Trading with the enemy.

[Txurce]

I just played a space-race game with the Egyptians (Emperor, standard) and launched in 1725, trying an enhanced version of a traditional research approach: trading with the enemy.

My start was the usual: I had Greece and Rome below me on my continent, so after building seven cities, I swung north and knocked England and then Germany off the land mass, taking ten cities in the process. I backfilled two spots, and settled into republic with my 19 cities in 30 AD. Early in the middle ages, I took the tech lead for good. I was on such good terms with everyone that I never upgraded my 14 WCs - they were my only offensive units until I built some tanks because I had nothing better to do. (Note: the AI took forever to research military tradition - no one beelined for it.) I never fought a real war after the ancient era - the Iroquois attacked across the water in a very lame manner right near the end.

My strategy was to trade or sell techs to the enemy throughout the game, staying one tech or less in the research lead. This accomplished three things: it kept me on good terms with all three major powers; gave me the money and luxuries to keep research at the highest possible rate for the entire game; and kept the AI close enough in tech that they occasionally researched something ahead of me on a different tree, which then allowed me to trade for it.

What was I counting on, purposely cutting things so close? That the AI couldn't beat me to space, even when it's on a par with me on every level - because it's just not as focused. This is a simple article of faith, and the AI has never disappointed me. As it turned out, it wasn't even close in the modern era, because they were all fighting, and loving me for keeping them in the tech game.

By the way, these results were achieved with one GL, which gave me a perfectly placed and timed FP (the key to the game), the Sistine Chapel, the Theory of Evolution, and SETI. What could I have done better? I missed out on both Copernicus and Newton, because I didn't have the industrial base; I should have built at least one. As it turned out, I didn't need to research military tradition, and sanitation didn't help all that much, because my cities grew very slowly. That's eight turns wasted on the techs, and who knows how many for missing both those science wonders.

[Theseus]

I can imagine your Egyptians being very self-satsified and even arrogant.

"Yes, we fought wars in our ancient past, but we really are the most civilized civ."

[Txurce]

They're also a pretty bored bunch: "How many ages until we launch, my queen?"

I had hoped that my not-overwhelming size (and Swiss Guard army) would lead to some conflict over the last 1700 years, but all that trading kept everybody smiling. It was weird. I felt downright uncomfortable not being hated.

[Theseus]

I have not had a spaceship win yet... is the AI not as focused as in Civ2?

Russia has built a structural unit. Russia has built a propulsion unit. Russia has built a module.

Theseus has taken Moscow!! Russia splits in two!!

[Txurce]

That tactic you just described was my favorite single aspect of Civ2, and what I miss the most.

My sense is that the AI in Civ3 focuses on building wonders, meaning it's aiming for a cultural victory, but can't compete well enough with itself to pull this off. Occasionally you see one militaristic civ engaging in what seems to be a quest for world conquest, but they're rarely as aggressive as you would expect. So in the end, all of them end up racing for space. But the AI's fatally generalist tendencies lead it to research recycling, for example, losing a step. They definitely don't research in an order designed to launch as quickly as possible... and they're never ready to launch one turn after researching the last tech, unlike the farsighted human. I would venture to say that you could enter the modern era one or two techs behind the AI, and still beat it to space.

So, getting back to my trading tactic, keeping them even with you is nowhere as risky as it sounds, as soon as you confirm that they are not researching significantly faster than you. My last trade was two space techs for ecology, which technically caught them up with me... but I trusted in the fact that I had just pulled ahead by two (which is how I could trade two for one). I was right. I quit trading after that, because I had plenty of gold and they failed to research anything I needed.

[Catt]

Txurce, I have never been as bold as you have been in your "trading with the enemy" strat, but I don't think I will be shy about using it in the future. From what I have seen (admittedly not a huge sample), you are absolutely right -- while the AI is seemingly going for a space race victory, it diverts attention away from victory to go for Recycling and even Genetics. I just lost a game to Greece via a space race victory. About 5 - 10 turns before the "humiliating defeat," I got the pop-up that the Greeks were building both Cure for Cancer and Longevity! (and, BTW, it wasn't as if the Greeks were multiple techs ahead of the other AI and "milking for wonders" -- it seemed to be a pretty tight race, at least among the AI -- I was miles behind but wanted to play it out ).

My somehwat limited anecdotal evidence, now that you've made me look at it more closely, indicates that I could be much more aggressive trading techs with the AI. Thanks!

Catt

[Metaliturtle]

Tzurce, You've inspired me, I'm off to win my first diety game!!!

