|
I don't think you have a choice anymore. That ten turn promise of war is automatic, isn't it?
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2013 19:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 10:10 |
|
|
Is it? I thought I remembered the AI getting super pissed at me for not declaring war after a promise was made, but I might be wrong.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2013 19:57
|
|
|
Krinkle posted:I don't think you have a choice anymore. That ten turn promise of war is automatic, isn't it? In ten turns, they'll pop up with "The time has come." and you get two options. Changed your mind, or declare war. I had Poland deciding to get all up in Greece's grill in my last game, and I decided to go along with it... until I got some troops up there and found out that I was out-teched and Greece was gonna eat my lunch. I pulled my troops back, waited out the ten turns, then Greece offered me a city. I took it, gave it back to 'em. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2013 20:09
|
|
|
I hosed up as Venice. Nobody spread near me so I couldn't trade with anyone safely, then I helped england conquer the world and she is not at all grateful. Aztec and inca are dead and she still won't be friends. My people are miserable because I traded away all our pearls and while my army was away a single barbarian horseman just set fire to 80% of Venice. Elizabeth and Catherine have about twelve wonders between them and I have two. I had bumped it up to king difficulty because gently caress it I mean why not.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2013 22:51
|
|
|
Krinkle posted:I had bumped it up to king difficulty because gently caress it I mean why not. I thought you gave a rather thorough list of reasons right there 
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2013 23:00
|
|
|
OH GOD if there's ever greater casus belli than hiding your loving spearmen behind forest and moving in to claim a barbarian camp after the eight turns I spent plinking away with a single archer I don't know it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2013 00:05
|
|
|
Krinkle posted:I hosed up as Venice. Nobody spread near me so I couldn't trade with anyone safely, then I helped england conquer the world and she is not at all grateful. Aztec and inca are dead and she still won't be friends. My people are miserable because I traded away all our pearls and while my army was away a single barbarian horseman just set fire to 80% of Venice. Elizabeth and Catherine have about twelve wonders between them and I have two. I had bumped it up to king difficulty because gently caress it I mean why not. Venice is so situational. I find buying out military city states extremely powerful though. Also never bring just one archer if you hope to get the camp.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2013 00:15
|
|
|
Krinkle posted:OH GOD if there's ever greater casus belli than hiding your loving spearmen behind forest and moving in to claim a barbarian camp after the eight turns I spent plinking away with a single archer I don't know it. Spreading their filthy religion to me, casus belli. Spreading tourism to me, casus belli. Stealing MY wonder, casus belli. Stealing my cultural heritage, casus belli. Settling near me, casus belli. Settling in a place I wanted to settle, casus belli. Moving a settler anywhere near my borders, casus belli. Being the shitlord Hiawatha, casus belli. Existing, casus belli.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2013 00:27
|
|
|
Maria Theresa's big ugly neck: casus belli. (also Alexander and Enrico for having the GALL to try and steal my city-states away from me.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2013 00:52
|
|
|
Austria and Venice have automatic casus belli on sight for being assholes who permanently destroy city states. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2013 00:56
|
|
|
Anyone who coups my citystate ally dies. I do not tolerate such bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2013 01:00
|
|
|
I always feel so bad for declaring war on somebody. I just wanna build roads and cities, why can't we be friends  If I actually get aggessive, it's generally to revive a destroyed civilization, usually either Polynesia or the Celts. Someties I feel Civilization isn't a game for me.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2013 01:32
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:I always feel so bad for declaring war on somebody. I just wanna build roads and cities, why can't we be friends Sometimes it's satisfying to try to be the "good guy" civ. only fight defensive wars, or to help other civs resist warmongers. The downside is that the other civs aren't going to care how nice you are and end up hating you for some stupid reason or another.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2013 02:21
|
|
|
Poil posted:Lots of them. Reminded me of : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUZvwxucXbw I know it's EU4 and not Civ 5... but casus belli
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2013 05:58
|
|
|
The Cheshire Cat posted:Sometimes it's satisfying to try to be the "good guy" civ. only fight defensive wars, or to help other civs resist warmongers. Theyll consider you a warmonger even if you only fight a lot of defencive wars.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2013 06:06
|
|
|
