Immortal/Deity - Can't progress, despite a ton of research

dragonxxx · Jul 28, 2014

consentient said:
Thanks. Does this apply regardless of whether you want to win domination or cultural/scientific?

[EDIT: Could you expand on timings? e.g. What should you have done before you attempt a certain diplomatic venture?]

Nah, if you want to win by science/culture, you just pay Gengis to attack the others and play nice with him. Just don't make friends with the other dudes

Sometimes this is not possible tho, so you need to prepare for an early war. Gengis always gets in trouble with the other AI, so its quite easy to make him hated by everyone, as he tends to attack CSs. So unless he runs out of targets, you should have no problems

Nick31 · Jul 28, 2014

I've seen a couple of people on the Forums recently saying they struggle with maintaining science late in the game, or having late game AI aggression be an issue. Just as a suggestion, learn a good Artillery rush to take out a nearby target with a few nice cities and some wonders.

It's pretty manageable (provided you execute diplomacy, war bribing and otherwise) to have strong Tradition 4 or a good Liberty foundation, play peaceful, and then Oxford into Ideologies as well as bulbing into Artillery asap.

That turn 185-215 window (depending on how fast a start you manage) is often the time to cement gains and ensure an easy lategame. You can plan targets, plan happiness, plan larger empire... all those nice things.

If you're struggling on a higher difficulty, Immortal or otherwise, learning to have 6-7 Cannon and some infantry ready (Freedom Legions or otherwise), 1,000 in gold, and a scientist or two to bulb into Artillery will generally demolish an AI as they are slow to upgrade into Artillery. You can kill units like crazy and then march onto the cities you want.

beetle · Jul 28, 2014

Nick31 said:
I've seen a couple of people on the Forums recently saying they struggle with maintaining science late in the game, or having late game AI aggression be an issue. Just as a suggestion, learn a good Artillery rush to take out a nearby target with a few nice cities and some wonders.

For some of us, the game fails to be enjoyable if CV/DV/SV are really DV in disguise. I realize that at Deity this expectation might not be realistic.

beetle · Jul 28, 2014

Can one of the actual experts weigh in on these two points please?

beetle said:
This might be a big part of your problem, or I might be wrong, but I think you only get one free DoW. Or is it one free Civ DoW and one free CS DoW? If its one-and-only-one, then your second DoW is really crimping your diplomacy. You might not think so, and there may be very little indication, but it is. (Or I might be wrong, and you get to initiate two DoWs.)

consentient said:
One DoW on AI and one DoW on CS has no penalty that lasts beyond the classical era. I have tested this at least ten times. You can see what penalties you're receiving by hovering over the GUARDED/NEUTRAL heading on the diplo screen. If you steal the settler of the first AI civ you meet, subsequent AIs you meet won't even know about it most of the time.

The hover text can be misleading, especially for Civs with high deception flavor. I would like clarity on the one-free-dow rule of thumb. Can I DoW one (and only one) CS without repercussions (assuming another Civ has not promised to protect it) regardless of early settler stealing? Can I DoW one (and only one) AI civ after stealing a worker from a CS without the ridiculous warmonger diplo penalties?

consentient said:
once you've got a couple of settlers out, build 3 archers/CBs for every city with your capital while the new cities are building granaries and libraries

beetle said:
This practice is certainly handicapping you. Your army is 2-3 times bigger than it needs to be if all you are worried about is an early game DoW. (But then your screen shot shows the opposite situation, so I am confused.)

consentient said:
Thanks for the support and the advice but you're wrong.

I used to only build one or two CBs per city but would just get overrun by Wu or Askia or someone else that loves to spam their units in the medieval period. Even if I built on hills and didn't take too many casualties, having to be on a war footing would just slow me down building up my cities for CV etc.

Well, I am hardly the best player, but I can hold off a DoW averaging just one or two CBs per city (assuming roads, and not too much of a surprise). I have not tried it, but I dont think three CBs per city would prevent the DoW. If things go well, I dont suffer from being at war. Casualties and pillaging are minimal, then I slowly (way more slowly than I would like) move the war to the AI. Averaging three CBs per city would be much, much more costly than what you characterize as my war footing. So I think your way slows down building up for CV etc. But I am interested to read more opinion about this!

consentient said:
Oh, and btw, some people that make the videos are really fun to watch, at least for me. Their games may not always play out like mine, but Moriarte and Marbozir are enjoyable for me, especially in the early game. I'm probably also learning more than I realize from watching them. And I have to point out that I've yet to see either of them favor Tradition.

I really should give the videos a chance. Agreed, the very best players favor Liberty. That does not mean that Liberty is best for you or I. Neither Moriarte nor Marbozir would have the trouble with Tradition (at Emperor no less) that you report. You have to walk before your run. Bad habits from easy levels lead to problems at Immortal and Deity, but I have never heard of Tradition being characterized as a bad habit!

Please figure out what is going wrong with your Emperor Tradition games -- and report back. I think it will be very illuminating.

