How strategy changes as difficulty level changes?

[Egbert]

Sometimes newbs post asking for advice and often get advice that would be good for the middle to higher levels but not very good for Chieftain so it got me thinking.

Whoring a tech (if you get a tech to whore ) is vital at emperor but essentially useless at Chieftain because the AI is normally flat broke all through the game. Basically, selling anything at Chieftain yields negligible gold.

Building Collusus/Copernicus/Newtons in the same city is a very very good idea at Chieftain because you have to do all the research yourself from around middle ancient onwards if you want to get to spaceship techs. OTH Some deity players set research to nil and buy and trade tech so they don't need a science city. I find if I try to build Collusus at Emperor it really hurts my expansion and I have no assurance whatsoever I will even get a shot at Copernicus or Newton so am therefore beginning to think I should leave it.

REXing at Chieftain can be done in the same way as it is done at Deity (umh but of course adequate REXing at Chieftain may be disaster at Deity).

Most of the strategy discussion is aimed at Regent and higher with the consequence that some if it seems actually worse than useless to the raw beginner at Chieftain. I think here of the "Early Archer Rush" thread which is very good for someone who is sufficiently familiar with the game to win at say Warlord but would more likely backfire very badly for a beginner.

Your thoughts about strategy/tactics changes as difficulty level changes?

[Frank Johnson]

Basicly, new players need to master the art of expansion first. On the easier levels they'll advance in tech and win in warfare just because they out number the enemy, if they expand right.

I never played cheiftain since I assumed it had the same insane combat modifiers for the player as civ2.

[vmxa1]

While what you say is basically correct we do have threads for new players.
It is hard to talk about levels below Monarch here as so many have been playing for a long time and can not really recall. In fact the game is not even the same now as it was when I played Regent.

[yxhuvud]

There are no combat modifiers at all in civ3, except for fighting barbarians

[Epistax]

damn! *throws away his bow +2 to giants*


All the "strategy" I had from civ2 is so dead it aint funny. I find Civ3 very hard to stay on top, at any difficulty.

[Thirgaral]

Chieftain is so easy that even the newest of newbs can win without any advice or game experience at all....

...almost...

[Dominae]

Originally posted by Epistax
All the "strategy" I had from civ2 is so dead it aint funny. I find Civ3 very hard to stay on top, at any difficulty.

Learn to expand as quickly as the AI. This is definitely do-able on Warlord even with little experience. You want to complete a Settler every time your city reaches size 3 (meaning you start building it before then). Expand aggressively toward Resources, Rivers and other goodies, using Warriors to defend your nation. Do this and you should do fine.


Dominae

[TheArsenal]

Not advice, but observation.

Chieftain - compared to Warlord, Regent and Monarch (the only levels I've tried), the AI is so far less aggressive as to be almost passive. It is far easier dictate when you want to go to battle, or to avoid battle altogether if that's your style. The AI is less likely to declare war if you don't cave in to demands, and you can build a larger army than it almost by accident.

In my opinion, the easiest Chieftain win is by culture which comes way before the 2050 cut off. This is aided by the fact that it is far easier to corner the market on Wonders. The few Chieftain games I played, the tech rate was so slow that a SS win was out of the question.

I would also say once the mechanics are mastered, go straight to Warlord. Chieftain gives one a very distorted idea of the game, in particular, what the human player can get away with.