[BTS] Skipped Prince

[JBryan314]

So, I started out playing on Settler, no shock there. As I got better I eventually found myself playing and usually winning on Noble. I now win about 90% of my games by either the UN or Space Race. I typically wage a few wars, usually a couple small scale peacekeeping type conflicts, with one huge world war around the time I build riflemen or infantry. All that aside, I've moved my difficulty level up... To Monarch. I skipped Prince just because. I don't really have a reason. Has anyone else done this, skipped a difficulty level altogether? What kind of results did you have on the new level? If I get run over a dozen times or something crazy like that, maybe I'll just bump it to Prince, but I think I'll give Monarch a go.

[Matty R]

I've seen it recommended by a number of people for those moving up from Noble to skip Prince and go straight to Monarch. I went from Noble to Prince though, and it's like I'm playing a whole different game.

[ggg]

I did when I played Vanilla a couple of years ago. It worked well and I won already after a few tries. If I recall correctly barbs was my biggest problem when moving up. The good thing with it was that it conviced me to take the game seriously and don't get worried when I was low in score or a stack of doom turned up knocking on my door. With BtS I have gone back to Noble, but I have learnt a few tricks so maybe it's time to move up again.

[Antilogic]

As a prior Civ vet, I ended up skipping straight to Noble/Prince and then Monarch afterwards. Been going one at a time since then.

[Htadus]

Yes, Went from civ3 GOTM trying to win Sid level to Monarch level in civ4. (also it just happened that the GOTM on the month I bought the game was in Monarch difficulty)

I found out very soon learning techs from left to right along all tech paths were bad, and building worker, settler and warrior, or settler, worker, and warrior, or warrior, settler and worker was bad.

Once I learned to tech appropriate worker techs, building a worker, growing city and building a settler, and expand to about 6-8 cities, the game became easy. Now I just stay away from Deity.

[UnforcedError]

I had no previous experience with Civ when I started off with civ 4 vanilla but being no newbie to 4x games I played and won my first game on warlords very easily, then moved up to noble, experimented around to get some ideas about special game mechanics, finally managed to win multiple games in succession. Then came prince which didn't feel a lot different from noble. Moving up to monarch was a real shock at first because you typically have to face barb and AI archers with warriors. It was emperor when I really got desperate and started googling civ 4 tactics, so I found this forum with tons of useful advice which propelled me up to immortal. (Thanks again, you guys are great )

Why don't you just try monarch with a favourite leader and see how it feels?

[Darth Fred]

I'm an ace at Noble, but usually get my butt handed to me on Prince. Monarch? I've not been in the mood to loose THAT bad.

Cool that you pulled it off though.

F

[UnforcedError]

Originally Posted by Darth Fred

I'm an ace at Noble, but usually get my butt handed to me on Prince. Monarch? I've not been in the mood to loose THAT bad.

Cool that you pulled it off though.

F

Thanks Why does Prince feel so much more difficult to you than Noble?

[lymond]

Darth - The difference between Noble and Prince is very very marginal. I recall back when I was "moving up the levels" that I played maybe 1 game on Prince before moving to Monarch. Granted, I was doing deep perusing over on the Strategy&Tips forum. Noble can be easily won with just understanding a couple of solid basic concepts like importance of workers, improved tiles, and food. Prince the AIs get slight productive bonuses but nothing major. The kicker on Monarch is the Archery start.

So with Prince, I'd probably try pulling in 1 or 2 more basic concepts to improve your game. Often more effective use of Great People will go a long way, as well as using the whip. Hard for me to really say, ofc, without seeing your game. If you are failing on Prince, then there are probably still some major flaws in your game that are not prevalent in a Noble game, but the slight bonuses on Prince are making them stand out.

[shakabrade]

I have just realized that I have never played game on prince, so I guess you can do well without it.

[Antilogic]

Originally Posted by lymond

Darth - The difference between Noble and Prince is very very marginal. I recall back when I was "moving up the levels" that I played maybe 1 game on Prince before moving to Monarch. Granted, I was doing deep perusing over on the Strategy&Tips forum. Noble can be easily won with just understanding a couple of solid basic concepts like importance of workers, improved tiles, and food. Prince the AIs get slight productive bonuses but nothing major. The kicker on Monarch is the Archery start.

So with Prince, I'd probably try pulling in 1 or 2 more basic concepts to improve your game. Often more effective use of Great People will go a long way, as well as using the whip. Hard for me to really say, ofc, without seeing your game. If you are failing on Prince, then there are probably still some major flaws in your game that are not prevalent in a Noble game, but the slight bonuses on Prince are making them stand out.

Largely agree, although depending on the map the additional kicker on Monarch could be the extra units at start--it lets the AI gobble up the goody huts far more quickly than you can, even if you start with a scout. Also, you don't find good stuff like free settlers on these levels, so players reliant on the goody hut bonuses feel like they are struggling because they don't get as much free stuff.

The AI also gets a better production bonus, right? I seem to remember their armies being smaller on Prince than on Monarch. Or did they change that when they adjusted the difficulty levels between expansions?

[lymond]

^^^things like huts and free settlers are irrelevant to me. I don't play with huts and even if I did or when I do (some HOF or GOTM games) it has no bearing on the difficulty of the game.

Each difficulty level increase the AI bonuses. They also do get some extra units, but it's not until Deity that they actually get an additional settler. The big kicker on Monarch, other than the ramp up of bonuses, would be that AIs start with Archery and Archers, so early rush tactics are not as straightforward. Whereas on Prince and below you might be able to take out 1 or 2 Ais with just warriors.

