Carry on or fold? (Game save attachment inside)

[The Priest]

Definitely not sure, it just seemed a feasible interpretation of the strange reports.

And if I were teaching the AI how to play, it is what I would teach it - keep investing for the long-term (buildings, workers and settlers) unless you notice a neighbour is preparing for war.

[Theben]

Originally posted by NFIH
However, this time I'm playing defensively as mentioned and am prepared for this style. I've got two military cities and two commerce cities. I build plenty of workers and improve land like mad. I hardly ever slave so that the populations can grow at full tilt. It works well and I have a tech and points lead with a strong, diversified military (though I lack horses). I've even founded three religions by the time I quit and am spreading one of them (Judaism) as liberally as I can.

If you didn't slave at the start, it could explain why you're so far behind later.

I also was attacked by Suleiman, but repulsed him handily, with a minor drop in my research. I've got a before and after save which I can post after work tonight. I'm already ahead of everyone else in tech, although Hannibal is close behind.
Fun game. Lots of warfare.

[Diadem]

Remember that you are creative. Fast and wide expansion (my 2nd and 3rd cities were far away from my capital) gives you a lot territory. This denies the AI critical resources and forces them to expand the other direction.

Around turn 80 the map is definitely not yet filled. In fact some civs are still on 1 city.

I really can't see why others experience continuous attacks. I never have such problems on the lower difficulty levels. Not this map, not other maps. I always have a few thousand years to expand.

The only explanation I can think of is that I'm those players are too slow. Number of soldiers is not the only statistic the AI looks at when declaring. If you're behind in power and techs ...

[Colm]

If these neighbors are so close, why don't you start (at 4000 BC) with a few warriors and kill off one of them? I always do that to have more space around me.
Usually 2 or 3 warriors is sufficient to annihilate a civ at the start.

[Ming]

That would depend on what level you are playing at.
If it is at a level when they start with archers, a few warriors isn't going to do it. (Unless you are the Incans)

[NFIH]

Originally posted by Theben


If you didn't slave at the start, it could explain why you're so far behind later.

I also was attacked by Suleiman, but repulsed him handily, with a minor drop in my research. I've got a before and after save which I can post after work tonight. I'm already ahead of everyone else in tech, although Hannibal is close behind.
Fun game. Lots of warfare.

Normally, I do slave. But I noticed that the apparent reason I was behind in tech/commerce was because with few cities to start I had a limited economy and slaving means tiles aren't being worked. So I tried a game where I didn't slave (except for very key moments) and was able to get big cities fast--and work all the cottage tiles as quickly as possible. That kept me ahead in the tech race despite having fewer cities than my rivals.

[NFIH]

Originally posted by Colm
If these neighbors are so close, why don't you start (at 4000 BC) with a few warriors and kill off one of them? I always do that to have more space around me.
Usually 2 or 3 warriors is sufficient to annihilate a civ at the start.

Tried that. Doesn't work. Everyone has archers or spears and/or has built on hills by the time you can get, say, even two warriors--never mind the five you would really need--over to an enemy city. Needless to say, that doesn't cut it.

It's worked for me on other starts on other maps, but not this one.

This is why I tried an upgraded axe rush instead (against Justinian), which kinda works but ultimately takes too long to complete and puts you too far in the hole against other civs that weren't at war.

[NFIH]

Originally posted by Diadem
Remember that you are creative. Fast and wide expansion (my 2nd and 3rd cities were far away from my capital) gives you a lot territory. This denies the AI critical resources and forces them to expand the other direction.

Around turn 80 the map is definitely not yet filled. In fact some civs are still on 1 city.

I really can't see why others experience continuous attacks. I never have such problems on the lower difficulty levels. Not this map, not other maps. I always have a few thousand years to expand.

The only explanation I can think of is that I'm those players are too slow. Number of soldiers is not the only statistic the AI looks at when declaring. If you're behind in power and techs ...

I might be off on my turn 80 count. Just going off memory. But I should note that I have been following a maximum expansion strategy to begin with--on the order of worker-->settler-->settler-->settler. Is it possible to go faster than that? (And this build assumes no interruption from barbs, which hasn't been the case, so I've typically had to delay the third settler in order to defend my cap from barb attacks.)

[Theben]

Originally posted by NFIH

Normally, I do slave. But I noticed that the apparent reason I was behind in tech/commerce was because with few cities to start I had a limited economy and slaving means tiles aren't being worked. So I tried a game where I didn't slave (except for very key moments) and was able to get big cities fast--and work all the cottage tiles as quickly as possible. That kept me ahead in the tech race despite having fewer cities than my rivals.

You slave to upgrade your cities quicker. A good example would be sacrificing 2 pop for a granary, with enough food to grow 1 pop next turn. So you lose 1 pop of production for the moment but get it back quickly and get quicker growth down the line.
With creative you should slave out libraries too. And if you can build the Pyramids, Thebes would be a good GP farm- it was for me- and allow you to run a specialist economy.

But I should note that I have been following a maximum expansion strategy to begin with--on the order of worker-->settler-->settler-->settler. Is it possible to go faster than that?

Some people swear by that formula. I'm a bit skeptical. I prefer to grow a bit and then slave/chop out settlers. I assume the former method involves a lot more chopping. Either way you'll need some early farms or mines and Thebes in this game offers both.

[NFIH]

Originally posted by Diadem
Just for the fun of it I opened the worldbuilder on my 900BC save (the end of my first DAR).

The AI doesn't have anything to attack me with. Only Suleiman has anything resembling an army, but he's almost as peace-loving as ghandi. And if he does attack, those two axes won't impress me much.

Justinian and Cyrus still haven't hooked up their strategic resources, and Zara Yaqob doesn't have any to begin with. They can't attack me.

