|
gggiiimmmppp posted:I tried using really advanced setup to demand a desert start the other day and it was like it interpreted my request as "don't start me in the desert" because I restarted the game 10 or 15 times and none of them were in the desert. Some of them had a tile of desert in view but otherwise it was starting me in tundra and poo poo as Arabia. I've used it pretty frequently in the past without issue, but lately I've been noticing it not behaving quite as well.
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 17:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 11:22 |
|
|
redreader posted:I'm starting to think I have no idea what I'm doing, because I play on prince and won my first two games or so, but now I'm losing most games. The main thing I have changed up in my most recent game is 'always have a decent army' (only got that because I'm shaka right now, so I decided to win via douchery i.e. combat). In this game I've taken two cities (should have burned one) and withstood a bunch of attacks by the most powerful civ. I'm finally figuring out how all this stuff works. but I always try to start a religion. Should I not do that? I almost always do, Religions can be quite powerful and at the very least, you can keep the benefits you want more easily (Where if you didnt found one, you're subject to the whims of who sends missionaries into your territories). Whether or not you actively spread it, that's a personal call.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 17:43
|
|
|
For some reason every time I start a game as Egypt I get shoved towards the poles.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 17:47
|
|
|
I always go for a religion now, especially if I'm going for sprawling liberty, in which case it's huge for keeping your happiness in order. The goal is to get a shrine up in every city, then when you found the religion try to get Religious Center (+2 happiness from temples in cities with 5+ followers), then build temples everywhere and halt growth when they've got 5 believers (which might require population greater than 5 or an inquisitor if some other religion is bleeding in). If you can't get Religious Centers, Asceticism gives +1 from shrines with 3+ pop. Once in a blue moon if you improve your religion quickly you can get both. Then you just spam 5 population cities every 4 tiles forever, just building shrine/temple/library and defensive/economic buildings in each one, and you'll have really silly levels of happiness even on the harder difficulties. Desert Folklore is an I Win button for religion if you've got a lot of desert so any time I get a good start in the desert I usually beeline for religion to try to get it. With desert folklore you can just forget about building religious buildings if you aren't doing the happiness thing and you'll still be a world leader in religion at least through the first few ages. Tithing is also really sexy combined with either Religious Texts or Itenerant Preachers (or both, as the byzantines), and if you can get a strong global foothold with such a religion you'll be making good money from tithing for the rest of the game. Especially as the Byzantines with both of those beliefs you can effectively convert an AI civ over time just by converting all their neigbors and neighboring citystates; religious pressure will do the work and you'll never take a diplo penalty since you never put a missionary in their territory.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 17:58
|
|
|
Yeah, I can't imagine playing without trying to found a religion now, even after all this time since G & K has been out and its lost its "shiny new thing" appeal. It just feels wrong, even if I can imagine the scenario in which focusing your attention on other things would be more beneficial to your goals (especially on higher difficulties, where the AI snaps up all the good beliefs before you can get to them more often than not). My favorite thing to do with religion lately is pick Holy Warriors just so that I can build an army without having to think too hard about it. Even if I don't plan to ever start a war, it's just a nice easy way to get an army automatically rolling out, freeing up your gold and production to build buildings and wonders, it's very pleasant. Last time, I actually went overboard and exceeded my supply without even realizing it. Blame it on building Stonehenge, and picking the religious idols pantheon with 5 silver tiles in my empire; I was popping out Composite Bowmen every 3-4 turns, it got ridiculous. Does the AI pick Holy Warriors very often? Like Tithe, it can be an amazing ability, but also like Tithe, I feel like I never see the AI pick it very quickly, if at all. I might just not be paying very much attention, though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 18:12
|
|
|
I have kind of a love/hate relationship with faith from ancient ruins in the early game because it basically lets any civ that finds one found a religion immediately which can torpedo your entire strategy on turn 5 regardless of your build order if you don't find one first. Another thing that can really make your religion from the start is dropping a city just to snatch up a religious natural wonder, which will often require you to bump right up against a citystate and buy some tiles to steal it from them, but the payoff in the end is well worth the cost since you can pull it off long before you can even build a temple (and you'll get several temples worth of faith out of it).
