a) Ultra-early war, b) Diplomatic status?

[Theseus]

I am having a huge amount of fun with a new game. Playing Emepror-difficulty as Egypt, 'cause I thought I could upgrade from WCs to Horsemen, providing a partial solution to the elite+leader problem. Not the case, but fun anyway.

A couple of observations. then my question.

- I am trying out my new ultra-early war strategy. Having built only 4 cities with optimum food, 3 on hills, I attacked Russia (easy target) with exploring Warriors in 2300BC. Took 2 of Cathy's Workers, killed a bunch of Warriors and Archers, and razed 1 city at the cost of 2 Warriors. This war continued for a LOOONG time... but I got 3 GLs out of it, for The Pyramids (1250BC), an Army (around 1000BC), and the Great Library (270BC).

- As a side note, by not building Settlers, my cities are much bigger, much earlier. So even though my GA got triggered with a small empire, productivity benefits were still there. Thebes was at 7 pop by 1000BC, and producing like crazy, and, even though I had wars ongoing, was able to build the Colossus in 24 turns in 490 BC.

- Elite+leaders are sent back to Thebes, for either an eventual upgrade, or, in the case of non-upgradable units (in this case a Swordsman), to act as the first unit in Armies.

OK, my question:

In addition to my own wars, I've been able to wreak general havoc with a series of alliances. At one point, early AD, I had EVERYONE at war with EVERYONE!! (Large map, 16 civs, so this was a true World War!!)

Now things have settled down a bit; only I am at war with France, Germany, and Greece, and Babylon is at war with France and Rome.

However: Germany, France, and Greece have NO diplomatic relations with each other... how is this possible?

[Jamski]

Perhaps they haven't established communications yet. Try trading communications to get em talking (and hopefully fighting )

-Jam

[Harovan]

I don't see a problem here. To have war with all 3 doesn't mean that they shall have contact with each other.

[Theseus]

No, sorry, did not fully explain. This is around 400AD, everybody has communications with each other. And the three of them are direct neighbors, BTW. And, I know that in earlier times, they had various permutations of alliances with each other.

The AI civs seemingly have a way of ending war, without entering peace.

[Jamski]

Do you have this information from the forgien advisor bloke's screen ?

-Jam

[Theseus]

Yes... as I cycle through the different civs (pain in the ass), everybody has lines connecting each other, except those three, who each have lines to all civs except the other two.

[Jamski]

And, you're playing with 16 civs you say....
Well, I've noticed just now in my current saved game, also with 16 civs that some of the civs are unconnected.

A minor bug perhaps?

Another little thing, why does the advisor not show all 16 civs? It can be VERY USEUL to know if someone has a MPP or not. I can never remember.

-Jam

[Theseus]

You know you have to hold shift and right click on a face to cycle through them, right?

[Jamski]

So I can see more than the 8 (or whatever) its shows as defalt ? I'm going to try this tonight. I just had a chain of MPPs start a huge world war. I'm up against 9 other civs....

Thanks Thesus

-jam

[Theseus]

I don;t believe it!!!

The French showed up with a mix of 40 Musketeers, Longbowmen, and Swordsmen... I had to beg for peace!!! Me!!! Pharoah Scorpion!!

All my Knights were off wreaking havoc on the Germans and Greeks!!! (BTW, as discussed on one of the other threads, I had to leave a captured city empty, in a tactical retreat, when those two showed with 40+ Longbowmen between'em).

Now I've had to get the whole continent to a state of peace (me, the warmonger!!), while a regroup.

Sheesh, those pinkies are a pain.

[tinyp3nis]

Most likely, they have relations. They dont like to tell their current relations to enemies. I could be wrong, but I think its no bug.

[Catt]

Re: a) Ultra-early war, b) Diplomatic status?

Originally posted by Theseus
However: Germany, France, and Greece have NO diplomatic relations with each other... how is this possible?

Originally posted by Theseus
No, sorry, did not fully explain. This is around 400AD, everybody has communications with each other. And the three of them are direct neighbors, BTW. And, I know that in earlier times, they had various permutations of alliances with each other.

The AI civs seemingly have a way of ending war, without entering peace.

Originally posted by War of Art
Do you have this information from the forgien advisor bloke's screen ?

Originally posted by Theseus
Yes...

I believe (but cannot swear to ) this is produced when you have not established an embassy with the releveant civs (even if they have established an embassy with you). Without an embassy, you don't know the current diplomatic status one AI civ has with another. They may appear on your foreign advisor's screen, but knowledge of their relationship with other civs is nil.

[Txurce]

Re the big question: sounds like a bug to me.

Now for the interesting stuff: how many restarts before you got territory that fit your new strategy like a glove, Theseus? Regardless... wow. It sounds like I have to try this. Did your warriors outnumber theirs, so early in the game? Did you get those three GLs with your warriors? Roughly how many offensive units did you use to rack up those three GLs?

And, in closing: how about those warmongering Egyptians, hmm?

[Theseus]

Catt:
Nope, I have embassies with everyone, although you are correct that if I did not, I would not be able to see their diplo relations with other civs.

Txurce:
Agreed, I think it's a bug... or the AI civs can somehow do something we can't. In answer to the "interesting" questions (I agree... this thread was sort of a faker to lay out the good stuff):

1. Probably 6-7 restarts. Nothing unusual though, just looking for wheat or cattle, preferably on a river, and without too much encroaching jungle. I think I'm still in Civ2 mode though... don;t pay enough attention to luxuries. Got lucky, as the game progressed, in that both Horses and Iron were within Thebes' range. As to the other 3 first cities, I did sacrifice positioning a little to put them on hills, but not too much.

2. Relative strength through numbers: I'm pretty sure I was outnumbered by Russia initially, but I think the AI, like us humans, is not focused on concentration of strength so early... we're all exploring. This game may have been sheer luck, but if you can get away with it, very early damage to nearby neighbors is devastating.

3. GLs: IIRC, I got the first from a WC (which I stupidly disbanded, rather than sending back to Thebes to garrison and eventually upgrade), the second from a Swordsman, which got immediately turned into an Army, with the elite+leader Swordsman as the base unit, and the third from another Swordsman, which is still sitting in Thebes almost 1000 years later (ceremonial guard).

3. My overall unit casualties have been low... I think I burned about 6 Warriors very early, a couple of WCs, 7-8 sacrificial Swordsmen, the odd Knight, and a couple of "come here, you sucker" Workers. I am proud to report that a totally left a city empty to save a Knight strike force, and ashamed to admit that I had to beg mercy and peace from France to save my ass when their pink-**** Musketeers showed up in force. But anyway, the early wars and GLs were not death-fests for me.

4. Warmongering Egyptians: In a development totally counter to prvious games, I have had to use the Chivalry period to build, as France and Germany are so powerful that I can't realistically fight them until Cavalry and a massive military build-up. So, builder / improvement mode... Egypt rocks.

[Txurce]

Yeah, Egypt is an all-purpose civ - build or fight. Your progress sounds very similar to mine when I play them - let me know how it turns out. I will try your "four core cities" strategy, since under good conditions, it could well give you a jump on the other guys. In retrospect, do you still see a need to build on hills? As Arrian pointed out, you lose the industrial bonus later, positioning was less than optimal, and you really had no intention of being on the defensive, right?