Iretep posted:Theyll consider you a warmonger even if you only fight a lot of defencive wars. It depends how you fight them. Going on the offensive and taking their cities will get you branded a warmonger even if you were the one that was attacked (unless those cities were originally yours in the first place). It's not a very "defensive" war if you start annexing territory or burning cities. Even if that city is right in the middle of your civ and come on dude I ASKED you not to settle near me (I'm almost sure the AI does this for no reason other than to provoke me)! If you stick to killing troops but not taking cities, you should be able to avoid the label. I'm not sure how it gets counted if you assist another civ by liberating their cities. I'm pretty sure it doesn't count against you either. The Cheshire Cat fucked around with this message at 06:58 on Dec 30, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2013 06:54
|
|
|
Since BNW or a subsequent patch you actually can lose warmonger points by liberating cities (but only if you actually choose Liberate City and never actually own it yourself, even for a partial turn).
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2013 07:16
|
|
|
Alkydere posted:Oh wow, I've never actually done an Interfaith Dialogue attack religion before and I wish I had before because this is magnificent. I'm auto-producing missionaries faster than I can use them and am straight up attacking any city that has a majority religion other than mine. I don't care about converting cities, I just care about farming those sweet, sweet technology points. Which Civ did you play as? I'm curious. Sometimes I just use religion as a local enhancement, sometimes I spread it far and wide, getting the right balance to get max gain for Interfaith Dialogue is tricky.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2013 07:26
|
|
|
alcaras posted:Reminded me of :
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2013 11:29
|
|
|
SurreptitiousMuffin posted:
Which tenet gives tourism? Wait did you mean the added bonus for filling out the piety tree? I already spent that on making my faith un-erasable. No, no. Ideological tenets. It says right here. Which one does +tourism? Order has a few but none about religious buildings. I can't find that one. I'm reading the hell out of these ideologies and none of them say what you said. I went to war with Portugal. Casus belli was building the forbidden palace fifteen marathon turns before me and then voting down my proposal that natural wonders are cool. Now I have the votes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2013 14:49
|
|
|
He's talking about the Reformation Belief from Piety. Elizabeth is untrustworthy; pay attention to AI behaviors and you'll learn to predict what they'll do. Always double-check your luxuries before trading them away lest you need them to maintain happiness. Always keep at least a couple defensive units around your cities to repel barbarians or stall for time. Lose your dependence on wonders - try a game where you never build any of them. They're not necessary and removing the crutch will force you to improve your game. If you're hunting camps, bring a melee unit to ensure you get the camp the same turn its guard dies, unless you can be certain there is no AI unit to snipe it. Your biggest problem seems to be that, rather than learn from the mistakes you've made, you blame the game for them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2013 15:22
|
|
|
I was with you until the last sentence. I'm not sure where you're getting that from. Yeah okay I'll lay off the wonders and see what happens. By AI behaviors do you mean how they suddenly won't trade at fair prices indicating they are pissed, or just their surface text of "oh, this loving guy again... well not for long, heh heh heh"? Krinkle fucked around with this message at 17:37 on Dec 30, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2013 17:34
|
|
|
I've had this game for quite a long time, and consider myself a veteran of the game (although not a star player by any means). I checked the op but didn't seem to see the following questions answered on there: For your reference, I play on Emperor difficulty, large size, random map, no mods. 1. Is there a list of solid Lets play videos/players for non-beginner users? (that could potentially answer the below questions). 2. What is your favorite Civ(s) and why? Just looking for new opinions here - I am sure I have brushed civs off as bad when they are not. I tend to favor Arabia for the double oil, luxury resources, and better land trade routes, not to mention more religion spread. My style of play has always been to make a tall 3-4 city empire, and only fight to defend myself, or to knock out someone getting too powerful/close to me. I am not against fighting, I will just never set the focus of my game to all out war, all the time. I do enjoy the Shoshone as well, but I don't know how to best chose the ruin bonuses. 3. Is there a De facto selection for religion choices, assuming you are not going for a very specific scenario of play? Are there ones to avoid at all costs? Is going piety for the reformation belief worth the effort? 4. Tradition social policy seems to be king around here, although should you go middle 3, or the full tree? Is there another must have social policy as well, or are the rest up to you? 5. Finally, what is your build order, assuming no wars, or crazy events? Is there an early game wonder that is a must have? I tend to go Scout, Monument, Granary, Worker (sometime 2x), Settler (if capital is 5 pop), Library, Archer x2, Water Mill (if on river), Caravan. The rest of the list becomes a hodgepodge of what I need/should do next. I tend to avoid wonders because I feel I won't be able to complete it in time before the AI does. Thanks in advance for any input Goons!