Uzael36 · Jul 28, 2014

I know that most all the guides I learned from, and from personal experience, that taking a worker or 2 from a Civ and taking several from a CS does not seem to have lasting consequences from most Civ's. There are some that may hold a mild grudge from this, but it seems to be quite manageable.

I tend to rely on my free warrior and early scouts until later. I'll usually build my first archers after my first expansion finishes its library in that city while my capital focuses on more important things, like the NC.

Tradition is favored for peaceful games. Even some favor it in domination, but the point being, domination minded players will likely be thinking about a large empire, rather than a tall, but few city empire. There are some wide peaceful strategies too, but they are more of the exception than the rule.

consentient · Jul 28, 2014

beetle said:
Well, I am hardly the best player, but I can hold off a DoW averaging just one or two CBs per city (assuming roads, and not too much of a surprise). I have not tried it, but I dont think three CBs per city would prevent the DoW. If things go well, I dont suffer from being at war. Casualties and pillaging are minimal, then I slowly (way more slowly than I would like) move the war to the AI. Averaging three CBs per city would be much, much more costly than what you characterize as my war footing. So I think your way slows down building up for CV etc. But I am interested to read more opinion about this!

Hey again Beetle

When you say 'hold off', what exactly do you mean? Successfully repel, right?

Have you seriously never been in a situation where you get a T75-T125 DoW from an absolutely enormous army by a deceptive player you've been paying to go bully other people, simply because the AI algorithm decided it's programming means it covets your lands? Some of these armies mean that I spend 30 turns fending them off, even WITH the increased army size I recommend. However, building more, and stationing several of them halfway between my city and theirs seems to SOMETIMES dissuading them. So I'd rather spend another 10-12 turns building CBs and pikes than spend twice or three times that fighting wars with casualties, repairing pillaging, and losing pop with a captured and recaptured city.

Obviously when we set out on our journeys to become better at civ we learned that we should hardly ever sustain casualties in our offensive wars, else we weren't ready for them, but the same is NOT true of defensive wars on Immortal. If they occur, I'm almost never ready for them. These days I like to be 1 or 2 for army size and to use the 'stun the AI' trick by DoWing THEM <T15 and taking the settler/worker.

Logically, this should make them MORE likely to DoW if the game made any sense, but then nothing about the game does, really, if you think about it. "Hmmm, perhaps there is someway of representing my thoughts by means of some kind of scribble. I should research this. I'll call it writing."

Please figure out what is going wrong with your Emperor Tradition games -- and report back. I think it will be very illuminating.

It's simple. I can't get enough benefit from them. When I try food caravans, I don't get the same growth the guides and videos claim. When I try the settle spam method, I lose turns that I could use to do other stuff, INCLUDING growing the capital. Even when I beeline ToA or HG and use workers to chop so I get them, my capital never outgrows the AI cities because of the handicap on Immortal.

Granted, I've still not won a CV on Immortal, but the best progress I made was with a dream start for Byzantium and liberty, building wide made a lot more gold, culture AND science than in any of my other 20+ attempts (I play Civ a LOT, so sue me!

)

Until I see a video that achieves a tradition-based CV in something that even vaguely resembles the kind of game conditions I experience, I'm sticking with my theory that tradition sucks.

The main two reasons I think this are:

a) with the possible exception of Landed Elite, none of the 5 tenets of Tradition are any good, and ALL 5 of Liberty are great.

b) In the Tradition LPs I've watched, at least one element I NEVER find in my games is present, such as MadDjinn as India being able to go more than 300 turns without receiving a DoW with almost no army. When I try this, even with attempts to diplo, I get backstabbed viciously. Granted, I may not be a very good player, but I'm only trying to implement the advice I'm reading, and I have to say, without meaning to cause offence to anyone, that the advice for liberty domination makes a lot more sense than Tradition CV.

Just so people realise I'm not arrogant, just frustrated, I'll say that one more time: I recognise that my failures COULD VERY WELL BE that I am not applying the model properly to my games, but well, at the moment, I'm just stumped as to how the top players are getting the results they are, since I can't get anything like them when trying VERY similar build orders and tech paths. :S

Nares · Jul 28, 2014

consentient said:
"Hmmm, perhaps there is someway of representing my thoughts by means of some kind of scribble. I should research this. I'll call it writing."

How is that strange? It's not like an alphabet was the first step.

Nick31 · Jul 28, 2014

Haha, but Tradition doesn't suck. There's an interesting thread a few months back where good players debated Liberty vs. Tradition, and it's a very good read.

If you can't manage to grow a core 4-city approach, I think it's worth your time. In that thread, most players argued Tradition, especially for raw science. Getting free aqueducts and empire-wide growth in the core 4 is a big party of it. I happen to think Liberty is very flexible, but it is harder to grow unless you're going to buy aqueducts and other growth enhancements. Big cities are what benefit most from Public Schools and Research Labs.

As for military, I can assure you that it's very doable to be bottom-half in military on Immortal for most of the game (I tend not to get top-half until Industrialization/Ideologies) and be fine. If you only want to be top-3 in military from an early state, you're sacrificing a lot of gold and hammers that could be getting your cities to grow. If you'd like to do that, fine, but it's a departure.