poverty goat fucked around with this message at 18:46 on Sep 3, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 18:42
|
|
|
gggiiimmmppp posted:I always go for a religion now, especially if I'm going for sprawling liberty, in which case it's huge for keeping your happiness in order. The goal is to get a shrine up in every city, then when you found the religion try to get Religious Center (+2 happiness from temples in cities with 5+ followers), then build temples everywhere and halt growth when they've got 5 believers (which might require population greater than 5 or an inquisitor if some other religion is bleeding in). If you can't get Religious Centers, Asceticism gives +1 from shrines with 3+ pop. Once in a blue moon if you improve your religion quickly you can get both. Then you just spam 5 population cities every 4 tiles forever, just building shrine/temple/library and defensive/economic buildings in each one, and you'll have really silly levels of happiness even on the harder difficulties. Doing this as Egypt is the best.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 18:48
|
|
|
Does anyone have some tips on playing Venice? I got BNW a couple of weeks ago and Civ V 2 weeks before that, and while I'm still kind of shaky on some stuff what I've played of Venice I've found extremely fun and a really cool playstyle compared to everything else so far. Eating city states is mighty satisfying and I love just gradually taking things over without directly warring or crushing Civs, but I'm unsure how to go about what social policies or buildings or anything technical to go with really.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 18:51
|
|
|
The Wicked Wall posted:Does anyone have some tips on playing Venice? I got BNW a couple of weeks ago and Civ V 2 weeks before that, and while I'm still kind of shaky on some stuff what I've played of Venice I've found extremely fun and a really cool playstyle compared to everything else so far. Eating city states is mighty satisfying and I love just gradually taking things over without directly warring or crushing Civs, but I'm unsure how to go about what social policies or buildings or anything technical to go with really. Note: I play on Prince/King because I'm bad, so this may not be relevant at higher difficulties. That said, I prefer to only eat a handful of CSes, between like two and four, based on what victory I'm going for (unless I'm going for Domination, then I use them as forward launch bases), and feed trade routes into Venice herself to make it a super-city. I nearly always go Tradition first, and then whatever policies make sense for whatever victory condition I'm in the mood for. I really like Commerce in all cases, though, because you do a whole lot of purchasing as Venice, and Big Ben + the Commerce policy that reduces purchase cost is almost cheating.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 19:08
|
|
|
The Wicked Wall posted:Does anyone have some tips on playing Venice? I got BNW a couple of weeks ago and Civ V 2 weeks before that, and while I'm still kind of shaky on some stuff what I've played of Venice I've found extremely fun and a really cool playstyle compared to everything else so far. Eating city states is mighty satisfying and I love just gradually taking things over without directly warring or crushing Civs, but I'm unsure how to go about what social policies or buildings or anything technical to go with really. In terms of social policies, your early choice is really going to be between Tradition and Liberty. Tradition will give your capital growth potential and will open Great Engineers later on, while Liberty will get you an extra puppet and possibly make your early game smoother. I tend to favor Tradition, since the main drawback to Tradition with ordinary civs is that you waste a lot of turns making settlers compared to Liberty -- but Venice overcomes this by not being allowed to make Settlers at all. In the mid-late game, I think Commerce is the clear winner for where to go next. You'll get Merchants of Venice faster, be able to faith buy them, and their trade missions are extra effective, as well as being able to buy things at a reduced cost. (For extra fun, build Big Ben to get even more discounts.) In terms of buildings, you'll be able to pick up National Wonders easily -- the buildings like National College, Circus Maximus, etc, which require "Have a ... in every city". These don't count puppets, so you only need to have that building in Venice to be able to get it. So you'll want to get as many of them as feasible. Use your fat stacks of cash to pump out an army when you want one -- every turn, just buy a new unit in Venice. I've had games where in the late Renaissance, I've had a per-turn income higher than the cost of a cannon, so to prep for war I bought 10 cannons and 4 knights in Venice, which had a Barracks, Armory, and Heroic Epic, and went to town on my continent. Early game I'd suggest focusing on growth and trade units - they're really your lifeblood as Venice. If you don't have max trade routes, you're not making full use of the civ's mechanics. In my experience playing Venice, the big pitfall is science. Since I only have one city that's contributing fully, it's easy to fall behind in the tech race. Conquest is a way to address this, since you'll get more puppets which means more pop which means more science, even with the penalty. (Plus you'll knock your rivals down, which will make your lovely science rate better by comparison.) When you do think about war, look for ways to leverage your moeny - buy ally status with your target's city states before you declare war on them, pay other civs to attack them as well, and so on.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 19:08
|
|
|