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2013 18:29
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:I always feel so bad for declaring war on somebody. I just wanna build roads and cities, why can't we be friends I hear you. So many things that need building. Hard to find time to build units when your cities and economy take up so much time and need to be done just to keep up. It's not impossible, but it's a pain. Though my main issue is 'war gets you nothing'. You take and hold the cities, they hate you(even more if you simply annex), your costs go up, you need to rebuild what you probably messed up, and all in all you gain really little out of it. You burn the cities, you've wasted the effort taken to take the city in the first place. Even if you resettled the ruins yourself, you'd still have to build the place from scratch. And after all that, everyone has issues with you, even if they're the ones who asked you to do the deed and everyone hates the target. But I'm often too passive, so pretty much every game ends up with a watchful peace: everyone's trading and so on, but nobody moves. Nobody wants to break anything. Everyone's got their units, but very rarely do you get anyone using them. It's times like this you understand why Galciv 1 and 2 had those random events. Hell, even Civ 1 had random things blow up(Though this was to get you to build more buildings mostly) and barbarians from nowhere. Maybe I need to mess with Barbarian spawn rates again or something. But it won't help when everything is settled, since then they can't show up... The following sounds mocking, but is a recommendation from someone who owns them: The various Settlers games and 'Anno' games are much more building friendly. The economy is very much the whole point.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2013 19:06
|
|
|
The Rev posted:I've had this game for quite a long time, and consider myself a veteran of the game (although not a star player by any means). I checked the op but didn't seem to see the following questions answered on there: For your reference, I play on Emperor difficulty, large size, random map, no mods. 1. Look for a dude called MadDjinn, he's capable of winning solidly on Deity with a variety of strategies and civs. 2. Venice is a lot of fun just because it's so different. I also like the Aztecs (with an "open Honour, rest in Tradition" start) since it's so safe to play as them. Babylon is probably the most powerful civ to win peacefully since they have the best science boost, and the Mongols get the best Unique Unit in the game, so they're probably your best bet for Domination victory. 3. I usually take Tithe for the extra money. Happiness boosters of any stripe are good to have, and you should probably avoid any belief that requires you to have believers in cities other than your own. Generally speaking, religion becomes less viable the higher you go in difficulty, so I tend to see it as a "grab a quick bonus I can use now" feature rather than a "rely on this to win me the game" feature. 4. Tradition is the best, and should be taken in this order: A. Opener (duh) B. Free monuments. Don't build a monument anywhere beforehand, it's a waste of hammers. C. Extra growth and food in the capital. D. Bonus happiness in the capital. E&F. The other two, in the order of your choice. I normally take Commerce from then on until I can take Rationalism. Tradition, Rationalism, and your Ideology are the biggest game-changers in the uh, game. 5. Normally I go scout, worker, then it's really a case of situation. Libraries and settlers are high on the priority list, as are food producing buildings, and archers. I tend not to build a settler until the capital is size 5 or more, as you note. Avoiding wonders is a good plan, especially early on when you don't really know what the AI is doing with it's hammers, and you're behind in tech anyway.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2013 19:20
|
|
|
