Trouble at low difficulty levels

[jnh140]

Trouble on noble settings:

I'm running the latest version of BTS. Been playing civ4 since release, on and off. Got back into it recently after a couple rousing games of col.

Civ2 is my favorite game ever. And the habits I learned in civ 2 have followed me to civ 4, and my gameplay is suffering massively. Even on noble difficulty, I am generally near the bottom of the power graphs, when most posters tend to say they are twice their nearest competitors throughout the game.


For general style, i'd always been a builder. Well, I quit building so many wonders. Course now I don't get nearly as many great people either. I beeline bronze, then I generally beeline liberalism for the free tech while picking up essentials along the way. I cottage spam, and chop after mathematics. I've really had to retrain myself to build units-- I build freakishly too few units if I don't work at it.

My last game I was on an island with montezuma. I warrior rushed him, and filled out the island. Some folks came accross me later, turned out I was basically Haiti and they were building very nice trains while I was discovering the merits of maces. Restarted the game to pick up a different order of techs... well, this time they were only up on me by 500 points when they found me.

I'm currently playing julius ceaser, I'm keeping my cities on the coast, try to keep 2 or 3 resource tiles at least per city, cottage spamming in general.

Theres a missing link here that I'm just not catching. Any advice is appreciated!

[jbavon]

Well I'm not as big an expert as others on this forum. I play Prince. But by isolating yourself on an island, you are alone in researching the tech tree because you dont have contact with others.

Meanwhile your competitors are happily trading techs left, right and center on the main continent leaving you to fall behind.

Thats the main problem I can see. Otherwise you're doing things okay although i beeline for other techs than you.

[wodan11]

It's likely you're building or conquering too many cities. Before you get Code of Laws (courthouses), currency (extra trade routes and markets), and other helpful techs, you really have to watch how much of your economy is paying for maintenance. Before this point, 5-6 cities is all you can support. Even if you have to raze some of a neighbor's cities and rebuild them later, that is often the best choice.

Keep an eye on the finance screen (F2), as well your beaker percentage (top left). If you drop below 50% research, that's a good benchmark of when you have to stop making/conquering cities until you get more economic tools. This is for a CE (cottage economy) which is what you're running. There are other ways to play but they will probably just confuse you with too much information right now.

Even after you get those techs, you will need to keep an eye on your research %. Again, if it drops below 50%, you're getting into trouble. Better is if you can keep it around 70% all game except for short periods when it might drop a bit.

Speaking of all this, I would suggest you insert a middle step in your beeline: Bronze Working, then Currency and Code of Laws (in either order), then Liberalism.

good luck!

[jnh140]

Thanks for the help. I have been keeping >50% generally all the time... a virtue of being trapped on a very small island. But I think I have been too late on currency. I will attempt to pick that up for my next run.

Also, I just realized, I forgot to pick up sailing... of all techs... until someone else almost met me. Did that squelch my coastal commerce?

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Hey, jhn! I'm a vet Civ2 player as well as a long-time poster here, and I'm having the exact same problems you are. As I try to sort them out, here are the Civ2 habits I'm trying to break (especially because I'm a builder like you):

1) As you've figured out, forget World wonders for the most part. Most of them are not that great. I like the Parthenon, Great Library, and Eiffel Tower, but none of them are the kind of must-gets that Civ2 had.

2) Yeah, build units. What I do now is look to found my second city on production-rich terrain and just turn it into a unit factory. I end up with one underdeveloped city, but otherwise everyone is well-developed and well-protected. I try to have a 6-city empire, with a barracks-built spearman, axman, and swordman in each city, by the year 0 A.D. This is do-able and seems to keep the peace and neutralize the barbs.

Still, I can't get over how unit-crazy the AI is. In my last game, I shared an island with the Greeks; we had very good relations, and neither of us were are war with anyone else, but at one point the Greek city closest to my border had something like a dozen units in it, and most of those were offensive (knights and catapult). That's very, very different from the Civ2 AI, and I have to completely rethink my playing style to deal with it.

3) Trade techs. In Civ2, I traded techs very, very sparingly, both to maintain my tech advantage and because getting the "wrong" techs would delay my march through the tech tree. But I keep lagging behind in the tech race on Noble, and I think it's because the other civs are all trading techs like crazy. So I have to conquer my reluctance here.

