|
Deceptive Thinker posted:Good ones to puppet are those that have luxuries or strategics that you want that are just outside of their current borders - once you build a few culture buildings, the borders will usually expand to those spots quickly Yeah I made a mistake early of puppeting one that gave me 0 luxuries, kinda sucked as I went negative happy for the only time all game. Easily fixed by being smarter about what you take.
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 21:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 04:53 |
|
|
Janjaw33d posted:So technically the best civ is Spain. Play a tiny 2-player duel map as the Huns. Kill your enemy with a battering ram. Technically the best civ is Huns. e: what I meant to say was Welcome to the Something Awful Forums! You are well on your way to posting Awful Somethings!
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 21:30
|
|
|
Muscle Tracer posted:Play a tiny 2-player duel map as the Huns. Kill your enemy with a battering ram. I am so playing this game wrong
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 21:46
|
|
|
Larz2021 posted:Yeah I made a mistake early of puppeting one that gave me 0 luxuries, kinda sucked as I went negative happy for the only time all game. Easily fixed by being smarter about what you take. Irritating thing about puppeting the ones with unique luxuries (like porcelain) is that once they are yours they lose the luxury.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 21:48
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:I am so playing this game wrong Optimal play, my friend. You can't argue with world dominance in 3800 BC!
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 21:49
|
|
|
You can win even faster if you play on Settler. Technically Settler is the best difficulty.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 21:52
|
|
|
I think we're all agreed, then. Settler. Duel map. Huns. Game solved. Nothing more to see here. Next?
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 22:00
|
|
|
Another fact about the Arsenal of Democracy Tenet: you can buy a rifleman for 320 gold and then gift it to a city state for 25 influence, or give 500 directly for 30 influence. If a city can produce a military unit in two turns, it can produce 12.5 city state influence per turn with the Freedom ideology.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 22:01
|
|
|
Be honest though, we've all done the Hun/Duel combo at least once, right? Just for the hilarity of winning a round of Civ in 20 minutes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 22:02
|
|
|
Gaz-L posted:Be honest though, we've all done the Hun/Duel combo at least once, right? Just for the hilarity of winning a round of Civ in 2 minutes. I had to fix your typo.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 22:03
|
|
|
Zigmidge posted:I had to fix your typo. Hey, you gotta count the restarts until you get a goodie hut upgrade to ram!
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 22:05
|
|
|
What civilization is the best "Producer"? I am currently playing Russia and if you can get a city that can work several strategic resources at once and on a river on a hill your production is quite insane but are there any civs that surpass that particular arrangement?
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 22:06
|
|
|
Is it conceivable to win a diplomatic victory on the UN's very first vote? I am absolutely rolling in gold in my latest game as Elizabeth and already have ten city-state allies, so I think I might beeline to the information era and try to end the game that way. Problem is, even with all those allies I'll have something like 26 delegates, and the victory screen claims I'll need 32. Can I extract some more delegates from other major civs or am I just going to have to bribe the remaining city-states to win?
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 22:13
|
|
|
BadLlama posted:What civilization is the best "Producer"? I am currently playing Russia and if you can get a city that can work several strategic resources at once and on a river on a hill your production is quite insane but are there any civs that surpass that particular arrangement?
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 22:14
|
|
|
Does it seem to anyone else that City State growth is a bit stunted now? I'm used to seeing most city states rival some capitals in size, and generally in beautiful starting locations. Now I'm seeing modern age city states with 11 pop, in the tundra with a pretty pitiful resource loadout. e: Vanilla BNW with no mods. Orcs and Ostriches fucked around with this message at 22:23 on Jul 15, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 22:20
|
|
|
It seems like they don't grow as much, which is good because they really shouldn't be muscling in on the actual players.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 22:36
|
|
|
I feel like if there's any wonder I can't do without, it's Forbidden Palace; that and founding the world congress means you can generally ram through everything and anything you please early on. On another note I read that using Jesuit Education with Siam means you can faith purchase both Wats and Universities. That sounds hilarious if it's true, but I can't check right now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 22:42
|
|
|
I tried Huns/Duel/Deity, but I guess a few of each starting unit (plus rams) isn't enough to take out a city with hills and mountains and a river on the non-coastal part.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 22:49
|
|
|
Well, either Raiders of the Lost Ark is glitched to where it doesn't actually need the German archaeologist near the American one, or it's only checking that the archaeologist is working in Egyptian territory, because I just had it pop on a lonesome dig with no units within two tiles besides an Egyptian crossbowman. Strange, though, this particular game's been crashing fairly frequently when I end a turn and an archaeologist finishes a dig. I haven't been having this problem in other games, so I have to wonder if it's related to this; like a buggy script or something?
