Civ IV Intermediate Tactics and Gambits

Last edited: April 15, 2008

Good job. Eh.

Good writeup of some useful techniques.

Good stuff, and well written too – thanks!

Some comments:

3. Clever trick, but I would say this is an exploit. Interesting parallel to how the first world handles "development aid" to the third world irl btw.

6. I thought that the AI cannot trade a technology received from you on your turn (= their "off" turn) in their next one. I believe you can safely trade away one advance in turn one, then trade with everybody else on your next turn without having to fear that the first trading partner will have given the tech away to everybody else. Be nice if someone could confirm or refute this.

7. Fat cross overlap is also good for bringing up cottages or all-hammers-mines between two cities if you have poor land and/or need to micromanage to growth caps. I quite like to have cities overlap a bit in the early game, especially when you haven't got much room to spread out into anyways.

J.

Well written and clear, being a regular Saladin player I have a few comments:

In warlords we no longer have philosophical (phi/spi is now Ghandi's domain) but the point you made about the Great Wall is still valid I think because Saladin is protective now and the GG points suit a defensive civ that might be going for a cultural victory (always an option with Saladin given the usually high number of religious buildings too). Like you said you can leave the final cultural run till quite late, which I prefer as you don't really know how its going to pan out till the early rennaisance anyway.


Good read.

3. Clever trick, but I would say this is an exploit. Interesting parallel to how the first world handles "development aid" to the third world irl btw.
Heh. Point well taken, especially your real-world analogy.

I could (and probably will) start a Civ IV ethics thread--what constitutes an exploit, and even then, how bad is it to use it?

Watch for it in the GD forum...

The Civil Service gambit is key. Making good use of that Great Prophet can be huge.

Nice article.

One slight correction for point 5 is that you'll need to research Writing as well if you want to choose CoL as your free tech from the Oracle.

The Riverside Ironworks strategy is particularly powerful in space race victories, or if you simply want to monopolise the late game wonders.

Re oracle/mc/pyramids. Cookie Crumbs pointed out in ALC#8 that you can also use GE to research machinery from metal-casting and GP to research civil service after code of laws (with usual provisos, poly and meditation but no masonry) which gives a very strong fall back strategy if somehow you're beaten to the pyramids.(the problem with this is that you need masonry for pyramids, but you can time it so you finish researching masonry on the turn you finish GE)

Nice article.

One slight correction for point 5 is that you'll need to research Writing as well if you want to choose CoL as your free tech from the Oracle.

The Riverside Ironworks strategy is particularly powerful in space race victories, or if you simply want to monopolise the late game wonders.
Thanks for the correction, that's now fixed.

I concur on the RI. That puppy churns out Wonders and SS parts like there's no tomorrow. It's also handy for a domination/conquest victory--it can build the Pentagon as well as producing units. I like to have it producing Bombers while my HE/WP city pumps out Level 4 armour and the like.

7. Fat Cross Overlap
Overlapping tiles in neighbouring cities’ fat crosses are not always a bad thing. One of the best types of tiles to have in more than one city’s fat cross is a commerce resource such as gems, gold, or silver. This is because these tiles yield high amounts of commerce but relatively low amounts of food and production.

One thing about this you didn't mention, but it's a nice trick, is to intentionally overlap cities with either your capital or one of the three culture cities in a cultural game. The other cities can work cottages on the overlapped tiles (rivers are ideal), and then, when your capital/culture city has happiness to grow (or no need to work mines, etc), it has a developed cottage instead of a fresh one. It's very nice if you can hand over a few villages to a bureaucratic capital with an academy once you get Monarchy :)

4. Specialist-Powered Cultural Victory
Hmm, I'm going to try this in my next game as Louis, as it seems to be perfectly suited for him (Industrious for all the great wonders you need for this strategy to work and UB giving you one free artist specialist). :goodjob:

very nice article, easy to understand yet precise :goodjob:

One minor thing you could add it a reference to the ALC # where it was used (if there is one! I can't remember Riverside Ironworks, but would like to see it done [easy 3 gorges dam + easy space elevator = easiest Space Race ever IMHO] )

very nice article, easy to understand yet precise :goodjob:

One minor thing you could add it a reference to the ALC # where it was used (if there is one! I can't remember Riverside Ironworks, but would like to see it done [easy 3 gorges dam + easy space elevator = easiest Space Race ever IMHO] )
1. ALC #7 (Frederick)
2. First used in ALC #3 (Qin), and in each subsequent ALC, IIRC, but especially in ALC # 5 (Victoria)
3. First discussed, IIRC, in ALC #4 (Hatshepsut)
4. ALC #5 (Victoria)
5. Surprisingly, I have never done this in an ALC, though I've done it several times in my off-line games.
6. Best exemplified in ALC #3 (Qin)
7. Best exemplified in ALC #7 (Frederick)

1. ALC #7 (Frederick)
2. First used in ALC #3 (Qin), and in each subsequent ALC, IIRC, but especially in ALC # 5 (Victoria)
3. First discussed, IIRC, in ALC #4 (Hatshepsut)
4. ALC #5 (Victoria)
5. Surprisingly, I have never done this in an ALC, though I've done it several times in my off-line games.
6. Best exemplified in ALC #3 (Qin)
7. Best exemplified in ALC #7 (Frederick)

thank you very much ! i'll take another look (not right now, but at home between my own games ;)) at vicky's final days of culturing

Contains some useful stuff, but I object to #7! The use of sharing and flip-flopping is only something that makes overlapping not-necessarily-always-bad. I can't see that it's an advantage. If every city has its own stuff, it can still micromanage according to present needs. For protection from barb animals, culture is needed, not fat crosses, right?

Contains some useful stuff, but I object to #7! The use of sharing and flip-flopping is only something that makes overlapping not-necessarily-always-bad. I can't see that it's an advantage. If every city has its own stuff, it can still micromanage according to present needs. For protection from barb animals, culture is needed, not fat crosses, right?
True, but in the early game, your cultural borders are going to only consist of your cities' fat crosses for a very long time (the capital being an obvious exception).

There are some very active threads going on right now about other advantages of locating city sites close to one another. I think this may end up being a debate along the lines of specialist-versus-cottage economies rather than a don't-automate-your-workers no-brainer.

sorry but what is an ALC poster?

On Prince level and especially higher, it is difficult if not impossible to achieve this. The AI will usually beat you to completion of the Oracle if you delay finishing it until you have researched Code of Laws.

A lot of people misunderstand the CS Slingshot (non-prophet version). Code of Laws is researched in time by building a quick library, then running two scientists for an Academy. This science boost powers through CoL in time for the Oracle to be built before the AI comfortably on Prince. Experienced players can pull it off on Monarch, especially in Warlords where the AI is busier on the new early wonders.

The Alternative CS Slingshot (via a Prophet) is easier though.

sorry but what is an ALC poster?
Someone who posts regularly in the All Leaders Challenge threads.

Contains some useful stuff, but I object to #7! The use of sharing and flip-flopping is only something that makes overlapping not-necessarily-always-bad. I can't see that it's an advantage. If every city has its own stuff, it can still micromanage according to present needs.

Overlapping is an advantage because you only have access to a finite number of resource tiles, while you can build as many cities as you want. If you have cities sharing your fixed quota of resource tiles, it's more likely you'll be able to effectively use them all. If you don't overlap, then you sometimes end up with cities at their population limit that can't really use more food, cities that want to maximize hammers and so aren't using their commerce resources, etc.

Wonderful ideas Sisiutil. We greatly appreciate the sharing of your recipes.