I'm glad you're having fun learning, though. :goodjob:

TheGrumpyBuddha · Jul 28, 2014

consentient, are you complaining that Tradition doesn't get you a CV on Deity, or that Tradition is just worse than Liberty overall?

If it's the former, yeah, I get it. I find peaceful CV on Deity without Polynesia to be nigh impossible (though I might be able to muscle through a Brazil one).

If it's the latter, yer a crazy man!

And stop comparing your city size to the AI city size. Not relevant.

(Also -- on Immortal, though, with Tradition you should be able to outpace the other Civs quite easily and get to Internet while they're mucking about in the Modern era. At least *some* of the time.)

dragonxxx · Jul 28, 2014

a) with the possible exception of Landed Elite, none of the 5 tenets of Tradition are any good, and ALL 5 of Liberty are great.

Тhats complete nonsense ....

1) Legalism gives you free monuments - thats a lot of saved early games hammers, that you use for stuff that actually grows
2) Monarchy gives you over 15 happiness and a lot of GPT , something you can't get with liberty, unless you have 15 cities, what is well, absurd.
3) Oligarchy saves your *** when you get dow'ed early, as its simply huge ...
4) Aristocracy makes you build NC faster + more happiness.
5) Landed Elite, what is actually maybe the worse of em all.

And that + 4 free aqueducts, that do not make you lose turns reasearching Engineering
+ 15% growth rate
and + 3 cpt right from the start ...

And what you get with liberty? A free settler, a free worker (that you get at the time you usually have enough workers, or you can just buy one ) and the only real good thing - the great person from the finisher ...

Yeah, sure ... Its better for early war but definitely not for a peaceful game.

beetle · Jul 28, 2014

I should confess that I am still on GnK not BNW. I hope not to miss the next sale! But from what I read, BNW makes things a little easier. That said, the CV and Diplo victories are much more complex. I also reload frequently (and without regrets, except for the longish delay).

consentient said:
When you say 'hold off', what exactly do you mean? Successfully repel, right?

Yes. Sometimes I lose a city, but usually not. Often I reload back to figure out how I missed the “tells” and move more CBs to that side of the map. Sometimes I need to go back further to have a few more units available. It is rare for me to quit the game because the early DoW was much too much, but that has happened too.

Have you seriously never been in a situation where you get a T75-T125 DoW from an absolutely enormous army by a deceptive player you've been paying to go bully other people, simply because the AI algorithm decided it's programming means it covets your lands?

I think that describes every game! But I guess it depends what you mean by “enormous”. Usually I see about 3x the numbers I have available. No doubt the AI has much more behind this first wave. The real problem is if a civ on the other side of me decides to dog pile. I still can’t handle that.

Some of these armies mean that I spend 30 turns fending them off, even WITH the increased army size I recommend.

Yeah, that is about how long it takes me to really turn the fight around too. The war goes on for much, much longer after that, because I enjoy the benefits...

However, building more, and stationing several of them halfway between my city and theirs seems to SOMETIMES dissuading them.

I have not tried that.

So I'd rather spend another 10-12 turns building CBs and pikes than spend twice or three times that fighting wars with casualties, repairing pillaging, and losing pop with a captured and recaptured city.

Like you, I build most my army in my cap. It would take me much longer than 10-12 turns to double my army size, so maybe my production sucks, but I am usually seeing 4 turns per unit. People complain about the pillaging cost of wars, but frankly the biggest downside I have noticed is not being able to work tiles that have enemy units on them. The actual pillaging is fairly light. I am very conservative at fighting. People talk about a 4:1 kill ratio, but I think I average closer to 10:1. That is probably not a good thing because it means I war too slow. If I loose more than one home city, I reload because it means the cost is too high. It may be that losing even one city puts a weak player like myself too far behind to win. The pop hit recovers pretty quick, but I hate losing buildings, especially the free ones from tradition!

Obviously when we set out on our journeys to become better at civ we learned that we should hardly ever sustain casualties in our offensive wars, else we weren't ready for them, but the same is NOT true of defensive wars on Immortal.

It is even more obvious that we should hardly ever sustain casualties in our defensive wars. Cities are OP. The first city in a surprise DoW might get over run, but only at a high cost. I think you need to be able to take it back within a handful of turns, certainly before it can shoot back at you. Then use your cities to wipe out the invaders. After the first couple of turns on a defensive war, you should expect zero casualties.

These days I like to be 1 or 2 for army size

I have never come close to that at Immortal. No doubt that is part of what I am doing wrong, but I think that means your army is crimping your non-dom games.

Until I see a video that achieves a tradition-based CV in something that even vaguely resembles the kind of game conditions I experience, I'm sticking with my theory that tradition sucks.

That theory requires that everyone on the board is a liar. It is more likely that you are doing a something wrong. Several of the Immortal Tradition games I have won, I replay from the start trying Liberty. Even with map knowledge, they never go as well. (OTOH, I always try at least 5-6 cities with Liberty, so maybe not a fair test.)

with the possible exception of Landed Elite, none of the 5 tenets of Tradition are any good, and ALL 5 of Liberty are great

Hmm. I feel almost the opposite! I like all the SP in Tradition, and a few of the Liberty ones seem quite weak.