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 22:53
|
|
|
The vote for World Leader really should've kept an information-age requirement. Most games you'd be an idiot to not go for a diplomatic victory since all you need for it is gold. I really wanted a science victory as Korea but in order to get it I had to forego just electing myself leader of the world like five times in a row.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 23:02
|
|
|
Alright, I probably put 1000 hours into Civs 2 and 4, and I have 500 hours played in Civ 5. I love the series, and BNW owns. I am super terrible at these games. I dunno, I've always just played on lower difficulties because I always viewed these games as a casual way to kill time when I didn't want to stress out and play an FPS or something. So with BNW out, I figured I'd actually start playing legitimately, and started a couple of games on Prince. Is there a post or resource that I can use that outlines how to start a game effectively? I mean I know the ins and outs of the game mechanics, but I don't really know how to put them into practice in the early game. Monument for your first project in the capital to start grabbing culture? Scout for better hut results? I'm pretty strong in mid game, and the late game stuff in BNW seems pretty easy to figure out. It's just starting out feels super slow and I feel like I always fall behi
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 23:03
|
|
|
Scout first to get more ancient ruins, monument second. Shrine third if you're gunning for a particular religion (which means, research pottery first!) but otherwise optional. With the new way things are balanced you also want to research animal husbandry pretty soon just to get the first caravan and get some gold coming in. How fast you prioritize building your worker depends on whether or not you're using the Liberty social policy tree for fast expansion. This is just my "standard" build order, and it can change if I've got other things going on like aggressive barbarians or a trait for my society that lets me do things different.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 23:10
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:The vote for World Leader really should've kept an information-age requirement. Most games you'd be an idiot to not go for a diplomatic victory since all you need for it is gold. I really wanted a science victory as Korea but in order to get it I had to forego just electing myself leader of the world like five times in a row. Yeah I am not liking the new World Leader voting thing either (Especially since its more about sucking city-states off rather then other civs). I will probably disable diplomatic victory in all my future games.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 23:13
|
|
|
Most people I know run some variant of scout-monument-worker. Maybe a second scout if you're on a map bigger than Standard, and it's also good to try and get a granary and/or shrine in early. In the very early game, it's important to explore a lot, get lots of ruins, and grab the money from being first to meet city-states. Meeting lots of city-states early also lets you do more quests, while meeting lots of civs early lets you get techs for cheaper. Another important early-game element is managing tech--it's easy to fall behind by researching blindly without a particular goal. For example, Archery is usually a bad first pick because it doesn't contribute directly to boosting science or getting luxuries connected. Connecting luxuries early is slightly less important than it used to be since you can't sell them off as easily, but it's still good to stay ahead of the happiness curve. In general, most people broadly aim towards the research-boosting techs (writing, education, scientific theory and so on), only taking detours to pick up production, resource, or military-related techs as necessary. If you get Education early, you can double back for Machinery faster than if you went the other way around. In short, try not to research a tech before you need it. Because research is always needed, that makes the research techs a high priority.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 23:13
|
|
|
Speedball posted:Scout first to get more ancient ruins, monument second. Shrine third if you're gunning for a particular religion (which means, research pottery first!) but otherwise optional. With the new way things are balanced you also want to research animal husbandry pretty soon just to get the first caravan and get some gold coming in. How fast you prioritize building your worker depends on whether or not you're using the Liberty social policy tree for fast expansion. Depending on how much stuff is around me I'll go scout scout shrine, or scout shrine. Unless I'm poland or something I wouldn't build a monument. It's a lot of hammers spent for something you'll get free anyway. I'd rather have a worker. If you're going Liberty building a monument early is fine, but Liberty is not as good as Tradition.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 23:17
|
|
|
Instead of disabling diplomatic victory, I've been running games with far fewer city states. Like, the same number of city states as civs seems to be about right. It makes the city states far more valuable, and world leader a little harder to get. Diplomatic victory is definitely the most broken thing right now. I don't think city states should ever give you more than one delegate, and I really like the idea posted a few pages ago about gold gifts slowly giving you influence rather than instantly.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 23:19
|
|
|
BadLlama posted:Yeah I am not liking the new World Leader voting thing either (Especially since its more about sucking city-states off rather then other civs). I will probably disable diplomatic victory in all my future games. Yeah, me too. It's sorta lame as is. It'd be nice if other civilizations would look at their delegate count and if they don't have anywhere near enough to win (say, 3-5x less then the leader) would throw them behind someone else they like more. On the other hand, that might lead to a lot of rapid 'game overs'. I actually think the whole diplomacy victory thing is just poorly thought out, and without a more indepth diplomacy system should just be scrapped.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 23:20
|
|
|
Fintilgin posted:On the other hand, that might lead to a lot of rapid 'game overs'. I actually think the whole diplomacy victory thing is just poorly thought out, and without a more indepth diplomacy system should just be scrapped. I don't think it needs to be scrapped. The diplomacy system has tons of depth right now, there's just no incentive to use it. Getting delegates needs to be way, way harder at the moment, basically.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 23:22
|
|
|
With all the damned barbarians now, archery has moved up in my priority list.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 23:22
|
|
|
splifyphus posted:Getting delegates needs to be way, way harder at the moment, basically. Or getting delegates from other AIs needs to be actually possible. Even lifelong friendly civs that have been my lucrative trading partners since the Renaissance and have been on the same side of every war as me are pretty drat tight with their votes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 23:27
|
|
|
 Randomed USA and in a strangely fitting game proceeded to dominate the world with my American culture while the rest of the world hated my guts but followed me anyway. Ultimately I had so much money and science that I had every city-state permanently on my side, and right at the end I proceeded to purchase ten nuclear missiles with my dozens of thousands of gold and 1200 research and detonated them around the globe. After which I was elected world leader. Ah, democracy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 23:38
|
|
|
So, I just hit the Industrial Era...and not only do I have literally no coal whatsoever, no city state in the world is even close to having any coal.  Now I am forced to go begging to Venice...
