Announcement

**notyoueither** · January 14, 2002, 04:13

A month of 8 hours a day? I wish.

Interesting take on Cavalry. I find them more useful than that. I keep the Cavalry Corps around the whole game. I find they can cope with Infantry adequately. Then after Tanks they can dart here and there around and about the Tanks, pillaging rail lines to limit the avenues of counter attack on the armour. Then later, I always like to have that last measure of man power to help with garrisonning my own cities, or more importantly, recent conquests to prevent reversion. I find it helps to have some men with guns around that I would never consider commiting to the front lines.

Salve

**Minmaster** · January 14, 2002, 05:56

some questions

nice strategies there. i got some questions.

how do you upgrade egyptian chariots to knights? aren't UU's not upgradable and can't be upgraded to one?

also you say you build armies of 3 modern armors and one mech inf. but thats 4 units and not 3. do you always build the pentagon or something? also its not possible to have more than 1 army at once right?

i only play diety and im lookin for some diety strategies. it seems like diety requires totally different approach and mentality. it feels like civ3 diety is about 5 times harder than civ2 diety/smac transcendence. for example i basically give up on the wonders. however, one wonder that i think many people overlook is the universal suffrage. especially if you are the democracy type player but need to go to war for whatever reasons. i built it once because i had a spare leader and it made a huge difference because it allowed my democratic nation to wage a successful war w/o the harsh affects of war weariness.

can you give some pointers on ur goverment choices post-monarch era?

**Aeson** · January 14, 2002, 10:34

Upgrading and UU's -

UU's can be upgraded if there is a valid upgrade path. They cannot be upgraded to though, which really makes the later UU's less powerful. I dislike playing with the Japanese, Chinese, Russians, and Indians for the simple fact that their UU blocks the horse units upgrade path. Upgrading is such a cheap way of always having a large 'modern' army.

Wonders -

I also play on Deity for the most part, and until the Industrial era, I don't even think about building a wonder unless its an Archipelago map (Lighthouse) or an OCC game (Great Library, whatever else I can get). It's just so much easier to capture wonders than to build them for the most part. I shoot straight for Chivalry, then to Military Tradition in the Middle ages, and that means I don't have a very good chance at building any of the wonders in that Age. I do have a VERY good chance of capturing any wonder I want (or all of them), and usually can conquer the world by the time the AI is first getting into the Industrial era.

Armies -

Building the Military Academy allows the production of as many armies as you want, without needing to use leaders. Only the city that builds the Military Academy can produce armies though. My first leader always is used for an army, and I find the best army to be 1 of my non-elite horse units (usually a Knight by that time). Putting in more units just means that I'll have less upgradable units. One Knight will easily be able to win its battle so that the Heroic Epic can be built. If I don't have Knights yet, I often do put all 3 horsemen into the army, just to make sure that they win their fight. Other than that, I have no use for armies, other than pure amusement of having 4 Mech Infantry Armies defending everywhere.

Civs -

My new favorite Civ is the Zulu's, though I am just starting to use them. Impies are the perfect unit to support horsemen with, and of course, the perfect defense against horsemen. Chosing the Zulu's means that I don't have to fight against the Impies. Also Expansionist is maybe the best trait on anything larger than standard maps. On Pangaea games, it definitely is the best trait as far as I'm concerned. Military is great as well, those extra leaders, fast promotions, and cheap barracks give a nice advantage when at war.

I also like the Egyptians. Cheap, early horsemen (War Chariots) make for very early conquest possibilities, and the extra cost of upgrading isn't a problem, as gold is abundant when everyone else is paying to keep you from attacking again. Though getting the Zulu's for a neighbor really bites. Conquering Impi defended cities with Horsemen/War Chariots is always a bloodbath, so many dead horsies. It's better just to take the Zulu's in my opinion.

The Iroquois are probably the best Civ. Expansionist I already touched on, and Religious is maybe the best overall attribute (it's great on any map). Combine that with the best UU in the game, and it's really not even close. For this reason they are my least favorite Civ, as it's just too easy to play with them.

