Vel's Strategy Thread - Part Two

[vmxa1]

I did not take a postion on Elvis being alive. I said it was either true or false, not an opinion.
Question: has any one figured out if there is any impact to using a despised government? Does it at least affect the happiness? If it does nothing, why bother to mention it? Should we be avoiding the use of a despised form of government?
Why does the AI sign trade embargos and MPP with a Civ that you are at war with the day after begging for peace? This puts them right back at war with you? I have had Civs do this three times in a row. War, peace,embargo/MPP,war. Each time losing cities and paying reparations.
Why do they insist on sending troops throuh your land, even after being clobbered?
Why do they persist in trying to land settlers next to your developed cities, when they can not hope to maintain them (I kill the defenders before they build)?

[DickK]

Originally posted by Velociryx
Continuation of the Civ-Analysis Article

Aztec (Religious/Militarist)
Starting Tech: Ceremonial Burial/Warrior Code
Special Unit: Jaguar Warrior (1/1/2): Warrior with an extra movement point that you can build from turn one. Same stats as Chariots…cheaper (50% cheaper!), and you don’t have to research any techs to train them!

Vel -- Hey, I think the AI has been reading your analysis!

I really like the fact that the AI has a personality, not as strongly as SMAC, but its still good. It seems to be aware of its advantages and tries to exploit them. That is a very positive change from the too-generic Civ2 civs.

Example: In my current game, I'm the Iriquois in the middle of a med-to-large continent with the Americans to the East and the Aztecs to the West. I'm glad I sent my first exploration unit west! Thanks to that I was able to block a key passage that somewhat limited the Aztecs' expansion. I also found & blocked the Americans and then turned my attention to back West. Didn't trust the Aztecs to keep the peace and they didn't--if he's going to exploit his advantage it has to be early and he's been trying real hard. Thank goodness for the Mounted Warrior. If I'd been the American's this time I'd be sacrifices on Aztec altars! The AI is playing a very aggressive and fairly smart war--the tactical situation is pretty simple and there's no complex tech in the game yet, so hasn't really caused most of the AI's weaknesses in combat to come into play.

I also "liked" how once I'd stopped his advance and pushed it back he immediately (bought?) an alliance with the Americans to create a second front. Fortunately I could largely ignore that since I had a narrow front with a few strong defenders. He then enlisted the aid of the Greeks (on another continent 2 squares South) and I signed up the English (on a third continent but who had established a couple cities near the Aztecs). They Aztecs immediately shifted to the defensive against me and swarmed onto the English cities taking both.

I've just gotten gunpowder so his Jaguar's aren't much of a threat to my cities anymore but its going to be a long war at the rate things are going!

I've been pleased at how the AI has managed to use a variety of things against me, all consistent with the Aztec "personality". The bottom line is that it matters a lot which Civ you select and you need to understand that Civ's stregths/weaknesses as well as how that impacts your interaction with the other ones.

Keep up the good work!

[Gen.Dragolen]

Muligan Strategies ?

Velociryx,

You have any suggestions for dealing with what amounts to a muligan everytime you start a game ?

I've been trying to deal with having no resources or luxuries in any starting city and so far have been unable to prevent getting gang raped by the AI's (ie. everyone with whom I've had contact to that point).

Not that I don't understand how the game worksor that I'm playing on Diety level (though in hindsight, that might be easier to take). I have played the Egyptians a few time since they are an old favorite from Civ's 1&2, and have repeated cultural victories in the early 1900's. I simply followed the rapid expasion stratagem to block in the AI's and then back fill. I never wanted for food resources or iron. The most of the games were headed that way and got boring. So I decided to try out the other civ's and have found that none of them could last much past 1 AD...