quote:(+2 happiness from temples in cities with 5+ followers), then build temples everywhere and halt growth when they've got 5 believers (which might require population greater than 5 or an inquisitor if some other religion is bleeding in). If you can't get Religious Centers, Asceticism gives +1 from shrines with 3+ pop. Once in a blue moon if you improve your religion quickly you can get both. Then you just spam 5 population cities every 4 tiles forever, just building shrine/temple/library and defensive/economic buildings in each one, and you'll have really silly levels of happiness even on the harder difficulties. Temple +2 with 5+, Colosseum +2...Where's the extra +1 to even out? I think I'm missing something here.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 19:14
|
|
|
The Wicked Wall posted:Does anyone have some tips on playing Venice? I got BNW a couple of weeks ago and Civ V 2 weeks before that, and while I'm still kind of shaky on some stuff what I've played of Venice I've found extremely fun and a really cool playstyle compared to everything else so far. Eating city states is mighty satisfying and I love just gradually taking things over without directly warring or crushing Civs, but I'm unsure how to go about what social policies or buildings or anything technical to go with really. Definitely aim for Colossus and Petra(if applicable). The extra trade routes are so worth it, especially since you get 2 trade routes instead of 1.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 19:16
|
|
|
Bloodly posted:Temple +2 with 5+, Colosseum +2...Where's the extra +1 to even out? I think I'm missing something here. +1 from Shrines with Asceticism. He said you could spam 5-pops forever if you got both Asceticism and Religious Centres.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 19:27
|
|
|
redreader posted:In this game I've taken two cities (should have burned one) It's not too late! You should still retain the option to raze an annexed city, though I'm unsure if that option lasts forever. To my embarassment, it took me months to discover this.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 19:30
|
|
|
Tao Jones posted:In my experience playing Venice, the big pitfall is science. Since I only have one city that's contributing fully, it's easy to fall behind in the tech race. Conquest is a way to address this, since you'll get more puppets which means more pop which means more science, even with the penalty. (Plus you'll knock your rivals down, which will make your lovely science rate better by comparison.) When you do think about war, look for ways to leverage your moeny - buy ally status with your target's city states before you declare war on them, pay other civs to attack them as well, and so on. My Venice / Diplomacy game just entered the 1950s and this is byfar my biggest problem. War seems to be a good solution so far (and has been GREAT for my economy!) - Poland was really expandy this game, so I'm keeping some of their cities and liberating others and washing across the continent like a purple wave. Meanwhile I've got 21 city-states as allies and am working on others since we're about to become the UN, and daddy needs his votes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 20:17
|
|
|
redreader posted:I'm starting to think I have no idea what I'm doing, because I play on prince and won my first two games or so, but now I'm losing most games. The main thing I have changed up in my most recent game is 'always have a decent army' (only got that because I'm shaka right now, so I decided to win via douchery i.e. combat). In this game I've taken two cities (should have burned one) and withstood a bunch of attacks by the most powerful civ. I'm finally figuring out how all this stuff works. but I always try to start a religion. Should I not do that? It's only worthwhile for me to found a religion if I have a good shot at building Stonehenge. Faith is too hard to come by. That said, I almost always have a good shot at building Stonehenge since the AI doesn't seem to prioritize it even on Emperor. Brave New World definitely made warmongering much more expensive, so I don't bother getting a standing army unless I expect war to break out soon.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 20:27
|
|
|
Sometimes the game just loves to troll you. These were two consecutive random map starts:  That Rome start would be so good too if it wasn't for stupid Mecca and stupid island map 
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 21:35
|
|
|
Star Platinum posted:That Rome start would be so good too if it wasn't for stupid Mecca and stupid island map If that's a good start, I'd hate to see what you think is a bad start. That's like "I grudgingly built a city here because it has a couple happiness resources" bad, dude.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 21:37
|
|
|
Yeah you basically have 2 capitals now, destroy Mecca and take his poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 21:40
|
|
|
The White Dragon posted:If that's a good start, I'd hate to see what you think is a bad start. That's like "I grudgingly built a city here because it has a couple happiness resources" bad, dude. Do you remember a couple pages ago where people posted all these "amazing" starts and it turned out they were all average at best? Yea
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 21:42
|
|
|
The White Dragon posted:If that's a good start, I'd hate to see what you think is a bad start. That's like "I grudgingly built a city here because it has a couple happiness resources" bad, dude. This one was a bit weaker  
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 21:46
|
|
|
Star Platinum posted:This one was a bit weaker Hahaha, post your turn 0 save, that looks like a fun challenge. Also what is going on with the ground graphics in that screenshot - am I seeing triangular green smudges?
