What's up Civ Fanatics. I'm a n00b to the boards and still pretty n00bish to Civ 4, so I'm looking for help for a general trend I encounter when I play. I invariably play non-violently, and thus go for either Diplomatic or Space Race victories. This also means I always play with non-Aggressive leaders (obviously)...my favorite is Gandhi.

Here's my issue: I always start out as the powerhouse, and continue that way until the mid-late game. Once I hit the Industrial era, however, it's like I hit a brick wall. It's either that my production and technology slows down or that every other enemy civ goes on steroids. Every time I win it's always by the skin of my teeth.

Do any of you veterans have some strategic advice to help me overcome this slowdown?

:confused:

My guess is you most likely don't have enough cities or you built too many farms at the expense of cottages.

I find that if I build workshops, by the time the late game hits, they are generating heaps of hammers if I run all the right civics. Same with cottages. They get an extra hammer with some civic or another and grow much faster too. (the ones at the end of the columns!)

Add in Mining Inc + Sid's Sushi and I am generating so much research and production in the late game.

When playing peaceful games I'm the opposite as you. I start off slow and I gradually catch up and in the modern age I run away with the tech lead. If I manage to survive until the Renaissance I can probably win by Space Race or diplomatic.

What difficulty are you playing on? Since you play peaceful games as Gandhi, try to get as many specialist cities as possible and switch to Pacifism. You can get a lot of great people to discover technologies and work as specialists.

I usually play on the lower difficulties (again, n00b talking) like Warlord. But I'll definately check out the workshop tip, I don't usually build many of them. But maybe Malanek is right...what is the optimum number of cities to have? Usually I end up relying on 3-4 truly massive cities to get my work done, because I generally expand slowly, making my cities I build later really not all that effective.

Oh, and Civverguy, I almost always do switch to Pacifism, but what do you mean by specialist cities?

It's better to have 7-10 cities to win. It doesn't matter if they're smaller, it's much quicker to get 10 cities to size 4 then it is to get 4 cities to size 10 yet you're still working the same number of tiles.

In fact, you're working 6 more (6 city-center tiles).

I usually play on the lower difficulties (again, n00b talking) like Warlord. But I'll definately check out the workshop tip, I don't usually build many of them. But maybe Malanek is right...what is the optimum number of cities to have? Usually I end up relying on 3-4 truly massive cities to get my work done, because I generally expand slowly, making my cities I build later really not all that effective.

There you go. Your being out produced by bigger empires, with bigger research and bigger armies. It becomes increasingly notable as your cities start hitting a slow down in there vertical growth.

i play on noble too, until recently warlord - i think 3-4 is way too little and thats why you are losing steam. Aim for at least 7, and also might be a good idea to war a little, you know thats part of the game too - you dont need to be a warmonger but if you can eliminate a neighbour and take around 5 cities from him thats a huge boost.

I guess for a space race win waging an occasional war strengthen your empire is not a bad idea.

Most of my space race wins are based on situations where i take out the entire continent and then use my large empire towards teching and by the end game the AI has no hope of catching up.

I think when you play too peacefully you are leaving that oppurtunity for the AI to challenge you.

Also for me 7 cities bare minimum. (i would be dissapointed), 10 is what i would gun for and if i get to 12 or more .... :D:D:D

Posting for no other reason than to echo other people - you're not building enough cities!

Extra cities beyond the first 4-5 are short-term drags to your economy, but they offer a huge long-term payoff when they are developed. The reason for this is that the amount of maintenance you can handle changes drastically throughout the game. You couldn't easily handle 8 cities in 1000BC, as they'll be costing you something of the order of 40 gold in maintenance - more than you can often produce at that time. 40 gold is nothing in 1500AD though, and your cities will have developed by then.

Assuming a standard size map many of the powerful national wonders require 6 of a building. Oxford requires 6 universities and Ironworks requires 6 forges. If your empire does not have Oxford and Ironworks at the minimum then quite frankly your empire sucks for a late game space race. You cannot hope to keep up at your skill level without leveraging some of the most powerful buildings the game has to offer. As others have said - expand faster and get more cities. 3-4 is horrible.

Also you do not have to keep the science slider at 100% to be "efficient". In case this is what you are trying to do, don't. A 100% slider netting 50 research is vastly inferior to a 40% slider netting 150 research. Percentages are misleading.

Oh, and Civverguy, I almost always do switch to Pacifism, but what do you mean by specialist cities?

Specialist cities are cities with a lot of surplus food so you can turn some of the citizens into scientists, spies, etc. without losing population.

Hi Jason the Red.

I'm going to also say more cities. However I'm going to add more cites earlier. The ealier they are up and running the sooner you can be working cottages/running more specialists/producing extra units etc.

When I was moving upto noble I tried to aim for 3/4 cities by 1000BC.

Another thing to remember if you are building more cities earlier is that you need to have more workers. I like to have 1.5 to 2 workers per city in the early part of the game. A good way to get these workers is to 2 pop whip a settler and then put the overflow into a worker. A two pop whip is simpily when you use the slavery to whip two pop points to complete something. An example of this might be whipping a settler at 103 hammers for 2 pop points to max the overflow into the next build (on epic speed and a non IMP civ).