In experimenting with the other civ's I have noticed that there are several advantages the AI enjoys with which the Egyptian civ can easily deal. First, starting locations. I have yet to see an AI that hasn't had a choice location for their captial compared to my starting location. Always food and a luxury or two. Not that they have any great production advantage at first while you build out, but that they seem to have food and all the resources they need to product their advanced units. As soon as I have iron working, they have iron in spades when I get one if I'm lucky. Second, the AI does not respect cultural borders when moving settlers. Short of lining up warriors across the map to keep them out, when you ask using the diplomacy, the AI will agree and exit your lands in the direction of your capital. This lead me to my third point. Why not attack the settlers? Because every single time I have, my warriors or whatever units I have used, they die in the assault. Right there, I have a huge problem with the combat model they have used for CivIII: unrealistic when an elite unit or UU can loose to an unfortified regular unit of the same type on open ground. Fourth, the AI's have a better position allows them to use the diplomacy options. With one city established behind your frontier, the AI's will demand your maps. And when refused, it has been declaring war the next turn. And this is usually after it has spent the current turn making alliances with everyone I've met so far, and so now you face multiple opponents. Before you say I should have made an alliance or two of my own, this leads me back to the original problem of not having any luxuries or resources to offer as inducement. And since the AI can see what I have for gold because of their embassy, they want every last shekel each time they offer a deal. And each one want the same things: your map and all your gold.

Now I'm thinking that the starting locations may be just my bad luck, but having the same situation 20+ starts in a row with anyone except the Egyptians, any strategy is frustrated by these circumstances. I'm going to reinstall and hope for better, because otherwise, I'll go back to mod'ng CTP2 where the AI has the same level of a starting advantage and leave CivIII on the shelf until Firaxis comes out with a multiplayer expansion.

Not that I haven't thought long and hard about the starting production orders and look at the ground and what it had to offer. I have tried to apply the lessons in the Art of War that have worked in real life on the battlefield (Infantry Officer's Combat Course), and should work on some level in the game but not one thing works when you get into a combat system where a healthy 1/1/1 warrior can defeat a healthy 4/2/1 UU in walled town built on hill...that should have been a warrior on his way to an early grave.

Better luck hunting that I've had...

[Arrian]

Dragolen,

Wow, sounds like you've been having some tough luck in your non-egyptian games. To a large degree, I think it's bad luck. Starting location is key, and I've had strings of bad starts between good ones before. Try out the Babylonians.

I'll be the first to admit that I restart a lot. Sometimes, you just get screwed in terms of starting position, and there is nothing you can do about it. The higher the level of difficulty 1) the more crucial start position is, and 2) the worse your start position tends to be.

-Arrian

[Quurgoth]

Ongoing commentary:

Starting location indeed matters, a TON, more so than in Civ2. This has led me to instantly restart if I'm in bad terrain, even on Regent level. Nearby luxuries are nice, and resources, and rivers are the best tiles near a capitol, IMO. Interestingly, the times I tried the Egyptians I got awful starting locations, and my best luck has been with the French.

Has anyone else won the space race in the early 1800s? I think the early victory may have been a result of the frequent tech trading I engage in.

A funny story:

I was in the earlier years of my current game (large/7/regent), with each civ having roughly 15 cities, when a nearby barbarian encampment suddenly exploded with 9 horsemen. Fortunately for me, the terrain was mountains/hills, and I had a nearby warrior.

Guess what? Those pesky barbarians followed my unit like bloodhounds... straight to enemy (American) territory, where they promptly lost focus on my warrior and proceeded to whack the American units in their city muwahahahaha!

Lastly: WHAT IN THE NAME OF ALL THAT IS HOLY DOES IT TAKE TO GET A GOOD LAND LOCATION ARGHETRJAEWRJ@#$!~@#~ In the 4 victories I completed, and in the 10 or so that I pursued briefly, I have had a grand total of ONE land location that I consider solid. In 90% of my starts, I'm right on a coast (a lousy spot for a capitol, given the proximity bonuses), or in mountain/hill/desert terrain, or I'm on a tiny island or peninsula.

I'm gettin' downright paranoid.

