Quick Answers / 'Newbie' Questions

Stacks of doom aren't scary until the highest difficulty levels and you shouldn't instaquit just because a stack of doom has entered your territory. There are many tactics to use to at least mitigate the damage done to your empire...

• Bribe other civs to declare war against the aggressor.
• Use the United Nations or Apostolic Palace to force a declaration of peace.
• Whip a walls/castle in the threatened city, which the AI might then take time bombarding, allowing you to move in reinforcements.
• Accept the loss of 1 border city and withdraw most or all units, while whipping together an army.
• Use flanking attacks with horsies to take out their siege units.
• Use suicide siege to weaken the stack. Having the initiative when using siege is important. Even when the player is aggressively warring, it can be better to declare war and let the initial enemy stack of doom enter your territory so you can destroy it with fewer losses and less war weariness.
• Lose a city on purpose to then attack the stack in it with units with city attack promotions.
• Lure the stack off tiles with defensive bonuses. (If you think you are likely to be attacked, then prioritise chopping any forest/jungle likely to be on the stack's path.)

Bamboocha said:

Another newbie related question (though also kind of related to doomstacks). I started a game as Hannibal, I shared a border with China (Qi, not Mao) and attacked almost instantly with 3 archers and one warrior (admittedly each on a separate tile, going for what I assumed was an easy victory against their second city (and who knows, marching on their capital after that and taking a competitor out of the game quickly). Yet the garrisson (a stack of two) somehow managed to defeat all of my guys. It was like the RNG was conspiring against me.

Click to expand...

You shouldn't expect to take a city with 3 archers + 1 warriors -- Both warriors and archers get a passive city defense bonus, so the defender has a huge advantage in this case. There are also other bonuses they get, such as the fortify bonus and cultural defense bonus. Its not that surprising you lost. If you want to check the odds, you can press alt and hover over the city to see what percent chance you have of winning.

Anyway, I wouldn't say RNG screwed you over--Its better to think of it this way: You chose a strategy that relied on luck, and it didn't pan out.

Things you can do better:

a) Build more units before attacking. 3 archers isn't really enough for this kind of attack.
b) Tech further. If you research bronze working or animal husbandry, you might find horses or copper. This will allow you to build chariots, horse archers or axemen, which are much stronger units and can take cities better than archers. If you lack horses and copper, you can tech towards construction and build catapults, which can be mixed with archers to take cities and don't require a strategic resource.
c) Focus on how to develop your empire better. If you manage your empire better, you can improve your production and research, which will make wars easier to win, because you will have more units and stronger units by the same point in the game.

pob said:

Stacks of doom aren't scary until the highest difficulty levels and you shouldn't instaquit just because a stack of doom has entered your territory.

Click to expand...

maybe i'm wrong in terminology, but i think if you have ways of dealing with it then it shouldn't be considered a true stack of doom.

Your suggestions are good, but my main point was that it's possible to get so far behind in development and/or diplomacy that you can be faced with a stack so large that there is absolutely nothing you can do to win. At this point it becomes a "stack of doom" rather than just an ordinary stack.

Bamboocha said:

Another newbie related question (though also kind of related to doomstacks). I started a game as Hannibal, I shared a border with China (Qi, not Mao) and attacked almost instantly with 3 archers and one warrior (admittedly each on a separate tile, going for what I assumed was an easy victory against their second city (and who knows, marching on their capital after that and taking a competitor out of the game quickly). Yet the garrisson (a stack of two) somehow managed to defeat all of my guys. It was like the RNG was conspiring against me.

So I build up my forces and send them on the offensive, but to no avail. Suddenly, China has a stack of 8+ with warriors and China's unique axeman replacement and they're out for blood. I could throw up my hands and say the RNG screwed me over, but I'm pretty sure I did something wrong. I just don't know what. Other than not stacking my troops, of course.

Click to expand...

China's unique axeman replacement? You playing a mod or something?

Let's go through the ol' checklist to see if the RNG did or did not screw you in that attack:

Did all of your units attack in the same turn?
Were those two units defending the city Archers or Warriors?
Was the city on a hill?
Did you attack over a river?
Did the city have any defenses from walls or culture?

Not stacking your units in this context is utterly irrelevant.

Hello, just as the title says. Playing on Warlords. I have corporation and economics plus more than 6 banks. Are there any other requirements to build it?

Nev mind figured it out. It was in queue for another city

greetings. I would ask you if you are so gentle a "technical" question, even if I m not sure this to be the place.
I have an old copy od Civ IV, and a Windows 10 pc. Do you know if it may be someway to let it run; it won t also if you moddify the command prompt.. if someone else had similar problem, he might know it. thank you so much.

Socrat said:

greetings. I would ask you if you are so gentle a "technical" question, even if I m not sure this to be the place.
I have an old copy od Civ IV, and a Windows 10 pc. Do you know if it may be someway to let it run; it won t also if you moddify the command prompt.. if someone else had similar problem, he might know it. thank you so much.

Click to expand...

This is the only possible solution I found for the disk version:

http://owensblogaboutstuff.blogspot.com/2016/08/how-to-play-civilization-iv-on-windows.html#more

Not sure if it works as I have a DD version myself.