Re: Riverside ironworks

An often overlooked tertiary option: Yes, a plains workshop is 1F4P(+1C/river) and a grass workshop is 2F3P(+1C). Note that this is IDENTICAL to lumbermills with railroads (plains RR lumbermill is 1F4P(+1C/river); grass RR lumbermill is 2F3P(+1C)). The difference: an early 30 hammer boost, or a +0.4 health for the rest of the game. The tradeoff is situational:
-expansives should use workshops
-non-expansives have to weigh it out, but IMO this is one of the cases where the long term planning exceeds short term gain
-floodplains cities: definitely Lmills. NEED the health, and unless there's a hill or two under those forests, they can find themselves completely w/o hammers once the choppings done.

Wonderful ideas Sisiutil. We greatly appreciate the sharing of your recipes.

Re: Riverside ironworks

An often overlooked tertiary option: Yes, a plains workshop is 1F4P(+1C/river) and a grass workshop is 2F3P(+1C). Note that this is IDENTICAL to lumbermills with railroads (plains RR lumbermill is 1F4P(+1C/river); grass RR lumbermill is 2F3P(+1C)). The difference: an early 30 hammer boost, or a +0.4 health for the rest of the game. The tradeoff is situational:
-expansives should use workshops
-non-expansives have to weigh it out, but IMO this is one of the cases where the long term planning exceeds short term gain
-floodplains cities: definitely Lmills. NEED the health, and unless there's a hill or two under those forests, they can find themselves completely w/o hammers once the choppings done.
That's a very good point. In ALC Game #8 (Alexander), I captured London, which is surrounded by floodplains--great for watermills, lousy for health. I made the mistake of chopping the two remaining forests it had, but I should have left them for lumbermills instead, since the city had some serious health problems.

This might be too obvious for this thread, but attacking from 'neutral' territory with Open Borders can be very helpful. Only gunships are fast enough to move in, pillage and retreat in one round, but other units can attack anything on the border without fear of a counter attack as long as the victim doesn't also have Open Borders. One move units should be careful not to kill the last unit in a stack though, or they will be stranded in enemy territory. In one really cool game my friend's culture was strong enough to completely envelop each city I conquered, making them less immediately useful but completely shielding them from counterattack. Most importantly, bombers can base in neutral cities with Open Borders and strike from there, making a carrier fleet much less necessary and letting you use bombers right away when assaulting trans-ocean.

This might be too obvious for this thread, but attacking from 'neutral' territory with Open Borders can be very helpful. Only gunships are fast enough to move in, pillage and retreat in one round, but other units can attack anything on the border without fear of a counter attack as long as the victim doesn't also have Open Borders. One move units should be careful not to kill the last unit in a stack though, or they will be stranded in enemy territory. In one really cool game my friend's culture was strong enough to completely envelop each city I conquered, making them less immediately useful but completely shielding them from counterattack. Most importantly, bombers can base in neutral cities with Open Borders and strike from there, making a carrier fleet much less necessary and letting you use bombers right away when assaulting trans-ocean.

about basing fighters/bombers in neutral cities, beware of the neutral civ opening borders with your enemy! Aircrafts and navy don't defend against foot troops.

Overlapping is an advantage because you only have access to a finite number of resource tiles, while you can build as many cities as you want. If you have cities sharing your fixed quota of resource tiles, it's more likely you'll be able to effectively use them all. If you don't overlap, then you sometimes end up with cities at their population limit that can't really use more food, cities that want to maximize hammers and so aren't using their commerce resources, etc.


Sorry - newbie question - but exactly how can one manipulate which city uses the 'overlapped' tiles? In my experience, if you found a city close to a previously existing one, the game automatically 'darkens out' some of the tiles within the fat cross of the second city (on the logic that these are already under the first city's area). Is there a method to 'flip-flop' a tile, so that the PLAYER can decide which city has control over a common tile?

Sorry - newbie question - but exactly how can one manipulate which city uses the 'overlapped' tiles? In my experience, if you found a city close to a previously existing one, the game automatically 'darkens out' some of the tiles within the fat cross of the second city (on the logic that these are already under the first city's area). Is there a method to 'flip-flop' a tile, so that the PLAYER can decide which city has control over a common tile?

All you need to do is to click the darkened tile from the city screen and it will be available to be worked by that city.

Sorry - newbie question - but exactly how can one manipulate which city uses the 'overlapped' tiles?

No reason to apologize---it took me a while to figure this out, too. For a long time I thought it wasn't possible. As Herse wrote, you just click on the tile you want to work, from within the city screen, and that "transfers" it to the control of that city.

This is the quick question's thread: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=134903&page=185

You can ask pretty much anything there that doesn't fit on a specific thread.

Thanks, Herse, DaviddesJ, a4phantom! Guess this is what comes out of not reading game manuals!!

I must try this out immediately...! :D

Thanks, Herse, DaviddesJ, a4phantom! Guess this is what comes out of not reading game manuals!!

I must try this out immediately...! :D

Games come with manuals now? Wow, do people actually read them? It must be a pretty boring game if it's more fun about to read about than play!

Thanks, Herse, DaviddesJ, a4phantom! Guess this is what comes out of not reading game manuals!!

There's nothing in the manual about working shared tiles in overlapping fat crosses. Like almost anything in the game, you can learn way more from CFC than you can from the official documentation.

Like almost anything in the game, you can learn way more from CFC than you can from the official documentation.

I agree entirely! And it is all thanks to forum-members like YOU, who generously take time out of your deity victories, to guide newbie players out of holes!! Keep it up, guys!

Revised October 9th, 2006.

I added a table of contents, revised the Fat Cross Overlap section to include cottages, added a "Flood Plains Caveat" to the Riverside Ironworks (thanks bassist2119!) and added sections on Trade Renegotiation, Trade Denial, and Trading for Obsoletes.

Oooooh, thank you, Sisutil :D Appreicate the hard work you've done :D

Edit: Too bad it isn't in .pdf format. Would be of tremendous help if it was :)

Oooooh, thank you, Sisutil :D Appreicate the hard work you've done :D

Edit: Too bad it isn't in .pdf format. Would be of tremendous help if it was :)
Since it has gotten longer, I see your point. I'll create one and attach it to the article soon.

Thanks, dude. :)

Update: PDF version added.

Oooh, thank you so much, bud! :goodjob:

A little trick I have used is to sell my cow/pig/sheep/deer against wheat/corn/rice when possible, since granaries are around ages earlier than supermarkets. AI-s however, seem to value those resources the same.

Something like Spices against Gold is also an option, if you already have forges but no grocers yet...

I made some minor revisions to the article in order to take account of changes to the game in the Warlords expansion pack and its patch.

The overlapped cross maneuver is also useful for having two cities benefit from the health bonus from the same forest, allowing you to chop more forests. Also, you can sell or give military resources without fear to your capitulated vassals if there's no conceivable way they'll break free.

The overlapped cross maneuver is also useful for having two cities benefit from the health bonus from the same forest, allowing you to chop more forests. Also, you can sell or give military resources without fear to your capitulated vassals if there's no conceivable way they'll break free.
An excellent point about the forests! I've incorporated that into the article.

I'm gradually including Warlords tips as I become familiar with them.

This is the happiest day of my life!

