Beyond warmongering

walletta

King
Joined
Jun 21, 2008
Messages
685
Location
Surrey, England
I am stuck as an emperor level warmonger. I have tried to play commercial games, seafaring games, industrial games and cultural ones but nothing seems to work so well as playing the Romans, finding some iron and sword-rushing my way to dominance with, IMO, the best UU in the game. Which, don't get me wrong, is a lot of fun, but it would be nice to learn other ways of playing too. I have incorporated pre-building (I have some timing issues there) and the settler factory into my play but could use some advice from the masters here.
 
I'm certainly not a 'master' (far from it!) - but I'm also looking for advice on Emperor level and was thinking about starting a Succession Game at Emperor level to get some advice from the old sages of the forums. I had provisionally suggested aiming for a Space Race victory, too, so that might fit nicely with your question.

If you're interested, feel free to sign up here: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=527007!


Sent from my mobile
 
Participating in or even just reading succession games, GOTM/COTM turnlogs, and various entries from Stories and Tales is a great way to learn new ways of doing things.

Occasionally someone will post a save game of theirs and ask how to do something or where to go from there and some of us go overboard in helpful hints and have on occasion played the game to see how we would alter it. For some reason I find that fun.
 
I am at a playing level between Emperor and Demigod, and there is a huge difference between the two. At Emperor most of the excitement is in the early game but by the Industrial Age I am well ahead and it tends to get a bit boring after that. On the other hand Demigod is a nail-biting fight for the whole game, which often ends in a loss.

If I had one single piece of advice it would be to do with city placement. In my latest game I spent a lot of time designing my dot map before building a second city, making sure each of my core cities would have exactly 12 productive tiles available to it. In other words when they reach maximum size there should be no single tile left unworked (I won't be building Hospitals). Others may pack those cities in even tighter.
 
@ walletta: A most interesting comment. I'd also been playing as Romans for over a decade, except that I found the Legionary too slow, too underpowered--especially against Hoplites and Numidian Mercs--to be a consistent warmonger. So I'd usually fight just enough to gain sufficient territory before settling back to win the Space Race as a (boringly?) peaceful Democrat. Had a couple domination wins under Republic but that was it. Ironic, no?

Lately though I've been playing Civs randomly in a so-far vain attempt to gain the exalted heights of Demigod. I've found the Immortal to be superior 'cuz of its increased attack: Basically it's a Medieval Infantry buttwhomper in Ancient Times. And if an experienced player like Ision rates the Mounted Warrior even higher due to its mobility, that begs the question: How in heck did you win consistent dominations on Emperor with a "second tier" (according to him and Arathorn) UU?

@dalgo: I second your observation concerning the differences 'twixt Emperor and Demigod. What especially flummoxes me is not so much the extra 10% AI discount, but that extra settler it starts out with. Totally unfair!

Thanks for the tip about city placement and tile usage. In my current game as Persians Persepolis is down to pop 6 after war weariness, and other cities are poaching its tiles. Gotta rectify that tout de suite.

Cheers and happy gaming everybody :).
 
Lately though I've been playing Civs randomly in a so-far vain attempt to gain the exalted heights of Demigod. I've found the Immortal to be superior 'cuz of its increased attack: Basically it's a Medieval Infantry buttwhomper in Ancient Times. And if an experienced player like Ision rates the Mounted Warrior even higher due to its mobility, that begs the question: How in heck did you win consistent dominations on Emperor with a "second tier" (according to him and Arathorn) UU?

In my experience, the value of a certain UU also depends on difficulty level and map characteristics. For example:
The Roman Legion is a Swordsman with +1 defense. If the AI never attacks you, the extra defense doesn't give you any benefit, so the Legion is no better than an ordinary Swordsman. But if you are up against heavy counter-attacks from the AI, the extra defense is invaluable! That means: on lower difficulty levels, where the AI usually does not have the resources for dangerous counter attacks, the Roman Legion is a lousy UU. After the first initial skirmish, the AI usually has shot its wad and all that remains is to march through their remaining cities as fast as possible. The Mounted Warrior can get this task done twice as fast as the slow Legions (especially if the AI didn't even manage to build a halfway decent road-network in its territory...) and the -2 defense compared to the Legion doesn't matter, because the MW are never attacked anyway. But they have a higher survival rate when attacking Spearmen because of the automatic retreat when losing.
On Demigod or higher, on the other hand, the Legion is great, because you would risk very high losses when sending an unprotected MW stack into the territory of a well-developed AI... So without a unit like the Legion you would have to employ "combined arms" techniques, which needs much more shields, because you need different units for attacking and for defending.

(Of course, with certain map characteristics, a Mounted Warrior stack can be as deadly on Deity as it is on Warlord, for example:
a) If the AI does not have horses, it may be possible to lead your MW stack in such a way, that it always "evades" the counter-attacks of the slow-moving enemy units. For this it is good, if there is a neutral third party, which has a RoP with you but not with the enemy: you just gift captured towns to that third party, your own units can quickly move through that territory, while your enemy's units get stuck: they lose one turn to move next to your town, then you gift it to the third party and then the enemy units lose another turn for getting out of the neutral territory again... :crazyeye: So by the time the enemy stack is back to where it came from, your MW stack can already be 12 tiles away...
b) If you can advance in the cover of mountains or hills, 2-3 Spearmen will be enough as protection for the MWs.)

There is, however, one other reason, why I prefer the Mounted Warrior even on Demigod - Sid: it can be upgraded all the way to Cavalry! On high difficulty levels you cannot expect to win the game already in the ancient age, especially on continents: the far away AIs will have developed Musketmen or even Riflemen by the time you reach them. So you will need Cavalry anyway for a save victory. If your first wave started out with Roman Legions, you will now have to produce a new army from scratch and march it from your core all the way to the current front, which may cost 10 turns or so. I remember one Deity COTM where we played the Iroquois, and where I was able to keep rolling from start to end: I started my attack on the nearby neighbors with MWs and kept researching towards Military Tradition. By the time I reached the "second ring neighbors", they had Pikemen, but I was able to trade Invention for Chivalry (or something like that), just upgraded my MWs to Knights directly on the front and kept going. By the time I reached the far away nations, they had musketmen, but I had finished Military Tradition and just upgraded my army to Cavalry, again directly at the current front line, and next turn I was able to press on and reach Domination.

In my opinion this makes the Mounted Warrior the best UU there is.
 
Yeah, the Legionary can be very effective if you use it right. Maybe I'm so "down" on the fellers these days 'cuz a promising attack against the Aztecs got screwed up and had to be blamed on somebody else. What happened was, after an initial assault that captured (and held) their biggest visible city I headed for a nearby town that had been crimping my own border settlement nurturing a luxury. Had maybe half a dozen Legionaries and an equal number of Cats.

A bunch of Swords show up. So what does the habitually error-prone commander do? Instead of beating off the counterattack he assaults the fortified Spears in town! The Cats hardly make a dent and the Romeboys are repulsed. On the AI turn my stack is annihilated and the lux town falls shortly thereafter.

If ONLY I'd concentrated on the unfortified reinforcements first, then waited for backup to take out the Spears. Up until then the Legionaries and Cats had been coordinating beautifully; most attacks against them suffered hits before an arrow was loosed or a blade was thrust. Took hardly any losses before the cockup. What a shame to throw away a golden opportunity like that!

Your observations regarding the Mounted Warrior are well taken. There are plenty of experienced players who agree with you, judging from the forums (fora?). Had some nodding acquaintance with it meself during an uncharacteristic go with Iroquois on Emperor some time back. IIRC got a fairly easy Space Race win after beating up anybody within range, then sitting back to build infrastructure and crank up research. But the siren call of the sturdy Legionary lured me back before I could make the MW a habit. Live and learn, eh wot?
 
Sorry to have started and then abandoned this thread. I am inexplicably useless at navigating this forum despite the fact I post elsewhere on forums that work the same way! I only just discovered the subscribed threads option for example. Although, since posting here, I have (sort of) won a demigod game it was still a domination victory and couldn't have been anything else given the state of affairs.

Btw. Jivilov I by no means win all my Roman emperor-level games but if I play the Romans and discover iron quickly enough then I expect to win, not with MM (which I only learned about recently) but just plain old brute force and early land-grabbing. The legionary remains useful for such a long time. It may or may not be better than the MW on the higher levels (how the heck would I know?) as Lanzelot says but it has to be vastly superior to most of the ancient UUs. The Mayan javelin chucker, for instance, is just an archer with 2 defensive points and the admittedly useful ability to capture and enslave opponents, but it costs 30 shields to make and triggers an early GA if you use it when it is actually superior to the neighbours. If you wait, then it proves to be obsolete. And like Lanzelot says, the legionary is strong both in attack and defence.

Anyhoo, I remain no further forward in the commerce or cultural depts. I have won space races but mostly when I could equally well have won by domination. I have also won at least one diplomatic game but I was so powerful that I could afford to bribe everyone to vote for me. Again, I could have won by domination but found a short cut.

That's not really what I'm after. There was an extraordinary thread here about a Deity game where the guy won a cultural victory with only one city. Only one city! How the heck is that possible? I am looking for elegance, if not of that order, anyway in that direction.
 