[Antilogic]

Originally Posted by lymond

^^^things like huts and free settlers are irrelevant to me. I don't play with huts and even if I did or when I do (some HOF or GOTM games) it has no bearing on the difficulty of the game.

Each difficulty level increase the AI bonuses. They also do get some extra units, but it's not until Deity that they actually get an additional settler. The big kicker on Monarch, other than the ramp up of bonuses, would be that AIs start with Archery and Archers, so early rush tactics are not as straightforward. Whereas on Prince and below you might be able to take out 1 or 2 Ais with just warriors.

That was in reference to some players who end up relying on the handouts and struggle with not having them on higher levels. It seemed like every other month in the early Warlords/BtS days somebody would post about how he couldn't find anymore free settlers (having moved up in difficulty and not realizing the game wouldn't give him free settlers anymore).

[UnforcedError]

Originally Posted by Antilogic

That was in reference to some players who end up relying on the handouts and struggle with not having them on higher levels. It seemed like every other month in the early Warlords/BtS days somebody would post about how he couldn't find anymore free settlers (having moved up in difficulty and not realizing the game wouldn't give him free settlers anymore).

Sure, but there's not too much difference between goody hut yields on noble or prince... And you can't get a settler / worker on noble anymore either, I guess. He must have other problems. One difference I can think of is the extra warrior the AI gets which might cause it to go worker first, while on noble it would go for a defender. It's probably much easier to get away with an inexperienced warrior-warrior-for-defense start on noble then on prince. (I actually had to play lots of noble games until I realized that I could own the game from the start by choosing worker as the first build. Sid's awesome tips really do help there But as long as you don't realize that AI warriors would never attack your empty capital for some reason and that barb units don't enter your borders in the early game the logical play is to go for a defender first and to keep your scouting warrior close.)

[Tristan_C]

I played a couple average Noble games back in the day, winning by good margins. Arrogantly, I skipped to Monarch/Raging Barbs on a sparse Ice Age map, mara speed. Outside of playing Doom 2 when I was little, it was the most terrifying gaming experience I ever had. So I went back to Prince for a while to learn the art of unitspam. That was a vacation. Very instructive games, all of them.

[King Kalmah]

Originally Posted by UnforcedError

But as long as you don't realize that AI warriors would never attack your empty capital for some reason and that barb units don't enter your borders in the early game the logical play is to go for a defender first and to keep your scouting warrior close.)

That is an excellent point.When I had figured that out the noble difficulty became a cake walk.Just build up your city and then build up the army and smash your enemy.

So I learned this well and mastered noble and then I moved up to Prince,but I want to move up to Monarch...

I fear Monarch difficulty due to the archery bonus and I like to play with barbs+Aggressive Civs to simulate a more realistic history .So I can imagine Monarch will be a challenge,but then I also fear the 20% bonus to teching that it also grants the AI....Mansa and Zara will be insane...

Plus why doesn't the game grant the player a free worker or something?

I always thought on the hardest difficulty you should at least get a free worker...

I will move up..its just Prince isn't bad if you like a fun game...I almost put random events in my last game,but then I realized it would do more harm then good...(I focus on quests,love the whip in the early days when no happiness is around so you can imagine all the revolts and of course factor in the Volcano or Ant armies taking out all your towns producing 5 coins)

[Darth Fred]

Originally Posted by lymond

Darth - The difference between Noble and Prince is very very marginal. I recall back when I was "moving up the levels" that I played maybe 1 game on Prince before moving to Monarch. Granted, I was doing deep perusing over on the Strategy&Tips forum. Noble can be easily won with just understanding a couple of solid basic concepts like importance of workers, improved tiles, and food. Prince the AIs get slight productive bonuses but nothing major. The kicker on Monarch is the Archery start.

So with Prince, I'd probably try pulling in 1 or 2 more basic concepts to improve your game. Often more effective use of Great People will go a long way, as well as using the whip. Hard for me to really say, ofc, without seeing your game. If you are failing on Prince, then there are probably still some major flaws in your game that are not prevalent in a Noble game, but the slight bonuses on Prince are making them stand out.

The biggest problem seems to be losing my tech edge. I just can't seem to get ahead of the AI on Prince.
F

[Darth Fred]

Originally Posted by UnforcedError

Thanks Why does Prince feel so much more difficult to you than Noble?

See above.

F

[Antilogic]

Originally Posted by King Kalmah

Plus why doesn't the game grant the player a free worker or something?

I always thought on the hardest difficulty you should at least get a free worker...

I will move up..its just Prince isn't bad if you like a fun game...I almost put random events in my last game,but then I realized it would do more harm then good...(I focus on quests,love the whip in the early days when no happiness is around so you can imagine all the revolts and of course factor in the Volcano or Ant armies taking out all your towns producing 5 coins)

It wouldn't be hard mode if you got a free worker!

I leave the random events on (I even modded in another four dozen or so). I'm a fan of the more simulator-type games like the Paradox and AGEod types, though, so this is probably where it comes from.

Originally Posted by Darth Fred

The biggest problem seems to be losing my tech edge. I just can't seem to get ahead of the AI on Prince.
F

It's all about selective researching, heavy trading, and getting a solid economy going with libraries, currency, and courthouses.

[Darth Fred]

Originally Posted by Antilogic

It's all about selective researching, heavy trading, and getting a solid economy going with libraries, currency, and courthouses.

I have a hunch I'm probably trying to do too much at once.

Science... no the economy... no my defense... no science...

Making a plan and sticking to it might do me a world of good.
F