the other settings if people want to play.

[Hauptman]

Be careful with the permanent aliance option... I used it on my second monarch game and allied with saladin just before i was about to win the game via space race...

I had one part left to build... so i go to build it (would have taken 4 turns) but it was unavailable to build...

"wtf?"

I look down at saladin and his absolutley worst city (had been culture squished by me prior to alliance) has it qued for a 35 turn build.... IN HIS WORST CITY.... /sigh


Luckily i still won.


On an off note just played an emporer game today here at work ( ) and was doing very well, I was really starting to out tech the AI's, had napoleon my only neighbor and friendly, and suddenly Montezuma, the greeks, and the incan's all attacked within 3 turns... I beat Monty back easily but before i was done greece moved in. nappy was nice enough to declare war for me and took out his units, but the Inca's super stacks where just too much... /sigh

My machine guns, cannons, and fancy riflemen made his grenadiers pay a dear price but he just had too many.

Ive never seen such a horrible gang rape before.. =(

[fluffyflyingpig]

OCC conquests are an amusing way to take out your frustrations at getting killed by the AI. It seems almost wrong to be number one militarily, and not dead last in points.

I tried a OCC standard noble game today, with conquest as the goal, and all victory options open. Tried Napoleon for traits and the hope i could get some use out of musketeers. A CS slingshot combined with a beeline to steel worked very nicely, I got the first grenadier in 1200 AD or so and the first cannon shortly thereafter. I've only gotten up to 1500 AD, but i think I can pull off a win, I'm sitting on a solid tech lead and have double as many troops as the nearest AI.

Thoughts: You want to keep all AIs equally stunted. All wars before grenadiers should be intended to raze the AI capitol/major city and get out so you can kill the next AI. I didn't do as much of this in my first game as I should have. After that, its just a matter of amassing a bunch of SoDs and pillage and burn. Balanced maps seem ideal for OCC conquests on larger maps.

[Risa]

In my opinion, Perm. Alli. removes late game challenges of space race and military threat. Just ally with Cyrus, Mansa Musa, or Frederick (from easy to hard), and the game is ganranteed won.

[korn469]

Here's a map that I won a diety OCC conquest victory on tiny with the Inca. Since I only had two opponents, as soon as I saw a scout I sent out my Quecha's. I thought I had a great start, but it wasn't quite as good as I would have liked. Good hunting! Enjoy!

[Skatterbone]

Too much weight is now placed on finding a weaker opponent. This hurts the OCC player in higher level games, by taking away his or her diplomatic options, since that player can not help but be the weakest militarily.

There should some way of using diplomacy to avoid attacks in OCC, or a way of bargaining for peace before being overwhelmed by huge AI armies.

Either that or there should be a certain attainable threshold of defensive strength that will guarantee no backstabbing attacks.

Well, its not a 'guaranted' defense, but I've learned not to underestimate the power of cash. Yesterday I played a standard/islands/monarch/Elizabeth game....my first OCC since finally getting around to the new patch. I managed to snag colossus/great lighthouse between the usual pyramid/oracle/great library route, so the cash was rolling in early. By the time I completed wallstreet, I was around +140ish gold/turn at 100% R. And that was running pacifism with a reasonably sized military for OCC.

Its impossible to spend that much without a rediculous military build up, so I began gifting it away....1000 gold at a time. I started with Monty and Kan just trying to attain trading relations...then Hatty toward the end game when I switched to Free Religion. I made no other concessions toward diplomacy (civics/religous/demands/etc).

Apollo was completed in 1890, so I had the AI on the ropes and naturally attitudes began to change. Monty received the most 'pay-offs' because he had the resources I needed. Relations teetered between cautious and annoyed, but he never attacked or made harsh demands. Kan warmongered most of the game, but left me alone despite having lukewarm relations. He beat up 2 civs and eliminated a third by the time I started building SS parts. Then both he and Hatty started making repeated demands for techs and money which I refused (but I kept up the 'gifting' as often as possible). Then Kan switched to vassalage/police state and made more tech demands....you know heads are about to role. I poured on the cash and he never attacked, though I never got relations above annoyed. It makes me wonder if a sudden large change in cash reserves forces the AI to 're-evaluate' current priorities....aside from the direct diplomacy issues.

I believe it is possible to virtually 'buy' peace, but its very expensive....in the tens of thousands on just a standard size map. Clearly not all civs/maps will support this kind of cash flow.

In retrospect, I could have supported an enormous military in this game (for OCC anyway). All this talk of OCC conquest games has me wondering how a financial civ would fair. I recon it would have to be a late game blitz....after most of your infrastructure was in place.

