One good thought, one bad...

[blueparrot1966]

I love the art work and the music for this mod. The portraits of the various leaders are far more elegant and interesting than the dopey "Disneyland heads" of vanilla Civ. And the music for the various civs is very descriptive, really sets the tone for that civ. The Calabim theme is disturbing almost to the point of being nauseating- which is just perfect after you've read the backstory.

Ok, I know I'm not going to get anywhere with this. I've read other posts, I know it's just how the mod is and I don't expect it to change. But I @#%! hate the @#$! barbarians.

It's not just a question of having more units. You can through all the warriors you like at a hill giant, and it won't matter. It's like trying to throw enough beef into a meat grinder to choke it. You're just going to wind up with a lot of hamburger. Units show up early, powerful, and numerous that are just too strong to be beaten by anything I could even theoretically have. It's all well and good to say "just stay out of their way", but they quickly choke off ANY development or exploration. It may make sense for the game setting, or for fiction based on the backstory. But in terms of gameplay, it's neither fun nor challenging, it just means a trip back to the main menu for a do over.

I'm sure this has all been hashed out before- in fact, I know barbarian comment has. Just wanted tovent a bit, and add my 2 cents to the mix.

[Grev_michal]

The barbarians can be a bit annoying at times - but I have become used to them and the challenges they come with.

How you deal with them depends on which civ you play - but yes the early game is a battle for survival (at least with raging barbs)

If you want to take a break from fighting of those pesky barbs you could choose one of the civ's with the barb trait or choose 'no barbarians'

[blueparrot1966]

Well, that's sorta the problem. Turning barbs off altogether always feels like a cheat to me. And honing your early units fighting 'em is a part of the game that I like- can't do that if you ARE a barbarian lol. It' just that there only seems to be two options with FFH. You can either turn em off or run for your life until the mid game. Really tricky to make anything else work.

[Silverkiss]

Nah, I always do well in games (I play barbs turned on) widhout barbarian trait civs, just stay in your borders and always have a heavy patrol, when you´re going to expand go with some extra units. Scout the terrain so you know where the dangerous ones are (Spiders, Giants), be carefull and you will survive fine...

[Grey Fox]

I always play with raging barbarians and I dont have a problem with the barbs. If I want to kill the animals I go for Hunters, if I get Orthus on me I defend till I can beat him.

I think its a good addition that spices up the early game, and makes it a bigger thing to create your 2nd city. You have to prepare more for expansion.

And I dont attack Hill giants until I can defeat them, no point wasting troops.

[TheJopa]

I don't have problems with barbs either.
Goblins and spearmans are weak.
Hill Giants (and Animals) wont enter your borders
Lizardmans can't pillage, so just fortify in your city and let him attack and die.
Most people miss that lizardmans cant pillage and risk their units for nothing.
Then there is orc slaying promotion. And shock is useful too as most barbs are melee (note that lizardmans and goblin count as orcs)
For Orthus... Well that IS problem. But only for one player. And I often manage to kill him when he is crazy enough to charge in my city. He stays injured and I kill him in counterattack with 3-4 warriors.

[Nikis-Knight]

If you want a milder barbarian experience, you could chose a map with "pressed" shoreline or medium to higher water level, or more civs than normal. There will be less area for barbarians to spawn.

When moving out to build a new city, I usually take 2 warriors and a scout along with the settler. One or two of the escort will die, but you can make it to your city spot if you are careful.

[Silverkiss]

I use 2 warrior If I am sure the area is protected (cities around or scouted 5 turns before, etc) or 3 warriors and 2 going ahead if it´s a new area...

[Xanikk999]

Originally Posted by JuliusBloodmoon

I use 2 warrior If I am sure the area is protected (cities around or scouted 5 turns before, etc) or 3 warriors and 2 going ahead if it´s a new area...

Wow.. If you build that many warriors for expanding then you must lose out to most of the good city sites.

I just reload if i lose a settler... its the only thing i reload for and its quicker.

[Sureshot]

and its cheating and doesnt work in multiplayer lol

[Xanikk999]

Originally Posted by Sureshot

and its cheating and doesnt work in multiplayer lol

OF course i always have an escort. But im not going to restart my game just because i lose my settlers to barbs or my capital gets taken out by barbs (Which happened with one of my first games on 0.16 but i restarted anyway because i was wiped out).

[Chandrasekhar]

It's an unfair adavantage, that much is true. The AI can't reload when they lose their settler escourts to freak hill giant placement. As well turn down the difficulty a notch.

