Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How Frequently Do Experienced Players Beat Monarch?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • How Frequently Do Experienced Players Beat Monarch?

    Report from the Monarch trenches.

    In order to get even for something, my kids gave me civ III for Xmas. I had never played a computer game before, but got hooked. This note is a progress report that might help other newbies.

    In the last few weeks as a test I've played monarch games on a standard map with everything random. This produced lots of wild starting positions and a great dose of variety. The goal was a winning streak -- no cheating, no restarts, a real test. It was fun.

    Conclusion: Strongly worded: MONARCH CAN'T BEAT A PLAYER WHO HAS READ AND ABSORBED THE WISDOM OF THIS FORUM. I've played bridge and chess for years and I can tell you I'm no gaming whiz. But the following principles will beat Monarch nearly every time and this is far from the only way:

    1. Build early cities close together. Two spaces between to achieve a city spacing that is one roaded move for a unit between cities. The reason is that ancient era cities don't need much space to crank out units, and that is all that counts. If the AI is very close on first contact, or you are lacking in usable turf (green or irrigated plains), build with only one space between. YOU ARE NOT BUILDING CITIES TO LAST FOREVER. Would it have made since for the US pilgrims to have built cities in Boston, NY, Washington, LA, and Dallas? Nope. Cull the herd and build modern cites later, if the game's not over by then.
    2. Workers are the strongest units in your army. When in doubt, have too many workers and stay ahead of your expansion.
    3. Build barracks. Don't build other buildings until your neighbors have been introduced to the concept that your are in charge. This is not a civ-specific idea. Even religious civs should wait for temples until the early wars are concluded.
    4. The early rush always works. I don't do warrior rushes, but admire those that do. If iron or horses show up in my area, that's neat, not necessary. Archers are cheap and powerful in large stacks. You can produce a huge early stack of archers with a couple of spears on top. That concentrated force will take out anyone. The point is not that archers are the best way but EVEN ARCHERS WILL DOMINATE THE EARLY GAME. Swords and horses are luxuries providing fun and games.
    5. AI settlers can't hurt you. Let them build settlers. Build military. It's who can hold ground that counts. The AI doesn't know when to stop expanding and build its military.
    6. Don't do early research. Buy tech to stay one step behind your neighbors. Beat tech out of your neighbors. This process is the equivalent of the GL for the ancient era. Use your first leader for the GL and you may not have to research anything before chemistry. The gold will flow.
    7. Writing is more important that iron working. If you are going to lose, it's going to be due to bad diplomacy. Pay demands so you can control the timing of wars. Bribe for alliances. You should hardly ever be so cocky that you risk getting double teamed in early wars. Since you don't need gold for research, what else is it for other than bribery??
    8. Your target is to have your continent all to yourself before monotheism. If you have succeeded, build your cities infrastructure. If you have not succeeded, don't sweat it. In that event, it's time for the chivalry detour. Build knights and finish the job.
    9. The human player has a huge advantage going through the turn to the industrial era. The AI does not understand the value of ToE. Depending on how close the tech race is, you should beeline for ToE and skip all optional techs to get there. You may have plenty of gold. If so, you can buy optional techs to try for wonders.
    10. In the industrial era, the human player builds a much better economy than the Monarch, unmodded AI and takes the research lead unless circumstances have kept the human player very small. In those few cases where you have not been able to get enough land, perhaps due to an isolated island start, you should make sure you get sanitation early and build pop in your cities. This is because, when all else fails, the human player can research computers early, build research labs, and outpace the AI to the SS techs even with a very small civ.
    11. As an alternative, if you have the size for it, the AI doesn't get MA either. While they beeline for nukes, you beeline for SS or for super tanks, depending on the type of win you want.

    So, the series of Monarch games I've just played convinced me that the human player has layers and layers and layers of safety valves. Once you have developed the skills the guys on these threads describe, many games will find you dominating from the start and sailing smoothly. Some games you will start on the desert and have to walk 8 space through the mountains to find the first patch of buildable land. Even then, you can find a way to win nearly every time.

    Many experienced players respond to the lack of downside risk by trying for artistic merit in their games. That is good if it works for you. Try for the wonders. Take some risks to achieve domination earlier. Don't do the early rush and see if you can win peacefully. They are all fun.

    It's back to Emperor for me. The AI has more early size advantages, along with production and research cost advantages, to make losing a realistic worry.
    49
    100%
    46.94%
    23
    90%
    38.78%
    19
    Who knows, they cheat
    2.04%
    1
    It's roughly 50% in reality
    12.24%
    6
    Illegitimi Non Carborundum

  • #2
    If I really want to win and play "full tournament strength" from the beginning (cold efficience, no hazard), I can beat Monarch, say, 99%. The remaining 1% concerns a very bad start position, like in SVC, but this hasn't happened yet to me so far.