This is the happiest day of my life!
No offense, but if this constitutes the happiest day of your life, you need to get one. ;) :D

hmm that didn't work at all

What? I met the girl of my dreams, why shouldn't it have been the happiest day of my life? :crazyeye:

What? I met the girl of my dreams, why shouldn't it have been the happiest day of my life? :crazyeye:

You'd pick that over Civ 4? You're insane, dude. :lol:

Congrats. :goodjob:

You'd pick that over Civ 4? You're insane, dude. :lol:

Congrats. :goodjob:

She doesn't live here, only home for the holidays, and we're both awfully independent people, so here's hoping I can have both! Of course, any woman who'd make you choose would be much too Isabelaish.

IMO, all women are Isabelish, but that's not the point. Good luck, dude. :)

IMO, all women are Isabelish, but that's not the point. Good luck, dude. :)

Dude, you just called my mom Isabelish. Swords at dawn!


Hehehe I'm gonna bring a Samurai sword, so I'll have +33% strength, +50% vs melee, and a couple of first strikes. Don't tell him.

I did an interesting move in my current game to get the Pyramids for my philosophical leader.

I found stone near my starting location, but too far away from the capital. I built the second city not too far from the stone (in a good location for later on). Then i chopped Stonehenge there to expand its borders. Meanwhile, after bronze working (for chopping and slavery), i headed straight for writing and mathematics. I connected the stone as soon as i could using a few workers to speed it up.

As soon as it was connected, i started building the Pyramids in my capital. I prechopped every forest i could find around my capital. I pop rushed a library to speed up my science and my discovery of mathematics. I settled the Great Prophet from Stonehenge in my capital to increase production. As soon as i got mathematics, i finished chopping all the forests, which gave me 60 hammers a piece (30 thanks to mathematics, +100% for stone).

I got the Pyramids in no time, without costing me any Great Person, and without requiring any tech that i wouldn't normally want asap anyway. This was done at immortal difficulty.

I thought this could be relevant to this article, especially the first part which explains a trick to get Pyramids early. Using chops plus stone and mathematics seems like another good approach to me, if you've got the stone handy.

In fact, i got Pyramids so easily that i used the remaining forests to get the Hanging Gardens as well. I already had mathematics and stone, so it only took a few turns. And it made for a heck of a Great Engineer producing city. Can't wait to see what happens next. This could be a monster of a wonder city, with all the engineers i'll be able to use for building wonders. Next stop is the Great Library with a Great Engineer, then the wonder that gives +1 happy using stone again.

Cool... I hardly ever bother with the Pyramids anymore, but the next time I start near stone, I may have to give this a try. Settling the Great Prophet strikes me as a very smart, almost counter-intuitive move; I'm usually inclined to pop him for a tech or use him for a shrine and don't usually settle them unless I get one in the late game.

I disagree about copper being a resource that you should never trade. In many cases, copper is the first resource you should trade away, before health resources even. This situation is when a civ has iron and no copper. Copper will allow them nothing more than they already get from iron, and they'll still stupidly pay a hefty price for it, giving you as much as two resources or a resource and money.

Whenever i have extra copper, i always start looking for civs with iron and no copper to trade the extra. Even if i haven't discovered iron working myself, i can find out who has iron by scanning their land and looking for a mine on flatland with no seeable resource, or on a hill which seemingly produces too much. I can even know where unused iron is by finding tiles in opponent's land that produce one too many hammers.

The exception to the rule is if the copper could be used to build wonders. Be especially weary of trading away copper to an industrious civ.

About settling Great Prophets, personally that's what i do most often with them. For one thing, they're the best Great Person to settle after Great Merchants. Gold is more useful than science, because they can all be settled in one city and that city will be the only one that needs to build marketplaces, grocers and banks. Extra production is also a great boost, though not as good as the merchant's food.

Another reason i settle them is because their other uses are often no good to me. I rarely found religions, so can't build shrines (unless i conquer a holy city that doesn't have a shrine yet). Since i don't go for early religions, and play with tech trading turned off, i often don't get the early religious techs until i need them as requirements for other techs. Therefore the only tech the Great Prophet will offer is usually something like Polytheism or something else equally worthless.

Finally, i'm a big fan of settling Great People in general, especially early in the game, because the net gain from doing so is bigger the more turns there are left in the game.

Finally, i'm a big fan of settling Great People in general, especially early in the game

Does that hold true at a lower level (Prince for me) where it's easier to grow the city and work more tiles?

The exception to the rule is if the copper could be used to build wonders. Be especially weary of trading away copper to an industrious civ.
A very good point about trading copper to a civ that has iron--I'll have to try that--but obviously wonders muddy things.

There are only 2 world wonders that are built faster with copper: the Colossus and the Statue of Liberty. Neither are on my list of "must-haves", though they are on my list of "nice-to-haves". I usually only build the Colossus if I have several seafood tiles around my coastal cities. The SoL is usually most useful if I'm pursuing a space race win, for that free specialist (usually a scientist when I'm researching, later an engineer when I'm building space ship parts). Otherwise I'll build it mainly to deny its benefits to the AI.

You can easily watch for when your copper recipient gets Democracy and cancel the trade. Metal Casting is trickier, though, as I've seen the AI get it in some games before I have Alphabet to discover that fact. Assuming you want to build these two wonders, the best time to trade copper to a civ with Iron is obviously in between the completion of the Colossus and the first acquisition of Democracy.

Does that hold true at a lower level (Prince for me) where it's easier to grow the city and work more tiles?
I apologize for pre-empting Zombie, but I think overall, your best use of GP depends on your strategy in each game.

As Zombie says above, he places a very low priority on religion. I myself don't make it the focus of my strategy, but I do find it useful for the happiness boost, culture, buildings, and civics. So I will often pop a Great Person for a tech that founds a particular religion--such as using your first Great Scientist for Philosophy and Taoism, or your first Great Prophet (in Warlords) for Theology and Christianity. Once you have a religion, it's extremely beneficial to have its shrine, so there's the next use of a Great Prophet.

If you're in a tight race for a valuable wonder, it makes sense to use a Great Engineer to guarantee that you acquire it. And in many cases, popping a tech early can be very advantageous if it gives you a significant jump on the AI, and/or unlocks your civ's unique building or unit. And the gold from a Great Merchant's trade mission can help you run research to the max, or upgrade several veteran units to the latest and greatest.

That being said, in most of my games, by mid-game (around 1300-1500) I've gone from using most of my GP for other purposes to settling them. Great Scientists invariably get settled in my science city (once the Academy is built); Great Prophets and Great Merchants get settled in the wealth city (which will build Wall Street and usually contains a shrine); Great Artists get settled in cities that are in a culture border war (which I find more effective over the long run than a culture bomb at flipping tiles); Great Engineers... well, I still tend to use them for Wonders rather than settling.

As with many things in Civ IV, the best approach is not "I do this in every game", but "what choice makes the most sense in this particular game?"

That being said, in most of my games, by mid-game (around 1300-1500) I've gone from using most of my GP for other purposes to settling them. Great Scientists invariably get settled in my science city (once the Academy is built); Great Prophets and Great Merchants get settled in the wealth city (which will build Wall Street and usually contains a shrine); Great Artists get settled in cities that are in a culture border war (which I find more effective over the long run than a culture bomb at flipping tiles); Great Engineers... well, I still tend to use them for Wonders rather than settling.

That's what I do with them basically from the beginning, except that I use Great Artists to culture bomb and instantly pacify important captured cities, ideally capitals. I don't build Parthenon anymore so unless I get Oracle I never get Great Prophets, which is fine since I don't found religions anymore. Thanks guys.

