Civ4 Q&A thread - Page 11

Kingreno · 13-11-2005, 09:37

The starts are FAR less diversed then in civ3 (no more 3 cow bonanza), this is good as it finaly balances the starts. This will lead to a far quicker path to the perfect start though. I have had a floodplain or other 3-food-tile in most cases, and often more then one. And since setlers/workers sum up food and shields it does not realy matter which ones you have! again easining the perfect start.

Shabbaman · 13-11-2005, 10:32

Quote:

quote:Originally posted by Shabbaman

So how do you finish a game quickly?

ProPain · 13-11-2005, 12:54

Quote:

quote:Originally posted by Shabbaman

Interesting. What score do you get with that?

Not too much, a few hundred I'd say.

But playing smaller maps helps to increase score

ProPain · 13-11-2005, 13:17

Quote:

quote:Originally posted by Kingreno

The starts are FAR less diversed then in civ3 (no more 3 cow bonanza), this is good as it finaly balances the starts. This will lead to a far quicker path to the perfect start though. I have had a floodplain or other 3-food-tile in most cases, and often more then one. And since setlers/workers sum up food and shields it does not realy matter which ones you have! again easining the perfect start.

I totally agree with you, it should be far easier to determine a optimal build order, especially as all extra hammers and food count for settler/worker building.

I know tend to build warriors/scouts untill I reach city size 3, then build a settler and a worker.

Exception: being on the ocean with crab/fish/clam nearby: build a workboat 1st. Alhtough this worker is consumed, it doesnt affect city growth, so I;m thinking it benefits you in 2 ways:
- fast +1 food for faster growth
- faster growth because boat doesnt halt city growth.

I do have the impression that resources are more abundant and more evenly spread. I rarely have a city without bonus resources and similarly I rarely have 1 with 3 or more resources. Should be pretty easy to make an excel table that works with 2 bonus resources for every city and say 2/3 turns between settler build and settling. Just add in the worker improvements and you're set.

Floor permitting I might look into it today

Several other observations:
- Seems a standard civ4 map contains less tiles than a standard civ3 map. Didnt count but it does appear that way to me
- there's an axtra required tile between cities

This leads to substantially less cities on a map than in good old Civ3. Combined with wonders that require a certain number of buildings present (uni's for Oxford, banks for Wallstreet (?)) this will severely restrict the candidates who can build those. Although I played very little, I do suspect the AI can't handle this, giving the human player an advantage to build these wonders.

Tech trading between AI and humans is more difficult than in Civ3 but the good old AI's appear to techwhore like the they always did. PLayed a continents map where I was on a continent alone and all the ai where on 2 continents close together. Prince dif level only . By the time I found the AI they were about 10 techs ahead of me. I traded with 2 of the AI's, next thing I know the other's wont trade with me: I traded with their worst enemy

Kemal · 13-11-2005, 13:43

Well, I agree with Sirian really, your starting decisions do depend on map, and especially on settings a lot. I do not believe there is a "perfect start" such as was the case in civ3.

I've just tried 5 games in a row with the above mentioned suggested build strategy, and got trounced bad 5 times (emperor difficulty, standard, 7 AI). Then again, if I use other tactics, I usually get trounced too.

Maybe things have changed from beta to retail (still haven't got the retail version yet), but imho, the step up from monarch to emperor is huge, I really have to stay focused 100% of the time to have a chance to compete at this level.
Usually I even struggle to keep the barbs off my back (always nice to end turn next to a bear/lion with your warrior/settler combo), let alone a more advanced and productive AI that has no problem whatsoever smelling and taking out a weaker civ, it seems.

ProPain · 13-11-2005, 13:58

I;m not saying the mentioned strat is best, but I do think an optimal strategy can be approached. Once you determine the number of cities you normally can build in a certain (map) setting, you just have to retrack and calculate the fastest way there. This still doenst garantuee that you can compete though, I tried one emperor game and got my ass handed to me as well

Kemal · 13-11-2005, 14:09

I guess it comes down to finding the right balance between military and expansion, but that will shift depending on opposition and barbarian activity, a sureproof expansion strategy independant from the specific ingame situation seems, at least to me, an illusion so far.

Once you know your surroundings, sure you can and should make strategic decisions on how to best settle the land and protect yourself. It is just that it won't be the same decisions everytime on each map, I think.