No, it looks like I'm quite safe. And I really wonder how others managed to get attacked on this map.

OK, I've attached another save. This time I tried a less militarized approach.

As you'll see it's turn 102, 325 BC or so, and Suleiman has DoWed on me. So not much farther along than turn 80. I went into World Builder and sure enough Suleiman's military is considerably larger than mine and includes copper and iron for axes and swords.

I'm in no position to beat him off even if I switch to military now. So I don't think the pacifist approach will work on this map and it must be plain luck that you weren't attacked as well.

[NFIH]

Yet another try at this map.

Honestly, am I just getting unusually screwed here or am I doing something wrong? Check this out:

This time I build up a strong military, good enough for third best on that score.

I'm Buddhist and share the religion with four other civs, including two of my three most aggressive neighbours, Justinian and Alexander.

In AD 820, Suleiman attacks. As usual. Ho-hum. He assaults a city and can't take it. I take one of his. Also, he's not Buddhist. So I turn to my religious friends for help. Everything is redded out. I can't do a bloody thing with them. WTF?

But get this: Not only do I not even have the opportunity to ask for help from my brothers, but in AD 1030 Alex and Qin Shi attack me. And Alex is Buddhist!

Attached are both saves from the years the civs declared on me. Please comment on whatever it is I'm doing wrong because I don't see it.

(Can't seem to attach two files so the second is in a new post below.)

[NFIH]

Save from AD 1030 of the same game mentioned above.

[Theben]

I think what we really need is a detailed report of your 1st 50 turns.

[Theben]

The point of this is to show your overreliance on a built-up military. This 1st pic is when Sully DoW'ed me. I admit I was surprised- I was expecting Cyrus to. He has a large force just across the border.
Sullys main force is highlighted, my force in Alexandria is also shown. Note the disparity. I do, however, have 10 cuirassiers in Heliopolis as a mobile defense, pulled from the Carthaginian/Byzantine border to watch Cyrus.



The AI, being stupid, plods up to my city and instead of attacking ASAP, tries to knock down the walls 1st. This allows my cuirassiers & cannons to destroy his army.

A similar situation plays out near Thebes. It also originally had 3 defenders. Sully sent a large force, but no seige equipment. Thebes gets reinforcements from Memphis, which not only has Heroic Epic, but 5 settled generals. After receiving some reinforcements himself, he apparently decides his odds aren't going to get better and tries an all-out assault. I lose nothing, his army is destroyed. Next turn I pick off the wounded limping towards home.
End result is that he pillaged 1 dye, 1 cow, 1 banana, and some roads. I think his spy destroyed a granary in Thebes also.


Sends more troops to a vastly better defended Thebes, again with no support.



Point being it took only a few turns for me to shore up my defenses to the point where he couldn't penetrate. Slavery helped out here, as did Spiritual trait which allowed me to switch quickly between civics. So I think if you rely on 1-2 small, mobile defense forces with some basic defenses in place in each city, and not worry about being attacked so much and instead expand and build, you'll do okay.

[Diadem]

Originally posted by NFIH

OK, I've attached another save. This time I tried a less militarized approach.

As you'll see it's turn 102, 325 BC or so, and Suleiman has DoWed on me. So not much farther along than turn 80. I went into World Builder and sure enough Suleiman's military is considerably larger than mine and includes copper and iron for axes and swords.

I'm in no position to beat him off even if I switch to military now. So I don't think the pacifist approach will work on this map and it must be plain luck that you weren't attacked as well.

Well he attacks with 5 units at turn 102. That's alltogether reasonable, and you should be able to defend against that. There are two things you are doing wrong this game. The first is that you haven't hooked up your trade network. The second is that you are building the wrong buildings and units.

You have copper, but your capital is not connected to it. So you can't slave axes in it. At size 6 you could easily slave 2, maybe even 3, axes before his stack arrives at your city. That's enough to beat back his attack (though he may plunder some tiles). Also with roads you can reinforce your defences quickly from other cities.

And you're building the wrong buildings and units. Don't build walls, not until way later in the game anyway, and even then only in specific circumstances. 50% defence bonus sounds great. But a single axeman would give more effective bonus. And I wouldn't build so many granaries that early either. They are great buildings, don't get me wrong, but I'd say that there are other priorities at the start. Workers (you have enough, but maybe you could've gotten them earlier, I don't know), military, or barrackes. And why are you building obelisks? You are creative! The only city where it might be useful is your capital, for the bonus priests.

I hope I don't criticise too much. I'm just trying to help.

[edit]
Also it looks like you might want to slave a bit more. Your capital for example has unhappiness due to size, no slavery unhappiness, yet you haven't rushed that libary. Why? (You shouldn't rush it now, costs only one pop. Should've slaved at 2 or even 3 pop).

[edit2]
I played your save a few turns and I was still able to beat back his attack with relative easy. Though I had to slave my capital far into the red, which is never nice.

One other thing I noticed. How is it that with 8 workers you still have hooked up so few resources? Your capital was size 6 but had only 4 improved tiles. That's bad. You haven't even hooked up your stone yet. And no roads. With 8 workers you should've been able to improve more (unless you build them only a few turns ago).

Ah, I see, you have way too many improvements around city 2 and 3. They both have 7 improvements, at size 4. That's waste. There's nothing wrong with making improvements for future use, but not while other cities are lacking them.

In my game for example I founded your city 3 two tiles to the east. For a long time it's only improvement was that stone. Nothing else. It started worker and then two quick warriors which didn't grow it and a settler. So it was size 1 for a long time. Hence no need for any other improvement (ofc I would've upgraded the rice, though, had I had Iron Working).

Anyway, bottomline: You need to use your workers smarter, more efficiently!