Very minor point on copper trading, it does speed growth of some of the Cathedral equivalents. I don't see why you'd care much unless you were in a very tight culture race with someone.

nice to see you back zombie ;)
about settling vs lightbulbing, the key fact in the earlier post was

Another reason i settle them is because their other uses are often no good to me. I rarely found religions, so can't build shrines (unless i conquer a holy city that doesn't have a shrine yet). Since i don't go for early religions, and play with tech trading turned off, i often don't get the early religious techs until i need them as requirements for other techs.
lightbulbing is especially strong when you can trade the tech around :
very early tech = monopoly tech = loads of trade
in a "no tech trade" game, i'd settle everyone, including engineers, up to very late in the game.

I don't know if you'll consider these Intermediate Tactics, or even good tactics, but they work for me (admittedly Prince Single Player, no mod or funky rules)

1. Skip archery and use axes as your defenders. They'll kill swordsmen, the primary city taker of the era, and they'll spare you researching a dead end tech. If there are cavalry roaming around throw in a spear. By the time Machinery comes around (maces and crossbows), I get archery in peace negotiations, or you could research it in 1 turn.

2. If a city's defenders are mixed, your attackers should not be. If a city is defended by archers and axes, you'd be stupid to attack with CR swords and axes, because your axes will fight their archers and your swords will fight their axes. It seems better to me to throw all axes into the fray, do well against the ax defenders (you've got city raider and they don't have city garrison) and poorly against the the archers (you'll have to rely on numbers to overwhelm them), or else all swords and do badly against the axes and well against the archers. This breaks down after siege weapons are introduced, along with most elements of strategy.

good point about mixed defense stack.
Only exception is for the clean up, which doesn't require a lot of strategy.
just one thing : depending on numbers of axes and archers, it may be better to have loads of swords, sacrificing one vs the lone axe isn't as costly as it seems.

just one thing : depending on numbers of axes and archers, it may be better to have loads of swords, sacrificing one vs the lone axe isn't as costly as it seems.

Yup, I said that, I just said it badly (unclearly) because it was late. :)

Yup, I said that, I just said it badly (unclearly) because it was late. :)

Sorry, i didn't see it.
But now that I read it again, you said it very clearly.:mischief:

We're cool. Would anyone care to suggest tactics or gambits for defending against siege units? I suppose have a few horse archers / cavalry to suck up the actual attack, and then give every other unit in your city Drill4 to slightly reduce the collateral damage, although of course only a few units can get Drill promos?

I'm still bitter about the way they do artillery in this otherwise beautiful game.

the defense vs siege is more siege+a few mounted

the defense vs siege is more siege+a few mounted

But neither will protect your stack from the collateral damage.

What about attacking them in the field?

What about attacking them in the field?

You can do that if you own the field, but if you're in enemy territory or a just captured city then your enemy controls the roads/rails and that's not an option. Your riflemen and cavalry will be quickly worn down by catapults.

You can do that if you own the field, but if you're in enemy territory or a just captured city then your enemy controls the roads/rails and that's not an option. Your riflemen and cavalry will be quickly worn down by catapults.

for this you need some highly defensive units with drills
(What comes to my mind are machine guns) + a good medic (medic 3 anyone ;)?)

UPDATE: I added a section on "Queue Loading"--a method of maximizing the benefits of the "war civics" while minimizing the time you spend running them.

UPDATE: I added a section on "Queue Loading"--a method of maximizing the benefits of the "war civics" while minimizing the time you spend running them.

Does that seem like it's dancing on the edge of being an exploit to anyone else?

UPDATE: I added a section on "Queue Loading"--a method of maximizing the benefits of the "war civics" while minimizing the time you spend running them.

UNIT_PRODUCTION_DECAY_TIME 10
BUILDING_PRODUCTION_DECAY_TIME = 50
(GlobalDefines.xml)

I believe, though I'm not 100% certain, that projects and wonders don't decay.

I'm not sure how close it lands to the exploit boundary. There is a built in cost associated with it (two turns of anarchy per cycle if you intend to sustain it), the hammer decay does set soft boundaries, your power rating suffers, and you lose fortification time. The upside is an improved build, and decreased maintenance (since the piece can be produced in time to defend, if necessary).

I'd put it closer to patched whipping (which is unbalanced) instead of the Heroic Theatre (which is broken).

I'm not sure how close it lands to the exploit boundary. There is a built in cost associated with it (two turns of anarchy per cycle if you intend to sustain it), the hammer decay does set soft boundaries, your power rating suffers, and you lose fortification time. The upside is an improved build, and decreased maintenance (since the piece can be produced in time to defend, if necessary).

But you pay the Anarchy penalty (unless Spiritual) whether you manipulate the queue to 'prebuild' units or not. I guess it doesn't matter, I won't do it and I don't play multi.

I'd put it closer to patched whipping (which is unbalanced) instead of the Heroic Theatre (which is broken).

I don't know what you mean. Heroic Epic and Globe Theatre in one high food city, to whip units out fast with no happiness issues? That's all I can think of.

I'm with VoU on this. I don't consider it an exploit because there are costs, as he pointed out, and limits associated with it--especially if you're not playing as a spiritual leader.

Think of it as keeping the troops in boot camp until you can give them that last bit of indoctrination that boosts their morale and fighting spirit. :D

Does that seem like it's dancing on the edge of being an exploit to anyone else?

I don't think it's an exploit. I do think it's a hassle. The power of the Spiritual trait is frequent civic switches. But, while those give you a substantial benefit, they also take a lot of effort to micro-manage. :(

Alright, I disagree with you guys so I won't use it, and as I only play Single Player it won't be used against me. But unless I misunderstand you, there is no penalty for it except for possibly some hammer decay, since you'd have the anarchy shifting in and out of the War civics to build your army whether you pre-build them or not.

Alright, I disagree with you guys so I won't use it, and as I only play Single Player it won't be used against me. But unless I misunderstand you, there is no penalty for it except for possibly some hammer decay, since you'd have the anarchy shifting in and out of the War civics to build your army whether you pre-build them or not.

If you're playing normally, you would just switch into the "war civics", and then build lots of units. If you want to switch in and out of the "war civics" several times, then you're going to have many more turns of anarchy, unless you are Spiritual.

If you're playing normally, you would just switch into the "war civics", and then build lots of units. If you want to switch in and out of the "war civics" several times, then you're going to have many more turns of anarchy, unless you are Spiritual.

Sure, but why on earth would you do that?

Alright, I disagree with you guys so I won't use it, and as I only play Single Player it won't be used against me. But unless I misunderstand you, there is no penalty for it except for possibly some hammer decay, since you'd have the anarchy shifting in and out of the War civics to build your army whether you pre-build them or not.
Some of these tactics are borderline exploits, I suppose. I certainly have come to regard "Trade Withdrawal" under that category and I don't use it anymore. You could even argue that "Trade Renegotiation" is an exploit, since I'll get lots of resources from the AI civs while I'm trying my best to only offer them one in return. But then again, I feel that's balanced out by all those civs who don't like me and won't trade their resources to me.

Like any player, a4, including myself, you're free to employ tactics like this or not. Some players never use the slavery civic, period, let alone leveraging some of its loopholes. I've never repeated the Pyramids gambit in another game because it just involves too much micromanagement for my taste. If the tactics detract from your enjoyment of the game in some way, don't use them. My aim is to collect these tactics in a convenient reference guide and then let the player decide which ones they want to employ. Or not. :D

All true. I used to never use slavery or raze cities, but I've learned to distinguish between doing things in a game that are immoral in real life and doing things that, in my view, subvert the rules of the game for unfair advantage. Again, I only play single player so someone else having a different position on what constitutes an exploit doesn't harm me any.

