Need a tip about Civ4

[CATHODERAY]

Hi,
I've been playing Civ since the first title of the series, but I'm quite new to Civ4.
Though I find many aspects of it very enjoyable, there is mainly 1 thing which happens in every time I start a map - I have a war in the classic age (though it comes at like 1000 AD). During the war,(in which I usually conquer some cities but dont eliminate the enemy), my progress is vastly slowed down. When the war ends, I'm behind the other civs (technology-wise) and I cant catch up with them (despite the fact that I have more cities and more powerfull armies). The most annoying thing is, since that point, in like one and a half hour (realtime) both medieval and renaissance eras pass by, which is no fun at all - I dont get to 'taste' this part of history (again, at all!).
I play noble/normal speed/large map/continents. And by the way, every game feels the same (despite the fact that I choose the same conditions, in previous titles taht didnt happen).

Any advice? or is it simply the mechanics of the game?

[Thedrin]

Normal speed in CivIV is much quicker than normal speed in previous versions of Civ. Play epic or marathon speeds (available with the patch).

[Solver]

My main suggestion would be to try the other game speeds. I also feel that some eras pass too quickly on Normal game speed. Play Epic. You can try Marathon, though I don't think it's well balanced. Or you can create your own speed.

Wars in Civ4 are very different than previous titles. Basically, yes, they slow your economy down. If you conquer more than your economy can support, you can have a serious crisis. That will be dealt with through experience, as you learn to better evaluate how much you can conquer.

Remember about city maintenance costs! So when you fight, think about how your maintenance will rise if you take more cities, and consider if you can afford it at all.

Use your Civics wisely. After you conquer some cities, they're not doing you much good. The key to having wars benefit you is making your newly conquered lands benefit you as soon as possible. You may want Theocracy during the war, but Organized Religion is probably better in building the new cities up. Send Missionaries if they don't have your state religion. Relocate some Workers if the land around has been pillaged, etc.

[CATHODERAY]

Thanx guys... perhaps I should try epic...
and what about the land size? I've noticed that every time I play a have about the same amount of cities (7-9), 2 neighbours of about the same strenght, ect. It just plays the same! maybe the solution IS simple (as you've suggested, to play epic) its just that when I played Civ2 or even Civ3, every time the game 'felt' different despite being played under the same conditions.

[Solver]

I don't know about that, my games are fairly different. I assume you are playing with the default number of AI opponents?

Also try Fractal instead of Continents for some slightly more interesting stuff.

But yeah, my games are different. Some games I expand, fight and grow big, other games I have fewer cities, but very strong ones...

[Thedrin]

Try playing pangaea as an experiment.Total continent lands tend to be less in CivIV than in previous versions so it's possible that you're seeing reduced variance in diplomatic relations as a result of less shared borders. On pangaea things should be a lot more interesting.

Alternatively try crowding the map. Say 13 civs on large. Early wars of expansion can lead to a more interesting diplomatic reality in the mid to late game.

[bjsiders]

I discovered that playing on normal speed, by the time I got to the industrial revolution, new unit that became available were outdated before I could even get one built. Especially musketman -> riflemen -> infantry. To a lesser extent, knights -> cavalry had the same problem. I play on marathon mostly, it's the only way I find that wars are at all satisfying. Otherwise I start a war and if it lasts more than about 15-20 turns my units are now three generations of technology behind.

As for the economy, I basically build 0 farms and 100% cottages except for any city I want to be a GP factory, or cities that are uniquely located to acquire resources but happen to be devoid of food supply. I'll farm those to keep pop up. But beyond that, I go basically all cottages and my economy manages to keep up.

If you get in a bind with the money, run through all your cities and click the "coin" icon in the governer screen - set them all, especially your coastal cities, to focus on trade. My last game, I neglected my trade technologies and expanded too quickly and found myself with 0% science and -12gold per turn. My money supply hit 100 gold and currency was 20 turns away. I switched every city over to cash and was able to prop up the economy long enough to discover currency and get things fixed.

Also, don't hesitate to sell off tech, even cutting-edge, hard-earned tech, for bottom dollar. The money in your pocket will fund your next research and allow you to run a 100% science economy for a long time. I'll pursue one tough tech and then sell it off to everybody. Yeah, they all catch up, sometimes I only get 100-200 gold for something that the AI would want 4000 for, but if that 100-200 gold means I can run 100% science instead of 80% science for the next 20 turns, it'll pay off when I get more tech, more quickly.

I am usually back of the pack for tech up through the the medieval period, and don't really pull ahead until the renaissance. After that I leave everybody else choking on my dust.

[Quick]

An alternative, when at war, is to hold a defensive position and build your civiliztion. With a few forts and a good mix of units I find that I can hold a border with few unit losses. Then as I grow, I sloooowly attack and hold enemy cities.

Watching the pace of expansion can keep the economy strong. Slow, controled growth beats the economy down blues.

[joncnunn]

A few more pointers:

After the war, add Court Houses to the conquered lands. Found the FP in the capital of your first opponent.