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 21:55
|
|
|
Unfortunately I don't have the save anymore, that pic is pretty old and I've switched computers since then. My old laptop was pretty weak so I had to run the game on fairly low settings, I think the smudge is a hosed up river or something.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 22:02
|
|
|
drat it, why is the AI so cranky about so-called warmongering? How is it my fault if some rear end in a top hat settles in my face right next to my capital?
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 22:25
|
|
|
Star Platinum posted:Unfortunately I don't have the save anymore, that pic is pretty old and I've switched computers since then. My old laptop was pretty weak so I had to run the game on fairly low settings, I think the smudge is a hosed up river or something. It's not your graphics card, those are rivers that terminate inland, with no connection to the sea. Whatever map script that is hosed up.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 22:27
|
|
|
So ever since the last update, for some reason Civ V interprets my username in LAN games as my real name whenever I play on my laptop or my desktop. Because of this, I'm not unable to play over LAN with my girlfriend, despite the fact that both of us have legitimate copies, because the game hangs when two people with the same name join a game. So we have to play over the internet which is a lot laggier and more error prone considering we're sitting right next to each other playing. Anyone know how I might override this or manually assign a name, or where the game might be pulling this name from so I can change it? It used to just be my steam profile name up until the most recent update.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 00:59
|
|
|
Can't either of you just change your displayed Steam name for a little? afaik, Civ 5 uses that to determine the player name.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 01:08
|
|
|
Read my post again. It used to default to the Steam account name, but for some reason after the last patch, it no longer does that. Changing your steam name only affects online play, not LAN play. I simply don't know where it's pulling the LAN name from. It seems to be my Windows/Live Account, my real name, but unlike my computer user name it's just the first name.
PoizenJam fucked around with this message at 01:27 on Sep 4, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 01:14
|
|
|
CAPTAIN CAPSLOCK posted:Do you remember a couple pages ago where people posted all these "amazing" starts and it turned out they were all average at best? Yea This was an okay start I guess.  There was more fish just NW of that atoll, some coal outside of worker range but within easy culture room, and I think a digsite on the island to the west of the atoll
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 01:17
|
|
|
Poil posted:drat it, why is the AI so cranky about so-called warmongering? How is it my fault if some rear end in a top hat settles in my face right next to my capital? This is what pisses me off the most still. If I drop cities next to me they'll denounce me quickly and move for war and seemingly no one gives one poo poo . If they do it to me and I denounce and try to go to war everyone hates me. WTF game?
