Search results

There's lots of techniques you can apply to reduce war weariness (civics, religion, etc) which other people have covered. I think the key point though is speed, i.e. the easiest means of preventing war weariness crippling your civ is to get the war over with ASAP. Therefore always ensure that...

Generally I would say no for the following reasons: - you want the cities up sooner rather than later - maintenance costs due to the distance - could take time to get the cities linked - the further you have to go the more risk from barbarians along the way Exceptions to this would be: - a...

The other side to building Stonehenge, whether you're creative or not, is the fact that it's generally very quick to construct (even without stone) and the AI doesn't seem to go for it. Often when I play I find that my civ has reached the point of having 2-3 cities, defenders out on hills...

I've had similar games before and invariably you'll find you're behind someone else when you finally make contact. As the previous posters say, don't panic and use the situation to your advantage. Generally this involves the following: The only military threat you'll face for a while is...

Don't keep the cities. Just take the capitals and/or ones with wonders and/or particularly good locations. Burn the rest :goodjob: No resistance, no dealing with unhappy rebel population, no additional maintenance.

Chariots (and especially Egyptian War Chariots) are a viable option in some circumstances. I've wiped civs on Emperor using just chariots and archers before getting hold of some metals. Here's a good example played using largely War Chariots in the early part of the game.

I think this is the key point: On Noble and Prince, you can get away with making it up as you go along. On Monarch and above however, if you don't have a strategy clear in your mind you WILL get mashed.

Razing a holy city gives you a -1 with just about everyone who isn't of that religion (did it the other day). Don't know what impact it would have to relations with a civ of that religion, but can't imagine it would be good! Would the religion be dead?

Personally I think a game of civ accurately reflects the history of the world - it's rare you can find a nation that hasn't had at least one war (some of them seem to make a national sport out of it!), so war should be one of the dominant factors (if not the factor!) On another note, an...

Usually I would say leave them at home as it's easier to defend that way and improvements can always be rebuilt, with perhaps the following exceptions: 1. you have a lot of developing cottages - you don't want these pillaged. But then again, they shouldn't be built on border / vunerable...

I've been following similar strategies, especially when my neighbours are: - financial - might overtake me research-wise later on - nutters who will probably back-stab anyway (e.g. Montezuma, Isabella) - someone who has built some nice early wonders and/or religious shrines. - someone who is...

I rarely over-ride the governer with the following exceptions: 1. Early in the game, where the difference between mine and the AI governor's choices are more significant 2. I'm chasing a wonder and want to maximise production, even to the point of causing starvation Although the governor is...

Not if their continent is far away. The point was not to intercept enemy naval invasions (as you say, thats quite hard and would require a lot of ships) but to prevent the enemy from idly pillaging your resources. It's easier to let them land and then wipe em out. Yeah of course, me...

In many games you only really need a navy for defensive reasons as the AI seems quite keen on sneak attacks to pillage water-based resources and dump stacks near cities. This is often more irritating than dangerous. However I've had several games (on different map types) were naval warfare was...

Another way to prevent your economy collapsing whilst still giving your enemies a good seeing to is to only keep the useful cities, i.e. keep the capitals, holy cities, one with key resources, etc. - raze the others. One downside to this is that you might end up with a fragmented empire as the...

My experience agrees with Plutonium. Take on a big civ, give them a good kicking to the point where they cannot retaliate, and they will do your research for you. This works on all levels I've played on (up to Emperor). It also doesn't seem to matter which civ it is incidentally, anyone else...

Having just played a game with Immortals I agree with all you've said, but also agree with shivute - Immortals are a good UU, but have a limited lifespan IMHO. I used them successfully to wipe out a couple of pesky cities very early on in a game on a small map, and to pillage key resources to...

A couple of previous posters have hinted at this but I'll make it explicit - make sure that each city is focused, i.e. you don't need to build every building in every city. For example, having a library is pretty useless if the city is not producing much research, barracks is a waste of...

113K culture is VERY good (assuming you're running on normal?) I would agree that a cultural victory is slightly riskier in that you have to completely gear your empire towards that victory condition meaning that your research and military will suffer, whereas (as you point out) the other...

Since when? If you've give them a good kicking and they're down to a couple of cities they'll give you anything, techs, gold, gpt, even cities! Ummm, good question, you got me thinking now - anyone know what the answer is?