The Greeks, Persians, and Aztecs are all good Civs. Greek Hoplites make for good horseman support, though it slows down the conquest a bit. Immortals are almost as effective as Mounted Warriors, only they can never be upgraded. The Jag Warriors are real pests, but I'd take 1 Impi over two Jags most of the time.

Deity Strategies -

There are a lot of effective strategies that can be used at Deity level, but almost all of them make extensive use of early military, and pop-rushing. Trying to find a strategy that doesn't require those two components is the real challenge of Deity IMO.

I have been using the Zulu's on large/huge maps. Selling world maps is one way to circumvent the need for early military rushes. Expansionist is good for this, and Impies are even better. In my most recent game, I was getting anywhere from 0 to 300 gold per turn, plus techs, from each of 15 other Civs. That on top of selling luxuries that I found first, techs that I got from Huts first, and residual per turn gold from earlier world map sales. By 500BC I had 3000 gold, and bringing in close to 200 per turn, with Science at 100%. I had built up a 2+ tech lead on every Civ, and all without ever fighting. Of course this is map dependant, as if you are hemmed in early, no one will want your maps. Just make sure to uncover a few more tiles per turn, and your maps will bring a good price. Once all the land is uncovered, get those boats out exploring. If you see a hut or resource, stop and sell your map, as they seem to bring better prices when you first uncover them.

Eventually though, Military action is needed. Having 100% science rate throughout the game means you can beat the AI to most any Middle age or later military Unit you want to use. Once you have that Unit, its first jobs should be to take out the strategic resources that the AI is holding, and the city with Sun Tzu's. That wonder is the only one that makes conquest harder, as the AI very rarely builds barracks on their own.

To get around needing pop-rushing, just build horsemen early on in the game. Get a large standing army, usualy 50 or so is enough, and then just wait till Chivalry or Military Tradition to upgrade, and sweep the oposition away. Having a large standing army also will help with the prices you recieve for techs and maps. Often you can get the weaker Civs to give a city or two for renegotiating peace treaties as well.

I am attaching a save game from my current Deity game. It is played on Marla's world map (a very nice map). It is different than most randomly generated maps though, food is more abundant, though it helps the AI as well. The main difference is that all the European Civ's are quite crowded, and puts them at a disadvantage early on. It's getting quite slow to play though, and 'victory' is for the most part assured, so I'm debating whether or not to finish. I did no pop-rushing except in captured cities, just want to show how well trading maps works if you can keep ahead of the AI in exploration.

Attached Files

end of turn.zip (355.0 KB, 169 views)

**Arrian** · January 14, 2002, 12:48

Interesting take(s) on the game, though different than my own. First off, I play Monarch (though I really should move up to Emperor), so my thoughts are influenced by that level of difficulty. I think people who play Diety have adjusted to that level, and thus certain civs become more or less valueable (see Aeson's notes on the Zulu).

First off, I strongly disagree with Blitzer on Cavalry. Cavalry do anything but suck. First off, they crush anything short of riflemen, and with good numbers of Cav, riflemen get run over too. No need for anything but Cav, pre-infantry. They are much, much better than infantry for attacking, though the two have the same attack strength - 6. They can run away, and infantry can't. Sure, escort them with infantry once the enemy has Cav to counterattack with, but they remain my attack force until I have Tanks. Normally, once the AI has infantry, I stop fighting until I have Tanks and Bombers, or even Modern Armor. In order to fight infantry pre-Tanks, you need a bunch of artillery support.

Favorite civs are the Babs and Egyptians, which made the end of Blitz's list. I build more than I conquer (there have been exceptions... even as the Babs).

Wonders: I'm a Great Library guy, though I concede the Pyramids are powerful. I'm generally annoyed if I don't build all of the following:

Great Library
Colossus (though it is acceptable to lose this, because you don't always have a coastal city with decent enough production... sometimes there is nothing you can do)
Sistine
Sun Tzu (if I must choose, clearly the Sistine)
Bach
Copernicus
Newton
---
All industrial & modern wonders.