And definately, post successful war, you may want to choose lower cost civics. (Probably not Pacifism though; your army is probably post-war big enough to cost more under Pacifism than the zero civic cost pays.)

During the war itself, consider weather the city is a valuable one for you. Because of the city maintanance costs; you might well want fewer cities to cover your opponents lands than they had.

In addiition, post war if you find yourself "losing the peace", you may want to start another war.

[Olavi]

Re: Need a tip about Civ4

I can't do much more than repeat what others have already said.

Originally posted by CATHODERAY
During the war,(in which I usually conquer some cities but dont eliminate the enemy), my progress is vastly slowed down. When the war ends, I'm behind the other civs (technology-wise) and I cant catch up with them (despite the fact that I have more cities and more powerfull armies).

In Civ IV, quality wins quantity. A couple of excellent cities is usually better than a large bunch of mediocre cities. When conquering a city, consider whether you really want it permanently or should it be razed instead. You suffer technologically because city maintenance is getting too high.

If you do want a large empire with a lot of cities, you must start working for it right from turn 1. The most important thing are probably cottages. Go for Pottery and cottage good tiles (floodplains, riverside grasslands) as soon as possible. The sooner they start to mature, the sooner you can afford to support that two or three extra cities.

Courthouses are also essential for a large empire.

both medieval and renaissance eras pass by, which is no fun at all - I dont get to 'taste' this part of history (again, at all!)

Epic speed!

And by the way, every game feels the same (despite the fact that I choose the same conditions, in previous titles taht didnt happen).

Weird. My experience is just the opposite. Alternative strategic approaches, more advanced diplomacy and new concepts like religion make my games vary a lot.

[Jaybe]

Originally posted by CATHODERAY
Thanx guys... perhaps I should try epic...
and what about the land size? I've noticed that every time I play a have about the same amount of cities (7-9), 2 neighbours of about the same strenght, ect. It just plays the same! maybe the solution IS simple (as you've suggested, to play epic) its just that when I played Civ2 or even Civ3, every time the game 'felt' different despite being played under the same conditions.

For a real epic, with more of a civ3 feel, play with larger maps, with at least the 'normal' number of civs, at slower speed.

Such as Huge/fractal or continents with 9 opponents, epic or (better yet) marathon speed.

[Harovan]

From a certain point on it's usually wise not to fight wars of conquest.

Firstly, you gain large cities without any or only with a few improvements, and it takes a lot of time and effort to get them efficient. Secondly, their tiles are usually poorly improved. Thirdly, they have accumulated a large amount of foreign culture and cities inhabited with a large amount of pissed off foreigners can get a real nuisance, if you fight prolongued wars against their home country. Furthermore, as others mentioned, it costs you, and dearly. One of the first rules of strategy is, don't fight a war if you don't gain anything by winning it.

From that certain point on, rather fight wars of destruction.

Pillage them clean. Wipe out all their nifty full developed villages and towns. Raze their roads. Back to nature should be your motto. Deprive them of all resources, so their foreign trades break. Bomb them back into the stone age. With one word, use modern American tactics. And if you really really must attack a city, raze it. Don't settle there, that city will be crappy and undeveloped anyway. Let the AI settle there and waste its resources. It will likely not succeed to build a city powerhouse there until the game ends. And if it does, fine, raze it again.

[Jaybe]

Yes, late wars of conquest (as opposed to destruction) can cost you dearly, unless you have a robust economy. Running the state property civic may also make a substantial difference.

Wars in the modern era playing huge/marathon games can be alot of work, in that there can be lots of area involved, and scores of units to manage. Some games, I still do it for the domination win.

[Olavi]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
From a certain point on it's usually wise not to fight wars of conquest.

Well I wouldn't go this far. Limited and well planned conquest wars are OK to me.

But before starting a war, one should have clear goals for the war and a planned way to stop fighting when the goals have been achieved.

So it may be wise to attack for valuable resources. It may even be wise to capture one or two large border cities just for expansion, assuming that your economy can take the rising maintenance price.

But unlimited, out-and-out conquest frenzy is no good, especially not in the early game. It will leave you with large but unefficient land area, high city maintenance and poor research.

[foudres]

Well it's just a matter of time and how to do it.

First you need to have between 4 and 8 cities on your own.

Many time, more than 5-6 is really difficult to manage at higher difficulties.

You need to have production cities of course but you really need commerce/research cities.

Thoses cities should have more food than need and 2-3 tile with high production. All other tiles should be seft sufficiant on food and you should cotage them all (or use the special resources).

Typical good research/commerce cities are with a river (give +1 gold to adjacent tiles, and +2 health), 1-3hill, maybe an iron/coper/horse title for added production and that's it.

Jungle zone are very good cites for commerce cities but you need iron working and 2 worker per cities to make them productive fast enough.


When you have thoses commerce cities... You can conquer the entire world til domination and have no problem with research or gold... And the additionnal cities five you plenty of production.

in civ4 you can still conquer the world... but you must plan for it.