I've really been giving it the old college try. I closely watch what's going on with my cities and my units. I build enough units to make my neighbors cower in fear. My cities grow well, and I find enough resources.

Is Warlord mode really supposed to be this hard? It seems like whatever I attack, regardless of my defensive position, be it on a hill or in the forest, I get slaughtered. It doesn't seem to matter if I am defending or not, my units die.

If the enemy comes at me with a small army, I've come to expect that they are *going* to win. I've also learned that it takes no less than 40 Praetorians to knock out 4 archers.

It just gets tiring when you know that when the odds are in your favor, chances are you're going to lose.

And Chieftan mode is too easy. A piece of cake. I just want to have one fun game. One that is neither too hard, nor too easy. And I don't want to have to do a bunch of math and ultra-strategy to get there. This is why I wanted Warlord mode. Alas, I guess I'll just have to do something else. Perhaps something more productive. maybe fun, too.

Warlord level is really easy. You're not using any siege weapons, are you? You should use some. Catapults, Trebuchets, Cannons, and Artillery are the 5 most important units in the game.

Yeah, that was one of the first things I learned in Civ4. Siege weapons have gone from "nice if you have them" to "don't attack without 'em." Even nicer is that siege weapons can take care of themselves if unaccompanied, or at least hurt the enemy before they die.

There is a lot more planning in wars now. Even on low levels it's hard to steamroll someone, let alone the high ones.

Do you understand how culture works for defence?Basically you will see a % on a city for example 40% this means any units inside get a 40% boost when defending.Siege engines can bombard this to lower it.The other use of siege weapons is they wound more than just the unit they attack so if there is a lot of defenders it is often prudent to sacrifice a few cats first they will probably lose but they have weakened the whole stack.

Dude, if it takes you no fewer than 40 Praetorians to take out 4 archers, either you're fighting Sitting Bull from the planet Krypton, or one of your friends went in and changed a bunch of values in your game's power levels. Either that or you have just insane luck.

Seige units. Nail. On. Head.

Seige units are essential to attacking cities... take out the cultural defence first and then attack with as many catapults as you can before using your main troops... this should leave troops with 99% odds and an easily taken city.

If your losing so much against 4 archers, I guess they're protective CGII upgrade, in a capital with 100% cultural defence. That means that although Archer's strength is 3, it's effectivly 6.6 if my math is correct. Bad luck clearly coming into play for you aswell.

....I suppose the enemy city must also be on a hill, across a river, to lose that bad. Were the Prat's at full health? 40 must be an exaggeration!

....I suppose the enemy city must also be on a hill, across a river, to lose that bad. Were the Prat's at full health? 40 must be an exaggeration!

I think he is exaggerating. Even without siege units to reduce city defences Praetorians should make mincemeat out of Archers in most cases - if given City Raider promotions that is.

At least Noble difficulty didn't require any siege weapon use when conquering 2 neighbors with praetorians. I have never really used siege weapons, but then again I haven't played much the later parts of the game. "stack of doom" has worked for me.

Of course if the first city you attack is a big city with big defences, and your units are newbies, there is a high chance of it ending to a disaster. Also, if you only have a stack of praetorians when attacking a major city, don't attack with the most experienced one first.. as long as the defenders have full or close to full health, they will win. And you better conquer that city during the same turn as you decide to launch the attack.

....I suppose the enemy city must also be on a hill, across a river, to lose that bad. Were the Prat's at full health? 40 must be an exaggeration!

Or he's marching them one by one, not at once but stretched out over multiple turns, into the slaughter ...

Worst case scenario :-
Archer is in a city which has 60% defence and is on a hill. He gets +50% city defence, +25% hill defence, and a first strike (unit characteristics);he has CG2 promo (+45%) and has been fortified for 5 turns or more (+25%).
Praet. has no promos and is attacking across a river (+25% to the defender).
Archer's effective strength becomes 3 +(60+50+25+45+25+25)% = 3+230% = 9.9, versus the Praet's 8. This gives a strength ratio of 0.8081, so the praet's odds of winning are about 25% - theoretically. But as is well known to most of us, this really means that the praet will almost always lose, though the archer is likely to be damaged, and if not attacked at once by another praet will heal rapidly back to full strength ready to repel a later attack.
The answer ? Catapults or trebs to reduce the city's defence, CR2 promos for the praets, and attack with as many praets as possible in the same turn - preferably marching them round to where they can attack without crossing a river. And do that before the enemy gets longbows.

+50% hill defense. 25 from tile, 25 from unit.

Also, 3+230% is the wrong way to write it.

I'm done. Tonight, I was slaughtered by the aposolistic palace. 50 years i spent ravaging a town, just to be forced to give it back. of course, NONE of my allies voted for me to keep it. the third time this happened, I got angry.

I'm done. Tonight, I was slaughtered by the aposolistic palace. 50 years i spent ravaging a town, just to be forced to give it back. of course, NONE of my allies voted for me to keep it. the third time this happened, I got angry.

You can defy. It's not that bad. :rolleyes:

Of course if it took you "50 years" to capture a town, on top of your complains in your other post, you're obviously doing it wrong.