Good point about a Middle Age golden age. To me, the Middle Age wonders are the key to the game, and thus that is the perfect time for a golden age. I hate wasting a golden age on despotism, and I have never managed to hold off until the industrial or modern ages (wonders trigger it). The later it is, the more poweful it is, but the Middle Ages golden age nails the key wonders for you.

-Arrian

**Skeletal Dragon** · January 14, 2002, 13:12

Isn't everyone disagreeing with Blitzer on his opinion on Cavalry?

Hey me too! Actually, Cavalry are still great vs Riflemen, even if they are in size 12 cities. Its actually when Infantry shows up that your Cavalry get a bit weaker. A -bit- weaker, but not quite. Cavalry units can escort Artillery backed up with Infantry, so that you can Bombard a city to death and still have enough movement to rush in, attack, and still retreat.

I find that Cavalry can beat Infantry about 50% of the time on the open field or within a 5- city as well.

In the Ancient Age to early Modern Age (on Monarch), I tend to just turn off my tech and just go straight commerce and buy the techs instead while I pound my enemys to death.

Once I get to Education/Banking/Democracy, I start building and pop-rushing Banks and Universities and make the switch to Demo and start a massive tech lead into the Industrial Era. I always seem to get Suffrage first though, since I always buy off a Factory and Coal Plant in my highest shield city as soon as I can.

After that, its Electricity -> Replaceable Parts and then to Medicine and Scientific Method for the Theory of Evolution.

Arrian's correct on his choice of Newton's and Copernicus as "priority" wonders. In Monarch, that's the only way I can keep up in tech (besides attacking the other tech leader, of course). Otherwise, I find myself consistently behind in tech.

But I must disagree with him on the choice of Sistine over Sun Tzu; It really depends on the situation within the game. If you find yourself in an aggressive position in the game, then its more favorable to build the Art of War. If not, then build the Sistine. IMO, they're both great wonders.

**Blitzer** · January 14, 2002, 13:29

stupid double post

**Blitzer** · January 14, 2002, 13:35

Isn't everyone disagreeing with Blitzer on his opinion on Cavalry? Hey me too! Actually, Cavalry are still great vs Riflemen, even if they are in size 12 cities. Its actually when Infantry shows up that your Cavalry get a bit weaker. A -bit- weaker, but not quite. Cavalry units can escort Artillery backed up with Infantry, so that you can Bombard a city to death and still have enough movement to rush in, attack, and still retreat. I find that Cavalry can beat Infantry about 50% of the time on the open field or within a 5- city as well.

First off, I strongly disagree with Blitzer on Cavalry. Cavalry do anything but suck. First off, they crush anything short of riflemen, and with good numbers of Cav, riflemen get run over too. No need for anything but Cav, pre-infantry. They are much, much better than infantry for attacking, though the two have the same attack strength - 6. They can run away, and infantry can't. Sure, escort them with infantry once the enemy has Cav to counterattack with, but they remain my attack force until I have Tanks. Normally, once the AI has infantry, I stop fighting until I have Tanks and Bombers, or even Modern Armor. In order to fight infantry pre-Tanks, you need a bunch of artillery support.

I think you guys missed the point. My comments on cavalry pertain only to that period between Replacable Parts and Motorized Transportation. In fact Arrian, you state that you choose not to fight in this period. My observations reflect your same observations. To wage war with a mainly cavalry based army in this period only ensures that you will not only lose many cavalry units in such a war, but you will also have a large obsolete army upon the arrival of tanks. There is no finer military unit for it's time than the cavalry, but against modern armor you may as well have a spearman.

Secondly, as to the comments on Deity, I don't play deity for a reason, mainly because standard Civ tactics are thrown out the window and it's a whole new game from my observations. On monarch or emporor you can enter every game and adapt to it. In Deity you must from 4000bc have a plan and stick to it for the most part. I find Deity games, while challenging, not as much fun. I enjoy building wonders, especially the ancient ones. I don't need to be crippled to the point where I must play every move by the book to win.