In a year or so, things could be totally different of course, as we will be seasoned veterans by then, having a lot of experience on AI/game behaviour.

DavidC · 13-11-2005, 15:01

I have to agree with Kemal here, I jsut played my first game on Noble and since then have been playing Emperor level only and I only get to winning positions about 50% of the time.
The jump from Monarch is big.
Also forget about the opening strategy no way you can write that down !
What I found though is that my losses on Emperor were heavily influenced by my starting position : a start with no cows or good balance between shields with food (forest) and bonus food
makes the game VERY difficult, especially flood plains start with desert and no good shields.

The huge question remains when to produce the first settler and even more the first worker. My experience is that producing those with small cities is not good.
You need to wait until size 3 or even better 4 so that you have decent shields and can halt your growth for less longer time, thats the main factor I would say.

akots · 14-11-2005, 08:11

Indeed the Emperor level seems to be a huge step. It is however rather possible to grow to size six or even 7 before 2000BC with at least one bonus tile near the capital if beelining to Monarchy and building a few warriors for military police. But then the nightmare starts. AIs are building wonders more rapidly than on Sid in Civ3 and all land is then taken. I've seen Fredercik in one game on Emperor building Stonehedge, Oracle, 4 cities, Pyramids, and Hindu shrine at 1800 BC on a tiny map.

Also, barbarians are extremely brutal on this level and it might be good idea to play without them apparently.

Another thing, I'm not sure how good is the map generator script. But on all archipelago or continents map I've tried (about 15-20 games started looking for a reasonable positions), I have not got within a reasonable reach a) Stone; b) got Marble only once in all these games; c) Either you get a few sources of iron or a few sources of copper but not both; d) only once got a non-calendar luxury (ivory) near the stating location. It seems that luxuries are even less abundant than in C3C; e) always got horses. Other luxuries/resources seem to be rather random, have not noticed anything unusual.

Another and extremely annoying feature for continents and islands is that the starting location is never in the middle of that island or continent. It is always somewhere in the corner, near the coast. Which basically forces the player to build Palace somewhere in a more reasonable location in the center later in the game. Well, at least there is usually lake or river in the vicinity of the start.

Since the script is apparently less random than in civ3, there is little point in screening through the maps trying to get something playable. That was apparently the purpose of the script. But the maps are often very awkward.

Good thing is that the archer-grenadier upgrade strategy is working. I've treid it only on Monarch though. If you can survive to Chemistry. Not that AIs are trying to kill you, it is just lack of resources which forces to abandon the game sometimes. Another good way of generating cash is building wonders and being beaten to them by AIs. Them there is a rather generous reimbursement for wasted production.

ERIKK · 14-11-2005, 08:44

Do you all notice that the automatic workers suck. If you put them on improve nearest city they go to sleep once the workerd-on tiles are done. They do not attempt to go to another city or build a trade network... They also do not work-ahead/improve everything in the radius.

It forces you to check on your units anyways. To prevent wasted turns sleeping

I bet you have to do/check tile-choice (food/shields) of the governor too.

This sucks as they promised something very different!

edited!

13-11-2005, 09:37	#101
Kingreno Moderator Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Netherlands. Posts: 3,270	The starts are FAR less diversed then in civ3 (no more 3 cow bonanza), this is good as it finaly balances the starts. This will lead to a far quicker path to the perfect start though. I have had a floodplain or other 3-food-tile in most cases, and often more then one. And since setlers/workers sum up food and shields it does not realy matter which ones you have! again easining the perfect start. __________________ Go ahead punk. Make my day.

13-11-2005, 13:43	#105
Kemal Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Netherlands. Posts: 3,108	Well, I agree with Sirian really, your starting decisions do depend on map, and especially on settings a lot. I do not believe there is a "perfect start" such as was the case in civ3. I've just tried 5 games in a row with the above mentioned suggested build strategy, and got trounced bad 5 times (emperor difficulty, standard, 7 AI). Then again, if I use other tactics, I usually get trounced too. Maybe things have changed from beta to retail (still haven't got the retail version yet), but imho, the step up from monarch to emperor is huge, I really have to stay focused 100% of the time to have a chance to compete at this level. Usually I even struggle to keep the barbs off my back (always nice to end turn next to a bear/lion with your warrior/settler combo), let alone a more advanced and productive AI that has no problem whatsoever smelling and taking out a weaker civ, it seems. __________________ <b>\"In the Game of Thrones, you win or you die\" </b>