OpenlyEvilJello posted:Lose your dependence on wonders - try a game where you never build any of them. They're not necessary and removing the crutch will force you to improve your game. They're only a crutch if you can't hold your own in combat against the AI due to building them. In which case you should have ALL the Wonders. In my current game, I was lucky enough to spawn on a megacontinent in Small Continents and I own every one I didn't build (including Pyramids). Learning how to trick the AI in battle is the most valuable thing you can do in this game because you can turn a handful of Archers and one Warrior into a death machine. Grind them on a city state if you have to--choose one to DoW as soon as you meet them and use it to train Range Archers that can take a city more effectively than a full military city can--but you can always guarantee a total victory against all enemies while building your favorite Wonders. Civ 5 is all about exploiting your human intelligence over the computer. Worst comes to worst, spend thirty turns grinding a couple Archers on your bitched City State, even on Quick. The AI doesn't know how to do that. Fur20 fucked around with this message at 19:50 on Dec 30, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2013 19:48
|
|
|
I finished a game on King as England, and man, Longbowmen are really nice. I made around 6, and with three range was able to take capitals without using catapults or trebuchets. I just had a knight tag along and cap the city once it was battered down. Plus, when they got upgraded to gatling guns, they kept the range upgrade. 2 range gatling guns and eventually bazookas is nuts.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2013 20:04
|
|
|
Has anyone ever had Ghandi (Ability: Double unhappiness per city, Half unhappiness per population) break his normal script of going tall (3-4 cities at maximum) and instead, like in my game playing as Venice, he's built 11 cities, all ranging around 6-7 population each? As a note, I did not select "Random personalities" in my game - this is default Ghandi with no mods installed. He went Order, I went freedom, and he's hovering something around -43 happiness in his empire due to my Tourism. One thing that *might* have caused this: I'm playing with raging barbarians, and for some reason he had about 3 captured settlers that I freed for him, then cleared out the 3 barbarian camps that were creating a "no man's zone" on the map that nobody had bothered to settle. Next thing I know, he's got 11 cities all over the map. * * * Also, when you found a new city and incurr the 3% science penalty, do you get that percentage back if you give that city away? One of my strategies to prevent a culture victory pre BNW, was to build useless tiny cities in snow/ice areas, donate that to a civ and most of the time they would annex the city. (Or, capture a city, raze it until it is down to 1 pop, then give it to the AI, since you cannot "puppet" a city that is being razed). I was thinking, if I want to prevent a civ from going runaway with tech, maybe build for them a slew of useless cities in the frozen north and "donate" them, but I don't know if the 3% penalty is incurred each time you *found* a city, or is based on your city *totals*.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2013 20:10
|
|
|
Guigui posted:Has anyone ever had Ghandi (Ability: Double unhappiness per city, Half unhappiness per population) break his normal script of going tall (3-4 cities at maximum) and instead, like in my game playing as Venice, he's built 11 cities, all ranging around 6-7 population each? It's apparently based on the highest number of cities you have ever owned at one time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2013 20:38
|
|
|
One-city culture victory was a lot of fun as Venice, especially with Gandhi trying to rush the Apollo project.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2013 20:58
|
|
|
My old strategy in Civ 4 was to make more cities than the AI. Like, way more cities. Spread out to take up every single luxury on my continent, try to ensure that all my cities were operating at full efficiency, with the best buildings, all the tile improvements they'd need, and everything else. I still get stuck in that mentality in Civ 5, and it seems like I'm not operating at as high a level as I should be. Why shouldn't I stretch out to get like... 30 cities? Can't the penalties be mitigated with proper buildings in your cities, and all that?