    But who wants to play "full tournament strength" all the time. A bit hazard is fun .

    Comment


    • #3
      I voted 90. Nothing's perfect.
      "I used to be a Scotialist, and spent a brief period as a Royalist, but now I'm PC"
      -me, discussing my banking history.

      Comment


      • #4
        I voted 100% since it's closer than 90% for me.

        I actually got bored of winning all of the time (back when we had monthly tournaments that always seemed to be on Monarchy) and started to play Emperor.

        Then disaster struck! I played Banana Island on Monarchy and had several really bad breaks. It's still hard to admit it, but I lost

        So the only Monarchy game I've played in months I've lost, but other than that I'm a 99% winner.

        Comment


        • #5
          unless finishing on a 1 tile island, I don't think I would ever loose on monarch.
          Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing?
          Then why call him God? - Epicurus

          Comment


          • #6
            Actually you could even win on emperor finishing on a 1 tile island by playing a OCC game- but I got tired of this game, I better wait for PTW (just forget about Deity if you care about your nerves )
            I will never understand why some people on Apolyton find you so clever. You're predictable, mundane, and a google-whore and the most observant of us all know this. Your battles of "wits" rely on obscurity and whenever you fail to find something sufficiently obscure, like this, you just act like a 5 year old. Congratulations, molly.

            Asher on molly bloom

            Comment


            • #7
              Nice write. The only real point I would never go along with, is the close cities. You can easy have a normal spacing at Monarch. The spacing you suggest will work, but I think it is excessive, unless the terrain is just the worst.

              Comment


              • #8
                vmax1

                Thanks and you are not alone on the spacing issue where I'm on the lunatic fringe, perhaps. Ditto the unwillingness to build anything but barracks.

                My point is that you don't use the extra tiles you get from wider spacing until after aqueducts and that is well after the ancient age shooting usually stops. I should add that I like small cities until a full lux compliment is available from the ocean navigation techs. After that point, I believe in widely spaced cities too. So, lots of abandoning cities after emptying them for workers to build the RR network takes place. Then they rejoin cities after hospitals. Not much is lost.
                Illegitimi Non Carborundum

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: How Frequently Do Experienced Players Beat Monarch?

                  Excellent post and excellent no-nonsense guide to whipping Monarch (or any level for that matter). I think my win percentage is about 99% if I truly focus on a win. Probably 90% - 95% if I play my normal game.

                  Coupla thoughts:

                  Originally posted by jshelr
                  In order to get even for something, my kids gave me civ III for Xmas.
                  My brother did the same thing to me.

                  Many experienced players respond to the lack of downside risk by trying for artistic merit in their games. That is good if it works for you. Try for the wonders. Take some risks to achieve domination earlier. Don't do the early rush and see if you can win peacefully. They are all fun.
                  This is the key point / insight that caught my attention. Building cities every third tile and only building barracks, units, and workers is a recipe for success, but becomes boring pretty quickly for me. I like to attempt to simultaneously build a military, "visit" neighbors as appropriate and develop a proud and uncompromising civilian infrastructure -- only the most dire of circumstances will take me down the alternate path of homicidal early conquest. My disinterest in most Deity games is that I am all too often forced into the ruthless win scenario which becomes tiring.

                  Catt

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Don't you hate it when you lose a "long reply" because of forum update problems? But, just discovered "long reply" in tmp, ah.

                    Originally posted by jshelr
                    Report from the Monarch trenches.

                    In order to get even for something, my kids gave me civ III for Xmas. I had never played a computer game before, but got hooked. This note is a progress report that might help other newbies.
                    Me too, but you seem to have advanced faster than I did. Also hooked. Big quandary is A) pick up PTW or B) learn monarch, advance to Emperor and then get PTW. Leaning to PTW in Nov. I sure could have used this guide before current and first monarch game.

                    How to play Monarch-- crib sheet
                    ================================
                    01. plant close cities, 2 tiles apart, cull later
                    02. enough workers, at least 1/city
                    03. barracks, at least in all border cities
                    04. early rush, plan for this vs builder style
                    05. settlers can't hurt you, welcome them and on't panic
                    06. don't research, buy techs. Goal is to be 1 tech behind in Ancient Era and start own research in chem.
                    07. Use 1st GL for GLib
                    08. writing more important than iron
                    09. milestone: sole continent before monotheism.
                    10. Indust--Beeline for ToE
                    11. Indust--2nd Sanitation.
                    12. Modern-- 1st: Computers for Research labs


                    Comments on crib notes:
                    #1 Yes on close cities and culling. Not sure about 2 tiles apart. I used a close space with a temporary city on a new continent just for military: barracks & workers & military only. Well actually made a mistake and put a library there. Opps, suggest if plan on putting cities close you give them a unique name so don't build incorrectly. I'll try this by using a capital T at the beginning or end of the city name.

