Civ Rev --> Civ IV Transitioning

[GamerDad]

I absolutely loved Civ Rev, but have lost the ability to command use of the only TV our gaming systems are hooked up to and am now itching for my Civ fix. In the past I've always felt overwhelmed by Civ on the PC, but then again I haven't tried it in years, and certainly not since playing Revolution on the console.

My question is simple: What are some tips for making the transition to Civ IV easier?

I know that the PC game requires more management, but are there specific things I can do to streamline it as Revolution has accomplished? Turn-based gameplay is wonderful because you do have time to think, so based on that alone I should be okay. But still, I would love to hear what others have done or experienced when making the transition to the more difficult and "busy" PC version of this great game.

[Joshua368]

Just play a low level. It won't take much micromanaging to win on Warlord, once you get the basics (which shouldn't take long with prior Civ experience).

[Ramesses]

I would suggest playing on Settler. The fact is that CivRev is such an overly simplified installment in the series, and that even Civ IV has tons more management involved. If you want to learn the ropes and still taste victory, Settler will let you make tons of mistakes and give you the opportunity to freely experiment without worry.

Also, play Vanilla Civ, not Warlords or BtS. Save the expansions for until after you've gotten the essentials down.

[troytheface]

Automate as much as you can and build alot of units and attack. You can automate wrkers, corporate guys, missionaries, work boats and auto explore with units (scouts or ealry warriors) and boats.
I refer to this as the hypermodern full auto method.

[TheMeInTeam]

Originally Posted by troytheface

Automate as much as you can and build alot of units and attack. You can automate wrkers, corporate guys, missionaries, work boats and auto explore with units (scouts or ealry warriors) and boats.
I refer to this as the hypermodern full auto method.

Terrible advice if the goal is to learn how to play high levels well, but doing it can be helpful to keep from being overwhelmed with all the decisions you need to make in a turn while still getting your feet wet.

Some people never automate...I usually won't until I feel I'm in a winning position...and I'm one of the faster (real life time) players around.

So...automate at first, but do eventually learn to do everything manually.

[GamerDad]

I definitely don't intend on automating everything. My game style is not about speed, it's about being thorough. That's why I prefer and love turn-based games so much more than real-time ones.

Thank you all for the advice given. I'll definitely start on a lower setting (as embarrassing inwardly as that may be) and won't be doing any expansions or mods until I've become competitive at higher difficulty settings. I'm still more than open to any suggestions about my first few games.

[troytheface]

Do not play at lower levels, a waste of time and if you venture into MP you'll get wiped out. Start at least at Noble and lose. Someone once wrote that to be a good chess player you have to lose a thousand games.
Most do not automate because they are control freaks- as noted in an article awhile back on Civ3.
Control freaks that have to win all the time - ouch.

[Perfxion]

If he doesn't know the game well, why not start at "t-ball" or "little league" to get the game basics down before trying "College World Series" and just losing and getting fed up? Wouldn't be easier to just learn the ropes then move up and die quick deaths.

Best thing I could add is befriend the top half of the score grid, wipe out the bottom half, then go 1 by 1 by 1 up the score chart until nothing is left.

[zyphyr]

Originally Posted by troytheface

Do not play at lower levels, a waste of time and if you venture into MP you'll get wiped out. Start at least at Noble and lose. Someone once wrote that to be a good chess player you have to lose a thousand games.

Learn basic mechanics through a couple low level games, then move up to higher difficulties. Losing is only a useful teaching tool once you have enough understanding to see why you lost - either through an understanding of the basic principles or by having someone else explain why. Understand how things work first, then work at putting the pieces together.

Most do not automate because they are control freaks- as noted in an article awhile back on Civ3.

Actually, most don't automate (at least in Civ4) because the automation ranges somewhere between incompetent and insane. In Civ1-3, worker automation was reasonable since the choice of what to do to a given tile was obvious in nearly every situation. Civ4 automation only works for those who don't specialize their cities (in other words those who still really haven't learned the game).

