Tweet
I like Catt's idea of early temples. I 100% agree, but isn't the build time prohibitive?
-
"In Italy for 30 years under the Borgias, they had warfare, terror, murder and bloodshed. But they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci and the Renaissance. In Switzerland, they had brotherly love. They had 500 years of democracy and peace. And what did that produce? The cuckoo clock."
—Orson Welles as Harry Lime -
Sometimes, especially for a non-religious civ. But again, I think of it in terms of return on investment. An early initial scout of the territory and neighbors will skew my early build priorities towards more or less military units -- the trade-off being cultural improvements. Effective early terrain improvements often means that even a non-religious civ can build a temple in 10 - 15 turns - time that is needed to grow the population back towards 3 people (and a settler) in any event. It is obviously much easier with a religious civ.Originally posted by MosesPresley
I like Catt's idea of early temples. I 100% agree, but isn't the build time prohibitive?
I'd describe myself as a buildmonger - essentially a builder at heart but unafraid to wage offensive war when circumstances warrant. I will often fight an ancient age war or two, and will usually fight a middle age war or two. The early culture really helps consolidate later war gains, because the chance of captured cities flipping back is greatly lessened. It took me a long time to appreciate (or, just wrongly believe
) the power of BC temples and libraries to the middle ages warmonger. Total civ culture is a powerful force for the entire game, and it almost always is a result of early focus on culture.
Catt
Comment
Comment