How do you progres in difficulty levels?

[Dry]

I was wondering how you are 'learning' the game.

Being a deity Civ2 player, but being also very humble, I started the very first game with the tutorial, in order to learn the interface, the basic game mechanics.

I went on then at warlord, in order to learn the basics of a 'good start'.
I mean: what are the best places to build a city, what brings the land improvements,...
After I played 2-3 games, I started a new one to learn diplomacy, then war,...
and so on, and so on. I short terms, I restart a new game each time to learn different aspect of the game (reason is: I made big mistakes in the previous one). The problem is that at such a low level, after I mastered the thing I wanted to learn, either the game gets plainty boring (we are the-best-of-the-best-of-the-best, having conquered half of the world with horsemen),or I bumped into the next wall (my wonder building strategy stills $*cks).
Until now (4 days that I have the game), I never played beyond the ancient times and I went on regent level yesterday.

How do you progress? Do you start a sissy (re:cheftain) game and play it until the end in order to have a rough picture of everything that you will refine by more begin-to-end games or do you, like me, progress by restarts until you mastered some precise point?

[rid102]

Do you start a sissy (re:cheftain) game and play it until the end in order to have a rough picture of everything that you will refine by more begin-to-end games

Yes.

Otherwise it just gets dull cycling over and over the same phase of the game. If you keep playing with constant restarts then it's difficult to get a good feeling of how overall strategies work (e.g. whether my cities are growing quick enough etc.).

Also, if you're just focusing on one area (e.g. War or Wonders) then it's easy to get stuck when you try to combine to two strategies into one, as often many goals within the game are mutual exclusive or counter-balancing (e.g. happiness vs science).

The problem I'm having at the moment with Civ3 is the fact I am trying to play it too much like Civ2, and tactics which were very good in Civ2 just don't work at all in Civ3. Then you have additional aspects (e.g. trading resources, which is now just as important as your economy or science) which completly got past me the first time I played and so the AI is running rings around me.

Civ2 was like Civ1++ (Civ1 on steriods). Civ3 is just an entirely different game in itself, based upon the same principles but with entirely different concepts driving major parts of the game.

[Grim Legacy]

I started at Deity, got a poor starting position and sort of gave up being boxed in before I could build my 4th settler or so -the AI 'bonuses' (cheats) were just a bit too obvious and too nearby.

Then played Monarch, lost due to lack of coal, salpeter, oil and rubber resources and thus to a spaceship in about 1730 AD, and since then played Emperor... beating the AI handily so far. Gunpowder era approaching.

The tougher levels are better teachers IMHO.

[JayKay]

Originally posted by Grim Legacy
The tougher levels are better teachers IMHO.

Indeed, i must agree with you!

I started the game in the tutorial to learn the basics of the new interface! I played the entire game until the end, so that i could get the big picture of it! (or so i thought)

I then started the GOTM 01 on CivFanatics (is like the Civ 3 Tournament in Apolyton)! This game was set up like this:

Human Civ: Persians
Difficulty Level: Regent (equivalent to prince in Civ 2)
Map Size: Small
Number of Civs: 5 (mine included)
Weather: Temperate
Age: 4 billion years
Barbarians: Restless

Has i later discovered the AI civs were: Aztecs; Americans; Babylonians and Zulus.

I'm still playing this game now (1950 AD), and aldo i'm doing very well (i'm in third place in the world and i've exterminated the Zulus), i must say i've learn a lot more from this game which was played two difficult levels above my first one that was played in Chieftan!
_________________________________________________



Portugal
Nation of: Magellan's (from Magellan's Expedition);
Vasco da Gama (Discoverer of the Maritime path to India);
and Pedro Álvares Cabral (Discoverer of Brazil in 1500)

[rid102]

The tougher levels are better teachers IMHO.

Most certainly! However, for my initial flirtations with Civ3 I started off easy more because I am still learning the game interface and mechanics. I feel as though I'm more fighting with the game still rather than the AI!

[Kekkonen]

I've done the sissy start thingie too. I never was a pro with Civ2, I beat it on Emperor occasionally. With Civ3, I played a game and a half on Chieftain (won the first, was so far ahead of everyone else in the second that I couldn't have lost it -- I had tanks, the other guys had pikemen), and now got my 2nd win on Warlord. I'm moving one up tonight again.

