What level are people are playing at?

[One_more_turn]

Wow, it's Gaussian random distribution.

[Verrucosus]

I'd had some success at Monarch, but Blake's improved AI prompted me to move back to Prince. I think I still need to play a few more Prince games before advancing to Monarch again.

[conmcb25]

I play on Chieftain

CIV IV is SOOOOOOOO hard.

[couerdelion]

Originally posted by Blake
Monarch. Once Monarch got too easy, I upgraded the AI so I could continue to play on Monarch.

I should perhaps mention that I play Emperor against the stupid AI version.

[Senethro]

I used to be able to beat Emperor though only through cheesy play and much warring. Blake's AI sees me get rushed by my neighbors on Monarch difficulty now, so I'm having trouble leaving Prince.

[DaveV]

I voted Prince (with Blake's AI). I just decided to step down from Monarch after Ghengis successfully attacked me with a few elephants and about 20 longbows. The problem with Monarch is that I have to spend my economy into near-bankruptcy to keep up with the AIs' insane troop buildup.

[DrSpike]

I prefer emperor and monarch, though all levels above Noble inclusive are worth playing.

Like Couerdelion it's usually a choice between stock emperor or Blakish monarch, and I'm waiting for the latter to settle down a bit.

[One_more_turn]

My rule of thumb for necessary aggression is:

At Monarch level, you need to rough up at least 1 AI civ to keep up with AI bonus.

At Emperor level, you need to rough up at least 2 AI civs to do the same. If I can destroy 2 AI civs before 0 AD here, I will be able to win the game.

[Calvin Vu]

Originally posted by rah
I think the biggest leap is from prince to monarch. I probably win as many emp games as monarch so I don't think the difference in those to levels is as great.

I found Emperor to be much harder than Monarch. It depends on the play style and maps, I guess. For people who plays as warmongers and on relatively small maps, then it might not matter much. For me, I only become aggressive only after I get a strong tech lead and can take cities with very few losses and without harming my economic base so that I will fall behind the other peaceful civs in techs. I don't have much problems getting a tech lead at Monarch level (even after Blake's mod). At Emperor, it's too hard now, especially if the techie civs (like India or Mansa) are far away and are left alone to do their researches.

I do pick my "favorite/interesting" civs to play all the time though. Since many people prefer to use random civs, I just tried that at Prince. The first random leader I picked was Stalin who is not really my techie type but I have no problem winning essentially the same way. The second one is the Zulu guy which is even worse for my style of playing.

[Addled Platypus]

I have made the transition to Noble..woot

[couerdelion]

Originally posted by One_more_turn
My rule of thumb for necessary aggression is:

At Monarch level, you need to rough up at least 1 AI civ to keep up with AI bonus.

At Emperor level, you need to rough up at least 2 AI civs to do the same. If I can destroy 2 AI civs before 0 AD here, I will be able to win the game.

2 civs before 0 AD!!

Surely it is already won if you can do that!!

[One_more_turn]

I need to state that I always play on epic speed setting. This helps warmongering more.

[couerdelion]

Even so, 2 civs is a very tall order. If I go for an early rush then I will presumably have destroyed one civ before 0 AD but, on more normal settings I am only likely to have stolen a few barbarian cities and then taken a large chunk out of one other civ by this time. That’s usually adequate to set the scene for later domination. Personally, I find that too much early combat can be a significant drain on resources in the early game.

And razing does not really solve this too much because the gold benefit from a razed city is not nearly sufficient to justify the military expense of capturing it.

[AshenPlanet]

.

2 civs by 0ad is about normal for me too.
In both my emperor wins, I had beaten or was in the process of beating my 3rd civ by 0ad.

I think starting resources are more important than leader bonuses - starting next to copper or horses is a huge deal.
In both my emporer wins, I started with horses in my capitol.
In both my emporer losses, I didn't have horses or copper anywhere near my capitol.

I play normal speed standard or large terra maps or the earth map.

.

[couerdelion]

So when are you guys finishing your games?