In the Tradition LPs I've watched, at least one element I NEVER find in my games is present, such as MadDjinn as India being able to go more than 300 turns without receiving a DoW with almost no army. When I try this, even with attempts to diplo, I get backstabbed viciously. Granted, I may not be a very good player, but I'm only trying to implement the advice I'm reading, and I have to say, without meaning to cause offence to anyone, that the advice for liberty domination makes a lot more sense than Tradition CV.

Well, I stopped playing Pangea after the second game with a triple DoW, but I have not seen the MadDjinn video. I am still trying to master Immortal SV as I think that is good benchmark. Other victory types, including dom, are really beyond me. I concur that Liberty seems best for domination. But you really need to figure out why Tradition is not working for you at all.

Just so people realise I'm not arrogant, just frustrated, I'll say that one more time: I recognize that my failures COULD VERY WELL BE that I am not applying the model properly to my games, but well, at the moment, I'm just stumped as to how the top players are getting the results they are, since I can't get anything like them when trying VERY similar build orders and tech paths.

I don’t think you come across as arrogant. I too have experienced frustrations similar to what you describe. One blind spot I have is wanting turns to go quick. My experiments with micro-managing the tiles cities work have not gone well, so I gave that up. I don’t think I will have that luxury with Deity!

kb27787 · Jul 28, 2014

dragonxxx said:
Тhats complete nonsense ....

1) Legalism gives you free monuments - thats a lot of saved early games hammers, that you use for stuff that actually grows
2) Monarchy gives you over 15 happiness and a lot of GPT , something you can't get with liberty, unless you have 15 cities, what is well, absurd.
3) Oligarchy saves your *** when you get dow'ed early, as its simply huge ...
4) Aristocracy makes you build NC faster + more happiness.
5) Landed Elite, what is actually maybe the worse of em all.

And that + 4 free aqueducts, that do not make you lose turns reasearching Engineering
+ 15% growth rate
and + 3 cpt right from the start ...

And what you get with liberty? A free settler, a free worker (that you get at the time you usually have enough workers, or you can just buy one ) and the only real good thing - the great person from the finisher ...

Yeah, sure ... Its better for early war but definitely not for a peaceful game.

Strangely enough I feel landed elite is the best SP to get very early game (2 food is game breaking at around size 5) :lol:

monarchy is good in the mid-early game to late game. Oligarchy is quite useless tbh unless you get DoW'd... but chances are between getting pillaged, losing caravans, etc. it's best to avoid war in the first place even if it means shelling out something for a bribe.

Uzael36 · Jul 28, 2014

@beetle: G&K has a lot more aggressive AI than BNW. While there are some BNW civ's that are warmongers, most will not attack if you have some military showing. It is usually pretty easy to play a game without ever going to war, but sometimes you are next to a warmonger, and will need to prepare. MOST the time, you just need some military strength shown, and they don't ever attack until they finish everyone else off.

Getting a military CS ally is quite handy in a game where you have a warmonger neighbor. They can keep your army up and running without you spending hammers on building an army.

The key to war in BNW is usually a show of force, and not actually warring. That said, you may occasionally have to war, just be prepared, and use your units wisely. If prepared, you can fight off an army twice your size.

dragonxxx · Jul 29, 2014

kb27787 said:
Strangely enough I feel landed elite is the best SP to get very early game (2 food is game breaking at around size 5) monarchy is good in the mid-early game to late game. Oligarchy is quite useless tbh unless you get DoW'd... but chances are between getting pillaged, losing caravans, etc. it's best to avoid war in the first place even if it means shelling out something for a bribe.

Landed Eliite is great early game, but it quickly loses value, monarchy is nice at all times (early too, as it gives you the happiness you need to keep expanding). And oligarchy is useless most of the time, but in the times when you need it ...
And sometimes there can be no peace, u know

consentient · Jul 29, 2014

Nick31 said:
Haha, but Tradition doesn't suck. There's an interesting thread a few months back where good players debated Liberty vs. Tradition, and it's a very good read.

Can you link me please?

As for military, I can assure you that it's very doable to be bottom-half in military on Immortal for most of the game (I tend not to get top-half until Industrialization/Ideologies) and be fine. If you only want to be top-3 in military from an early state, you're sacrificing a lot of gold and hammers that could be getting your cities to grow. If you'd like to do that, fine, but it's a departure.

I hear what you're saying, but it doesn't seem to bear out that way in my games, that's all. When all is said is done, I can only go on what I'm seeing. Sometimes I wonder if I have some radically different patch from being on the Mac version or something.

Perhaps I should be more specific and try to break up some of my generalisations...