                    If use jselr's plan you will have:
                    {Key: X=permanent city, T=temp city}

                    _ X _ _ T _ _ X _ pre culling
                    _ X _ _ o _ _ X _ post culling

                    Note tile 'o' cannot be utilized by either non culled city.

                    Alternative:

                    _ X _ _ T _ X _ pre culling or
                    _ X _ T _ _ X _

                    _ X _ _ _ _ X _ post culling

                    This is kind of like the Borg plan, city T is started a bit later and with no culture to boost military. Post culling all tiles are still available for maximum production.


                    #2 Ratio of 1:1 {worker to city} is rough guideline. You actually need 2-5 extras to build your military transport lanes.

                    #3 Only the first military unit should be before barracks. In all other cases barracks come first.

                    #4 Will have to adjust if edited default distance between civs. For example, I increased initial distance between civs to 20 tiles so you don't have too early of a civ elimination game. Definitely keeps you jumping. Fall back is knight or cav force to turn other civ into lemmings.

                    #7 Another reason writing is more important. For high culture values for your civ you want both library and temples early in your empire.

                    #8 If not sole continent, at least good chuck of continent at natural choke point. In some games there is only one continent.

                    #9 Point here may not be tech acquisition as tech reservation and delaying techs to AI

                    #10 I would make Sanitation 3rd priority. 2nd I would want Rep.Parts for RR-2xspeed-Inf combination. Sanitation is not really needed as much for city size as for BM. You need 5 hospitals for BM. Lack of BM can really cramp your military options.

                    #11 Depends on winning options. I don't have SS turned on, so beeline is for Nuclear Power. The military production capability increase when you use Nuclear power plants is awesome. AI tends to use coal or hydro, neither of which are as powerful.



                    Ok, that's a few cents from a new Monarch player. Great topic and suggestions. Thanks Jshelr.

                    -- PF

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Just a couple of responses for PF.

                      You won't run into unusable tiles as a practical consideration in the post-culling civ.

                      I agree that Sanitation is down the priority list -- unless you are a tiny civ trying for a come-from-behind SS win. Then you need the pop asap.

                      Fission is first in modern era as a matter of course. Otherwise, you don't control the UN, which is a no, no. Next up are computers for a SS or and the modern armor route for a domination win. You can trade for techs in the nuke chain. I don't think you really need more shields at this point, so I don't push Nuclear Power much. That would be a good debate, though.
                      Illegitimi Non Carborundum

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        jsheir, I passed on the barracks as that case is debatable. The thing that you will lose for sure is the culture from the 1000 year old temples. By RR time I would have some useful structures in some of those cities such a libs, more culture going away. On deity, I may be wiling to go that route, especially if I want to just war and make troops or my land stunk.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Well, it's been a while since I played a Monarch game, let alone lose one... I'm around 100% on Emperor. Deity is something else, but somehow, even if it is challenging, it doesn't feel as good as when I just started Emperor. There I'd say I got 50/50 wins so far... it's either be crushed before 1 AD, or slowly work your way up.

                          I agree with the points you make, apart from #3: The first thing I build as a religious civ is a temple, sometimes even right after my initial warrior (so without any explorers). I build it always before the second settler. The reason is that with that one very early temple, you will have enough culture to safely go conquering, it will take 2000 years before the next civ gets even on culture. So... no culture flips, or you have to get a very bad RNG number, in which case you won't mind either.

                          DeepO

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            vmxa1

                            On the barracks question, my gut hunch is that it's cost effective to add the additional hit point and, anyway, vet units need only two promotions to become GLs. That last item clinches it for me. Otherwise, I would probably not even build barracks, but just build more regular units. Early rushes are so effective that I'm really more interested in the leader production end of the business than whether the rush will succeed.

                            By RR, I agree, your cities should be fully built up. The pure warmonger bit is just for early continent-clearing operations. As soon as you have humbled all neighboring civs into client states, or eliminated them, build everything, by all means.

                            You are right on the lost culture. That might mean flipping of captured cities is a somewhat bigger problem. The cures are razing and acceptance of flipping as only a nuisance. I think the game would be better if lost culture were really a big problem for someone focused on winning. But, IMO, it is not.
                            Illegitimi Non Carborundum

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              DeepO

                              We posted simultaneously. You guys are talking about something I'm not qualified to judge. I've not built the early temple and don't have a clue whether it's worth the 6 or so military units a religious civ has to give up to build it.

                              Flipping has not been a big problem, but the additional culture might get you better deals on trade and more respect during diplomacy.

                              Food for thought. Thanks.
                              Illegitimi Non Carborundum

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X