Here's a tactic some might consider an exploit. When beseiging a city with many archers, put a warrior *alone* on some square without a road, hopefully not a hill. If there are three or more archers, one will probably attack the warrior. The archer will probably win, but will be wounded and outside the city, making it easy for your axemen or swordsmen or horsebowmen to kill it, which will make the city much easier to capture. Sacrificing an obsolete unit and taking damage to one modern unit is a very good ratio for taking out an entrenched defender. I call this a possible exploit because a human would not be stupid enough to fall for it, but on the other hand it has huge historical backing (the Normans conquered England largely because Harold's Saxons broke ranks to charge retreating Normans, the Mongols also used this tactic.)

Sure, but why on earth would you do that?

I don't understand you. First you complain that it's too powerful to switch back and forth between "war civics" and "peace civics". Now you say there's no reason at all to do it. Huh??

The reason to switch back and forth is so that you can build units and get the benefits of Vassalage and Theocracy for those units, and still get the benefits of other legal and religious civics most of the time.

I don't understand you. First you complain that it's too powerful to switch back and forth between "war civics" and "peace civics". Now you say there's no reason at all to do it. Huh??

Not true at all. There's no reason to be constantly switching back and forth between the War Civics and the Peace Civics. No one has proposed doing such a thing. It makes perfect sense to switch to the War Civics to build your army and then switch back. It makes even more sense to prebuild your army under the peace civics, then switch, finish those units with +4 experience in one turn each, and then switch back to the Peace Civics, and that's what's being discussed.

Not true at all. There's no reason to be constantly switching back and forth between the War Civics and the Peace Civics. No one has proposed doing such a thing. It makes perfect sense to switch to the War Civics to build your army and then switch back. It makes even more sense to prebuild your army under the peace civics, then switch, finish those units with +4 experience in one turn each, and then switch back to the Peace Civics, and that's what's being discussed.

You can't build a whole army all at once, in a single switch. You would either have to stay in "war civics" for a long time, so that each of your production cities can build several units during that time, or you would have to switch in and out several times.

The Sisiutil article discusses the tactic of building several different types of units, so that you can have more of them queued up and switch civics less often. But this carries the cost of forcing you to build different units than you probably want, and it still would require multiple switches for building an army of any significant size.

You can't build a whole army all at once, in a single switch. You would either have to stay in "war civics" for a long time, so that each of your production cities can build several units during that time, or you would have to switch in and out several times.

The Sisiutil article discusses the tactic of building several different types of units, so that you can have more of them queued up and switch civics less often. But this carries the cost of forcing you to build different units than you probably want, and it still would require multiple switches for building an army of any significant size.
It really depends how many cities you have, what techs you have available, and how big an army you need.

There are three definite periods in the game when you can do this, and obtain an army of mixed units with high promotion levels.

First off is the medieval era, which is usually the earliest these civics are available. You can build a mixed force of Macemen, Longbowmen, Catapults, Trebuchets, Pikemen, Crossbowmen, and Knights. All of them have their uses in medieval warfare. I especially like having several Combat I/Medic I Pikemen whom I leave behind in cities near the front. They defend against pillaging incursions by enemy Knights (which are all too common) and can heal injured units while the stack moves on to the next target.

Second is the renaissance era, when you can build a mixed force of Cavalry, Riflemen, Grenadiers, and Cannons. Not to mention Frigates and Galleons, if required.

Third is the modern era, when you can build Infantry, Marines, Tanks, Artillery, and several nifty warships (Battleships, Destroyers, Submarines, Transports, Carriers).

I don't usually use the Queue Loading tactic in all three eras in every game--it's usually only necessary once or twice, I find. My favourite era to do it is the medieval, just because of the wide variety of units available. And I find I usually don't need a massive force, which is too expensive anyway; I need just enough units to get the job done, and if they have more promotions, they get the job done much more efficiently and often survive--thus lessening my need for more units.

First off is the medieval era, which is usually the earliest these civics are available. You can build a mixed force of Macemen, Longbowmen, Catapults, Trebuchets, Pikemen, Crossbowmen, and Knights.

I find that I usually want to build a large army of one particular unit type, as soon as I get the technology. Before my opponents become more advanced. But I can see this as a reasonable alternative.

having a queue of 7 units is a bit overkill isn't it?
hammers start decaying after 10 turns, so there is no point using more turns than 11? 12? 13? (10 + the time to prebuild the first unit) turns to "prebuild".

having a queue of 7 units is a bit overkill isn't it?
hammers start decaying after 10 turns, so there is no point using more turns than 11? 12? 13? (10 + the time to prebuild the first unit) turns to "prebuild".
Yes, and I hope I made that point in the article. I don't usually build a queue of 7 units, no--well, except in the Heroic Epic city, maybe. Usually it's 2-4 units in each build queue depending on the city's production capacity.

You can't build a whole army all at once, in a single switch. You would either have to stay in "war civics" for a long time, so that each of your production cities can build several units during that time, or you would have to switch in and out several times.

The Sisiutil article discusses the tactic of building several different types of units, so that you can have more of them queued up and switch civics less often. But this carries the cost of forcing you to build different units than you probably want, and it still would require multiple switches for building an army of any significant size.

Sure, I'm not going to argue with you or try to convince you to read what I wrote.

Sure, I'm not going to argue with you or try to convince you to read what I wrote.

I read what you wrote. It just doesn't make much sense. You can't "prebuild your army under the peace civics, then switch, finish those units with +4 experience in one turn each, and then switch back to the Peace Civics". Because you can't queue up an entire army all at once.

If your production city with Heroic Epic could queue up a bunch of cavalry without completing any of them, sure, this would be a viable strategy. But you can't do that.

At least it's refreshing not to have you argue with me.

I read what you wrote. It just doesn't make much sense. You can't "prebuild your army under the peace civics, then switch, finish those units with +4 experience in one turn each, and then switch back to the Peace Civics". Because you can't queue up an entire army all at once.

Sisiutil will have to tell us whether that's what he meant or not. How many units per productive city do you consider an army?

How many units per productive city do you consider an army?

Usually, I find that most of my units are built in only a few cities. So, if you only queue up a few units, in only a few cities, that's clearly a pretty small force.

Sisiutil has some interesting ideas, and I can see the point of building a unit or two in every city, just so that you can pump them out at the same time. If it takes a while (because those cities have low production rates), you could go ahead and build several units (without the civic benefits) in the high-production cities, switching only when every city has a unit ready.

I'm not convinced there's very much benefit, though.

I certainly will sometimes switch to Vassalage and Theocracy when also switching to Slavery, and have many of my cities poprush units, with the civic benefits. But for that, you don't really need queue manipulation.

Usually, I find that most of my units are built in only a few cities. So, if you only queue up a few units, in only a few cities, that's clearly a pretty small force.

Sisiutil has some interesting ideas, and I can see the point of building a unit or two in every city, just so that you can pump them out at the same time. If it takes a while (because those cities have low production rates), you could go ahead and build several units (without the civic benefits) in the high-production cities, switching only when every city has a unit ready.

I'm not convinced there's very much benefit, though.

I certainly will sometimes switch to Vassalage and Theocracy when also switching to Slavery, and have many of my cities poprush units, with the civic benefits. But for that, you don't really need queue manipulation.