Automated exploration, missionaries and work boats can be OK, though never optimal.

[troytheface]

Automated Missionaries seem to covert at a better percentage. Automated with no chop no change will save forests for forest preserves with Scientific Method. Automated scouts aim for huts. I would also suggest auto promote . This will free your thinking to persue more important issues.

[Willem]

Originally Posted by troytheface

Automated Missionaries seem to covert at a better percentage.

It makes absolutely no difference, it's all in the code for establishing a religion. Whether it's automated or not makes no difference. You also don't want to automate them once Corporations come around since that automates Executives as well. You could end up bankrupting your economy if you're not selective about where those go.

Automated with no chop no change will save forests for forest preserves with Scientific Method.

And will also hopelessly mismanage your empire, building things that don't make sense and aren't even remotely optimal. And you'll have no control over your city specialization since the AI will be building Cottages in your production city when it should have been building farms to support your mines there. Then it will turn around and build a Windmill on a Plains Hill. Automating your Workers is absolutely the worst possible way you can play the game.

Automated scouts aim for huts.

That I would agree with.

I would also suggest auto promote . This will free your thinking to persue more important issues.

That is absolutely the worse advice I've ever seen given on this forum. The AI is definitely not going to be able to promote your units as well as you can. You're going to end up with a completely sub-optimal military doing it that way. There isn't any more important issue in the game than the condition of your military, that's what's going to keep you alive when your enemies attack.

[Joshua368]

Auto-promote? Seriously?

Even if you don't want to wait and save those promotions until the field, you certainly don't want the AI doing it! Manually promoting them as soon as possible is better than that. Besides it's very simple thing to do, and somewhat fun as well.

[bestbrian]

My first bit of advice would be to play Settler to learn the concepts and then move quickly to Noble, and execute your learning on a level playing field with the AI. Don't automate anything; you'll learn by doing, you'll see what options are availible to you, and you'll see how horribly the AI utilizes those options when you have to redo all the improvements when you take it's lands. BTS is the game you'll be playing eventually anyway, so skip Vanilla and Warlords, and play BTS.

And anything by TroyTheFace or Attacko is for novelty purposes only and not to be taken seriously.

Have fun and goodluck.

[GamerDad]

Question: Does the AI in the PC game actually attack each other? One of my largest complaints with Civ: Revolution is that the human player is always a punching bag for the rest of the world. I very, very rarely see any AI declaring war on each other or forming alliances with each other to go against another AI player.

[Starkow]

The higher you go up in difficulty, the more likely they will declare on eachother. It doesn't happen at all in Cheiftan, and VERY rarely in Warlord.

[GamerDad]

Well, that's fine, because at Warlord/Chieftan it's completely managable even if they do try to gang up on you. It's the higher levels that present an almost unfair level of difficulty (in Civ:Rev) when you have to fend off three or more AI opponents and they just sit back and let each other win.

[Willem]

Originally Posted by GamerDad

Question: Does the AI in the PC game actually attack each other?

If Montezuma or Shaka are in the game it's pretty much guarenteed that they'll go after someone at some point. But overall, AI>AI wars are not that uncommon. You might get the odd game where everyone likes each other and nothing happens but that's rare.

[GamerDad]

Excellent news! Can't wait to experience that.

[Willem]

Originally Posted by GamerDad

Excellent news! Can't wait to experience that.

You can also set up a custom game with Aggressive AI so wars become much more common. And no, that doesn't necessarily mean that everyone will just gang up on you more often, they'll also fight amongst themesleves more too.

[Joshua368]

Another thing that's great is that you actually get friends and allies with other civilizations, who won't threaten or backstab you and help you in wars against hostile AIs. Though they might beg for treats from time to time... but you can just beg back and they'll usually share some spare change or resources. Religions usually mold alliances.

I mean that's probably what kills Revolution the most for me, every AI hating you.