Basically, on a continents map I find my maps fall into one of 3 categories:

1. I have no neighbours even remotely close, being at the end of a thinner, more peninsula-like continent and the other(s) being at the other end with a lot of rough terrain between us. I don't play these games because in order to be competitive on Immortal I need to have my units get some XP and run trade caravans for science, plus TRY to do something about runaways on my continent, to stand a chance. A better player can surely use this free turtle scenario to leap forward to a science victory, but I'm not interested in that. CV and DV are both dependent on having a certain level of contact with the AI, and if your cargo ships and caravans can't reach the AI cities on your continent EVEN WITH harbors and serais.

2. I have one or two 'neighbourly' neighbours like Gandhi or Sejong, and allowing them to quietly tech away would give them too much of an advantage. Plus if I'm close and I don't go liberty, I always seem to lose the first choice of good city locations and have to make do with my 2nd city being on a spot with no new lux, mediocre food, missing out on pantheon bonuses etc.

3. I have one or more covetous lunatic AIs who make staying alive really hard work. I have found that I reach turn T150 in much better shape if I build 2/3 CBs and 1 pike per city and then try to take the war to them after I repel their attack. There is, UNDOUBTEDLY a hammer and gold cost to this, but as I keep saying, whenever I try the 1 CB per city approach I get floored before T150.

Hope that clears things up a bit. I think I'll take some screenshots of my latest game where I went tradition-piety with Poland and nabbed Glory of God. I'll work on that later.

I'm glad you're having fun learning, though.

Thanks, man

TheGrumpyBuddha said:
consentient, are you complaining that Tradition doesn't get you a CV on Deity, or that Tradition is just worse than Liberty overall?

...that I can't get a CV on anything above King, and that I seem nearer to achieving it when I go liberty and build 4 big cities and 2 or 3 'outposts' (usually 3 pop, no growth for things like faith wonders), than when I go 4 city tradition, regardless of which tradition guide I use to help me.

If it's the former, yeah, I get it. I find peaceful CV on Deity without Polynesia to be nigh impossible (though I might be able to muscle through a Brazil one).

I can't even get it on Emperor, man. All the CV videos I've watched HAVE been on Deity and as I've said many times before, I don't know how they were able to win.

If it's the latter, yer a crazy man!

I'm not the only person that favours liberty. In fact, I'm hearing more and more people 'confessing' that on Immortal and Deity, tech and military is what enables ALL victory conditions. As was said above, it feels less fun if you just happen to have the best army and use THAT to force your blue jeans and Shakira on people.

And stop comparing your city size to the AI city size. Not relevant.

How is it not relevant? Want a wonder to help your CV? Want to produce...um...anything? Want to out science your AIs? ALL are helped by having equal or bigger cities than them. It is possible, I'm just saying that I don't yet see the proof in MY pudding that tradition makes any difference by T150, really. I realise that this is because I may not be growing my cities correctly. I think I'll try to record a video of my own if something's not abundantly clear after posting the screenshots of my Poland game later today.

(Also -- on Immortal, though, with Tradition you should be able to outpace the other Civs quite easily and get to Internet while they're mucking about in the Modern era. At least *some* of the time.)

Even if I SHOULD, I have failed to thus far.

dragonxxx said:
And what you get with liberty? A free settler

Which enables you to found a 2nd or 3rd city in a spot you're otherwise not gonna get. Especially if you're playing as a Civ that needs the boost of a well-positioned 2nd city or are trying for a pantheon (which we all know is soooo important on Immortal and above), this is, IMHO, better than any other SP.

a free worker (that you get at the time you usually have enough workers, or you can just buy one )

I'll grant you that the worker is kinda surplus at this point, but don't forget the tile improvement speed increase, which when combined with Pyramids (which is the easiest wonder to get on Immortal) makes for game-changing dynamics.

and the only real good thing - the great person from the finisher ...

And you can tailor that person to take your game leaps and bounds ahead of where you'd be if you went tradition. Your cities might be a bit bigger, but you're still gonna have to wait for Astronomy to meet everyone else, rather than use and Admiral. You're still gonna have to wait for 300 faith to get a prophet, you can help yourself to a really quick NC with an engineer etc. The free great person is so good I expect them to patch it out in Civ 6.

Yeah, sure ... Its better for early war but definitely not for a peaceful game.

I hear what you're saying, but jury is still out for me.

beetle said:
I should confess that I am still on GnK not BNW.

Well, in which case, that kinda invalidates our whole exchange to this point!

I found G&K and BNW to be completely different games. What works on one will almost certainly not work on the other.

BNW makes things a little easier.

In some ways, yes. The AI is certainly less aggressive DoW-wise. But it's more aggressive in ways that can lead to runaway AIs. Despite the name, G&K AIs don't really know how to use religion. In BNW you can have some truly insane religious runaways, CS-stealing runaways (Siam, Alexander), etc.

BNW may make it easier to build, but it also makes the AI actually try to win with something approaching a sensible defensive VC.

I also reload frequently (and without regrets, except for the longish delay).

This also kinda makes our discussion a bit void, IMO. If you reload, you're at a huge advantage. The reason I prepare for medieval DoWs is because I DON'T KNOW when they're coming. If I get DoW'ed and then go back 20 turns and prepare, surely that's defeating the whole point of making the choices you make. Do you also reload when you get pipped to a wonder with 5 turns to go? So you don't waste the hammers?