4) Try to found a religion, either Confuscianism or Taoism (because those techs are on your beeline anyway). Founding a religion is beneficial in may ways, obviously, but the big one for me is that it allows me to spread the religion to my neighbors and see when they seem to be building an attack force (see #2 above). If they're building-up, it's a sign that they think they can take me and therefore I need to build up, too.

That's what I've figured out so far, in part thanks to advice I've heard here. Let's keep sharing, and good luck Civving!

[johnmcd]

Don't worry too much about the power graph, the AI understands that it has to divide it by the number of cities, it's relative to empire size, not an absolute measure. If you only have eight or so cities, the most I normally have, you can be bottom by miles, a tenth of the big guys, and they'll still leave you alone even on emperor.

So long as you have three units per city, plus (in my opinion) a float of a dozen to counter attack with, you'll be fine.

Those lonely island games are hard though. As you discover the world you'll rapidly catch up though. Try and push for an unusual tech you can trade to fill in gaps. Music or Philosophy can be a good bet as techs the person who is first to caravels won't yet have.

[Lord Avalon]

Hire scientists! In your science city/-ies build a Library and have enough food to have scientist specialists. They'll keep your tech rate up, even if your science slider drops below 50%.

While it's good to have someone to trade techs with, it's tough to be alone on a continent with Monty: if you don't wipe him out, he may wipe you out.

[The Priest]

I would also question the wisdom of 'bee-lining' to certain techs. I know that some folks have very particular strategies worked out, particularly in combination with the oracle. But that is all a bit technical if you ask me. There are some you can avoid if you want (e.g. I suppose archery, horseriding, aesthetics, music, drama) but most nations will end up with most of them. Yes there are choices to be made about order, but the later ones are much more costly, and you pay more if others haven't got them yet, and if you don't have all of the techs which lead to them, so bee-lining is very expensive. Until you are happily beating the AI, I would advance on a broad front with tech - yes choose to go for bronze working from the off if you want, but generally keep knocking off the cheap ones don't make a headlong dash for things which are expensive.

Though if you do have nations to trade with, picking up one which others don't have yet can be great - you can find yourself getting five different techs back all in exchange for one unusual one

[Willem]

Originally posted by jnh140
Even on noble difficulty, I am generally near the bottom of the power graphs, when most posters tend to say they are twice their nearest competitors throughout the game.

I'd hardly say most players. If you can be in the top third of the graph you should be alright, provided you don't have Monty or some other loony as a neighbour.

Course now I don't get nearly as many great people either.

Wonders don't really have alot to do with Great People, you get more points with a regular building that allows you run to Specialists. For instance with a Market you can have two Merchants for 6 Great Merchant points. You'd need to build 3 Wonders in order to match that. Wonders only help out, it's the regular buildings you need to be concerned about when trying to get GPs.

...and chop after mathematics.

You shouldn't wait until then. If you feel like you could benefit from an earlier chop, go ahead and do so. You might actually have that Forest regrow so you end up with an extra chop.

...well, this time they were only up on me by 500 points when they found me.

I'd take those points with a grain of salt if I were you. More important factors are how many techs ahead and the size of their military. I've had plenty of games where I was behind in points but ahead in those two areas.

[joncnunn]

Re: Trouble at low difficulty levels

In Civ IV, Noble isn't a "low difficulty level", it's the closest to equal level (like Monarch in Civ II).

There's a recent thread dealing with a Civ II Vet new to Civ IV, which you might want to read.

This does sound like you've gotten your head handed to you, so I think I will recomend you droping down one level to Warlord for now, but as soon as you win one Warlord game go back up to Noble.

Liberalism though is a bit far to beline from directly from Bronze Working.

Think a bit smaller. After a succesful warrior rush you definately need the basic worker techs you haven't reserached yet. And it sounds like you wiped out the only civ you have pre Caravel contact with so you'll be reseraching everything yourself for a while. So if Montzie didn't found a religion for you, after the basic worker techs I'd go immedately for Code of Laws to both found a religion and provide Court Houses. I'd next go for Currency, and 3rd Optics. Build two caravels and send them in opposite directions.

Originally posted by jnh140
Trouble on noble settings:

I'm running the latest version of BTS. Been playing civ4 since release, on and off. Got back into it recently after a couple rousing games of col.

Civ2 is my favorite game ever. And the habits I learned in civ 2 have followed me to civ 4, and my gameplay is suffering massively. Even on noble difficulty, I am generally near the bottom of the power graphs, when most posters tend to say they are twice their nearest competitors throughout the game.