I usually have only a few cities building units, and with Instructors that tendency is enhanced. And I don't usually bother with the War Civics. However, when I build a large force, either because I'm planning an invasion or I need to modernize my army and all my cities are defended by low XP axemen and warriors, it's worth two turns of Anarchy and several turns on War Civics to produce a large force of high experience units. Switching back and forth from War to Peace Civcs would mean many more turns of anarchy, which I didn't advocate and I think neither did Sisiutil. The strategy of prebuilding several units per city to within one turn of completion, and then switching to the War Civics to finish building all of them 1/turn doesn't require switching Civcs multiple times, it merely cuts down the time you need to stay in War Civics to produce the same number of experienced troops. That's what I called an exploit, not switching multiple times, which would be fair although I would think more costly than it's worth.

The strategy of prebuilding several units per city to within one turn of completion, and then switching to the War Civics to finish building all of them 1/turn doesn't require switching Civcs multiple times

But it would require building units of a variety of types, rather than building your best available unit. And it also presents the likelihood of losing hammers to decay. So that benefit comes with costs that are, at least, substantial.

I know I would never build "several" different types of units in a single city at a single time, unless I were pursuing this plan.

Usually you want to get other civs to attack your enemies in a war, for obvious reasons. However, if you are close to achieving your military objectives you might not want to enlist more allies. Yes, they will kill at least a few units, and you will get a diplomatic bonus with your ally (our mutual military struggle...). But the AI loves to pillage, and they will likely destroy all the improvements in reach, possibly crippling a city or two you want to conquer and make productive quickly. This happened to me when I was marching on London and enlisted Stalin's aid, I thought he would draw off English soldiers but mostly he just destroyed the countryside that would soon be mine. Much more importantly, if your victim is at war with two civs, he could capitulate to the other forcing you to give up the fight.

But it would require building units of a variety of types, rather than building your best available unit. And it also presents the likelihood of losing hammers to decay. So that benefit comes with costs that are, at least, substantial.

I know I would never build "several" different types of units in a single city at a single time, unless I were pursuing this plan.
Interesting discussion. Two points:

First, I don't use this tactic to build my entire army. I likely have some veterans hanging about who will form its core, who will be upgraded if they have enough promotions to justify it (usually Level 3 or higher). I have also likely been building some units at lower XP levels. Siege weapons are good candidates for this, as are City Garrison, naval, and air units. So this tactic is designed to supplement my military, not build it from scratch. In other words, Daviddes' point about not being able to build an entire army this way is well taken, and that's not the intent of the tactic.

Second, with the changes to many of the units in Warlords, I find there is a greater need for a balanced force. You now need a greater variety of units to counter those you will be fighting. So building several different types of units makes sense.

What, exactly, is your "best unit" anyway? For taking cities, it will be a melee unit with City Raider promotions. But you can't build an army solely comprised of Axemen or Macemen. Mounted units, which the AI loves, will wreak havoc with them (especially Chariots versus Axes), so you'll also need a few Spearmen or Pikemen, and not just with the stack; I find I need to include a mounted counter in my border cities to handle the mounted pillagers the AI throws my way. Of course, you'll also need siege units--some with Accuracy promotions (Level 3 required!) and some with City Raider and/or Barrage to do the necessary collateral damage. (Yes, I know I said I build these without the extra XPs, but I also build a few with them; the more XPs they have, the more effective they are, and are more likely to survive. You can never have too many siege units, I find.) You'll also need some good defensive units such as Longbows and Crossbows to protect the stack and to hang on to the cities you take. Finally, you'll need some mounted units yourself, for recon, pillaging, stack support, and counter-attacks, among other things.

In other words, there is never one "best unit" in this game, so there are definite advantages to quickly producing a mixed force of units with high promotion levels. Trust me, I've used it to great effect in several games.

But it would require building units of a variety of types, rather than building your best available unit. And it also presents the likelihood of losing hammers to decay. So that benefit comes with costs that are, at least, substantial.

I know I would never build "several" different types of units in a single city at a single time, unless I were pursuing this plan.

I was hoping someone else would ask/answer this to cover my ignorance, but why would you only build one type of unit in each city? I can see specializing occasionally, for example building cavalry in the cities farthest from the front line. But aside from the Stable, which every military city can easily have, unless you're playing the Alexander scenario I don't see any typical reason to have each city specialize in one kind of unit.

I was hoping someone else would ask/answer this to cover my ignorance, but why would you only build one type of unit in each city? I can see specializing occasionally, for example building cavalry in the cities farthest from the front line. But aside from the Stable, which every military city can easily have, unless you're playing the Alexander scenario I don't see any typical reason to have each city specialize in one kind of unit.

It's not that each city specializes in one kind of unit. It's that usually all of my cities are all building just one kind of unit.

I'm not so sold on the value of a mixed force as Sisiutil is. (But I haven't played so much Warlords and so maybe it really is more important now.) But, even if I did want a mixed force, I wouldn't typically be building different unit types at the same time. E.g., if I want some crossbowmen and some knights, I'm going to get the ability to build those different units at different times. So I'm going to build the crossbowmen during the turns before I get Guilds, so that when I get Guilds I can immediately put all of my cities to work building knights, and launch the attack relatively soon thereafter.

Since it's rare to simultaneously acquire the abilities to build several different kinds of units, it's rare for me to want to build many different kinds of units at once (except perhaps for building catapults in non-barracks cities while I build direct combat units in barracks cities).

I do think it's an interesting idea to use the queueing strategy to build a lot of units all at once. Especially if I'm running Pacifism and so there's an advantage to having them in the queues rather than pre-built before I'm ready to use them. So I may try it sometime. But it's a signficant deviation from what I would otherwise do.

Well, i personnally do this often in my games, especially if playing spiritual leaders. I've been doing so for over a year and i still think it's a good tactic to use.

A corollary tactic is this:
Before getting a tech or resource that allows for a new unit, start making the unit that is obsoleted by this one. Bring it to one turn of completion, then make something else. As soon as the tech or resource becomes available, switch back to this unit. It will switch to the new type, and the hammers used will be put into this new unit. This allows you to get the new unit on the very next turn that you get the tech or resource, in every city if you want. In cases where two units go obsolete by the same tech, you can even queue up two different ones and get two units of the new kind in just two turns.

An example of this is when playing Alexander, i usually try to build warriors up to 14/15 before grabing copper, then when i grab it, all my Phalanxes are already at 14/35 and can be finished quickly.

With slavery, it gets even better. I can build the warrior to 14/15, then whip it to bring it to 44/15, and leave it there while building something else. Then when i get copper, my first Phalanx is already at 44/35, which means that i've got the first one already done and 9 hammers already done for the second one (or alternately for an axeman to go along with it).

With slavery, it gets even better. I can build the warrior to 14/15, then whip it to bring it to 44/15, and leave it there while building something else. Then when i get copper, my first Phalanx is already at 44/35, which means that i've got the first one already done and 9 hammers already done for the second one (or alternately for an axeman to go along with it).

I'm going to add that trick to the Vocum when I get a chance. Very nice.

I forgot to mention... You can get the new unit on the very turn that you get a new tech (but not a new resource), you don't have to wait for the next turn. The turn before you get the tech, order your unit to finish building. On the next turn, your tech will come in, and the unit will automatically switch to the upgraded form before being completed. This way, for instance, you can get a maceman in each of your cities on the very turn that you discover machinery.

Of course, this doesn't work when you need a new resource connected, because it doesn't get connected at the begining of the turn, but rather sometime later during the turn, when the worker gets his turn.

Of course, this doesn't work when you need a new resource connected, because it doesn't get connected at the begining of the turn, but rather sometime later during the turn, when the worker gets his turn.