As for the Sistene vs Sun Tsu argument... they are both great wonders, but if you are going to play the conquest game I feel that you may as well let the AI build the Art of War and take it later. Sistene Chapel is a critical wonder for waging war under Democracy (which is actually possible in sub-deity games), which IMHO makes it more valuable to a warmonger than the barracks. After all by the late industrial age everyone on your continent is dead, and you have railroads everywhere. The benefit of a frontline barracks is gone, as you are fighting on a far off continent. All your cities have a railroad now anyways, so you may as well stop being so lazy and upgrad the old fashioned way

.

Conquering Impi defended cities with Horsemen/War Chariots is always a bloodbath, so many dead horsies. It's better just to take the Zulu's in my opinion.

Exactly. Hopalites and Legionares aren't exactly wonderful matchups either, especially in the early game where you may well be fighting around hills or jungle. This is a good reason why I choose swordsmen and catapults. I use my horsemen more often than not to defend against the counterattack. Retreating is nice, but with catapults you really don't lose too many swordsmen anyway.

Thanks for your feedback guys. I stand by my post, but your comments are great.

**Aeson** · January 14, 2002, 14:01

I agree that Deity is a completely different game than even Emporer. Any big mistakes mean game over, and even a few small ones can make a huge difference in the final outcome. Also on Deity, building wonders is putting yourself at a disadvantage.

That being said, I usually don't have a coherant strategy entering a Deity game, as it actually takes a lot more adaptation than any other difficulty level. The shape of the landmass, location of luxuries/resources, and location of other Civs all make a big difference in how to play the game. Granted that to win you need to choose the "best" of your options almost every time. The course of a Deity game needs to be determined by about halfway through the Ancient era.

If I had a spare leader to choose between Sun Tzu's and Sistene, I'd choose Sistene every time. Sun Tzu's is actually one I want the AI to build, hopefully on another continent. All my productive cities will have barracks before then anyways, and having free barracks on another continent is more of an advantage. But leader built wonders should be restricted to 3rd or 4th leader priority. First an army so that the Heroic Epic can be built. Second the building of the forbidden palace, and 3rd is the relocation of your palace to a more central location. In about 80% of my games, my empire will be much more productive with a palace relocation, because of nearby coasts. The only wonder I build with a leader is the UN if diplomatic victory is enabled and I think the AI might beat me to it. Usually by then I have enough of a tech lead to guarantee that I can build it first though.

**Aeson** · January 14, 2002, 14:20

On Hoplites and Legionaries

I think horsemen are actually much better at taking out Hoplites than Swordsmen/Catapults. Granted it might take 10 horsemen to conquer a Greek City, but usually with very little actual losses. To guarantee the same mortality rates with Swordsmen/Catapults, there need to be enough Catapults to take 2 defenders down to 1hp each before the Swordsmen attack. That negates any numbers advantages that would have been had otherwise.

The Romans don't use Legionaries to defend their cities, so Horsemen can just play keepaway while they take Roman Cities. Even if the Legionaries catch up, the horsemen will almost always get away (retreat). It isn't hard to take out the Iron producing cities, and then no more Legionaries.

Overall though, the main reason for Horsemen is they become Knights, and then Calvary. Swordsmen become obsolete, it isn't much of a contest. The cost of upgrading is so much less than rebuilding units that it should never be ignored. Calvary take 80 shields to produce, or 100 gold to upgrade from Horsemen. First of all, gold is something you can store up, shields aren't. Gold can be taken/requested from other Civs, shields cannot. Also, it takes 4 gold to rush one shield, so having a ratio of 80:320 would be more balanced, not the current 80:100. Considering mortality rates (well managed Horsemen, 80% become Calvary on average), upgrade costs, and unit production returns (captured production in the form of workers, cities, territory, tribute), upgrading Horsemen is like being paid for getting free Calvary.

**Qilue** · January 14, 2002, 14:41

Two wonders I like but not mentioned.

Smith's trading company - free support for harbours, marketplaces, banks and airports.

Hoover dam - hydro plant in every city on the continent (even those not normally allowed to build one (possible bug))

I'm curious how others feel about them.