[Velociryx]

Hey guys....sorry I've not been around much t'day....work has been...UGH....well...'bout typical for a Monday....

Anyway, I agree completely with Arri, Dragolen....I think it's mostly bad luck. When I first started testing, I tried to do so under optimal conditions and would restart till I got some terrain that I "liked" but the past several games, I've just been running with it, regardless. Sure, it's an uphill climb sometimes, but...::shrug:: all part of the fun 'n games.

And Arri....an excellent and interesting synopsis on the similarities (and differences) of our current games!

I think, in broad terms here, my strongest games have been ones with two wars in them....well, perhaps multiple short wars, but with two primary opponents. In the early game, a turf war for land and resources, and late in the game, with the biggest, meanest AI dog on the block (and generally, that one opens up with an RoP blitz....

The first war establishes local dominance, and the second, to knock out your next nearest competitor. When I've done both, it's not even close....

Other stuff I forgot to mention earlier:

More on Armies:
An army only counts as one garrison for purposes of quelling discontent. IMO, it should quell all discontent in a given city regardless of the type of government you're running, at the price of say....increased corruption or something (discontent populace venting in other ways?).

Also, I TRIED to make a city revert back to it's former owners this past game. Let them riot in the streets and did nothing to stop it. It was right next door to the Zulu capitol, and my only garrison was an army, and the city never changed hands as I expected it would.....so apparently, they're good for that too....anti-reversion insurance?

Anybody know if you can build the Pentagon by having three empty armies? I'm gonna try that when I get home. I finished my military academy, and will be building armies soon, but I don't wanna staff them till late game (mech inf). So....I figured I'd build them now as "shells" and if it works, when my third one pops out, I should be be able to build the Pentagon too, which will allow me to put four Mech. Inf. in them (eventually).

Taking Denial to the next level
We've already been discussing here about early turf wars and expansion styles to deny rival Civs access to strategic terrain or resources....here's another goody tho....

The AI LOVES to build it's UU's. When a UU wins a battle, that civ gets a golden age. Now that I've seen the sheer power of a mid/late game GA, I've been thinking that it might be an excellent idea to pick fights with all my near neighbors and intentionally LOSE a battle to one of their UU's...they get a golden age when it's largely meaningless (since on Monarch, they're gonna get most of the early wonders anyway), and I force them to burn an important advantage (true, since they're getting wonders left and right, many of them already ARE getting golden ages, but this way, I can control precisely when it happens).....now we're inching into the metagame, which I've intentionally not been saying much about so far....cos I'm still learning it myself! But....I'm gonna play with that and other concepts floating around in my head and see what shakes out.....for the moment tho...it's back to work....

-=Vel=-

[Arrian]

Vel,

Hmm... about deliberatly picking a fight in order to lose to a UU and trigger a "premature" golden age for the AI. There are several problems with this.

For one, you now have an angry AI with production + golden age bonuses. Eek.

Second, the whole strategic thinking behind this requires that the civ you attack is not one you've designated for destruction, or even vassalage. Why is that? Because if you're going to make them your vassal, why do you care when their golden age occurs? A vassal, by definition, is a civ you can wack with ease at any time. Ok, so by this reasoning you would do this to a civ relatively far away and try to make peace asap. They will dislike you for some time, however, and if they get too strong, you've made yourself an enemy you may not want. Anyway, as you said yourself, the AI is triggering golden ages left and right early on due to the wonder building advantage it has.

Regarding the RoP blitz... do you use that all the time (once per game, I mean)? I dunno if I could do that... especially because if I saw the AI put his whole army in attack position near my cities, I'd do something about it, RoP or no. It's one of those "gray" areas, I think.

Yes, you can build the Pentagon w/three empty armies, so you can wait for mech inf

-Arrian

p.s. Yeah, mondays suck.

[Velociryx]

Good points all around! I think specifically it would work best with the ancient civs, since you can make the declaration and then sue for peace while they're still little and (production bonuses or no, pretty harmless). Then, you can spend time and cash making them friendly toward you again.

