War or Economy?

[Ram]

Hi there!
First of all, I'd like to say I'm only playing in the second difficulty level (second-easy, whatever it is called).
Anyway, I have this problem: I can never decide if to concentrate on building militaty units, or improving my cities. You see, I like to play it economiclly, and to see my civilization flourish, but I also understand the power (both diplomaticlly and militarisitclly) of a big, strong army. I try to combine a strong economy and a large army, but it seems to always fail - at least until I reach the industialized/modern age (my favorite two! ), when I have a good economy, and an ability to quickly produce many military units.
Another problem, which have no real relation and no real solution, but I just want to tell you about it , is this: I just *HATE* conquering cities. It's not that I don't enjoy taking them - I do, believe me - it's just that I hate starting to rehabilitate a criplling city.
Well, that's all for now... I think.

[planetfall]

Welcome Ram.

Re: War or Economy, i.e. in forum jargon be a "warmonger" or a "builder".

This is the crux of the game. You can't do both and as you progress in difficulty levels the timing of this decision becomes more and more important. As a general rule, both warmongers and builders are able to play their style game easily at the lower 3 levels. At the higher levels most tend to slide towards war mongering because the AI will not respect tons of culture if you have a weak military.

Check out the military academy and strategy forums for ideas on value of playing warmonger or builder.


Re: conquering cities.

Then you will probably hate even more the concept of "milking", the tedious work of increasing your score just for the sake of having a high score. Naturally the most common alternatives are: A) don't go for a conquest win, and B) destory the city and start over.

== PF

[Quandary]

I've only played at regent level so far, although I think I'll be moving up next game.

My solution? I do play both, just not at the same time.

In the early game I concentrate on building and improving. I can usually be 5th or lower in land mass but still have the highest gross national product. While doing this, I give gifts (maps etc, just not advances) to other Civs, and will comply with any Civ's demands for tribute... then put them on my eternal sh!t list.

Then in the latter part of the game I put all thse well developed cities to work producing the (usually more advanced) military units until I get to "strong", and I decimate the Civs that threatened me when I was weak.

In my current game, I played the main supplier of free stuff to the Iroquois from 4,000 BC to around 1700 AD (they used to be the 800 pound gorilla), then in one six turn war I took over 3/5ths of their cities... after I had wiped out the Zulu for the same reason (constant tribute demands).

I agree that rebuilding cities is a pain, and I've had to relocate my palace twice so far due to the corruption (I also don't understand how the one Civ with a higher culture value than mine doesn't have more than one temple per ten cities....).

One thing I'm sure of though, I'll never play a large or huge map again. Administering to 120+ cities is mind numbing.

[stalin006]

ull lose stiking to one, waht i do is this:
at first try to build as many cities as posible.
then i build and grow economy and culture, when a city doetnt have anything else to build i then start building and stockpilling horseman (since they can be upgraded to knight or equivalent) then war comes, i dont ussually take more than 20 turns, but during those i try to be the most efficient, kill the whole other civ if posible, declare peace and rebuild ur conquered cities (culture firsts so they dont revolt an leave) this normally takes around 10 turns depending on how many citys i got, during the new cities reconstruction i contunue building culture and economy on my fist cities.....then build massive army and attack again. i do this until i get what i want, i hate looooong useless wars against 3 or 4 AIs

[Sirp]

planetfall: there are Deity-level players of both persuasions: warmongers and builders, and shades between.

I think this is a sign that the game is very well balanced, that one can win with either strategy.

However, if there is lots of free land, it tends to be a builder's game; if there is relatively little land in comparison to the number of civilizations, it's a warlike game.

Personally, I'm somewhat of a builder. The sign of a true builder is someone who can't stand building military units in a city that already has a garrison, and has civic improvements available to build. I am one of those.

A warmonger is happy to build military while there are civil improvements available, confident that they will capture sufficient resources, or inflict substantial enough damage on enemies, to make up for their lack of infrastructure.

For an example of Deity games where little war took place, see my Epic 4 game on my Civilization III page, or the RBE1 succession game: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showth...threadid=28481

In my epic game, I didn't fight a single war in the whole game! Consequently, I never had a Golden Age.

-Sirp.

[lord42]

Personally I go economy first then I use it to build larger armies then warmongers.
Generally three ages of war: knights, calvery, and tanks.
I usually win before modern armor............

[JMK]

In most of the game I have played so far, there was time for war and time for building, time for war could be very early depends on map size and how close your neighbor civs are.
War and Economy are linked, it is much more easier to build large army with a lot improvements in your core cities.
My advice will be to dedicate a couple cities (close to your capital) improved with garrison to military units, other cities can build improvements, it is also good to have a couple cities building settlers and workers.
At higher level, you will always have the choice to either build military or improvement, at monarch the tech pace will allow you to build new improvement until the middle of the industrial age.

[bladester]

In my experience it is best to not concentrate too much on one aspect say on culture and not military. I have had situations where the AI forced me into a war that I was totally unprepared for. I switched all my production to military and survived losing only a few cities but once the war became a world war I was totally behind in military that I could not keep up.

In my current games I try to keep a balance between military and infrastructure depending on my needs and what victory I am going for. Now AI civs are a little more respectful

[Balrog]

Well I am always trying to balance the war/economy in my games hehe.
Economy, diplomacy and finally war is the order!

[Hawkster]

As a builder rather than a warmonger I often end up having to go to war becasue the AI starts it..you always need a strong millitary regardless of playing style. In the early game I'll try to concentrate on building defensive units (spearmen / pikemen /muskateers) to keep the AI at bay.

Often I will have one city with high production producing units to ship out to other cities - so that those cities can build improvements. Later I'll build more offensive units so that if I'm attacked.......... :ripper:

Frequent trading can help keep the AI from starting a war with you while you build up.

Imn my current game the Zulu had a go at me - they lost a couple of cities then I got them to agree peace - I just know that they wil attack again soon but I'll be ready and then... :rocket:

[sabo]

I don't like to start any wars until I can at least get some Temples, Marketplaces, Libraries, and Barracks in my cities. I'm usually kissing the AI's butt with their demands up until then. One thing I've noticed though, if you start an early war it's probably a good idea not to make it a long one early in the game, take a couple of cities and then make peace.

[JMK]

SABO 10
You are right, I do not like start early war neither, but in some of my game I had no choice, there was no demand from the AI just WAR!
Like you write take a couple cities and then make peace, you better be ready for that, otherwise the AI could take a couple cities from you.

[Ram]

Originally posted by Sirp
The sign of a true builder is someone who can't stand building military units in a city that already has a garrison, and has civic improvements available to build.

Well then, I guess I'm a builder - because that's just my characters.