**Aeson** · January 14, 2002, 15:04

I like Hoover Dam as well. In most games it is possible to get all of the Modern age wonders, so they don't get talked about too much. Smiths is nice to have, but it comes at a time when building Calvary is of most importance in my games. Like most wonders, just let the AI build it for you.

**Arrian** · January 14, 2002, 16:03

Originally posted by Blitzer

I think you guys missed the point. My comments on cavalry pertain only to that period between Replacable Parts and Motorized Transportation. In fact Arrian, you state that you choose not to fight in this period. My observations reflect your same observations. To wage war with a mainly cavalry based army in this period only ensures that you will not only lose many cavalry units in such a war, but you will also have a large obsolete army upon the arrival of tanks. There is no finer military unit for it's time than the cavalry, but against modern armor you may as well have a spearman.

Oh, I see. I did miss the point, actually

Sorry. I assumed (and I'm sure we all know what that does), since you described your army as infantry/artillery based, that you were arguing for footsoldiers against mounted troops (including Cavalry) in general, and Cav vs. Infantry in the specific.

Aeson,

Yeah, the horse unit upgrade cost is way, way too cheap (all other things being equal... if they toy with retreat, this may no longer be the case). 20gold for Knight to Cavalry?? You gotta be kiddin' me!

Wonders: I consider the Sistine more valuable because happiness wonders have always been better than warrior wonders. Think of it this way: show me a wonder that does more vs. war weariness than the Sistine. Sun Tzu is nice, and makes upgrading SOOOO much less tedious, but the human player doesn't need it. It does seriously strengthen an AI civ, though, and that is a good reason to build it. I generally go for both of them. In my last several Monarch games, I've ended up nearly a full AGE ahead of the AI in tech, largely due to the Colossus + Cop's + Newton, and later SETI (not that it matters at that point, as the AI scratches and claws its way to refining), not to mention trading luxuries and some tech for gold/turn.

I also left Adam Smith's off my list, not because I don't consider it key, but because it's so obvious that I forgot it.

The way I approach Wonders is the ONLY part of the game where I haven't adjusted from Civ II. I still want all of them, or at least nearly all of them. That's the main thing keeping me from moving on up to Emperor - I know I won't build them all, plus there is a part of me that absolutely HATES that the AI gets to cheat so outrageously (even though the reasonable and rational side of me accepts that it must in order to compete).

-Arrian

**Skeletal Dragon** · January 14, 2002, 21:28

Blitzer: Actually, it is VERY possible to wage a war with an army mainly consisting of Cavalry between Replaceable Parts and Motorized Transportation. You need the following:

40-50 Cavalry (This isn't hard with Mobilization and Factories w/ Power plants)
1-2 Infantry
2-3 Artillery (No Artillery is fine too).

First, select the city that you want to hit.
Second, Rush all of the above units 2 squares away from the city (preferably on some strategic terrain) and end your turn. Your Infantry will protect your Cavalry.
Third, Bombard the city (if you have Artillery) for a chance to weaken it, then send in your Cavalry units. Remember, they have enough movement points to retreat! After about 15 or 25 Cavalry, you should be able to take the city. Send your Infantry up to your damaged Cavalry to protect them and leave your 2nd Infantry to protect your Artillery (if you have them, of course).

Basically, its a brute force method.

I had to use this once since I needed Oil, but I didn't have the tech for Motorized Transportation and they had Replaceable Parts. Of course, you don't really need to use Infantry for this strategy, but its more risky.

Oh, if you notice carefully, there is always -one- cavalry unit that can kill an Infantry unit, even fortified in a size 12+ city!

I'm not sure if anyone noticed this, but does anyone notice that Infantry tends to lose more battles attacking than Cavalry when they have the same attack power?

**Blitzer** · January 15, 2002, 04:47

You need the following:

40-50 Cavalry (This isn't hard with Mobilization and Factories w/ Power plants)

Whoah heh.

I don't think I've ever had that many units. If I do, the game is already over lol

Announcement

Some miscelaneous thoughts on the game

Some miscelaneous thoughts on the game

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment