I'm a newcomer to OCC (tho' not to Civ -- I've managed to beat Deity a couple of times, so I think I can claim to have passed the 'rookie' stage!).
I've read the 'Paulicy' with great interest, tho' I found it raised more questions for me than it answered - especially when I actually tried a couple of OCC games.
One thing, amongst many, that wasn't made clear, was how to use diplomacy to keep powerful civs off your back. I tend to play normal Civ fairly aggressively at least in the early stages -- and retaliation, taking an enemy's city, is one of the best ways to cool him down and get him out of your hair. But you can't do this when you only have 3 warriors guarding your one and only city!! Yet a policy of total appeasement doesn't seem to work either: you send an emissary with the kindly intention of sweetening a hostile opponent with a gift, and before you can get a word in edgeways he's declared war on you or demanded punitive tribute!
In the 'Paulicy' there IS mention in a couple of places of being at war, gaining a cease-fire, and demanding tribute. But how can you afford to be at war when all your fortunes hang on one meagrely-defended city?! Likewise demanding tribute: fine when you have the muscle to back it up, but not when you're the poor relation! Or do all these comments merely reveal that I didn't do well enough in the opening stages of the game?!
I'd be grateful for any enlightening comments from those who've been this way before!
They were all the time enthusiastic & worshipful. I kept feeding them all the techs I managed to get and then asked for the gift so I sort-of sold my techs
For the record, I played as Zulus with version 2.42. My power was 'pathetic' all the time. The world & landmasses were both large so AI had plenty of space to build large empires. Actually it's good thing to play with large world: AI builds more cities-->they get richer-->they give all the gold to you
-->you get richer! 
Comment