No offence intended, but reloading kinda defeats the point for me. I'd rather just learn from the mistake and adapt accordingly.

The real problem is if a civ on the other side of me decides to dog pile. I still cant handle that.

Yeah, I'd really like to see a top Deity player showcase how to deal with a double whammy.

Like you, I build most my army in my cap. It would take me much longer than 10-12 turns to double my army size, so maybe my production sucks, but I am usually seeing 4 turns per unit.

I can usually get to 3-4 turns by the medieval, so with 3 cities, 1 CB per city, if I want to make it 2 CB per city it will take 9-12 turns. Plus I might rush-buy a couple of pikes.

People complain about the pillaging cost of wars, but frankly the biggest downside I have noticed is not being able to work tiles that have enemy units on them. The actual pillaging is fairly light. I am very conservative at fighting. People talk about a 4:1 kill ratio, but I think I average closer to 10:1. That is probably not a good thing because it means I war too slow. If I loose more than one home city, I reload because it means the cost is too high. It may be that losing even one city puts a weak player like myself too far behind to win. The pop hit recovers pretty quick, but I hate losing buildings, especially the free ones from tradition!

Whatever the dramas you face during war, the key is that your progress towards a CV is being slowed all the time you are in that war.

I should also say at this point that a CV in BNW is about 20x harder than a CV on G&K. It's not about filling SP trees but about PRODUCING a ton of stuff to entice the other civs to come on holiday. I'm sure you know that, but until you actually attempt it yourself, you won't know for sure how difficult a CV on Immortal and above in BNW is. It's REALLY hard. That's why I'm not satisfied or impressed with my DV with Attila. It was 100x easier.

That theory requires that everyone on the board is a liar. It is more likely that you are doing a something wrong. Several of the Immortal Tradition games I have won, I replay from the start trying Liberty. Even with map knowledge, they never go as well. (OTOH, I always try at least 5-6 cities with Liberty, so maybe not a fair test.)

Well, now. A lot of the tradition openers for G&K aren't possible on BNW, so make sure you're comparing like with like. Liberty is DEFINITELY a lot better on BNW than it was on G&K.

I am still trying to master Immortal SV as I think that is good benchmark.

Even SV is more difficult on BNW, btw. Because the AIs actually GO FOR IT.

One blind spot I have is wanting turns to go quick. My experiments with micro-managing the tiles cities work have not gone well, so I gave that up. I dont think I will have that luxury with Deity!

Micro-management of almost every part of the game is a necessary evil on Immortal and above on BNW. If your sub-optimal play costs you say 20 or 30 turns during the course of the game, you can lose because of it.

consentient · Jul 29, 2014

OK here are the screenshots of my latest game. As you can see, I didn't have that much room to expand, since Gaja was to my West and Wu directly to the south. I went tradition, made two settlers when I was pop 5, and tried my hardest to grow peacefully and use diplo to make Wu and Attila and Gaja fight. Polynesia is in danger of becoming a runaway, and my biggest regret is not having settled a 4th, coastal city, earlier. Lodz is making one as we speak, and then I'll plonk it down on the coast East of Krakow, unless someone has a better suggestion for location. Then I make a caravel and go find out who I'm up against. I'm trying to play on continents because it's a more regular game, I find. Pangaea just becomes an all-out war I can't help but be embroiled in. I played once on Lakes as Aztecs and found that I had to bail as DV because CV was too hard.

Anyway, I'm getting distracted.

I'd appreciate any input on what is shown in the screenshots.

P.S> The area was to begin with almost totally covered in forest, except the desert tiles, and chopping it all down was how I got Petra and MoD, I'd imagine. Though I often find with tradition CV attempts that I have nothing better to build at certain points in time than trying to build wonders, anyway.

Uzael36 · Jul 29, 2014

consentient said:
OK here are the screenshots of my latest game. As you can see, I didn't have that much room to expand, since Gaja was to my West and Wu directly to the south. I went tradition, made two settlers when I was pop 5, and tried my hardest to grow peacefully and use diplo to make Wu and Attila and Gaja fight. Polynesia is in danger of becoming a runaway, and my biggest regret is not having settled a 4th, coastal city, earlier. Lodz is making one as we speak, and then I'll plonk it down on the coast East of Krakow, unless someone has a better suggestion for location. Then I make a caravel and go find out who I'm up against. I'm trying to play on continents because it's a more regular game, I find. Pangaea just becomes an all-out war I can't help but be embroiled in. I played once on Lakes as Aztecs and found that I had to bail as DV because CV was too hard.

Anyway, I'm getting distracted.

I'd appreciate any input on what is shown in the screenshots.

P.S> The area was to begin with almost totally covered in forest, except the desert tiles, and chopping it all down was how I got Petra and MoD, I'd imagine. Though I often find with tradition CV attempts that I have nothing better to build at certain points in time than trying to build wonders, anyway.