I actually haven't lost a game yet. If I had gone to the end with the tutorial, I probably would've lost that one; I made "Civ-2 decisions", and was alone on a resource-poor island (which actually initially looked like a terrific place to start, but it had no iron and no saltpeter and no squares which possibly could have had oil). I was horribly behind everyone else by the time I managed to get my triremes across the sea; I had no idea map making was so crucial, because in Civ2 was seldom needed until you ran out of space on your original continent.

[JayKay]

Originally posted by Kekkonen
I actually haven't lost a game yet. If I had gone to the end with the tutorial, I probably would've lost that one; I made "Civ-2 decisions", and was alone on a resource-poor island (which actually initially looked like a terrific place to start, but it had no iron and no saltpeter and no squares which possibly could have had oil). I was horribly behind everyone else by the time I managed to get my triremes across the sea; I had no idea map making was so crucial, because in Civ2 was seldom needed until you ran out of space on your original continent.

I know exactly what you mean! The same things happen to me!
_________________________________________________



Portugal
Nation of: Magellan's (from Magellan's Expedition);
Vasco da Gama (Discoverer of the Maritime path to India);
and Pedro Álvares Cabral (Discoverer of Brazil in 1500)

[rid102]

I started my first game on Chieftain and was really very suprised at how the AI was keeping up with me at first. Then again, I was basically playing it like Civ2. I had no idea about resources and this puzzled me at first as I discovered Gunpowder quite early but then didn't build any Musketmen for about another 300 years until I worked out what was going on.

Ended up getting a fair edge over the AI but was overall quite impressed with how it kept up with me in terms of expansion and science. I realise now that I was running science all wrong and that gold is the key to it all (i.e. tweaking our rates to get maximum efficiency).

I am still unsure of exactly how war weariness actually works (i.e. how can I tell the general level of happiness amoungst the populace? etc.)

The heavy emphasis on good diplomacy is also taking some adjusting to as well.

[Kekkonen]

Originally posted by rid102
I am still unsure of exactly how war weariness actually works (i.e. how can I tell the general level of happiness amoungst the populace? etc.)

The heavy emphasis on good diplomacy is also taking some adjusting to as well.

If you click on the unhappy citizen in the city view, they'll tell you what's bugging them. If it's "100% It's just too crowded", it means you have to build a temple/colosseum/cathedral.

I agree on the diplomacy thing. In my first game, I was acting as if all the foreign civs were from Civ2, i.e. that they'll all eventually attack you no matter what (unless, of course, they're the Mongols, in which case omit the word "eventually"). I really like the fact that you can have a meaningful relationship with an AI civ.

[Jusbaummer]

Manual says you should play one or two levels below civ2 difficulty...bad advice! I'm one of the smallest in Regent now and it's hard to think I should play Emperor...

[rid102]

Yes, I used to play King mainly and sometimes Emperor and I could normally win pretty comfortable, have a good game and get a high score.

Now I am struggling on Warlord...

Partly I think it's because the AI is genuinely better and improved. Partly I also think it's because it's taking me time to adjust to the new game mechanics and tactics required.

[rid102]

If you click on the unhappy citizen in the city view, they'll tell you what's bugging them. If it's "100% It's just too crowded", it means you have to build a temple/colosseum/cathedral.

Thanks! I'll use that and see if I can apply it to tracking War Weariness.

[Jaybe]

(SHIFT-Click on an unhappy citizen to see the unhappiness causes in that city).

I started with the tutorial game, played to the end of the game, and came in second on points.

I am now in my second game, Warlord, in early modern age (1780's). I am going to play the game through. So far I am second in points, again.

I prefer to do the whole thing, learning for all periods rather than concentrating on a period at a time. I feel that each game may be substantially different than others, so you can't necessarily expect previous lessons to apply to other games.

[Wrong_shui]

I played the easiest, got far ahead so quit.

Then tried warlord, the jump in difficulty was huge! and got whooped.

So now im trying regent and im 2nd from bottom, above the germainians, who im gonna kill.

[Master Marcus]

My first three games at Regent , all won. I think I master the basics, but only the basics since I hardly won my first Monarch game ( but Space Race is the easiest victory, I don't think I can win yet at this level by any other form of victory ). My second Monarch game was lost and my only defeat yet: I tried to win by domination,or Rank at 2050, and maybe culturally. All games at average map + 8 civs. Now I'm setting back to Regent.... and trying a long huge game+16 civs...