Scenarios: Conflicts in Civilization

[Marquis de Sodaq]

You've done much better than me. My Kentuckian time warp was from a save in mid 1862. I ought to restart from the beginning , but with a coherent strategy!

How did you manage to produce enough units to capture cities early? Also, how did you keep peace with one while fighting the other?

[La Fayette]

Originally posted by Marquis de Sodaq
How did you manage to produce enough units to capture cities early? Also, how did you keep peace with one while fighting the other?

I didn't capture cities early (not before the end of 1864).
I stayed in democracy and built 4 small cities close to the previous 4 (defenders = poor 'milices', then field artillery ASAP).
Tried to stay at peace and grow through WLTPD. As usual, the AI wasn't willing to let me grow so peacefully, but the field artillery did the job (not without losses, but this is war after all, even if it is civil).
Those cotton merchants are very cheap and travel quite fast, so I managed to get quite a lot of gold from trade, though being at war.
I knew from the start (a glance at civilopedia) that the right unit to attack with was advanced infantry (at least IMO), but of course couldn't start researching seriously the right tech before being somewhat safe and solid. Got the tech mid 64, then incremental rushbuilding at full speed and ATTACK!

I (almost) never managed to keep peace with one while fighting the other. I attacked one whilst defending against the other.
... and the right one to attack was definitely the Union (about 3 defenders/city on the average and almost no counter attack, compared with about 6 defenders/city, many rivered cities (very painful with the units available in this scenario) and harsh counter attacks by the Southerners.

[arii]

I am interested in playing some scenario and compare the strategies/outcome. What scenario are you guys playing now?
La fayette: c'est a cote de quelle ville albi?

[La Fayette]

Originally posted by arii
I am interested in playing some scenario and compare the strategies/outcome. What scenario are you guys playing now?
La fayette: c'est a cote de quelle ville albi?

Hello arii

Albi est à 80km au Nord-Est de Toulouse. C'est là que je travaille.
J'habite Saint-Sulpice, une petite ville de 6000 habitants à mi-chemin entre Toulouse et Albi.

You are welcome to the club of scenario players. There has been quite a high degree of competition and discussion about Rome and about ww2 played with smaller civs, then also about Alexandre.
Since then, most of the discussion has been between Marquis de Sodaq and myself.
If you read my threads 'Delenda sunt', 'Arriba',
'Napoléon...', 'Scenarios: Conflicts in civ', 'Scenarios: Fantastic Worlds' and 'Scenarios: Community', you will know everything.

The last one I played was 'Civil War' (played as Ken Turk, glorious leader of Kentucky).
The one I am playing now is 'Discover' (played as Consul Van Ribannah, glorious leader of the Dutch).


(La Fayette, ready to discuss anything about scenarios with anyone and especially with such an early lander as arii)

[arii]

Thanks!

Il n'y a pas beaucoup de francais par ici.

I've played multiplayer mostly lately but am just getting in some scenarios.
For the early landing, it has been quit some time and some players have done much better recently.

[arii]

I'll try to play the discover scenario as the dutch, deity level to compare. I like the human competition aspect. What is the objective?

[Marquis de Sodaq]

I've played Discover several times. The Dutch are fun because they start out so small. Even so, they are only at a small disadvantage. Bribing Stockholm is good, IIRC.

The basic plan is to capture settlements from the True Peoples, colonize, and get rich! Only Tenochtitlan has even a marginally good defense. Until the Portuguese trade the natives gunpowder, anyway. The Neutrals get to be tiresome with their endless attacks.

Besides trade and settling on the odd spice special, pile up gold by bribing Algiers (gold, harbor).

[La Fayette]

Originally posted by arii
What is the objective?

It is written in the book that the objective is world conquest before 1741. IMO this is exactly the kind of rule that provides what I call 'boring endgame', since the map is quite big and there are already more than 100 cities on the map in 1492.
My proposal for that sort of games (with no specific objective cities defined by the author) is to agree that one stops when one has conquered 1/2 of the cities on the map.
(IMO when you have achieved that, you are sure to win anyway, and this rule would spare us many hours of micromanaging numerous cities, one hour/turn or more, which I consider boring)

THEREFORE I SHALL PLAY THIS SCENARIO UNTIL I OWN ONE HALF OF THE WORLD + 1 CITY (please, tell me if you like the idea)

Marquis
I have now played this game until 1690, with a strategy completely different from what you describe.
I built a small Dutch civ of 7 cities (where I managed to find 'lebensraum': namely Finnland, Scotland, Iceland and West Africa), then started taking the British Isles from the English (took Dublin and York in 1613, then Plymouth in 1618 and London in 1627), then went on taking Eastern Europe from the Neutrals (about 1 city every 5 years on the average).
Beating the English was very easy, but beating the Neutrals is not easy at all: they suffer HUGE losses (more than 7 times higher than mine), but always pour new dragoons and guns on the battlefield.
I think I made a huge strategical mistake when I started fighting the Neutrals instead of taking the rest of Western Europe from the French, the Spaniards and the Portuguese. OK I beat the Neutrals, but much too slowly.
We say in french: 'la nuit porte conseil'.
Therefore I go to bed and probably start a new game tomorrow.