Archers in hill cities are hard nuts to crack without siege units. Longbows are even harder to smack down. And if you've hit them enough times without killing them, they can accumulate a lot of promotions. CG3 promo and drill promos can be very tough. A protective trait leader can make taking out archers hard. Sitting Bull's archers are extremely hard to just chomp through. They can easily have CG3 plus Drill, making them much tougher than your Praetorians. If you can't give your Praetorians City Raider 2 (or better, 3), you may have to accept losing large numbers in order to beat them

The good news is that archers aren't much good on the attack. You only have to worry about the other units your enemy uses, and defend against them, if your enemy's defenders are simply too tough to beat.

In the early phase of the game, you have to mass your forces and expect losses. Mass is one of the keys to winning battles. Always build up enough force to take down the enemy in one turn, so they can't heal up and promote. For Rome, which has a great attack unit, it still can require several Praetorians per archer in order to take a tough city sans siege. I'll sometimes bypass hill cities to take ones on flat land, and make peace until I get catapults to finish them off.

The Apostolic Palace is good on your side, but not nice if you can't control it. If you can't build it yourself (and on Warlord difficulty you should definitely try to do so), spread the AP religion everywhere in your civ. Make sure that your allies aren't better friends of the AP resident than they are of you. Also, it is best to be in the "AP Club" by adopting the AP religion as state religion. That doubles your votes, and also gives immunity to resolutions that only apply to voting members (those who don't have the AP as state religion).

If your "allies" aren't voting to support you, they aren't that friendly. Check the relationship level you have with them, compare it to your competition.

Ideally, take control of the AP by being voted resident. If your civilization is big enough, it shouldn't be too hard to pull that off. Diplomacy in BTS is often all about being extra nice -- give in to demands from friends, trade often, support them in war, etc. Just remember that you can't be friends with your leading competitor, because they'll want (and get) votes for themselves. Make nice with whoever is #2 or #3, tough enough to help you but not your direct rival.


AP control is all about spreading and using the AP religion to your advantage.

Each level up in BTS is a jump in difficulty, until you get used to it. A few more games, and maybe you'll get the hang of the new situation.

I've really been giving it the old college try. I closely watch what's going on with my cities and my units. I build enough units to make my neighbors cower in fear. My cities grow well, and I find enough resources.

Is Warlord mode really supposed to be this hard? It seems like whatever I attack, regardless of my defensive position, be it on a hill or in the forest, I get slaughtered. It doesn't seem to matter if I am defending or not, my units die.

If the enemy comes at me with a small army, I've come to expect that they are *going* to win. I've also learned that it takes no less than 40 Praetorians to knock out 4 archers.

It just gets tiring when you know that when the odds are in your favor, chances are you're going to lose.

And Chieftan mode is too easy. A piece of cake. I just want to have one fun game. One that is neither too hard, nor too easy. And I don't want to have to do a bunch of math and ultra-strategy to get there. This is why I wanted Warlord mode. Alas, I guess I'll just have to do something else. Perhaps something more productive. maybe fun, too.

A lot of the stuff here makes no sense at all. Start a new game, post screenshots up here and make a detailed account of what happened in the game, being sure to take screenshots of starting capital, # of units in army, etc. I can't offer any useful advice based on this.

This thread is starting to tickle me now. I really hope the OP comes back in another two days saying "nope, that's the last straw, i have't got any coal and tokugawa won't trade me it. THIS IS AN OUTRAGE." and smashes his pc.

If he just made his stuff more clear to me...

I mean, I can kill 4 archers with 4 praetorians, not 40!

I was slaughtered by the aposolistic palace.

If you switch off the Diplomatic victory condition, it takes the Apostolic Palace [and the UN] out of the game.

You can use a spy to get rid of that culture defense too so you won't need as much siege. You do the city revolt thing and for one turn that city won't have culture defense.

Hill cities are hard to beat though, you gotta have city raider guys and siege weapons be able to knock em down.

Reccomendation: Before throwing away your copy of BtS, go and post your games (along with important screenshots), and saves here:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/forumdisplay.php?f=155

You should get alot of constructive critisism...

But basically, if you have equal techs, and have around 50% of your army in siege, capturing cities should be a piece of cake.

The AP (and UN) is a pain in the butt for war-mongerers however. It is possible to defy a resolution (for +5 :mad: in all cities with the state religion, and -2 production for all religious buildings of that religion for the AP, and just a flat +5 :mad: for all cities for the UN), and of course, you can always disable diplomatic victory (which destroys the AP and UN), in Custom Game.

But Civ IV is pretty hard for new players. I have been playing for about 15 months, and recently feel confident in Prince games ;) But the best part about this is it's replayability!! What other game can you play for 15 months, in Single Player mode? :P)

Medieval 2 and all it's expansions....

I get the impression the OP doesnt read the comments.
plenty of good tips in here and if it takes you " 50 years" to capture a city and loose a stack of prets to native american archers from krypton, those tips will make all the difference.

or did the OP already thre out his copy of BTS?