Curious - I would expect the resource to be available as soon as the tech is discovered, if it happens to be connected (copper appearing in a connected mine, or under a connected city).

Anybody know off the top of their head what determines whether the warriors get converted to Axemen or Spearmen?

Curious - I would expect the resource to be available as soon as the tech is discovered, if it happens to be connected (copper appearing in a connected mine, or under a connected city).

Anybody know off the top of their head what determines whether the warriors get converted to Axemen or Spearmen?

they don't!

they don't!

Oh? Are you really sure?

Oh? Are you really sure?

no
WB test :
- started a game
- started a warrior
- entered WB
- gave myself hunting
- gave myself BW
- gave myself a connected copper mine
- exited WB
- hit enter
result :
warrior became spearman

tried giving me copper first then hunting, then a copper mine, still got a spearman

After staring at the code for a while, it looks to me as though...

1) The magic conversion should only work if the unit you are training becomes obsolete. For instance, Bronze Working alone doesn't convert your warriors - you need Hunting as well

2) It is done on a city by city basis. So you can found the city and start training a warrior, knowing that before it is finished your city will be connected and the warrior hammers will go to something useful.

3) The unit that your warrior will upgrade to is going to be the last one that appears in Civ4UnitInfos.xml - normally that means the one that is last when ordered alphabetically. I'm not sure what happens if a unique unit which replaces the last unit in the list comes before an alternative.

Curious - I would expect the resource to be available as soon as the tech is discovered, if it happens to be connected (copper appearing in a connected mine, or under a connected city).

Anybody know off the top of their head what determines whether the warriors get converted to Axemen or Spearmen?

Always spearman. This is why i prefer doing this with Alexander (Phalanxes), because i find normal spearmen quite useless most of the time (not playing Warlords).

Yes, you could hope for the resource to be already connected, but that's not a good move. Chances are it won't be, and then you'll complete a useless warrior instead of your spearman. Better to be safe than sorry, and not call for the warrior to be completed until you're sure that it will be obsolete before the beginning of your next turn.

I don't know whether anyone has mentioned this, but I thought this might be useful to add to the guide.

The AI places less value on techs that you have partially researched, meaning you can often trade for a tech they weren't originally willing to trade to you when you've researched part of it (how much of the tech you need to research may vary in different situations). This, however, means you have to invest at least a few turns of research in that tech before being able to get it from the AI. Here's how you can trade for it immediately: If the tech is sufficiently expensive beaker-wise (eg. Industrial techs), you can use a GP to lightbulb part of the tech (should shave off a few turns) and then try to trade for it again. Now that you have gotten part of it researched, the AI is more willing to trade that tech to you. If the AI still refuses, well, just continue researching it yourself. This can be considered the extension of a lightbulbing-intensive strategy (especially if you are playing an SE), allowing lightbulbing to remain relatively useful when it no longer yields enough beakers to make much difference on its own. The downside is you can only do this with techs that the GP can lightbulb.

For an example of this, refer to the EMC 4 thread, where I lightbulbed part of Physics so that I could get it from Huayna immediately.

Thanks, aelf! I'm going to look for an opportunity to do this in my current ALC game (and off-line too, if I have time). Then I'll look into writing it up.

I'm just curious, though, as to how the AI knows that you've researched part of a tech, since without spies, I can't tell what they're researching.

Thanks, aelf! I'm going to look for an opportunity to do this in my current ALC game (and off-line too, if I have time). Then I'll look into writing it up.

I'm just curious, though, as to how the AI knows that you've researched part of a tech, since without spies, I can't tell what they're researching.

the same computer plays the AI and calculates what it costs
now how on earth can it know?:D

This is something I use to see how close to a tech an AI is :
try to trade it to him at different moments.
When the price drops ridiculously you can say it is going to have it really soon.
No need to hang on that tech any longer, go trading.

I'm just curious, though, as to how the AI knows that you've researched part of a tech, since without spies, I can't tell what they're researching.

I don't know, but since this works, it doesn't really matter, does it?

Happy to help :)

What an awesome thread. I will be sending people here a lot.

Thanks for some great tips.

I have a question regarding the Gambit.


[B]1. The Oracle/Metal Casting/Pyramids Gambit
.
.
.

Because the 2nd city’s GP generation has to play catch-up, the most critical part of this gambit is to build the forge in the second city within 6 turns of finishing the Oracle. This is no mean feat. This is why you will build a barracks or obelisk in the city, but stop building it when you’re one turn from finishing. You want to whip this building to completion so that the overflow of hammers goes towards the build of the Forge (and in the capital, towards the Oracle).
.
.
.



Why the forge needs to completed within 6 turns of finishing the oracle?
Is there something specific that suppose to happen when it is finished in 6 turns?

""Why the forge needs to completed within 6 turns of finishing the oracle?
Is there something specific that suppose to happen when it is finished in 6 turns?""

You want to have great engineer from that city before your oracle city creates prophet. If you wait more that 6 turns your forge city can´t beat oracle city

Of course, this doesn't work when you need a new resource connected, because it doesn't get connected at the begining of the turn, but rather sometime later during the turn, when the worker gets his turn.

This is wrong. It is only a bug. After the road is made, enter the city screen then exit. Re-enter and you will be able to produce the axeman/spearman.

You don't understand what i'm saying. Of course you can produce axemen AFTER the road is made. That's what i said. But you can't produce them the turn before, or at the beginning of the turn where the road WILL be made.

However, you can produce them at the beginning of the turn where you discover a new tech. That's not a bug, and it makes perfect sense.

You don't understand what i'm saying. Of course you can produce axemen AFTER the road is made. That's what i said. But you can't produce them the turn before, or at the beginning of the turn where the road WILL be made.

However, you can produce them at the beginning of the turn where you discover a new tech. That's not a bug, and it makes perfect sense.

oh sorry, i misunsderstood. I though you were talking about this bug that occurs when the copper just get connected :

http://i139.photobucket.com/albums/q306/kiershar/copper_warrior_bug.jpg

Hey,

I absolutely don't agree about the trade tactics expressed in the article. First and foremost I think that even getting 1 Gold per Surplus Resource is better than having it piled up idle somewhere.

In the beginning when there's hardly any inflation 1-2 gold coins from each of a few opponents matter a lot. It gives you an edge.

+Relations
+Money (for Tech Race or similar)
+Causes others to depend on you.
+Could rule out other third party trade treaties.

-AI gets additional benefits.

+But we assume it's common that most players have standard military resources like iron. If you supply another player with iron he'll increase the total war costs (destruction) generated by him and his enemy.

You might argue that the other player will get an edge too. Yes he will compared to the other players (not you, as you're trading a surplus resource and getting money for it). BUT, if you do deals with multiple players your edge will be a lot bigger. In the end you could end up receiving 100 gold for maybe 6-7 resources. The nice thing is that these resources are spread out on multiple civilizations while you amass loads of money alone.

By using this technique I usually get more money from foreign countries than my own country would generate itself.

This is pretty much an implementation of neo-liberal economics. But as someone wrote above one has to learn to distinguish game and real life actions and morals.

Hey,

I absolutely don't agree about the trade tactics expressed in the article. First and foremost I think that even getting 1 Gold per Surplus Resource is better than having it piled up idle somewhere.

In the beginning when there's hardly any inflation 1-2 gold coins from each of a few opponents matter a lot. It gives you an edge.

+Relations
+Money (for Tech Race or similar)
+Causes others to depend on you.
+Could rule out other third party trade treaties.