If you don't get it a work, I recommend getting CIV IV Complete online.

Bamboocha said:

Another newbie related question (though also kind of related to doomstacks). I started a game as Hannibal, I shared a border with China (Qi, not Mao) and attacked almost instantly with 3 archers and one warrior (admittedly each on a separate tile, going for what I assumed was an easy victory against their second city (and who knows, marching on their capital after that and taking a competitor out of the game quickly). Yet the garrisson (a stack of two) somehow managed to defeat all of my guys. It was like the RNG was conspiring against me.

So I build up my forces and send them on the offensive, but to no avail. Suddenly, China has a stack of 8+ with warriors and China's unique axeman replacement and they're out for blood. I could throw up my hands and say the RNG screwed me over, but I'm pretty sure I did something wrong. I just don't know what. Other than not stacking my troops, of course.

Click to expand...

Agree with the overall conversation, so far. Let me add...

In Civ3, archers were offensive units. In Civ5, archers were a great ranged unit that worked well on offense. In Civ4, archers are primarily *defensive* units, used for city garrison. Axemen are the strong offensive unit you're looking for, in the ancient age.

Early, early battles like the one you embarked on can be tricky, and the subtle defensive bonuses (attacking across a river, city on a hill) are easy to overlook.
Most early battles are fought with axemen, swordsmen, and chariots. Horse archers are also good for offense, and are available to all civ's not just as a unique unit.

To answer that question.
Was it BTS, since the bts UU for china is a crossbow.
What difficulty were you playing, since if NOBLE and if was almost instantly the AI would only have warriors.
Stacking gives no advantage on attacking not including attacking with multiple units in a row.

I'm not entirely sure about this one.

I am in war with Sury, and an Apostolic Palace vote will come up the next turn. It might be to stop the war. I know that if the vote goes through it will enforce a 10 turn peace treaty which I don't want, and I know that I can prevent that vote by taking a cease-fire. I'm just not sure about the timing.

Can I go on with the war, wait for the vote to show up, and take a cease-fire just before it is resolved? Or might I still get the 10-turn peace treaty, and should take a cease-fire before the vote even shows up?

georgjorge said:

I'm not entirely sure about this one.

I am in war with Sury, and an Apostolic Palace vote will come up the next turn. It might be to stop the war. I know that if the vote goes through it will enforce a 10 turn peace treaty which I don't want, and I know that I can prevent that vote by taking a cease-fire. I'm just not sure about the timing.

Can I go on with the war, wait for the vote to show up, and take a cease-fire just before it is resolved? Or might I still get the 10-turn peace treaty, and should take a cease-fire before the vote even shows up?

Click to expand...

Cease fire when it says turns until next vote: 0. I believe that you can cease fire then as player is first one to play. Therefore on AI's turn, he'll be at peace and vote for peace will not make sense, right? You can always Defy the resolution if it still comes up.

Thanks for your answer!

Yes, I can still make a cease-fire when there's zero turns to the vote. But can I also make a cease-fire the next turn - after a peace vote has been proposed (but not resolved) - thus keeping the vote from resolving the turn after that due to no war, and not get a 10-turn peace treaty this way?

An additional benefit would be that if I make a cease-fire this turn, the vote might well be to give back a conquered city instead. If I let the AP propose a peace vote and then sabotage it via cease-fire, that won't happen.

So - can I still wage war for an additional, crucial turn before having to take a cease-fire?

georgjorge said:

Thanks for your answer!

Yes, I can still make a cease-fire when there's zero turns to the vote. But can I also make a cease-fire the next turn - after a peace vote has been proposed (but not resolved) - thus keeping the vote from resolving the turn after that due to no war, and not get a 10-turn peace treaty this way?

Spoiler :

I am not 100% sure, but I think you would get 10 turns of peace treaty in this case. I feel like I have seen that.

An additional benefit would be that if I make a cease-fire this turn, the vote might well be to give back a conquered city instead. If I let the AP propose a peace vote and then sabotage it via cease-fire, that won't happen.

So - can I still wage war for an additional, crucial turn before having to take a cease-fire?

Click to expand...

I don't think so. Unless Sury capitulates that very turn, you'll be in the bad spot.

My memory fails me on this one, gg, but I actually think it may work. I know I have encountered the dilemma before. Cease fire basically negates the vote. Only way to know for sure is work up test game. Give someone ap, start at war, give him bunch of warriors u can kill

Thanks for your answers!

I actually made a test game, and shaka was right - cease-fire after the vote has been proposed doesn't cancel it and I would still get the 10-turn treaty.

ah yeah...maybe that was the case. I know I've tried the same thing before, but could not remember results and probably confusing with something else similar I tried. The AP and war crap is the worst. I bet I know what game this pertains too.

Hello,
How long moderate new files?

Uploaded file sep 13, 2016:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/downloads.php?do=file&id=25346
This file is in the moderation queue

Nothing happens...

Is there any impact on having a nuclear weapon on the AI's "mind"? Does it discourages the AI to attack you? Or is the nuke just another weapon for them?

It's just another weapon, although one with a pretty decent amount of power (for AI comparisons of power rating).