For general style, i'd always been a builder. Well, I quit building so many wonders. Course now I don't get nearly as many great people either. I beeline bronze, then I generally beeline liberalism for the free tech while picking up essentials along the way. I cottage spam, and chop after mathematics. I've really had to retrain myself to build units-- I build freakishly too few units if I don't work at it.

My last game I was on an island with montezuma. I warrior rushed him, and filled out the island. Some folks came accross me later, turned out I was basically Haiti and they were building very nice trains while I was discovering the merits of maces. Restarted the game to pick up a different order of techs... well, this time they were only up on me by 500 points when they found me.

I'm currently playing julius ceaser, I'm keeping my cities on the coast, try to keep 2 or 3 resource tiles at least per city, cottage spamming in general.

Theres a missing link here that I'm just not catching. Any advice is appreciated!

[jnh140]

Thanks for these helpful suggestions. I was wondering if my beeline was really actually helping me or not. After following some of these strats, I actually did quite a bit better. But I'm still definatly not ready to move out of noble yet.

Biggest problem is maintaining the discipline to have specialized cities. I try to build everything in every city! And I always forget what the heck i'm doing. Maybe i'll just start naming my cities "industry" or "specialists."

which brings me to another question, it always seems like i'm massively hampering growth if I assign specialists. Should I be building more farms, or what?

[rah]

First ask yourself why you're assiging specialists.

If it's your GP farm, then that city should have as much food available as you can manage which usually means lots of farms. .

If you're doing the two scientists in every city to make up for your crappy research percentage because your empire is expanding then you only need enough food to support those two with some extra for growth. The same goes for usuing merchants to keep your money up.

If the city is a military unit whip city, the extra food from farms let's you work more mines and whip more troops.

Unless you're running representation, a specialist may not be desired in some cities. Working a square can provide more return than the specialist.

Make sure there's a reason you're assigning specialists in cities.

[Solomwi]

Re: Trouble at low difficulty levels

Originally posted by jnh140
For general style, i'd always been a builder. Well, I quit building so many wonders. Course now I don't get nearly as many great people either.

At the risk of covering some ground rah and Willem already touched on, this sounds like you're relying on wonders for GP generation, which in turn means you're not relying on specialists. If GP generation is a goal of yours, this is a mistake.

World wonders generate 2 GP points per turn (GPP). National wonders generate 1 GP. Specialists generate 3 GPP. Specialists are easier to get than wonders, for several reasons:

1. Cost. Basically, specialist-enabling buildings are cheaper than wonders. Consider the forge and Colossus, both available with metal casting. The forge costs 120 hammers and enables an engineer for 3 GPP, and the Colossus costs 250 hammers (effectively 125 if you have copper, making it nearly as cheap as the forge, but resource-dependent), but gives 2 GPP. A full cost-benefit analysis is complicated somewhat by the opportunity cost of the engineer (i.e., the yield of the tile that citizen would be working if not assigned as a specialist), among other factors on both sides, but for GPP purposes, the forge allows you to collect more points starting at an earlier date, or at worst, the same time. For a more striking example, consider the 90-hammer library, which allows two scientists (6 GPP), compared with any of the aesthetics wonders, just one tech away. To match the base GPP output of the library scientists, you'd need to build all three wonders, at a total hammer cost of between 575 (if you're lucky enough to have gold, ivory and marble all hooked up) and 1150 (with none of the relevant resources). The Parthenon's 50% GPP bonus applies also to specialists, and needs to be fed by base GPP, which is why I've ignored it here. The initial requirements also favor the library. It only needs writing, while the wonders need writing as a prerequisite to aesthetics, meditation (Shwedagon Paya), polytheism (Parthenon) and two monuments (Statue of Zeus). Even just grabbing the cheapest one will cost you 300 hammers (150 with ivory). Again, you start collecting GPP far earlier going the specialist route, and collect more per turn, in effect, unless you built all the wonders in the same city.

This makes the most effective wonders for GPP purposes those that either come with free specialists (Great Library, Temple of Artemis, Hanging Garden sort of, Statue of Liberty, National Park) or enable more specialists, assuming you can feed them (Angkor Wat, Kremlin, Oxford University, Wall Street), and obviously the Parthenon with its multiplier effect. Note that this is mainly independent of the effects of the wonders, which to me provide a far more compelling reason to pursue (or not) a particular wonder than simply 2 GPP. Note also that I'm not recommending eschewing wonders altogether. If it makes sense, build it. 2 GPP is better than zero. My point is not to rely on multiple wonders for your GPP. Rely on specialists and augment them with wonders that make sense when all factors are considered, but keep in mind that, as rah at least implied, specialists need to make overall sense, too.