As to my reasoning tho....specifically cos later in the game, they might be real contenders for a couple of juicy projects you've got your eye on. Deny them their GA bonus and you make it tougher for them to beat you to it....or...something along those lines!

LOL...don't mind me today....my brain is still fuzzy from lack of sleep. I think the concept is prolly valid, but you have to be strong (top dog or nearly so) to pull it off well.....

UGH...and let me just say that if this Monday EVER ends, I'm gonna head home and sleep.

No civving tonight for Vel!

....well....maybe just a little....



-=Vel=-

[Velociryx]

D'oh! I forgot! RoP Blitz -

Actually, I've only done it the way I outlined one time. Generally, the AI that's my nearest competitor is on the other continent, so I'll make an RoP agreement with someone who shares a border from them, drop my guys and mass them on the "safe" side of the continent, and "blitz" them from the neighbor's turf.

Once I do that (late game), my first build is a rushed airport.

That's game, set and match. (Airdrop in bulk)

-=Vel=-

[Arrian]

Finally hit the wall with lack of sleep, huh Vel? Me, I've just doubled my diet coke consumption.

I'm ridiculously addicted to this game. It took forever to fall asleep last night, because my brain refused to stop planning the attack on Berlin and defense of my silk city (the name escapes me).

Speaking of golden ages, I'm really happy the Germans are going to die without producing a single panzer. The last unit they attacked me with was a knight - they must be unable to trade for saltpetre (no cav), and since I took their oil... NO TANK FOR YOU!

One thing about the Industrious ability that I've been thinking about: the industrious worker bonus jumpstarts you quite nicely. Usually, the first thing I do is mine a shielded grassland (or cow, if available), which allows me to pump out my exploring/garrison units quicker and move on to a settler. This goes 2x as fast for an industrious civ. So does connecting your early cities by roads. This may help you get a settler over to that great city spot the AI is gunning for too - it may be the reason I was able to keep pace with my AI neighbors in the land grab in my Persian game. Persopolis is a pretty nice spot, but by no means "ideal." I wonder what I could have done with a bonus resource or two (what I had was a river, 2 floodplain, some forest, some plains and some shielded grassland).

-Arrian

[DickK]

Starting location importance.

While I suspect Vel's right that virtually any start is viable in the long term, I personally don't have the patience to suffer with a poor start. If I see a big patch of jungle close by or I start where I can't see at least a couple food bonuses and/or luxuries close by then its time to restart.

If I start a bunch of times on the same map I've noticed that I tend to end up in the same spots over and over again. That got me thinking about it so I played with the editor for a while and noticed a couple things about starting locations--at least as designated by the editor. The key issue for their placement seems to be spacing them out. Once its figured out where a starting location needs to be, it then seems to simply adjust to get it in a minimally viable spot--can't tell what the rules it uses for that tho'. But locations are clearly influenced by the overall and local conditions--if grassland/plains are uncommon then it will pick spots that it would otherwise seem to bypass.

An interesting thing happens if you edit the map and delete all the game-designated player starting locations. On the two maps I tried this with, as long as I picked the same civ I always ended up exactly the same spot. Restarting ~10 times always landed me in exactly the same square. Picking a different civ landed me in a different but again constant spot. Took the map and edited it slightly--adding a few land squares near the spot I always landed at and now I started in a completely different spot on the other side of the "world". Would love to know more about how the software "decides" to pick starting locations because there's something interesting going on here.

[Velociryx]

Yep....last night I was like this in front of the computer:

::looks over shoulder and talks to cat, who's looking accusingly at him:: "....yeah...I know, I know...but I just gotta get those dyes from the Zulu and set up some juicy trade agreements. Then I'll go to bed."