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 01:26
|
|
|
Pretty sure they care less about who declares war and more about who actually takes cities from the deal.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 01:34
|
|
|
Tiny Chalupa posted:This is what pisses me off the most still. If I drop cities next to me they'll denounce me quickly and move for war and seemingly no one gives one poo poo It has to do with who they like more before the war. If you've neglected to make friends and you're at war with someone most of the world likes more than you, the diplomatic penalties are going to be worse even if you didn't technically start the war (though from the sound of it war was probably a predictable outcome of you squatting on their borders). If you have a strong coalition and you're fighting someone they hate, they may even come to war with you if you ask them. If you're going to have close borders with a neighbor you should be planning from far in advance to either make really good friends with them (which won't always work), or to build a coalition against them so that when war inevitably comes along it'll strengthen your coalition (and maybe get you a little help) instead of isolating you. The whole point of denouncing someone is that everyone who likes you more than them will have a reduced opinion of the denouncee. If they like the other guy more than you, they're going to be mad at you for denouncing their friend. This is why diplomacy is so important! When you start a game and start to size things up diplomatically, try to identify any neighbors that are too close for comfort, as well as any typically warmongering civs in the world and focus your diplomacy on isolating them from the rest of the world. Hating, denouncing and going to war against the same leaders will pull the rest of the world together into a coalition even in the face of smaller squabbles (though this will all get hosed up once you start rolling out ideologies if your bloc doesn't fall nicely along ideological lines, but worry about that later). This is really important to the long game unless you want the whole world turning against you. Bloodly posted:Temple +2 with 5+, Colosseum +2...Where's the extra +1 to even out? I think I'm missing something here. Asceticism is nice if you can get it too but generally you'll hopefully be scooping up luxuries most of the time as well, if not getting extra copies of luxuries that you can trade for more luxuries. Alternatively, you can get happiness from garrisoned units in Honor as well as some other sources of happiness in the mid-late game social policies. Happiness in the endgame is easy, it's just a matter of keeping your head above water 'till you get over the hump. Most of the timeI wind up uncapping a lot of my cities by the endgame if I'm not still expanding actively since I always wind up with 20-30+ happiness to burn by the modern era. e: obviously, prioritizing neuschwanstein goes a long way toward eliminating any happiness woes in the endgame with this strat poverty goat fucked around with this message at 03:47 on Sep 4, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 01:38
|
|
|
The Minuteman is super awesome considering he has extra vision from the American UA and ignores all terrain movement penalties like a scout. You can get an army of murderous scouts that are stronger than their contemporaries that will upgrade all the way to Mechanized Infantry. The bombers are usually overkill, really. The problem is that the American UA just looks so boring and underwhelming. An extra tile of sight and half price tile buys, sign me up.  Even the tile buying can be very powerful depending on how you use it. Also, as was said earlier, America is patently worse the lower the difficulty level because on prince and below an early UU or more immediately impressive UA can clinch the game before people even discover gunpowder. Murkah, playin' the long game. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 05:00
|
|
|
Pvt.Scott posted:The Minuteman is super awesome considering he has extra vision from the American UA and ignores all terrain movement penalties like a scout. You can get an army of murderous scouts that are stronger than their contemporaries that will upgrade all the way to Mechanized Infantry. If it keeps the tile buying part they need to add something money related to the UA to make it worthwhile over the Shoshone.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 05:03
|
|
|
I read this thread right before starting my second game of BNW. How can I police the world if you keep resisting?  Warmongering seems a lot more difficult in BNW than it was in G&K. I have nobody to connect trade routes to and pretty much nothing except some nice cities and an army of 20 or so B-17s. Also, half the civs have outstripped me when it comes to research. Not that it actually matters when I have 20 B-17s, but it kinda sucks anyway. This is why I usually just build a decent enough army to not be attacked and then go for science victories. Do The Evolution fucked around with this message at 07:36 on Sep 4, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 06:04
|
|
|
What tips do you guys have for making declarations of friendship with the ai? I always return their workers, and I try my best NOT to expand in their face unless it's a really good location, but ever since I started playing on emperor, I would be lucky to have five completed research agreements a game.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 09:40
|
|
|