Romans are poor

Militaristic and Commercial just have no real synergy

They're slow to expand, you pay full price on most buildings, no easy culture, terrible at science

Yeah you can go domination if you get Iron, but if you don't?

Literally handicapping yourself

They're even worse when the AI plays them - the AI plays all the Civilisations badly - never seen Romans do well, ever

They've got the name going for them, that's about it

I'd take them over the Hittites, maybe over the Zulu too, that's pretty much it
 
This sounds fairly obvious, but if I'm going for a Religious victory, or a Space Race victory, I will go for a Religious or Scientific civilisation

Combine them both, or pair either with Agricutural

Should make life a little easier for yourself

Mind you, my last game was a Diplomatic win with Carthage, so swings and roundabouts
 
@ walletta: Yeah I used to attack early with the Romans too. Except after beating up on one or two civs I'd sit back and concentrate on research for Space Race. Trouble is (as you said) you get a premature GA, so better to wait (like Lanzelot), build your settler/worker pumps, develop your core, slingshot to Republic, and only then crank out military and kick hindquarters. His "Asterix" TDG was a real eye-opener for MM, no?

@RS8 Your views on the Romans are echoed by other experienced players (including Izion). However the low-cost barracks and courthouses (and marketplaces/banks?) can be helpful. But yeah, they're not as good as religious, scientific or agri civs.

Btw what do you mean by a "Religious" victory? Meant to say "cultural"?

Speaking of UUs, how about the Numidian Mercenary? My C3C manual says it's 2.2.1 but my in-game Civilopedia says 2.3.1. Awhile back I had a stack of Legionaries going against a Carthaginian town and my guys kept getting flustered by those Mercs, who defended like Greek Hoplites. So what are the actual stats on the Merc? Thanks.
 
@ walletta: Yeah I used to attack early with the Romans too. Except after beating up on one or two civs I'd sit back and concentrate on research for Space Race. Trouble is (as you said) you get a premature GA, so better to wait (like Lanzelot), build your settler/worker pumps, develop your core, slingshot to Republic, and only then crank out military and kick hindquarters. His "Asterix" TDG was a real eye-opener for MM, no?

@RS8 Your views on the Romans are echoed by other experienced players (including Izion). However the low-cost barracks and courthouses (and marketplaces/banks?) can be helpful. But yeah, they're not as good as religious, scientific or agri civs.

Btw what do you mean by a "Religious" victory? Meant to say "cultural"?

Speaking of UUs, how about the Numidian Mercenary? My C3C manual says it's 2.2.1 but my in-game Civilopedia says 2.3.1. Awhile back I had a stack of Legionaries going against a Carthaginian town and my guys kept getting flustered by those Mercs, who defended like Greek Hoplites. So what are the actual stats on the Merc? Thanks.

I bet they are 2.3.1 because they are a pain in the butt to knock off. In my one and only 'win' at demigod, secured after many false starts, I ended up resorting to hitting them with catapults which either let's you bump them off with a horse or induces them to turn around and go back. They seem not to like wandering about with less than the maximum hit-points. Mathematics is (are?) accordingly useful for that as well as the Statue of Zeus (man I would like to combine that with Maya power!)
 
Romans are poor

Militaristic and Commercial just have no real synergy

They're slow to expand, you pay full price on most buildings, no easy culture, terrible at science

Yeah you can go domination if you get Iron, but if you don't?

Literally handicapping yourself

They're even worse when the AI plays them - the AI plays all the Civilisations badly - never seen Romans do well, ever

They've got the name going for them, that's about it

I'd take them over the Hittites, maybe over the Zulu too, that's pretty much it

What Civ would you choose if going for, say, a cultural win? And why?
 
@ walletta: Yeah I used to attack early with the Romans too. Except after beating up on one or two civs I'd sit back and concentrate on research for Space Race. Trouble is (as you said) you get a premature GA, so better to wait (like Lanzelot), build your settler/worker pumps, develop your core, slingshot to Republic, and only then crank out military and kick hindquarters. His "Asterix" TDG was a real eye-opener for MM, no?

@RS8 Your views on the Romans are echoed by other experienced players (including Izion). However the low-cost barracks and courthouses (and marketplaces/banks?) can be helpful. But yeah, they're not as good as religious, scientific or agri civs.

Btw what do you mean by a "Religious" victory? Meant to say "cultural"?

Speaking of UUs, how about the Numidian Mercenary? My C3C manual says it's 2.2.1 but my in-game Civilopedia says 2.3.1. Awhile back I had a stack of Legionaries going against a Carthaginian town and my guys kept getting flustered by those Mercs, who defended like Greek Hoplites. So what are the actual stats on the Merc? Thanks.