[arii]

I agree that conquering all the cities seems tedious and not fun once the civ are thoroughly beaten. Capturing half+1 of the initial city sounds a lot more reasonable.
Inially the cities are as followed:
North& central america: 11
South Am: 7
Africa: 6
Asia: 17
Europe: 20
So 61 total initial cities
So capturing 31 of those cities sounds like a good goal.

[arii]

Started the game: just massive city building so far.
1521 13 cities
5 in europe, 3 in asia, 5 in north america.

[Marquis de Sodaq]

discover

La Fayette, the basic plan I mention above is more a synopsis of what the intent of the scenario is. I agree with you that for our purposes, this will just not suffice!

I've restarted, but am only about 5 turns into the game. I bribed the spanish musketeer as soon as he was nearer Paris - NON unit for my city. Then my diplomat bribed Berlin as soon as I had the gold. Next up will be Stockholm and a new city or two in scandanavia. Greenland has a good spot or two to settle.

I remember playing as the Spanish and using the conquest of europe as a starting point. First Florence, and two musketeers and a cannon in Fortress Alps to keep the Neutrals at bay. The Portuguese fell to just a few cannon.

The purple cities are a cinch to capture, that is the one real incentive to send a boatload of dragoons across the sea early. Once they get gunpowder from an AI european, they become much harder to capture.

[La Fayette]

Originally posted by arii
Capturing half+1 of the initial city sounds a lot more reasonable.
Inially the cities are as followed:
North& central america: 11
South Am: 7
Africa: 6
Asia: 17
Europe: 20
So 61 total initial cities
So capturing 31 of those cities sounds like a good goal.

I didn't mean half+1 of the initial number of cities, but half+1 of the number of cities on the map when you stop playing, considering you have won (this last number is much higher in this scenario, since the Neutrals and the Natives build a lot of cities).

In fact I don't care which rule we choose.
But I would like it to ensure:
1) the certitude of having won when you stop playing,
2) the certitude tnat you avoid spending hours and hours chasing tiny enemy cities hidden faraway.

[arii]

I feel the same way: I don't like chasing those little cities. Not fun and a waste of time. I suggested the initial cities because otherwise it's hard to know when you have conquered half the cities. I would prefere a fairly precise objective for compatison purposes. Besides the initial cities are going to become the big cities later in the game, thus the more difficult to capture and the more valuable.
I stopped my initial attempt. My quick city building ran into happinness problem quickly since the game is at deity. Also the neutral built mike on the other side of the world so no hope to capture it anytime soon.
In my newer attempts I go for mike very early. I try to keep my number of cities around 12 while I build up my civ.
The neutrals are a pain in the ass. They declare war very early and send scores of musketers, dragon and canoons at you. So I invested heavily in defense, with barracs and city walls. Then they started to bribe my cities. Lost quite a bit of time and ressources bribing back 2-3 cities.
How are you guys doing?

[Marquis de Sodaq]

Discover

1525, the Dutch have four cities (A'dam, Berlin, Stockholm, N.V.L.), six NON-units, and a heap of gold. My seers told me there was a good city spot on Greenland. I sail off with a settler - the damned Portuguese already have a city there! So off the north america to settle Nieuwvondland (guess where that is ). Caravan deliveries to Tenochtitlan have so far reaped at least 330 gold per camel.

Meanwhile, Amsterdam is size 16. The english have declared war, but this actually looks beneficial. A'dam rolls out a diplomat every 2 turns. Once the eighth one is built, I plan to shuttle across the channel to destroy London's improvements until the harbor is gone. Or maybe until there's nothing at all left standing. They will hopefully free up those last 3 ocean squares for A'dam's use...

Two more settlers are sailing westward to colonize some specials. Then it will be time to roll out the bad guys and send them to england for holiday. Once the english are speaking Dutch, I will have to make a further plans.

Arii, building a wonder ahead of the Neutrals is hard. They finish them quickly.

[La Fayette]

which objective?

arii
1) The number of cities on the map is given very precisely, civ by civ, on the 'diplomacy' screen, so this shouldn't be a problem.

2) But the limit I had in mind (half +1) is probably too low (just think of a remaining civ owning a number of big cities).

3) What would you think of 2/3 (= owning at least 2 cities out of 3 on the map when you are declared winner)?

This would mean that you have managed to grow your civ about twice as strong as the rest of the world, and I suppose that no one would deny that this is enough for a decisive victory.