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 23:39
|
|
|
A Tartan Tory posted:So, I just hit the Industrial Era...and not only do I have literally no coal whatsoever, no city state in the world is even close to having any coal. Either that, or tech to the Modern era as quickly as you can!
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 23:41
|
|
|
In my recent science victory game, I depended on Korea providing me aluminum as I had none around me. Thankfully he was friendly and just wanted salt.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 23:44
|
|
|
Is there anybody else who customarily plays on Warlord? If so, you should know that either Brave New World or the patch right before it changed the default difficulty (what it sets it to if you pick reset on the advanced setup page) is Prince. That was an unpleasant surprise! (though I still did better than I expected before finally losing due to time running out)
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 23:45
|
|
|
Time can run out?
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 23:52
|
|
|
Bashez posted:Depending on how much stuff is around me I'll go scout scout shrine, or scout shrine. Unless I'm poland or something I wouldn't build a monument. It's a lot of hammers spent for something you'll get free anyway. I'd rather have a worker. Nah Liberty is still quite insane, you just have to be a bit more reserved in how many cities you set up because, unsurprisingly, increasing tech costs for cities makes ICS kind of a problem. I hope they fix it since it is a horrible change, although the new DOF for trading gold is kind of like hitting the lottery in half your games. I've been able to win on Deity with a Liberty opening and I'm not the only one, since that guy doing the LP as Poland also went Liberty. If anything Tradition got a little worse, since you can no longer rush buy settlers while your capital grows, and instead need to hard build them. Liberty on the other hand hard builds settlers anyways and gets a free one, the biggest difference for me is how I space cities. Internal trade routes add an interesting wrinkle to city planning, especially whether or not you want it on the coast and how you evaluate food resources.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 23:55
|
|
|
Bro Enlai posted:meeting lots of civs early lets you get techs for cheaper. Wait, how? Is this one of those weird mechanics that the game just never tells you about unless you dig around in the micromanagement of it, or does it tie into some sort of strategy?
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 23:57
|
|
|
I know people have observed that the AI is more peaceful now, but holy crap I'm having the biggest love-in I've ever seen in this game, all focused around the hatred of one man, Ashurbanipal. This is a huge earth map with 22 civs, and my expectation, given that I put seven European civs in amongst those 22 (including myself as Venice) was that the European continent was going to be an utter clusterfuck of fighting. There were some wars early on, Denmark attacked Poland, France attacked Portugal, but meanwhile over in the middle east Assyria and Persia were at each other's throats, completely isolated from any conflict here in Europe. But then Assyria annexed Persia's city state allies in Sidon and Ur, which presented a problem for my future Diplomatic victory plans. Previously in G&K declaring war on a civ was generally the downfall for any peaceful play on my part, as inevitably the whole game would spiral into people hating me, declaring war on me, etc etc. This time around, I denounced Ashurbanipal, which was followed up almost immediately by my friends in Poland Russia and Portugal offering to go to war with me, which was great because I wanted them all to commit to the war before I did as I didn't want those warmonger penalties that had ended things for me in the past. We declared war, took back the city states and liberated them, and just before we made peace there was a massive dogpile on Ashurbanipal even from states way too far away to reach him. Now 100 years later, aside from a long-running war between the Iroquis and the Shoshone, and a long-distance conflict between Egypt and the Zulu, world peace has been achieved through hatred of Ashurbanipal. Other civs don't even dislike one another, aside from Egypt being a bit "YOU STOLE MY WONDERS!!!  " at some people on other continents, everyone has a neutral or friendly attitude to other players. All because I called Ashurbanipal out for conquering two city-states.I just wonder what will happen when someone finally conquers the poor bastard.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 23:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 04:53 |
|
|
Davincie posted:Time can run out? If you leave the score victory enabled, and you reach 2050 without anyone having won any of the other victory types (or if all the other victory types are disabled), whoever has the highest score wins. I didn't have enough votes to win diplomatically (but neither did the other two surviving civs); I was only dominant over one of the two surviving civs (and was 100+ turns away from the other one, who was about that far away from being dominant over my culture); none of us were remotely close to finishing a spaceship; and neither of the other two civs could make it into melee range of either of my two cities (and for some reason weren't trying to murder each other). So 2050 rolled around and I got the you-lost screen, which I'd actually never seen before (I've always quit when it was obvious I wasn't going to win, but I was hoping to get a spaceship built...)
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2013 00:02
|
|