Overall Style/Preference of Play

[Purple]

I've played all kinds of map configurations, but usually find myself drawn to Old (few mountains), large archipelago maps with a medium amount of water coverage, the rest default. This tends to generate maps with a lot of peninsulas and choke points (good for defense) and narrow straits (good for exploration).

I like fewer rather than more Civs, because I love the early exploration and settling phase of the game, and less competition gives me more time to build.

As I reach the limits of expansion by settlement, I begin a military buildup, but keep a few extra settlers ready to exploit sudden open spots created by razing. I settle for rebuffing weak attackers from distant homelands, but go into full revenge mode against my nearest neighbors whose defeats offer me opportunities to expand, often continuing a war until the enemy Civ is completely eliminated (otherwise a rival might take advantage of my weakening of my former enemy and absorb the last vestiges of its territory).

[Giovanni Wine]

Map: Standard or large, Continent, temperate, medium.

Civ: Rome (almost always), played with almost all of them beside India at least once.

Opponents: Maximum allowed

Style: ultra-early war, build up my empire, when cavalry comes around I take out one (or two) other civs, when it is tanks I try to go for all my continent. Almost never go for war on the other continent, i like to let them warring, give them supply and receive tons of money to win the space race.

Saluti

[Theseus]

Giovanni,

I like your style.

When MP comes, I will play Persia.

Ave Caesar! Morituri te salutamus!

[bigvic]

Yeah, ultra early war? Give me the Iroqois, and we got an @$$kicking game

[Theseus]

Slight detour from OT:

We are all developing styles / strategies in SP...

My god, what a riot the early days of MP will be.

Ultra-early war guys are gonna duke it out with what, Impis, JWs, WCs, MWs, and Warriors, Spearmen, and Horsemen for the rest ... facing off against the early turtles with Hoplites.

Boom, then come the Iron Age players, Legions and Immortals, and Swords for all else.

Then the Chivalry players...

I got some bad news for the builders out there.

[Velociryx]

When I was playing, it was mostly with default settings, 8 civs (keeps the traits balanced more-or-less).

My favorite civs were/are:

Egyptian (the combination of Industrious and Religious is tops for any style of game)

Aztec (pure terror)

Iroquois (just cos I like 'em, and they've a wicked UU...not quite as coolio as the Jags, but close...verrrrry close)

Babs (cultural Gods)

Game-style: Early all-out war (first conquest is generally a suckerpunch with 2-3 cities and warriors only...brief period of settlement, and then almost all cities go to producing troops, keeping 1, maybe two making settlers to continue growth during hostilities). Oscillating between opponents, stir well, mix thoroughly until the continent is under control. Once it looks to be in the bag, all cities produce settlers and we blanket the continent like nobody's bidness. From there, the sounds of the fat lady singing can be clearly heard.



-=Vel=-

[Theseus]

Play out of balance, grasshopper.

[Velociryx]

Perhaps out of balance, but it plays a perfect accompaniment to the built in game mechanics and is blazingly effective. Makes your troops like an elemental force in the game....

-=Vel=-

[Nym]

Map: Huge (preferred but minimum standard), all random.

Opponents: maximum, depending on the map.

Civ: Babs (I tried Rome for my first game and India once).

Style: Builder (easy to guess considering the civ ). The strategy I prefer is absorbing civs by cultural flip. I noticed it works very good with the Zulus.

[planetfall]

All out early war. This sounds like the default AI behavior for Germany, no building, just military and attack, attack, attack. What was the German AI doing bad that you are doing good? Could there be more to your strategy than this?

I can see how this strategy would work if civ's are close to each other, but can it work on standard map with civs spaced further?

[Velociryx]

Hiya planetfall!

The short answer to that question is yes! All out early war is not map dependent, tho you DO have to change the meaning/timeframe of "early." In general, "early" in my book is "as soon as I see the first bit of someone else's border markers.

Doesn't matter who...that Civ's goose is cooked. No warning, no apology.

If I'm playing a game where the civs are more spaced out, I'm either playing a civ with a fast UU (Aztec), or I'm playing an Industrious Civ (my favorite trait, and generally that sees me playing Egypt). In those cases, I have a readily available means of getting to the badguys, no matter how far away they are. My general rule of thumb is 4 units per # of cities I see = my attack force. If I need more, that will become apparent as the war grinds on, and I can drop to the defensive till reinforcements arrive. If I need less....:: shrug:: no biggie. I've got troops already made for the next conquest.

As to what I'm doing differently in the early war....mostly, it has to do with force concentration and unyielding pressure. I simply hit and don't let up until the civ is backed into a corner and has to cry uncle. Generally, in the early game, if a civ has 2-4 cities, I plan on hitting two of them on the same turn.

More often than not, the "war" lasts exactly one turn, and I can move on, having dealt the civ I just attacked a devastating early game blow from which they will never recover. I'm also two cities bigger for my troubles, and begin using those new cities to backfill the territory between the new cities and my established ones, makin settlers and smiling politely at the former owners as they struggle in vain to make up for lost ground.

The key to success is a good military road network that enables the rapid shifting of troops. You don't NEED an army equal to the size of all your rivals combined. You simply need a good road network and steady focus.

-=Vel=-

[Giovanni Wine]

Velociryx!

I see you like Religious civ most of all: Aztecs, Iroquois, Egypt or Babs.
Do you think that the Religious trait is the most important?
What do you find so good about being a Religious, yes free temples are huge advantage for a warmongerer, but I personally find myself better with Militaristic Industrious (Chinese), or Rome (I like the UU).

The key to success is a good military road network that enables the rapid shifting of troops. You don't NEED an army equal to the size of all your rivals combined. You simply need a good road network and steady focus.

There is nothing more true than that

Saluti

[monkeyman]

Originally posted by Giovanni Wine
or Rome (I like the UU).

Saluti

Yeah, I just started my first game as the romans. Was sandwiched betwn the greeks and the americans. I had to offensive settle to get an iron from the neighboring americans. ...20turns, 10 american cities and 5 greek cities later ... a continent of my own. Those legionaries go though spearmen like hot knife/butter and hoplites?.. The best thing was when abe's men tried to counterattack it was just plain silly...

love those legionaries

--mm

[monkeyman]

Ooo look at me, I'm a chieftain!

--mm

[Giovanni Wine]

Originally posted by monkeyman
Those legionaries go though spearmen like hot knife/butter and hoplites?.. The best thing was when abe's men tried to counterattack it was just plain silly...

love those legionaries

--mm

Yup!

They took the most powerful Ancient Era Unit and gave to them the best defense possible, they defende better than spearman, they attck like swordmen, if you use them with some horsies, you can be sure that you'll never lose one manin one of your attack!

Saluti