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2013 21:02
|
|
|
rotinaj posted:My old strategy in Civ 4 was to make more cities than the AI. Like, way more cities. Spread out to take up every single luxury on my continent, try to ensure that all my cities were operating at full efficiency, with the best buildings, all the tile improvements they'd need, and everything else. I still get stuck in that mentality in Civ 5, and it seems like I'm not operating at as high a level as I should be. The penalties can not be mitigated. Buildings alone are not enough to keep yourself happiness positive, as those happiness bonuses from common buildings cannot exceed city population. Unless you're India, there's no way to actually infinitely expand and grow. If you go super wide, your cities will end up really small. They'll be unable to produce anything of value late game. They will not be able to overcome the penalties to your science and SP rates, especially with the changes Brave New World made. You cannot grow your culture rate easily with more cities anymore now that so much of it is tied to specialists from your guilds and the great works. Science rate is also heavily dependent on specialists and academies and high tier buildings, stuff you can't really get in small cities, making it hard to overcome the science penalty. Basically, you will be technologically backwards and have no social policies because the happiness system won't allow you to grow your cities. If you abuse India's UA correctly, you could conceivably go both tall and wide, but even still, that's suboptimal. So much of what BNW changed removed the importance of individual cities and centralized stuff like gold and culture income into empire-wide systems, that beyond your initial core cities extra cities are almost completely useless. They just don't contribute anything of value anymore. Dr. Video Games 0031 fucked around with this message at 21:22 on Dec 30, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2013 21:11
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:The penalties can not be mitigated. Buildings alone are not enough to keep yourself happiness positive, as those happiness bonuses from common buildings cannot exceed city population. Unless you're India, there's no way to actually infinitely expand and grow. If you go super wide, your cities will end up really small. They'll be unable to produce anything of value late game. They will not be able to overcome the penalties to your science and SP rates, especially with the changes Brave New World made. You cannot grow your culture rate easily with more cities anymore now that so much of it is tied to specialists from your guilds and the great works. Science rate is also heavily dependent on specialists and academies and high tier buildings, stuff you can't really get in small cities, making it hard to overcome the science penalty. Basically, you will be technologically backwards and have no social policies because the happiness system won't allow you to grow your cities. Huh. I'll have to try to play "properly" then, to see if I've gotten it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2013 21:29
|
|
|
Speedball posted:Which Civ did you play as? I'm curious. Sometimes I just use religion as a local enhancement, sometimes I spread it far and wide, getting the right balance to get max gain for Interfaith Dialogue is tricky. Indonesia since I can then get some free faith from any spill-over from neighboring or aggressively proselytizing civs in my territory. Honestly though it really doesn't matter which civ you chose as long as you're lucky with getting 2-3 friendly neighbors with their own religions. I got especially lucky and got both Russia (who's got 3 cities in Tundra but determined to spread Orthodoxy across the globe) and Morocco (who has been absurdly friendly the entire game and building all the wonders). Russia likes me, but not enough to give me open borders so my missionaries wither, but I don't care. The strength of the missionary doesn't matter, only the amount of population following religions other than yours matters. Morocco thinks I can do no loving wrong and is my bestest buddy. All game I've been alternating between leaching 120-180 research pops off of Morocco's capitol and then sending my missionaries to Russia for them to die/leach from Moscow and St. Petersburg for 100-120 until Catherine tells me to piss off, at which point I go back to Morocco who has regenerated his followers so I can get some really juicy leaches.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2013 21:31
|
|
|
rotinaj posted:Huh. I'll have to try to play "properly" then, to see if I've gotten it. If you're going to try to play tall for the first time, the mindset you have to get into is food > everything else. Growth is more important than constructing buildings or wonders, than pumping out military units (unless you're in danger), prioritize food buildings to others (buy them if building takes too long, don't switch citizens off of food duty), prefer farms to mines or trading posts on any terrain that allows farms, and so on. Never stop maximizing your growth at all times, always pull whatever tricks you can to stay happiness positive. Make your cities as massively huge as possible. Dr. Video Games 0031 fucked around with this message at 21:49 on Dec 30, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2013 21:47