Coordinator010 posted:I read this thread right before starting my second game of BNW. You really have to be more opportunist in the early and mid games, picking off whoever is the most hated civ of the moment is. Make friends and get people to declare war on your target and/or get people to pay you for doing so, and so on in order to get people to hate you less for being a warmonger. You can't remove all the penalties but you can get enough positive modifiers like being in a war together and attacking their enemies, then that will offset the diplomatic penalties. As long as you can get one or two other civs to be BFFs with you, other civs will tend to not hate on you as much because they're afraid of denouncing someone their friend likes. Avoid going total war until you have a very clear military advantage over the entire rest of the world. At some point you will end up in a situation where your only trade routes will be with City States but you ought to be able to make do with that. And if city states are embargoed, do trade within your empire to boost growth and production, which is crucial. You should never ever be at zero trade routes past the first few dozen turns. Don't keep any trade routes with anyone you expect to declare war on you unless you're using the trade routes as deterrence (if it makes them a lot of money, they'll be reluctant to ruin that) and also have safer routes elsewhere.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 10:05
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:Helpful diplomacy advice I see, thank you. I honestly haven't paid any real attention to the AI's diplomacy as the last civ game I played before 5 was 2, and back then not only was I something like 12 years old but I don't think the AI really 'got' diplomacy. It hadn't occurred to me to go after the guy on the world's shitlist, I've always just refused the "We should declare war on <civilization>!" offers from the AI just out of habit and the expectation I'd receive no help based on my experiences with being at war with a civ halfway across the world. The benefits of being able to eliminate someone from the game with the AI's blessing didn't even register with me. I'll try it out next time and play as Zulu or something. Still need to try out the new civs and one of my friends told me the Zulu got Pikemen that not only have a ranged+melee attack, but upgrade into Riflemen instead of Lancers. Sounds good to me. E: Dumb question - do people build a monument first when going for 4 city tradition? On one hand you get your first couple cultural choices a lot sooner, but you're also wasting the benefit of the free cultural building from tradition. Do The Evolution fucked around with this message at 10:45 on Sep 4, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 10:29
|
|
|
Ainsley McTree posted:Yeah, I can't imagine playing without trying to found a religion now, even after all this time since G & K has been out and its lost its "shiny new thing" appeal. It just feels wrong, even if I can imagine the scenario in which focusing your attention on other things would be more beneficial to your goals (especially on higher difficulties, where the AI snaps up all the good beliefs before you can get to them more often than not). Early religion used to be my strategy as well, but I've started to move away from it. Unless I happen to pop a faith hut, or I am in a favorable position to crank out large amounts of faith without too much infrastructure (i.e. lot's of desert, one of the faith natural wonders, lot's of gold/silver, playing with a religion focused Civ). Trying to force an early religion with shrines/temples often ends up being to costly in the short term, and often only leads to marginal gains in the long term (especially if you miss out on a key belief). And while pressing hard for Stonehenge can often get you a religion early it often comes at the cost of valuable territory to the AI you could have had yourself with an early settler, or spent on an army to help wipe out a neighbor early. Also in BNW it's pretty typical for one of the AIs to go bonkers with spreading religion. I find they typically will leave my cities alone, but trying to keep CSs under your sway becomes almost impossible many times as you can't out faith the AI most times. This can affect the long term usefulness of your religion. Lastly, not having your own religion means the AI(s) will try their damnedest to spread theirs into your cities. Which can lead to neat things like being able to build multiple religious buildings in your cities (hello city with a Cathedral, Temple, ...).
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 10:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 11:22 |
|
|
Coordinator010 posted:I see, thank you. I honestly haven't paid any real attention to the AI's diplomacy as the last civ game I played before 5 was 2, and back then not only was I something like 12 years old but I don't think the AI really 'got' diplomacy. It hadn't occurred to me to go after the guy on the world's shitlist, I've always just refused the "We should declare war on <civilization>!" offers from the AI just out of habit and the expectation I'd receive no help based on my experiences with being at war with a civ halfway across the world. The benefits of being able to eliminate someone from the game with the AI's blessing didn't even register with me. I'll try it out next time and play as Zulu or something. Still need to try out the new civs and one of my friends told me the Zulu got Pikemen that not only have a ranged+melee attack, but upgrade into Riflemen instead of Lancers. Sounds good to me. If you build a monument first, you get a free Amphitheater once that tech unlocks, so you aren't wasting anything. Still, early game hammers are precious so there's some validity to wanting to build a shrine or granary or an extra scout first. Getting a free amphitheater is good though and you could really go either way. Also another diplomacy tip: Try not to completely eliminate other civs. The way diplomacy penalties work is that every time you take someone's city, the AI thinks of you as more of a warmonger. The less cities a civ has, the higher the penalty, with the final city being a fairly big penalty. So leaving them with a handful of useless cities is smart, often times an AI civ will swoop in and finish them off, taking the brunt of the warmonger hit. Keep in mind that a domination victory only requires you to take the capital cities, the rest doesn't matter.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 12:13
|
|