{{{Two hours later}}}

::looks over shoulder and talks to the cat, who's been very patient about waiting for the traditional pre-bedtime snack, and who's now beginning to grow horns and have smoke drift up out of her nostrils:: "Okay....okay....I give....let's go get you some food, I'll refill my tea, and then......comebackinandplayjustaLITTLEmore......af ter all....I'm in the middle of this bada$$ Golden Age and I'm only two turns away from landing both Universal Suffrage AND the TOE" (at this, my cat looks at me like I'm COMPLETELY insane).

{{{Three MORE hours later}}}

One....mo....ore....turn....just....one...m...m... .m....{{clunk, as Vel's head hits the desk}}



-=Vel=-

[inca911]

Ditto...Ditto....

Originally posted by Arrian
It took forever to fall asleep last night, because my brain refused to stop planning the attack on Berlin and defense of my silk city (the name escapes me).

I'm really happy the Germans are going to die without producing a single panzer.

-Arrian

Interesting. I also debated last night whether a war to deny coal to the rest of the world (except one other civ) was worth the effort. I pondered both an assault directly on the capital heartland (demanding the coal containing city as part of the cost of peace) and a simple single city grab (one AI city has 2/3 remaining coal not controlled by me throughout the world). The presence of Furs in the Persians capital city made up my mind. The plan is to now take their capital and one other city, both having many, many wonders and demand the coal city as well. One question remains:
When you obtain a city from the AI, do you get their military units as well or must you staff the city by yourself?

If all goes well, I will have two ~ pop 12 cities that I want to keep to cripple the Persians and if I have to deal with revolt suppression as well in that coal city, then I have to move some troops ASAP!!!

[Velociryx]

One small gripe....

....as I sit here in this half-delerious state and contemplate going home.

You know what this game is lacking in somehow? Atmosphere and suspense! I mean....sure, when you're doing a delicate balancing act re: diplomacy, there's a certain dramatic tension, and the sweep of history certainly makes for a dramatic setting but....case in point:

In SMAC, when you build the Secret Project (read: Wonder) called "The Dream Twister," you got treated to an EERIE, SPOOKY damned movie that had all sorts of disturbing imagry in it (and creepy music too!).--I should mention that the Dream Twister was a means of launching an enhanced Psychic Attack against your enemy, essentially either driving them mad, or worse.

At the end of said movie, the following lines of white text appear on an all-black screen:

Three blind mice.
Three blind mice.
See how they run
See how they run....

{{Assassin's Redoubt - Final Transmission}}

OoO

And when you see that....when you read those words while still listening to that creepy music in your head, you know without being outright told that something bad....something really, impossibly bad happend at Assassin's Redoubt, and as you shiver to fight that "skin-crawl" sensation that's on the back of your neck, you suddenly find yourself glad you weren't there.

Civ doesn't have that, and it could.

Or....maybe I just need sleep.

-=Vel=-

edit: Here's what I mean for an off the cuff example of how it could be added to this game.

You finish the colassus and the screen goes blank for a moment. The next thing you hear (before you can actually see anything) are the creaking sounds of being on a wooden ship.

Slowly, the screen lights, and you find yourself staring at this massive pair of bronze FEET....attached to this even MORE massive bronze Statue that's straddling the harbor (oh, I know it didn't REALLLLY straddle the harbor, but...effect, you know?). Big fanfare music, awesome statue....that'd be tops...

-=Vel=-
(off to bed with me!)

[Hastus]

About the game atmosphere.

I agree with you there Vel.

This is the only complaint I have about the game really, the lack of movies.

I remember playing Civ 2 and SMAC and one of the most fun parts for me was actually to see the different movies after each wonder.
No matter how many times I built Magellans expedition it was still as much fun to see the ship sailing on the sea and the sailors rushing around on the ship. And to hear the sea crash against the ship when it broke the waves.

Another thing that I would have liked in Civ 3 is different ending movies as well. When you finish as a diplomacy victory for example you should see some sort of movie for it.

Although I think these movies should have been in the game when it was released. I would buy the expansion just if it had the movies. Hopefully it will. *Prays*