How Frequently Do Experienced Players Beat Monarch?

[jshelr]

Drew Japan on a plane flight yesterday and tried the ultra-early temple. I think Catt's right. You can live without it, but once you've tried it, you probably won't go back.

BTW, I'm making book on Ralph. 100 to one odds he wins. There's always a way on Monarch.

[Arrian]

[Quote]You can live without it, but once you[ve tried it, you probably won't go back.[Quote]

I agree. Similar to industrious workers - some people just can't deal with the normal ones once they've played an industrious civ. Even I feel pain playing Japan after playing Egypt.

As for the odds on Sir Ralph, I'm not betting against him.

-Arrian

[ducki]

[QUOTE] Originally posted by Arrian
[Quote]You can live without it, but once you[ve tried it, you probably won't go back.

I agree. Similar to industrious workers - some people just can't deal with the normal ones once they've played an industrious civ. Even I feel pain playing Japan after playing Egypt.
-Arrian

This is soooo true.

I was thinking of writing up a "Things a Newbie Should Know/Do/Read" thread, and planned on including "Play an Industrious Civ."

I started with industrious and I despise playing anything else. They're just so sloooooow.

I really wish I'd started with non-industrious, as I know I'm missing a lot of good fun but the slowness just brings me down. Especially once I get Democracy.
Vroom!

[alva]

I used to have the same 'industrious' problem , but after a couple non-indus. games, it fades.
IT is a shock though to suddenly go back ,(as I did in your game with the Egyptians)

[metalhead]

It would be 100% for me, except for my propensity for firing up Civ3 after hitting the bars hard on Friday and Saturday. Usually provides lots of laughs when I look at those games the next day, except when the next day involves waking up in front of my computer after "falling asleep" in my computer chair.

[Harovan]

Here's part 2 of the story (the result of today). The past 500 years have been very successful.

It took some more suicide galleys to make contact to the Greeks and Babylonians to my south. They have a continent and an island of their own, 2 different luxuries and their terrain is a paradise compared to mine. Surprise, surprise, both were, albeit more advanced than me, still in the ancient age. I had saved about 2000 gold and succeeded to trade maps and to buy techs for a good price. I bought The Republic and switched immediately. That helped a lot. On the island was an unclaimed iron resource. I ship-chained a settler over and beat Hammurabi to it very close.

From the island I sent more suicide galleys to the west, where I suspected to find the rest of the gang. Yes, there were the Indians and Chinese, and soon I had traded contact to the Japanese and Russians too. They were in the medieval age, but not far. The Indians and Chinese had Monotheism, Feudalism and most likely Theology and Chivalry, may be even Education. But they lacked Engineering, so I thought, they can't have more than roughly 4 techs lead, plus Monarchy, which doesn't count. The Russians and Japanese were not so advanced. I sold all I had, including maps, contacts and the rest of my cash, and managed to buy Feudalism, which I whored to Russia and Japan to get Monotheism.

After I had discovered Engineering, I sold it again to Japan and Russia (India and China had it meanwhile) and got Theology and Chivalry. This made it possible to switch a good prebuilt wonder to the Sistine, which I built 900AD . It rules to have civs with a different level of techs. It's so much easier to trade than if all AIs are even.

Now it's 1050AD. I have Education and Astronomy and can trade the latter with Russia for Printing press. So I'm even in tech and together with India leader by score:

India 761
Egypt 761
Greece 728
Babylon 698
China 619
Russia 490
Japan 488
Rome (gone) 87.

But I can't hold that status for long, as I have a serious growth problem and have sold all, including my soul. So I have no other choice than to prepare for war. The target is chosen easily: Babylon. Actually I'm building an army of 20 WC's, which I will upgrade to Knights. Tomorrow Babylon is toast.

I'm pretty sure now, that I can win the game.

[vmxa1]

Charge

[jshelr]

To bad: no one bet against SR, despite the 100 to one odds.

[Harovan]

Come on, bet against me! Hint: I just called the store and they said "Anno 1503" is out today. That's the game I waited for since long. So I might hurry and make a lot of mistakes .

But again, if I take Babylon (and I will!) and get a leader to move my Palace to Babylon city (the city in the very center of Babylon), the fate of this game is sealed, as nobody will be able to outproduce or outresearch me then.

[Harovan]

Short report:

Conquered Babylon, except 3 cities. But the war was pointless, because I must be in the leader hell. I had many elite victories, but no leader to move my palace. Now I have 2 useless territories, one cold, which doesn't grow, and one 95% corrupt. I saved 3 Babylonian cities and placed some elites around, and will try to make a leader as soon as the Babylonians build a new unit. Will continue so as long as war weariness allows it (I'm a Republic).

To attack another civ is hazard at this point, and there is no war going I might join. I have problems to keep up in tech. I'm in the industrial age and one tech behind (+ one optional). I hope to get ToE, I'm prebuilding the wonder in my best city (size 7, almost not corrupt). Building wonders gets more and more hard, as the AIs have all core cities size 12 and soon even above it.

It's 1470AD. If I don't get a leader soon to move my palace, things look bad. But I don't worry, yet. I'm still thinking I'll win that game.

So still nobody bets against me?

[Mattaba]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
So still nobody bets against me?

Depends upon what victory conditions you have checked.

[vmxa1]

We have the utmost confidence in you. Grab them by the nose and kick them in the a** as Patton said.

[Inverse Icarus]

i'm willing to say 95%+, but i usually get bored when i'm the largest power by far (usually middle industrial).

[alva]

Then you might like this one Uber

[Theseus]

First, great opening post, jshelr.

Before I get to the temple debate, what struck me was your comment about sending out Settlers with your ancient era attacks forces. What for? CF-ing is pretty much a non-issue, especially as long as you starve and / or poprush towns down to 1.

I generally do build very early temples, unless I know I have to go maniacally warmonger very early, and / or I have at least 2 luxuries immediately available. Where possible though, I absolutely want the benefits of: 1 happy cit, territory expansion, long-term culture, and, sometimes MOST important, the stepping stone to Cathedrals (I love Sistine if I can get it).

Put it this way... I sometimes think of the game as "Civ3: The Pursuit of Happiness." So yeah, Temples are usually a must.

Re Sir Ralph: You gotta be kidding (Well done above, btw. Can we say Cavs versus Hoplites?).

Re me: 100%, but only on the games I choose to play... I'm a little picky about my starts, like Arrian, although I pretty much agree with the premise that Monarch is almost always winnable.