Difficulty level

[CreepyD]

I've just got the hang of Prince.
played a tiny continents map and trounced 6 AI's to a dom victory while still using macemen.

More recently a more 'normal' game i won a time victory (woulda won via space anyway). everyone was miles off building a space ship - playing on epic.
I guess I should turn off time victory with tech trading off?

Will move up to monarch soon, see how that is.

Is funny, I used to win civ1 and civ2 on emperor all the time (that was top level in those wasnt it?).

AI has defo come a long way, even tho it still has an even longer way to be human like.

[Crossfire]

I have won a couple games on Monarch but I usually play on Prince. I just have more fun. I also find the need to be especially aggressive on Monarch (in comparison) is not the way I always want to play. I do usually take out one or more civs, but I don't want to be forced into warmongering in the early game. I have come close to winning a few Emporer OCC games, but alas, I always get crushed just before finishing the space race.

[Bkeela]

I'm sceptical that people winning at the high levels do so because of skill. Luck would be the key reason.

[trev]

Winning at emperor is not particularly hard, I will not speak for higher levels though. Some people turn off certain victory conditions, or tech trading to make it easier. Personally I feel that a fair win is one that lets the AI compete by whatever victory it chooses, not limit the AI by banning trading or certain victory conditions. All you need to win at Emperor is to manage tech trades with AI well, and generate good GDP and maintain a military suffficiently strong that you are not vulnerable to sneak attacks, not difficult to master all three. An occasional aggresive foray of your own is useful also.

[trev]

As far as the difficulty settings go compared to previous civs, civ1 and civ2 were too easy at the highest levels, no real challenge, civ 3 I finally won at Sid the week civ4 came out, so that was difficult, I seem to be progressing through the civ4 difficulty levels quicker than civ3, so I think it overall is easier than civ3, certainly is a more enjoyable game than civ3.

[Robert]

I concider a fair win a normal win on a normal map with a normal number of AI players.
Thus a duel with the AI on a small map or something doesn't count IMHO.

[rjmatsleepers]

Originally posted by Bkeela
I'm sceptical that people winning at the high levels do so because of skill. Luck would be the key reason.

Any win at higher level requires some luck - good starting position, good huts, reasonable neighbours, not too much trouble with barbarians, etc. Having said that however, it is not possible to win at higher levels without playing accurately and understanding what to build when. The same precision at lower levels leads to a swift and easy victory. That sounds like skill to me.

RJM at Sleeper's

[mutax2003]

I won a deity game on a duel map, using quechua rush against Bismark, but I don't consider that all that hard at those settings. On continental standard sized map with default number of AIs, I have won about two games on emperor.

[uberfish]

I play standard/continents mostly, and highest level I've taken a win at is immortal.

I'm more comfortable with emperor though, I think the majority of emperor starts are winnable and if I get out of the BCs in a decent position can consistently outresearch the AI - though there are certainly some bad luck starts like being next to an aggressive civ and uncover no military resources.

[jonta]

To make sense out off this Q.

You need some rules

Never saved, and then load if things went wrong ?
Playing with babarians on ?

On this settings my only win is nobel !
Looks like next game will be Prince, as im getting better

But i know from earlier versions of civ. that you get
a lot higher if you save before a major attack, and then
load if things go wrong.

Or you even save before starting the war, and then go back to build more army, if it turns out it was too small.

I think its a lot more fun to play "like mulitplayer"
and if you get beaten, well better luck next game

[One_more_turn]

Originally posted by Bill3000


Pangaea is a favorable map? I thought that AI civs are inherintly harder in a more land-based environment.

Because I'm the one making war on others. I'm not good at managing seaborne invasions.

[One_more_turn]

On Pangea maps, it's pretty easy to knock out 1-2 AIs early on, giving you lots of space and population to work with.

I only select civs with financial or organized traits.

[ChaotikVisions]

I've only won on Noble so far, can't quite get the hang of Prince games. Also the level of difficulty on land or water heavy maps really depends on starting conditions. I would consider land heavy to be a little harder though since theres nothing stopping any AI from marching over to you and attacking. I found that out once when I had the Romans march halfway across the world to attack me. Only lots of drafting and some luck saved me, heh.

[Harovan]

Noble. Yes, noble, seriously. It was my first game and the only one I finished. I played some more games mostly on Monarch, but actually never finished them either because I was bored, didn't like the map setting or ran out of time. I tend not to continue old games after a longer break, I rather start a new one. That said, I don't really play at all at the moment. My interest has shifted toward other game types.

[Saurus]

Emperor. Pangea. Cultural Victory