The lazy man's method of military dominance

[Willem]

Playing on Noble, I've been trying out a technique using the the alternation between an Alt-click unit and a building. I've been building Barracks in every city and when it's done, I Alt-click a unit for it to build. Then I add a city building at the bottom of the list so when the unit is complete, my city will improve it's infrastucture. I just keep alternating like this all the time, and I've been way over the top on military all through the game. And without having to bother too much with micromanaging my military builds. And I almost always have new recruits coming on line each turn. I just might have to move up a level after this.

[Willem]

Well that's what I get for being cocky. Several civs kept trying to plant a city in this corner of my territory that I hadn't managed to colonize yet so I destroyed their city each time. After the last time, the next thing I know everyone was at war with me. I had a + 10 on "You declared war on my friend" with everyone of them. I was powerful, but not powerful enough to fight 6 civs at once. Especially with War Weariness starting to kick in. I guess I better keep a eye on my diplomacy in the future.

[Urban Ranger]

I reckon it is better to culture flip the first city instead of destroying it. You don't incur diplomatic penalties this way AFAIK ("-20 My people likes you better than me! Hmmppphhh!!"). This also stops others from building there once you flipped it.

[greenday_234]

This is definately an interesting technique. I'm going to try it out. Most of my problem is that I focus so much on infustructure improvements that I'm trying to build a massive military all at once and wasting 40 turns or so doing so. Has there been any point at which you have broken this rule of yours?

[Willem]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
I reckon it is better to culture flip the first city instead of destroying it. You don't incur diplomatic penalties this way AFAIK ("-20 My people likes you better than me! Hmmppphhh!!"). This also stops others from building there once you flipped it.

Or I could have let it grow a little bit and taken it for myself. It was quite a popular spot, at least 4 civs tried to establish a city there. Oh well, I'll know better next time.

[Willem]

Originally posted by greenday_234
This is definately an interesting technique. I'm going to try it out. Most of my problem is that I focus so much on infustructure improvements that I'm trying to build a massive military all at once and wasting 40 turns or so doing so. Has there been any point at which you have broken this rule of yours?

No, never. The only thing I changed was having my coastal cities produce Frigates instead of land units after Chemistry. As a result I had the largest navy I've ever had at that point in the game. The approach works very well, you can build up your military without sacrifising infrastructure. And with the way the perpetual build switches in the queue, it's fairly easy to manage. When the unit is complete and waiting for orders, I'd just add the next building I wanted to the bottom of the list.

Oh yes, there was one change. I had one city that had so many hills, it just ended up building units until the Ironworks came along. It had no need for anything since it wasn't producing any commerce. What I did there was select an Alt-click, waited a turn then selected another and so on. So it was alternating between all available units.

Oh yes, occasionally I would bump something to the top if I really wanted it to be built, like Wonders that came along or Settlers for new cities. The nice thing about that was if a city was working on a Wonder, I still had all the rest of them building units, so it wasn't a big loss of production for me.

[axisworks]

I've found alternating between building buildings and units between classical and modern age is a great strategy, in particular. Mind you, I only got 3 wonders in my capital this way, but I ended up being the largest military force to be reckoned with very early in the game. It served me so well that I destroyed my best military rival in four turns. Mind you, the whole time I was carefully lining up my allies through diplomacy, and ended up getting a diplomatic win right after building the UN.

[unamablebuiler]

excellent post willem i have been experimenting with this rule also and have had mixed sucess. Against a pure builder it works brilliantly. However for a warmonger you would also need use your units more effectively than them in order to win.

the best thing is that you have constantly mordern units being built even though they are inexperinced. Also good is the steady improvement of the economy while at war
i never found woners a proble as i broke this rule for them as soon as i have the tech i will start building them appart from the start when establising your self is more important

[El Conquistador]

This can't be the way to go. Playing like this will inevitably lead to unit doing nothing and infrastructure being built too late. Also, this will not work very efficiently in combination with civics. Those will usually promote building either military units or buildings but not both.

[Willem]

Originally posted by El Conquistador
Playing like this will inevitably lead to unit doing nothing and infrastructure being built too late.

In that game I managed to get into more military campaigns than I've ever done at that point. Besides, you have to build up your defences as well as your offensive force. As for infrastucture, in a city with reasonable production, one unit doesn't take all that long to build. I certainly didn't feel like buildings were being delayed.

Also, this will not work very efficiently in combination with civics. Those will usually promote building either military units or buildings but not both.

Once you get to Free Religion you have neither, so what's your point? It's up to the player to decide his priority. Unless you're Spiritual, most people stick with their favoured civic to avoid the Anarchy, so your objection is moot. No player will just build one thing or another, no matter what civic you choose you have to build a combination.

In the game I just finished playing, I was tops in almost everything in the demographics thing, especially Military. And it was pretty much a tie for top place in tech between me and 2 other civs. I was also the largest civ on the planet. So I don't think this approach is all that bad.

[Cadarn]

Congrats on your triumph Wiilem.

However, on levels above Noble I would bet that your huge military would start to place a big burden on your economy.

Even playing (consistently) only one tier higher on Prince with Huge maps, 12 civs and Epic timescale I have found that I don't have the time to build all the buildings I want without making some sacrifices. (That's build choice OR population sacrifice!)

Even my mid-sized army would hurt me without my Holy City shrine and markets etc in good commerce cities.

[Willem]

Originally posted by Cadarn
Congrats on your triumph Wiilem.

Well it wasn't exactly a triumph, I got my buttkicked when four civs suddenly declared war on me. I was already at war with two others at the time. My military wasn't powerful enough to stand up to those odds.

[greenday_234]

With odds like that, few armies ever are

[Willem]

It might be interesting if the AI remembered your dealings with it from game to game. Treat a civ poorly in one game and in the next it will tend to dislike you a bit more because of it. Or vice versa. Of course that would totally screw up the warmongers who go for a Conquest or Domination win. It might favour the builder type though.

[rewster1]

Haha, then you'd start seeing things like....
+1 "You beat us in a space race!"
+1 "You were defeated last game!"