|
|
|
The other reason going tall is so powerful is the mechanics of science generation, specifically the National College. You can generally get more people going Tradition (since half happiness in your mega-capital is worth more than 1 happiness per city) than you can by going Liberty, so that's more science in your empire in general. Now, combine that with the 50% bonus to science in your capital (since you should always build the National College in your capital) and you're flying ahead in science compared to a Liberty empire. There's also the fact that if you have ten cities and you build a library in one, that's 10% of your population with a library. If you have four mega-cities you will not only build that library faster (due to more people per city), but you will also have a larger proportion of your population affected by it. All this relies on you being able to grow your cities fast, so food is very valuable and you should get as much as you can.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2013 22:27
|
|
|
Krinkle posted:I was with you until the last sentence. I'm not sure where you're getting that from. All I can really go on is your text, which sometimes reads like whining about the game being bullshit (in ways that it is not). If that's not the case, then carry on. By AI behaviors I mean their personalities. Liz is treacherous, Monty will try to kill everyone (and probably fail), Harald will love you for kicking his rear end. That sort of thing. Keeping an eye on what they'll offer you for deals can definitely help you navigate around deceptive civs, who may appear Friendly when they're about to backstab you. Oh, and since I like knowing what difficulty people play on when I read their advice, I've not bothered with Immortal or Deity yet, but can comfortably win an Emperor OCC. The White Dragon posted:They're only a crutch if you can't hold your own in combat against the AI due to building them. In which case you should have ALL the Wonders. In my current game, I was lucky enough to spawn on a megacontinent in Small Continents and I own every one I didn't build (including Pyramids). Learning how to trick the AI in battle is the most valuable thing you can do in this game because you can turn a handful of Archers and one Warrior into a death machine. Grind them on a city state if you have to--choose one to DoW as soon as you meet them and use it to train Range Archers that can take a city more effectively than a full military city can--but you can always guarantee a total victory against all enemies while building your favorite Wonders. I don't mean to say wonders are bad; I build plenty of them myself (or used to, since I haven't actually played for a few months). I do think newer players tend to get fixated on wonders to the detriment of the rest of their game, typically sacrificing either minimum military levels or key normal buildings to try to grab wonders that won't even help them that much. Learning how to play without them forces you to focus on more fundamental elements of the game, after which you can add wonders back in knowing what you're doing. Going without also teaches you that getting beaten to a wonder isn't going to lose you the game.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2013 00:09
|
|
|
Dr. Video Games 0031 posted:If you're going to try to play tall for the first time, the mindset you have to get into is food > everything else. Growth is more important than constructing buildings or wonders, than pumping out military units (unless you're in danger), prioritize food buildings to others (buy them if building takes too long, don't switch citizens off of food duty), prefer farms to mines or trading posts on any terrain that allows farms, and so on. Never stop maximizing your growth at all times, always pull whatever tricks you can to stay happiness positive. Make your cities as massively huge as possible. What's the number of cities you should be aiming for on each size map (roughly)?
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2013 00:24
|
|
|
Kippling posted:What's the number of cities you should be aiming for on each size map (roughly)? Tiny: 4. Small: 4. Standard: 4. Large: 4. Huge: 4.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2013 00:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 10:10 |
|
|
4 cities and go tradition and rationalism policies, everything else is subpar! But personally I go with as many cities as I can and one more, and for policies I usually go with liberty and whatever strikes my fancy except for rationalism (it's booooring!). It's enough to beat emperor and that's good enough for me. 
Poil fucked around with this message at 00:44 on Dec 31, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2013 00:34
|
|