It seems to me, you may be better off if you stopped focusing on the AI so much. There are no runaways in your game. There are pretty much NO runaways in BNW. The science penalty to large empires makes it so that large empires, that used to allow massive tech leads by the civ, are no longer a threat for science victories.

You may be 1 tech behind, but you are producing more science than anyone, which means you will pass them up before long. However, you have made a number of mistakes:
1) Your cities are tiny for turn 164. Your capital should be about 10 population more and your satellites should be 5 pop bigger if not more. You are working a lot of unimproved tiles.
2) You need workers to improve your tiles. You only have 2, you should have 4+.
3) You need to put farms on as many of those river tiles as you can. You are currently working several unimproved tiles.
4) Stop plotting against your neighbors. They are not the problem. Focus on what you can do to improve, and not so much on what is making them beat you. You are struggling because at turn 164 you have a fraction of the science per turn that top players have.

Now, you can't completely ignore your neighbors if they show aggression (You have plenty of defense), but you are so worried about a "runaway" that you simply have let yourself fall WAY behind what you should be at.

dragonxxx · Jul 29, 2014

first settler should be made at 4 pop. there is no reason to wait for 5 if you want to get the good land

beetle · Jul 29, 2014

consentient said:
In fact, I'm hearing more and more people 'confessing' that on Immortal and Deity, tech and military is what enables ALL victory conditions. As was said above, it feels less fun if you just happen to have the best army and use THAT to force your blue jeans and Shakira on people.

I concur, CV claims on Immortal/Deity look like aborted Dom victories to me. I don’t see the point.

Which enables you to found a 2nd or 3rd city in a spot you're otherwise not gonna get. Especially if you're playing as a Civ that needs the boost of a well-positioned 2nd city or are trying for a pantheon (which we all know is soooo important on Immortal and above), this is, IMHO, better than any other SP.

Don’t forget the production boost for hard building settlers. It is a great SP. Liberty cities come out fast, but borders and pop are much, much too slow.

You still need to figure out why you can’t make Tradition work at Emperor. It is quite predictable that you will not be successful at Immortal/Deity with Liberty until then.

And you can tailor that person to take your game leaps and bounds ahead of where you'd be if you went tradition. Your cities might be a bit bigger, but you're still gonna have to wait for Astronomy to meet everyone else, rather than use and Admiral. You're still gonna have to wait for 300 faith to get a prophet, you can help yourself to a really quick NC with an engineer etc. The free great person is so good I expect them to patch it out in Civ 6.

Agree, the Liberty GP is fantastic. I cannot imagine using it for anything other than a World Wonder though.

Well, in which case, that kinda invalidates our whole exchange to this point!

Not at all, as I have moderated my comments to reflect my (admittedly second hand) understanding of BNW. In particular, I have limited my comments about diplo and cultural victories.

I found G&K and BNW to be completely different games. What works on one will almost certainly not work on the other.

Those are kind of silly assertions. They more alike than different. Sure, the late game is much different, but we have been mostly talking about early game stuff.

In some ways, yes. The AI is certainly less aggressive DoW-wise.

That is my understanding, which makes curious about the early game problems you are experiencing. I am on a Mac too, but I can’t really believe that is the difference!

But it's more aggressive in ways that can lead to runaway AIs.

My main obstacle is runaway AIs on far-away continents. I may have to go back to Pangaea.

Despite the name, G&K AIs don't really know how to use religion. In BNW you can have some truly insane religious runaways, CS-stealing runaways (Siam, Alexander), etc.

Citation please? Sure they buffed religion, and maybe founding is even harder, but I have never heard before that the AIs “know how to use religion”. Religious and CS-stealing runaways are common in my games. I have had to ban Alex. Siam seems okay.

This also kinda makes our discussion a bit void, IMO. If you reload, you're at a huge advantage. The reason I prepare for medieval DoWs is because I DON'T KNOW when they're coming. If I get DoW'ed and then go back 20 turns and prepare, surely that's defeating the whole point of making the choices you make.

How can you learn from mistakes without reloading? Playing to defeat after being crippled is not educational, it is not virtuous in SP either. What you are trying to figure out is how to avoid and minimize mistakes. Playing through serious errors teaches you very, very little. You are handicapping yourself every game by having an idle army. You cannot afford the opportunity cost. You need to go back 20 turns, not to change any of your builds, but to figure out how you missed the clues that the DoW was coming. Of course, part of that might require checking trade offers. I don’t have that kind of patience for every turn for every civ, but once a know I can expect a DoW in a few turns, I will try it with the civ in question. Pretty much from this experiment alone, I have convinced myself that reloading saves time, not that it necessarily provides new information. There are other tells. Your having units as satellites sounds good, and I think I should build extra scouts for that.

Do you also reload when you get pipped to a wonder with 5 turns to go? So you don't waste the hammers?

Prolly not, but I will if I get beaten by 1 turn. Again, my game play is not strong enough that I can throw away 15+ turns of city production and still expect to win. If I had an irrational belief that reloading==cheating then I would quit and start a new game at that point. Lesson learned. Chalk the game up mentally as a loss, and go back 15 turns and see what else the current game has to teach me.