[Xanikk999]

Originally Posted by Chandrasekhar

It's an unfair adavantage, that much is true. The AI can't reload when they lose their settler escourts to freak hill giant placement. As well turn down the difficulty a notch.

Well the AI already has a bunch of bonuses on prince anyway dont they?

Besides the AI gets an insane bonus against barbs on all levels.

I just dont want to restart, and if i lose a settler early on it makes the game less fun.

[QES]

I never ever ever reload.
I will start over, but never reload. I'm want to admit defeate early if i lose a settler that'll set me back too far - but i wont reload that same game. My theory is, If i reload, so does everyone else (AI) so its fair for all involved.

I tend to use the quickness of my first built settler to build a second city rather close - then (in .16 i build close to four warriors, and a settler, and THEN expand, repeat a few times. The sheer numbers of warriors let me expand pretty much wherever - because even if i lose a few battles, they'll never get to that settler - who will keep moving and plant a city where i tell it to.
-Qes

[Sureshot]

ya, if i reload once whats to stop me from reloading when i lose a prized warrior on 99% odds?

it ruins the game for me atleast, because its cheating. if i lose my capital then i know its because i risked too much, if i lose a settler its the same thing. i never lose settlers myself, i always create a path of units to the spot i want to go beforehand, only way i ever lose them is if i forgot about a unit nearby

[Xanikk999]

Originally Posted by Sureshot

ya, if i reload once whats to stop me from reloading when i lose a prized warrior on 99% odds?

it ruins the game for me atleast, because its cheating. if i lose my capital then i know its because i risked too much, if i lose a settler its the same thing. i never lose settlers myself, i always create a path of units to the spot i want to go beforehand, only way i ever lose them is if i forgot about a unit nearby

Oh well good for you. For me its unfun to lose a settler so i reload. Its too much of a setback for me.

I dont reload on anything else EVER.

[Grey Fox]

As my MP opponents might know, I expand very late and focus all my attention on my capital early. I go for a religon very quickly and I secure my territory. I do not want those pesky barbarians to destroy my cottages/villages/towns. That could mean someone like sureshot gets the religion instead. :P

So I focus on getting the capital to max size in population, effectivity and commerce making. I do NOT switch civic until I have a religion, if you lost your religion by 1 turn because you switched civic you are gonna regret it. And there is not really any civics that will help me get the religions faster early on. And I do not build any settlers yet.

Once my capital has a religion and my surroundings are secure, then I will build a 2nd city. (I've probably kept some units patrolling the area to keep it clean from barbs by now aswell, and I might even have a road leading its location)

And Xanikk, you should really try to never reload sometimes. I used to play like you when I started playing Civ3 but (partly thanks to the GoTM) I stopped and its much more fun to play without "cheating". You learn more, and its more rewarding to come back from a setback then to cheat your way through it.

[Xanikk999]

Originally Posted by Grey Fox

As my MP opponents might know, I expand very late and focus all my attention on my capital early. I go for a religon very quickly and I secure my territory. I do not want those pesky barbarians to destroy my cottages/villages/towns. That could mean someone like sureshot gets the religion instead. :P

So I focus on getting the capital to max size in population, effectivity and commerce making. I do NOT switch civic until I have a religion, if you lost your religion by 1 turn because you switched civic you are gonna regret it. And there is not really any civics that will help me get the religions faster early on. And I do not build any settlers yet.

Once my capital has a religion and my surroundings are secure, then I will build a 2nd city. (I've probably kept some units patrolling the area to keep it clean from barbs by now aswell, and I might even have a road leading its location)

And Xanikk, you should really try to never reload sometimes. I used to play like you when I started playing Civ3 but (partly thanks to the GoTM) I stopped and its much more fun to play without "cheating". You learn more, and its more rewarding to come back from a setback then to cheat your way through it.

I know its more rewarding. But its rewarding enough for me to be able to beat vanilla or warlords on monarch with a few reloads because i wouldnt be able to beat it elsewise.

[Grev_michal]

I usually build 3 cities, meanwhile I take a few growth techs that a apply to the land and then go for religion. Unless I am forced into military action by ai or babarian, then I focus on a straight line to religion and make sure my armies holds up.

But then again thats the fun of the game - its different everytime :-)

decisions...decisions..

[Kael]

Originally Posted by Xanikk999

Oh well good for you. For me its unfun to lose a settler so i reload. Its too much of a setback for me.

I dont reload on anything else EVER.

I always hate to hear anyone say cheating. Do whatever is fun for you. If thats reloads, go for it. If thats getting untis out of the worldbuilder than more power to you. Just dont combine the "cheating" practice with complaints that the mod is to easy (and I know Xanikk hasnt).