[WestSideBilly]

I ran across this thread about 2 weeks ago and have been trying to beat an OCC since. My settings:

- Gandhi, OCC, no cheat
- Noble or Prince (tried a couple Monarch for the fun of it)
- Islands, some small islands (tried a couple Pangea also)

So far, I have 0 wins in ~15 tries. I play about 5 turns and if I don't like my start spot I scrap it. I've played about 15 games through though. I typically end up in 2050 about 10 turns short of fusion (so about 15 short of launching). My typical end game I have about 150 gold @ 100% R, 700 beakers, 700+ culture, and anywhere from 125 to 150 shields (though it's more than that before the UN gets built and the AI votes away beaucracy). I still can't finish the tech fast enough, even trading aggressively with the AI, and I just don't see how you guys can finish fusion before 2000.

My games usually play out:
- Research meditation, masonry, bronze, priest, then fill in worker techs depending on what I have available.
- Build worker, then switch to pyramids and start chopping. I usually finish around 1800 BC but have finished earlier with good start spot, switch to representation. Finish pyramid and go for oracle (50/50 whether I get it). Parthenon if I have time.
- Lit -> Math (usually need aqueduct by now) -> music for free artist. Build great library, switch to suffrage if I have gold and rush it, then switch back aftter 5 turns.
- Some AI usually show up so I start trading to fill in worker techs and other branches.
- Get civil service for beaucracy, drama for Globe.
- Go for Education (uni and Ox), then Liberalism (I usually take astronomy for the free tech) and econ after (usually get one or the other free guy). Go for Physics (90% get it first). Go for computers (filling in via trade whatever I can), get the lab built, then industrialism and artillery -> rocketry. I'm not sure but I think the benefit of having AL (or knowing you're not getting it and trading for it) before starting apollo is worth it?
- try to survive the random AI attacks until I can launch.

I've launched Apollo anywhere from 1862 (!) to 1940 and it hasn't made a lick of difference - I always end up 5-10 turns short on Fusion/launch in 2050. I almost always turn my great people into great workers (except the first scientist who makes an academy). My cities end up with 20-25 population. With the beaker production, it seems like I should be winning some of these...

- If I get a tech lead, the AI will gang up on me - I've had 5 of 7 AI at war at once before, with all 5 refusing to talk. They didn't kill me but the damage to my city was immense and I ran out of time. Sometimes I can avoid war (usually with defensive pacts) but it helps little.
- If I fall behind pre-industrial (quite possible with a bad city location or nagging barbarian/AI war problems) they will all refuse to trade until I have nothing to offer.
- If I stay about even... the leading AI always beats me to the launch by conjuring 4 great people and getting 14 turns of super production.

For those of you launching on Monarch (which has 10% more expensive research vs Prince?) in 1975, what are you doing differently? I just don't get it.

I included my last game if you want to take a look. Not a great start spot but I had coal, iron, and aluminum, plus marble for early game stuff (but not stone). I had a bonehead start and built stonehenge before pyramids, then missed oracle. Otherwise I got just about everything (music, liberalism, physics) I shoot for despite the mediocre start spot. I have a surplus of mid-game wonders because I got ahead in tech but further ahead in construction so I built whatever was there, in between stockpiling a few more units and extra research. I built the UN thinking Catherine (who had warred with most everyone at one point and was not overly popular) and I would be in the running and I'd get votes from Hat and Mansa; I was wrong. In fact there was only one session where Alex was SecGen and, of course, immediately did free speech. After that nobody could get enough votes to get elected so it was a non-issue.

Thoughts, ideas, general disdain?

[WestSideBilly]

Also, I noticed a behavior on OCC that I haven't seen in general games - If an AI is friendly, even +10 or higher with no negatives, they'll still occasionally declare war on you if they're the most powerful. What's the point of diplomacy in OCC

[fluffyflyingpig]

And then there was one. Paris, the city of lights, was the lone beacon of civilization in the vast sea of barbarism. In 1812, French granadiers razed the last Spanish city for a OCC conquest victory on a standard map.

Haha, that was fun. Standard balenced map, defult number of AIs, noble. 52 cities razed, 112 longbowmen, 49 catapults. and 24 workers killed. French arms sieze the day!

I like Napoleon for OCC conquest on large maps. Traits are good, since you should sweep all the important wonders with industrious. Musketeers are usually better than knights thanks to the aggresive trait, so the UU is still quite useful. No WW is fun, I can warmonger as much as I want without disent. Standard CS slingshot and a beeline to Steel worked wonderfully. I got sloppy at the end and took longer than I should have to kill Isabella's last island city.

On a side note, it's prety funny seing barbs spawn in 1500 AD and beyond!


Saves

start
End

[Hauptman]

actually westsidebilly... OCC games get EASIER as the level progresses up (well faster)... I like you started OCC on the lower levels and ran out of time.

Now on monarch+ the ai's get a huge bonus on tech research, so techs come into play earlier. If you trade wisely and tech deep yourself you end up winning much earlier on "harder" levels.

[mdbill]

WestSideBilly,

One word.... Internet.

You didn't mention building the Internet. That's the key to finishing the tech race. Go from computers straight to Fiber Optics.