Yeah I meant Cultural victory

Cheap barracks are only handy if you're planning to go to war right from the start

No civilisation gets cheap Courthouses, Marketplaces, Banks etc

Sun Tzus solves your problems, and if it doesn't, by the the time you're out of the Ancient Age, you'll have built Barracks in all the towns that need them

Cheap Harbours are ok, but they're more a seafaring thing

Probably added in to throw Militaristic a bone - it's a fairly awful trait

Carthage's mercs do defend like Hoplites and Pikemen - 3 defense - they're an excellent defender and cheap as compared to their upgrade, Musketmen

However....the reality is that you should be warring on your opponent's turf, not yours

I.e your cities or defenders (if you have any) should not be taking any attacks

That being said, they (and Pikemen etc) are perfect for defending artillery stacks until Riflemen come along

I bet they are 2.3.1 because they are a pain in the butt to knock off. In my one and only 'win' at demigod, secured after many false starts, I ended up resorting to hitting them with catapults which either let's you bump them off with a horse or induces them to turn around and go back. They seem not to like wandering about with less than the maximum hit-points. Mathematics is (are?) accordingly useful for that as well as the Statue of Zeus (man I would like to combine that with Maya power!)

If you take a hit point off an AI, it will retreat the unit all the way back home for healing

Catapults will take down defenders, but you will need a lot due to the miss chance

And at that stage of the game...that's a lot of resources, which is going away from your science and your money

I wouldn't bother attacking Cartage unless I had odds of 10 units to 1, or had no other choice - stuck on island etc


What Civ would you choose if going for, say, a cultural win? And why?

20k - Byzantines

100k - Babylon, Celts, Sumeria

100k is tedious though, really tedious. You'll probably win at something else out of boredom

20k is at least fun, can be challenge with a civilisation not 'as good', and hey, who doesn't like seeing that wonder screen flash up?

Except in a 20k you have an excuse for it
 
I am stuck as an emperor level warmonger. I have tried to play commercial games, seafaring games, industrial games and cultural ones but nothing seems to work so well as playing the Romans, finding some iron and sword-rushing my way to dominance with, IMO, the best UU in the game. Which, don't get me wrong, is a lot of fun, but it would be nice to learn other ways of playing too.

Anyhoo, I remain no further forward in the commerce or cultural depts. I have won space races but mostly when I could equally well have won by domination. I have also won at least one diplomatic game but I was so powerful that I could afford to bribe everyone to vote for me. Again, I could have won by domination but found a short cut.

Unfortunately, expanding (which means military on higher levels because you're probably not gonna get any cultural flips...) seems to be the only way to get more powerful. You can't outresearch the AI, they'll trade to keep up with you. You can't build more city improvements than them, and even if you could, what would the challenge be, building them in the correct order? You can't do much with diplomacy, the AI is gonna forget your kindness in 20 turns and declare war on you...

When it's time to win by domination or space race, or when the time runs out, it's all about having the largest empire. Treasury won't help you because space parts can't be rushed (how stupid is that)...

Outsmarting the AI by making good decisions is what a strategy game is about, and you can't do that with culture, diplomacy or science, those parts of the game are too simplified. Expect for being able to make some good trading, Civilization is a war game.
 
Yeah I meant Cultural victory

Cheap barracks are only handy if you're planning to go to war right from the start

No civilisation gets cheap Courthouses, Marketplaces, Banks etc

Sun Tzus solves your problems, and if it doesn't, by the the time you're out of the Ancient Age, you'll have built Barracks in all the towns that need them

Cheap Harbours are ok, but they're more a seafaring thing

Probably added in to throw Militaristic a bone - it's a fairly awful trait

Carthage's mercs do defend like Hoplites and Pikemen - 3 defense - they're an excellent defender and cheap as compared to their upgrade, Musketmen

However....the reality is that you should be warring on your opponent's turf, not yours

I.e your cities or defenders (if you have any) should not be taking any attacks

That being said, they (and Pikemen etc) are perfect for defending artillery stacks until Riflemen come along



If you take a hit point off an AI, it will retreat the unit all the way back home for healing

Catapults will take down defenders, but you will need a lot due to the miss chance

And at that stage of the game...that's a lot of resources, which is going away from your science and your money

I wouldn't bother attacking Cartage unless I had odds of 10 units to 1, or had no other choice - stuck on island etc




20k - Byzantines

100k - Babylon, Celts, Sumeria

100k is tedious though, really tedious. You'll probably win at something else out of boredom

20k is at least fun, can be challenge with a civilisation not 'as good', and hey, who doesn't like seeing that wonder screen flash up?