It's also possible to open up unlimited specialist slots via the Caste System civic. This lets you run as many scientists, artists and merchants as you like, meaning food is your limiting factor, and the only hammer cost depends on what tiles you're not working by assigning specialists, or farming to feed the specialists, instead of building production improvements (which really doesn't become a factor until workshops and watermills become viable later in the game).

2. Exclusivity. If an AI builds a library and assigns scientists, that doesn't keep you from doing the same. If the AI builds Stonehenge, though, you can't build it, too. This makes the specialist route more reliable, since nothing the AI can do short of taking away your city can stop you from deciding how many GPP that city will generate.

3. Flexibility. If you're generating GPP from specialists, you can easily affect what kind of GP you'll generate next, within some limits. Need a merchant? Assign merchant specialists only in a city that can support several. Need an academy for that newly conquered enemy capital with three fish and a riverside corn? Run scientists instead. The main limitation is that, early in the game, you can only run one engineer or spy, and your priests are limited by the number of religions spread to or founded in your lands. Caste System can be had early and give you great flexibility with the other three specialist types.

Trying to do the same with wonders isn't impossible, but requires several cities with high enough production to build wonders competitively, and the discipline to keep cities limited to wonders which produce one type of GP. Certain wonders, like Pyramids for a Great Engineer or Stonehenge/Oracle for a Great Prophet, are fantastic for overcoming specialist limitations to get a particular type of GP very early, but as the game progresses, the GP pools become muddier and the sheer number of points required for that next GP gets higher, which makes this approach less effective.

In short, by making better use of specialists, you'll hardly notice the GPP you miss out on by passing up wonders. Given the other benefits of cutting back on wonders, especially early on, it's well worth investing some time into learning how to use specialists properly.

A personal anecdote: I'm helping a good friend learn the game by playing a series of Noble-level succession games, where we alternate 20-turn sets, with various leaders. The biggest change for him has been giving up wonders. He more or less saw the light when, as Asoka, we were able to axe-rush Ramesses and expand organically at the same time, basically giving us 4 cities before any AI had gotten its third up, and use that to catapult us to game-long dominance. I still had to lay down a firm "no wonders" rule in the latest game with Boudica of Japan, but he's coming around and expressing continued amazement at the difference it makes.

[rjmatsleepers]

Originally posted by Willem

Wonders don't really have alot to do with Great People, you get more points with a regular building that allows you run to Specialists. For instance with a Market you can have two Merchants for 6 Great Merchant points. You'd need to build 3 Wonders in order to match that. Wonders only help out, it's the regular buildings you need to be concerned about when trying to get GPs.

Except the Great Library, of course, which gives you 6 points from 2 free scientists as well as the 2 from the wonder itself.

RJM

[jnh140]

Well, with some of the tips, things are going better. Played a normal sized map on noble in my most recent game, and abso-positively obliterated the opposition with a 2k point lead. And now I'm rolling my tanks over longbowmen and the odd musketeer. This was made possible by a 2-warrior capture of my pop-5 neighbor city, with 3 clams and a corn. That city got to the high 20s before Sid's Sushi corp boosted it to the 30s, so I don't know if its really fair to consider my skill to be much greater, my start was simply fantastic. I ended up building basically every wonder simply because I could.

I'm much better at using specialists now. I think I took the advice to cottage-spam just a little too seriously, and really did build no improvements except for resource dependent improvements and cottages.

So heres my next question: I notice that I *always* start really, really close to someone, and that civ number is determined by world size, roughly. Do people generally warmonger the nearest civ in general, or only if he's a meanie, or has something you really want? This is two games in a row i've played where I warrior rushed the nearest town, which was planted barely 10 spaces away.

And thoughts on religion? Two specific questions: I have generally found religion to be generally unhelpful, only really useful for the temple and 10% research bonus of a monastary. Do the 10% bonuses stack for multiple monastaries and temples of multiple religions, and, how important *really* is it to aggressively spread religion to every city in your empire? I understand the benefit of both founding a religion and converting other nations, but I was wondering what you really get from it, outside the religion civic considerations, which I do get.