-AI gets additional benefits.

+But we assume it's common that most players have standard military resources like iron. If you supply another player with iron he'll increase the total war costs (destruction) generated by him and his enemy.

You might argue that the other player will get an edge too. Yes he will compared to the other players (not you, as you're trading a surplus resource and getting money for it). BUT, if you do deals with multiple players your edge will be a lot bigger. In the end you could end up receiving 100 gold for maybe 6-7 resources. The nice thing is that these resources are spread out on multiple civilizations while you amass loads of money alone.

By using this technique I usually get more money from foreign countries than my own country would generate itself.

This is pretty much an implementation of neo-liberal economics. But as someone wrote above one has to learn to distinguish game and real life actions and morals.
Well, it really comes down to the situation in the game.

Say I'm building military because I plan to take on Rome in a few turns. Caesar has 2 GPT to offer me; the only surplus resource I can offer him is iron.

Does it really makes sense to trade iron to him in those circumstances? So he can build better units (Praetorians) that will, in turn, cost me far more in the long run? I'll lose more hammers through additional unit losses and encounter higher war weariness resulting in lost production, commerce, and research. All for, say, 20 gold (2 GPT over 10 turns minimum).

Another factor is wonders. Would you trade a surplus marble resource to another civ for a couple of GPT when you're trying to build the Great Library and they also possess knowledge of Literature? Clearly you run the risk of missing out on the wonder.

So, as is often the case in Civ, it depends.

That being said, if there's no other danger, I'll often trade a strategic resource to a distant civ that poses no danger to me. One of my favourite resources to trade away is any and all copper I have provided I have iron, especially in the long era in between the Colossus and the Statue of Liberty. The AI will pay through the nose for copper, even if it has iron. Though frankly, that sometimes feels like a bit of an exploit.

Does the "tactic" (in my mind, exploit,) of Trade Withdrawal still work in BtS?

Does the "tactic" (in my mind, exploit,) of Trade Withdrawal still work in BtS?
I haven't tried trade withdrawal in BtS--I haven't used it in a while, since I consider it an exploit rather than a tactic.

Trade renegotiation, however, strikes me as a very fair tactic that is reminiscent of the real world. Everybody renegotiates contracts after a period of time; furthermore, inflation is built into the game, so of course prices should go up.

It does still work in BtS, but with some significant changes. As of Warlords, I noticed, sometimes the AI appears to have more GPT available, but when you cancel the trade, they have none. :confused: You have to wait about 2 to 4 turns until their GPT returns to the level you thought it would be.

Also, as of BtS, the AI will cancel trades that it no longer considers suitable (such as an expensive trade for ivory once knights come along). The AI will also no longer trade all of its GPT for a particular resource. The price can usually rise very high, but there seems to be a cap for most resources.

I haven't tried trade withdrawal in BtS--I haven't used it in a while, since I consider it an exploit rather than a tactic.

Trade renegotiation, however, strikes me as a very fair tactic that is reminiscent of the real world. Everybody renegotiates contracts after a period of time; furthermore, inflation is built into the game, so of course prices should go up.

It does still work in BtS, but with some significant changes. As of Warlords, I noticed, sometimes the AI appears to have more GPT available, but when you cancel the trade, they have none. :confused: You have to wait about 2 to 4 turns until their GPT returns to the level you thought it would be.

Also, as of BtS, the AI will cancel trades that it no longer considers suitable (such as an expensive trade for ivory once knights come along). The AI will also no longer trade all of its GPT for a particular resource. The price can usually rise very high, but there seems to be a cap for most resources.

I agree w/you on trade renegotiations.....but I'd observed that the AI appeared to be a bit "smarter" in such things, which is why I asked the question about "trade withdrawal" -- I bet it's something that's been nerfed thanks to the better AI....

Trade renegotiation, however, strikes me as a very fair tactic that is reminiscent of the real world. Everybody renegotiates contracts after a period of time; furthermore, inflation is built into the game, so of course prices should go up.
It does still work in BtS, but with some significant changes.

As of Warlords, I noticed, sometimes the AI appears to have more GPT available, but when you cancel the trade, they have none. :confused: You have to wait about 2 to 4 turns until their GPT returns to the level you thought it would be.The same applies to Vanilla as of either the 1.74 patch or loading it's HoF Mod, which incorporates Warlords elements.

Hello Sisiutil!

You produce the finest Civ 4 writing I've seen, thank you!:goodjob:

Like your other guides, can you button this one up, give it a version number/date, and pdf it? That way, I can print it out for my family and I to read, instead of copying off page after page of a massive thread.

Regards,

JohnYoga

Good read, some very nice ideas are in here.

I do however have one comment. I do not know if it had been brought up before. I did not feel like plowing through 7 pages to see if a minor detail was covered.

You mention however that you can trade health recources to a civ and take it away later, and that you can benefit from the health hit they receive. I think this is not entirely correct that you benefit from it. For one thing, the AI did benefit from increased health for the duration of the trade, generating more commerce for him. When you ate away the resource, the AI can still compensate for the pop hit by whipping the people he had lost anyway, increasing the hammers the AI has.

It is a minor addition of course, it was the only comment I could think of. It is a good article. :)

Hello everyone,

Check the first post in the thread for an updated guide! I made the following changes:

As per a long-standing request, I've converted the content to a PDF file like my other guides
New section: Level Jumping (general tips on moving up a difficulty level)
New section: Great Wall/Great Spy Tech Stealing (BtS)
Added a small amount of BtS content where appropriate

The guide has been updated. I added a new section on "Early Astronomy" (inspired by the Ragnar ALC game) and did some slight revisions in the MC/Pyramids gambit section regarding the trait changes in Warlords/BtS.

Sisiutil,

I have been using your guides for years and realized I have not yet said thank you!

A great big shout out for these most excellent guides.

A nice guide! Thank you, sir!

The early astronomy is a new one on me and rather cool - will try that soon...



There is another route at an early Civil Service that I've found useful in the past.

Part bulb it with a Great Merchant - easiest to generate from running CS merchants from CoL.

It's just a case of researching or closing off the preferred GM techs. Not got my game in front of me now, but I recall that you will have to research/bulb Currency, also either research Metal Casting or close it off by taking a very long delay to pottery or bronze working - neither of which is that palatable!

It's not nearly as fast as the oracle gambit, but it can still be pretty quick - particularly with a philo civ with a strong GPP farm.

Has the advantages that: It is not wonder reliant, costs no hammers, involves researching useful techs and the merchant specialists can often fund a considerable increase in the size of your civ without tanking scientific advancement.

A nice guide! Thank you, sir!

The early astronomy is a new one on me and rather cool - will try that soon...



There is another route at an early Civil Service that I've found useful in the past.

Part bulb it with a Great Merchant - easiest to generate from running CS merchants from CoL.

It's just a case of researching or closing off the preferred GM techs. Not got my game in front of me now, but I recall that you will have to research/bulb Currency, also either research Metal Casting or close it off by taking a very long delay to pottery or bronze working - neither of which is that palatable!

It's not nearly as fast as the oracle gambit, but it can still be pretty quick - particularly with a philo civ with a strong GPP farm.

Has the advantages that: It is not wonder reliant, costs no hammers, involves researching useful techs and the merchant specialists can often fund a considerable increase in the size of your civ without tanking scientific advancement.
Interesting. I'll have to look into that. I've been able to generate early game GMs by building the Great Lighthouse and the Colossus (and Metal Casting is on that tech route, you say), so that might help too (in addition to those wonders' other substantial benefits).