Except in a 20k you have an excuse for it

Interesting, thanks.
 
Unfortunately, expanding (which means military on higher levels because you're probably not gonna get any cultural flips...) seems to be the only way to get more powerful. You can't outresearch the AI, they'll trade to keep up with you. You can't build more city improvements than them, and even if you could, what would the challenge be, building them in the correct order? You can't do much with diplomacy, the AI is gonna forget your kindness in 20 turns and declare war on you...

When it's time to win by domination or space race, or when the time runs out, it's all about having the largest empire. Treasury won't help you because space parts can't be rushed (how stupid is that)...

Outsmarting the AI by making good decisions is what a strategy game is about, and you can't do that with culture, diplomacy or science, those parts of the game are too simplified. Expect for being able to make some good trading, Civilization is a war game.

Hmm, better reconcile myself to it then.
 
Catapults will take down defenders, but you will need a lot due to the miss chance

And at that stage of the game...that's a lot of resources, which is going away from your science and your money

Here's some calculation because I like them :)

With artillery units in the stack you can only move at 1 tile/turn in enemy territory, so you'll get about 1 captured city every 5 turn, right? With an army defending the stack you'll lose no shields from killed melee defenders, and with 15 artillery softening the city defense you'll lose practically no melee attackers. The only cost is the upkeep for the artillery units: 15 * 2 = 30 gpt in republic, so 30 * 5 = 150 gold per captured city (only 75 gold in monarchy).

With no artillery and only swordmen, against 2 fortified spearmen, you'll probably lose 1.5 (?) of them per captured city = 45 shields = 225 gold per captured city.

With fast cavalry and no artillery slowing them down, you can capture cities at three times the speed, but you'll lose much more shields than swordmen when they die: 90 * 1.5 = 135 shields = 540 gold per captured city.

This doesn't count the one-time cost of the artillery. If you're only gonna capture a few cities, building artillery may not be worth it, but if you're gonna capture as many cities as possible they can save some cash.
 
I don't think these calculations are right?! First of all, why are 45 shields = 225 gold? If I count 1s as 4g (which is the price for rushing), then 45s = 180g. And if you use the disconnect-connect mechanism on iron, then you can build a warrior (10s = 40g) and then upgrade it for 60g to a swordsman, so the total cost for 1.5 swordsmen would be 150g.

Next: cavalry is 80 shields, not 90. And also you won't lose 1.5 per captured city, not even if the AI already has pikes.

For me the question of whether artillery is worth it, depends on two factors:
a) Difficulty level. Below Emperor the AI is so weak, that I never build artillery type units. They only slow me down. Build a few extra horsemen instead and domination will be reached a couple of centuries earlier... Emperor is a border case. With a good start position it's not much different from Monarch, but with a bad start and powerful AIs, I may need artillery.
b) Does my target have iron (and later saltpeter). If they don't have these resources (or I can deprive them thereof early enough), I will be fighting mainly spearmen, so don't need artillery.

Also map size sometimes plays a certain role. On larger maps it takes longer to get to the far away Civs, so they may have musketmen/riflemen by the time I reach them.

Please note: all the above applies to military games (domination, conquest and 100K). In 20K, space or UN games I don't concentrate on early military, so of course the AI will be further advanced by the time a war does need to be fought. (And then I may or may not need some artillery, depending on how far advanced my own empire is. We just had such a case in the Acronym's Bucket List SG.)
 
First of all, why are 45 shields = 225 gold? If I count 1s as 4g (which is the price for rushing), then 45s = 180g. And if you use the disconnect-connect mechanism on iron, then you can build a warrior (10s = 40g) and then upgrade it for 60g to a swordsman, so the total cost for 1.5 swordsmen would be 150g.

Thanks for the correct numbers. I've used a disconnected city for converting gold to shields but never thought of that upgrading is a little cheaper than rushing. I've never seen the big advantage of Leonardo's Workshop, but together with disconnection you can make gold much more valuable than 1/4 shields, and harbor cities important even in war games. I gotta try it in my next game :)

Next: cavalry is 80 shields, not 90. And also you won't lose 1.5 per captured city, not even if the AI already has pikes.

On higher levels, my cavalry army always meet musketmen or even riflemen.

Does my target have iron (and later saltpeter). If they don't have these resources (or I can deprive them thereof early enough), I will be fighting mainly spearmen, so don't need artillery.

Very interesting, do you actually try to prevent your neighbour from trading these resources by allying against (or with) the AIs that have them?
 
Top Bottom