[Txurce]

Catt, it occurred to me that just because the AI out-researches you in parts of the game (the ancient era, for example), doesn't mean you can't trade with it. If you think about it, trading is how they get ahead in the first place and zip right along. So why not play along, knowing you can plan ahead and beat them to your main space-race goal - scientific method - and then space itself.

(Looking back, I realize I also built Hoover, but that was strictly preventive.)

Metaliturtle, if you win at Deity with this method, definitely let me know!

[Lucilla]

I had two or three games where this strat worked really well (regent level, though). I always try to get to the point where I can trade techs and either get enormous amounts of money or other techs out of it.

It's a dangerous strategy, but very thrilling and so far the most exciting way that worked successfully for me in the end game.

An addition to that:
I try to sell luxury / strategic resources as much as possible. When these trades are started at different turns, every few turns I have the possibility to cancel the trade and then get the AI to offer me either more money or its newly researched tech.

[Metaliturtle]

Cultural VICTORY!!! I played a pangea with 3 civs and me, I was the Greeks, I quickly allied with Rome, and began some hardcore trading. The French and British were north on the Pangea, and the French were whomping the brits, giving me a perfect trade partner, because the brits were money hungry. The french got the brits down to like 3 cities, when France declared on Rome, the romans asked for my help, and I evened up my trade stance. I then made peace with france, and invaded the rest of England, London had massive wonderage, which is how I got my culture up. The french and the romans were stalemated, so I just traded tech and built temples and libraries, from the final map it looked like I would have gotten a domination vict if I'd had gone off to war with the Romans.

What I found was that I had to give up my luxury recources (I started with 3 wines and a furs, and my next two cities had fur and dyes respectively.)

I think I lucked out with my starting position, but I did utilize the AI will take a spearman in a mountain over a spearman on a plain one square further strat.

Techs just barely went into industrial, but could have gone much further quickly.

I also lucked out with london having killer wonders, Copernicus and Newtons!! This let me keep up in tech, even though the people are really b*tchy on diety and I'm going back to my regent games which I love so very very much.

[Alkis]

There are situations, I think, where it's better not to trade your luxuries. Just leave them there to rot rather than be used by a rival Civ.

Example. Suppose you have a monopoly of a certain luxury. This means another Civ has only one way of getting that particular luxury, trading with you. You will get some 10 - 15 per turn, he will have the benefit of something like 50 per cent a turn. Having that luxury means he will allocate less to keep the people happy, meaning he will allocate more into science.

In some situations, when trading with my main rival for instance, I would go so far as to give them money, lots of money, to get what I want and let my luxuries rot.

Try it.

[Txurce]

I don't know what's a good deal here, Alkis: wouldn't all that money you're giving them allow them to allocate more for science? Who knows... we'll never have a chart that tells us who comes out ahead in every possible situation. Because we're usually playing against ourselves in the end, I tend to keep trading, since almost any trade gets me to my goal - winning asap - quicker than not trading.

[Alkis]

Txurce, you really have a point. The money I gave the Germans in one game, (about 40 per turn) surely helped them and I was aware of that. I just thought that giving them the luxury(s) they wanted would help them even more. You see, when you are in the domestic advisor screen every click of 10% equals about 100 per turn in the late industrial age. When you have many luxuries a single marketplace can keep a 12 size city in order with zero % on luxuries. All that on Emperor. What they asked to sell me their gems where 3 luxuries of mine. Yes, 3 luxuries for their gems. I thought it would be a mistake to accept such a deal. On the other hand getting their gems by giving money would enable me to cut luxuries from 10% to zero %, thus gaining more than double the money I gave them.

Something else on the same subject and in the same game, I gave the Russians who were at war with the strong Germans 3 luxuries for 1. That was done on purpose because I wanted to make them as strong as possible in their war against my main rival.

All I want to say is that it just isn't a good idea to give your luxuries for some 10-15 gold per turn blindly. In some situations your rivals will benefit a lot more. In others, its ok and it's a good idea.

[Lucilla]

Alkis,
I agree, if you have a monopoly for a certain luxury, it's of course much more worth. But if other civs can sell that luxury as well, the AI will most likely deal with another civ. If I get the deal, I can at least prevent that they are dealing amongst each other.

[Lucilla]

Addition to previous post:

For the same reason I'm often willing to sell a tech to other civs as soon as I've sold it once. If I don't sell it immediatly, the AI will do it in the next turn, and getting less money than it's maybe worth is better than getting nothing and the AI keeps happily spreading it's tech.