No offence intended, but reloading kinda defeats the point for me. I'd rather just learn from the mistake and adapt accordingly.

It depends how much the mistake has set you back. Your reluctance to reload ever is probably handicapping your ability to learn. My goal is get better, and reload less, and that is happening.

I can usually get to 3-4 turns by the medieval, so with 3 cities, 1 CB per city, if I want to make it 2 CB per city it will take 9-12 turns. Plus I might rush-buy a couple of pikes.

Okay, so we are about even there. I have also been experimenting lately with Holy Warriors and friendship with military CS. I had turned my nose up at both, but they really help.

Whatever the dramas you face during war, the key is that your progress towards a CV is being slowed all the time you are in that war.

I am not following this assertion. War is what I am doing with units, not more units. Since my army is sparse but sufficient; war is not slowing my building production, except for the occasional walls or castle. I am not picking SP for war either. Also early culture game is mostly only about monuments/amphitheater and setting up religion, so again I don’t see the connection.

I should also say at this point that a CV in BNW is about 20x harder than a CV on G&K. It's not about filling SP trees but about PRODUCING a ton of stuff to entice the other civs to come on holiday. I'm sure you know that, but until you actually attempt it yourself, you won't know for sure how difficult a CV on Immortal and above in BNW is. It's REALLY hard.

Understood. And as you have observed, CV at Immortal really seem to be aborted Dom victories. Why are you not trying to master SV first?

That's why I'm not satisfied or impressed with my DV with Attila. It was 100x easier.

It was one game. Can you reliably replicate that success? If so, what about replicating the strategy you followed with a different civ? How about Tilly with an ugly looking start? The UUs help quite a bit, but player skill matters more than dirt, and both matter more than civ. Or were you following Crogmagnus BC Attila Deity Domination script?

Liberty is DEFINITELY a lot better on BNW than it was on G&K.

That still does not explain your inability to thrive using Tradition at Emperor.

Even SV is more difficult on BNW, btw. Because the AIs actually GO FOR IT.

And still, losing to a SV is how my games turn out as often as not!

Micro-management of almost every part of the game is a necessary evil on Immortal and above on BNW.

I am stubbornly trying to convince myself otherwise (at least for Immortal). (Maybe sort of like how you are stubbornly trying to convince yourself that Tradition sucks?)

If your sub-optimal play costs you say 20 or 30 turns during the course of the game, you can lose because of it.

Hmm. The games I loose are mostly within 20 turns. I might really have to micro!

consentient · Jul 29, 2014

Uzael36 said:
It seems to me, you may be better off if you stopped focusing on the AI so much.

Thanks, but when I only focus on what I'm doing I get wiped out.

There are no runaways in your game.

No, not yet. But I know by T200 my tech will be behind again. I asked a question about this on the forum and was told that the AI is using spies and RAs to stretch out the lead again. Clearly the earlier I can get into renaissance/rationalism the better, but there's nothing I can do if the AI decides not to like me due to CS competition or something petty, and so I have no one to RA with.

There are pretty much NO runaways in BNW.

I'm sorry but this is just sheer hyperbole. I played a continents game a few weeks back as the Shoshone, played defensive, kept growing, was out in front of divs on my continent. Chose GA as free great person, went to the other continent and Venice had tech'ed a full era ahead of me before I could get there. And that was an education 105 kinda game.

The science penalty to large empires makes it so that large empires, that used to allow massive tech leads by the civ, are no longer a threat for science victories.

Granted, but it's still very common in a lot of people's games for one AI civ to runaway and AT THE LEAST make it very difficult/nigh on impossible to sell them blue jeans and pop music.

You may be 1 tech behind, but you are producing more science than anyone, which means you will pass them up before long.

I don't share your optimism because in my last X games, the same thing has happened, with even much better city size, and then one (or both) of two things happen.

A: One or more AI civs find 'some way' to close the gap and then stretch out again. Especially if I can't make RAs as per above.

B: Someone who has quietly been building an army for 100 turns comes and slows my progress by putting me on a war footing that I'm not able to repel quickly.

1) Your cities are tiny for turn 164. Your capital should be about 10 population more and your satellites should be 5 pop bigger if not more. You are working a lot of unimproved tiles.
2) You need workers to improve your tiles. You only have 2, you should have 4+.
3) You need to put farms on as many of those river tiles as you can. You are currently working several unimproved tiles.

Now, you can't completely ignore your neighbors if they show aggression (You have plenty of defense), but you are so worried about a "runaway" that you simply have let yourself fall WAY behind what you should be at.

Thanks for the tips on tile improvement. I'll look into that some more in future, build more workers, etc.

But believe me, that is not 'plenty of defence' if Wu decides to attack me, which she will.

Immortal/Deity - Can't progress, despite a ton of research

King

Prince

Deity

Deity

Prince

Domination!

Emperor

Prince

King

King

Deity

Deity

Prince

King

Domination!

Domination!

Prince

King

Deity

Domination!

Similar threads