13-11-2005, 13:58	#106
ProPain Customized Admin :) Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: sailing the seas of cheese. Posts: 5,852	I;m not saying the mentioned strat is best, but I do think an optimal strategy can be approached. Once you determine the number of cities you normally can build in a certain (map) setting, you just have to retrack and calculate the fastest way there. This still doenst garantuee that you can compete though, I tried one emperor game and got my ass handed to me as well __________________ I fed my Dog the American Dream Well, he rolled over and he started to scream He said, I dig the taste of salt but it don't keep me alive yeah, yeah

13-11-2005, 14:09	#107
Kemal Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Netherlands. Posts: 3,108	I guess it comes down to finding the right balance between military and expansion, but that will shift depending on opposition and barbarian activity, a sureproof expansion strategy independant from the specific ingame situation seems, at least to me, an illusion so far. Once you know your surroundings, sure you can and should make strategic decisions on how to best settle the land and protect yourself. It is just that it won't be the same decisions everytime on each map, I think. In a year or so, things could be totally different of course, as we will be seasoned veterans by then, having a lot of experience on AI/game behaviour. __________________ <b>\"In the Game of Thrones, you win or you die\" </b>

14-11-2005, 08:11	#109
akots Nebuchadnezzar II Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Glover Park Posts: 4,459	Indeed the Emperor level seems to be a huge step. It is however rather possible to grow to size six or even 7 before 2000BC with at least one bonus tile near the capital if beelining to Monarchy and building a few warriors for military police. But then the nightmare starts. AIs are building wonders more rapidly than on Sid in Civ3 and all land is then taken. I've seen Fredercik in one game on Emperor building Stonehedge, Oracle, 4 cities, Pyramids, and Hindu shrine at 1800 BC on a tiny map. Also, barbarians are extremely brutal on this level and it might be good idea to play without them apparently. Another thing, I'm not sure how good is the map generator script. But on all archipelago or continents map I've tried (about 15-20 games started looking for a reasonable positions), I have not got within a reasonable reach a) Stone; b) got Marble only once in all these games; c) Either you get a few sources of iron or a few sources of copper but not both; d) only once got a non-calendar luxury (ivory) near the stating location. It seems that luxuries are even less abundant than in C3C; e) always got horses. Other luxuries/resources seem to be rather random, have not noticed anything unusual. Another and extremely annoying feature for continents and islands is that the starting location is never in the middle of that island or continent. It is always somewhere in the corner, near the coast. Which basically forces the player to build Palace somewhere in a more reasonable location in the center later in the game. Well, at least there is usually lake or river in the vicinity of the start. Since the script is apparently less random than in civ3, there is little point in screening through the maps trying to get something playable. That was apparently the purpose of the script. But the maps are often very awkward. Good thing is that the archer-grenadier upgrade strategy is working. I've treid it only on Monarch though. If you can survive to Chemistry. Not that AIs are trying to kill you, it is just lack of resources which forces to abandon the game sometimes. Another good way of generating cash is building wonders and being beaten to them by AIs. Them there is a rather generous reimbursement for wasted production. __________________ Cujusvis hominis est errare; nullius, nisi insipientis in errore perseverare Ciceron (Marcus Tullius)

13-11-2005, 15:01	#108
DavidC Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: . Posts: 118	I have to agree with Kemal here, I jsut played my first game on Noble and since then have been playing Emperor level only and I only get to winning positions about 50% of the time. The jump from Monarch is big. Also forget about the opening strategy no way you can write that down ! What I found though is that my losses on Emperor were heavily influenced by my starting position : a start with no cows or good balance between shields with food (forest) and bonus food makes the game VERY difficult, especially flood plains start with desert and no good shields. The huge question remains when to produce the first settler and even more the first worker. My experience is that producing those with small cities is not good. You need to wait until size 3 or even better 4 so that you have decent shields and can halt your growth for less longer time, thats the main factor I would say.

14-11-2005, 08:44	#110
ERIKK Moderator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Netherlands!. Posts: 2,636	Do you all notice that the automatic workers suck. If you put them on improve nearest city they go to sleep once the workerd-on tiles are done. They do not attempt to go to another city or build a trade network... They also do not work-ahead/improve everything in the radius. It forces you to check on your units anyways. To prevent wasted turns sleeping I bet you have to do/check tile-choice (food/shields) of the governor too. This sucks as they promised something very different! edited!