I also recomend checking out the War Acadamy and the strat articles.

I don't understand neglecting military assaults... it hasn't really paid off in history...
But, if you insist... build cities as fast as you can until you are bankrupt practically, THEN focus on infrastructure. This should help you. Once you get your cities up and running, you will BLOW the computer away on warlord. There will be no skin of your teeth victories...

But, back to the aggression thing... it'll be next to impossible to progress into higher levels if you continue to neglect military conquest when it is suitable.

Also, just because you play Gandhi, doesn't mean you have to play like Gandhi...
A Swordsman for Gandhi is a strength of 6...
A Swordsman for Genghis Khan, strength of 6...

See what I am saying? When you control the leader, you can do whatever you want with him, all that matters really are the two leader traits...

I don't understand neglecting military assaults... it hasn't really paid off in history...
But, if you insist... build cities as fast as you can until you are bankrupt practically, THEN focus on infrastructure. This should help you. Once you get your cities up and running, you will BLOW the computer away on warlord. There will be no skin of your teeth victories...

But, back to the aggression thing... it'll be next to impossible to progress into higher levels if you continue to neglect military conquest when it is suitable.

Also, just because you play Gandhi, doesn't mean you have to play like Gandhi...
A Swordsman for Gandhi is a strength of 6...
A Swordsman for Genghis Khan, strength of 6...

See what I am saying? When you control the leader, you can do whatever you want with him, all that matters really are the two leader traits...

actually a Swordsman for Genghis Khan is 6.6 out of the box, because he's aggressive (free combat 1)
just saying...

Thanks guys, I really appreciate the help! :goodjob:

actually a Swordsman for Genghis Khan is 6.6 out of the box, because he's aggressive (free combat 1)
just saying...

Good point... I was actually thinking that too...
Ok, exchange Genghis Khan for Frederick the Great

Guys, I tried out what you said and it worked like a charm. Thanks again!

Guys, I tried out what you said and it worked like a charm. Thanks again!

Now it's time to move up...:mwaha:

No dont move up yet - enjoy the game try all the different things you can do, try to see if you can get one of each different victory type. Try different leaders.

Just a difference of opinion - with no offence meant, i hope none will be taken, i dont believe it should be a race to the highest difficulty level but rather a relaxing , enjoyable game.

By the looks of it you are still learning the basics, so take your time.

I must have racked up around 15 - 20 wins on warlord before i recently decided to move to noble.

ppl will argue that you will learn some bad habits as the lower levels give you advantages that you use as a crutch etc. All true i guess but who cares you are not training for the olypimcs and i guess you can unlearn those bad habits as you move up in difficulty.

just remember, as in any civ game, bigger is always better. Slowdown comes when the cost of researching techs, producing buildings and units become increasingly expensive, but you aren't having a net growth big enough to offset them. Assembly line and factories go a long way in alleviating the productive problems, and sushi or cereal mills can help you work more cottages and specialists.

But all in all, the best solution is always be bigger than the next guy. Sure, someone can have a city producing a tank in 3 turns, but if you have 2 cities doing that in 5 each, you're in better shape. You're also getting more out of sushi or mining based on how many redundant resources available, so having a larger empire, is having more resources [having them yourself, giving you more health and happiness or having more to offer in trade] mean you'll get more benefit out of corporations.

to OP:
to me if you reach 0% research everything is ok: you have grown big. Time to revitalize and harvest.

Looks like this thread had first posts for both Jason the Red and malanek, so:

Welcome to the Forums!!!!

:band::beer::dance::dance::dance::beer:

Honestly I wouldn't bother playing below noble. Noble is still quite easy. The bonuses on warlord are beyond easy and the ai will basically just sit there and let you have your way with them. I don't think you'll get much valuable experience below noble that will apply to higher levels.

You do want lots of cities, on a normal size map aim to have 10 by 1AD and then either plan a war or if there is still room to expand peacefully you can build another 5-10 by 1500ad to put yourself in a good position to win. Cottages are great for any grassland tile and usually for plains too. Your city placement is important as well, make sure your cities have food resources to grow.

You don't necessarily need that many cities. My last game as Ghandi I had 3 - but I did have 3 other city locations blocked off to expand into when I got to education so I could build 6 universities. Ghandi having the philosophical trait means +100% to great people. I built a huge amount of wonders in the capital and settled all my scientists there and my merchants in my gold city. I was way ahead in tech, and once I got to tanks and such I could easily take everyone in war.

Try the oracle -> civil service grab and learn the power of bureaucracy. Read my game in Immortal University Napoleon. Or search for threads on Oracle->CS.

Try the Great Lighthouse even on a pangaea map if you have early room to expand coastal with good resources/production (hiils and food to work them). You can usually peacefully pick up a couple more cities than normal as the AI expands inland and you'll have a lot of extra commerce.

And getting pyramids and running the representation civic with scientist specialists is always good. Build libraries and stay in slavery or get to CoL for caste early.

My first war before macemen came during my Immortal University Isabella game I played several weeks ago. I always go for domination, but I do it with a big tech lead (and play epic speed normally which gives more time for wars before someone researches a better military tech)