Broad brush early game strategy talk

[tommynt]

FFA 6 player:
Ok this is mainly a response to adrianos post, but might also be general guideline:

Starting build: ALLWAYS monument
Granny nearly allways >> worker
and then FFA is about wonder spam, with bad players its pretty easy - just grab all of them, build after free settler (which should be 2nd or 3rd sp or maybe even 4th sp) 2 or 3 more settlers and continue wonder spam.
The other ciites can build units if you NEED units.

As with other good player other know aswell that wonder spam is way to win you have to calculate which wonders u can ge pretty safely or if you go for a risky one who hard u try for it (sacrifice growth for production and short term wood cuts for long time tile improvement)

So it might be a good idea NOT to go for GL if u cant get it easy but go for Pyras and HG and rather improve land then chopping everything for gl.

After that its - easy bigger is better - so check how to be able to grow and maintain happy same time

 

[kafka1945]

Some good strategy tips here.....thanks to all. Long time SP player, hope to try MP soon. But I have so many questions! Here are three, if anyone has time to respond:

1. Is there any combination of SP settings that closely parallels an MP game, for practice purposes? At deity and immortal, I have tried duel, pangea, quick pace, domination, turn timer with no CS, barbs or ruins. Also, immediate DOW by me at first contact. But at both deity and immortal, games seem to collapse into just one strategy option: spam units or die!

2. Is there time in an MP game to open Tradition first (+3 culture), then Liberty and then later (after Phil) to go back to Tradition for Legalism (4 rel buildings, costly but big culture boost)? Or is culture/social policies mostly a non-issue?

In advance, thanks for any available advice!

 

[kafka1945]

Good stuff Tommy......thank you!

 

[Adreno]

I appreciate the advice tommy, some questions:

Starting build: ALLWAYS monument

If ruins are on does it make sense to build the scout first? This means policies will be coming later, but you are likely to find more ruins (and find natural wonders faster, and scout more foreign lands before they are closed by expanding borders). Sometimes it hurts a lot when my liberty settler is delayed, other times I have a high growth capital and a fast settler would turn my empire unhappy before I have time to get a worker. If I intend to go tradition instead of liberty, and ruins are on, I always build the scout first because I still get the wonder bonus almost in time for GL/pyramids.

Granny nearly allways >> worker

I usually build the granary in capital only after I've built my settlers. I feel like the granary is wasted if I'm building 2-4 settlers from cap. What do you think?

I usually build an early worker but lately I've been wondering if that makes sense in an emperor game with CS on. You can poach a worker from CS so easily around the same time you could complete one in the capital that maybe wasting hammers on it doesn't make sense. Of course there's a risk you won't get it due to barbs or other reasons (do CS ever build a military unit before a worker?)

 

[Adreno]

I'm starting to think honor is never a viable policy in FFA. I've now played 2 games where I get a good start with honor and lose with a big margin.

Today: NQ FFA, 6 players, pangaea, raging barbs, no strategic balance - and I get the Iroques! If there ever was a good time to take the honor tree, this would be it. Raging barbs make the honor starter useful, and the lack of strategic balance makes mohawk rush very overpowered (since iron is scarce, I will likely tech IW much earlier than anyone else, and even if my neighbors have IW they need to find iron and connect it)

Monument->Scout-Worker->Granary

This was the first game where I built an early granary without bonus resources. I figured I need the growth as I won't be building a 2nd city any time soon. After granary I got my +15% land unit bonus and started building warriors. As my 4th warrior completed I reached IW and upgraded all. After the upgrades I was left with 17g so I microed that pretty efficiently. My capital was producing more mohawks as I marched my army of 4 towards France. Because of raging barbs the first wave of units would move slower than reinforcements anyway. I tried to micro barb exp so that all units would get heals on french lands, but did a half ass job on it.

So I conquered France, Persia and Siam with mohawks. While I was taking the Siamese capital, Japan attacked with cannons and rifles. He was at 49% tech while I was at 34%. I had just researched education and he was 5 turns from dynamite... One reason I was behind was I waited until the liberty settler to expand. I felt obligated to just pump mohawks once I chose the path of honor. Even with an early settler I still would have been way behind on tech. I feel the conditions were ripe for honor tree, my start was good, and I didn't make any major mistakes. Still got beaten by a huge margin.



Another game I played a few weeks ago. 6-player pang, got Greece and decided to hoplite rush on loading screen. Ruins are in the game and I'm not going for the liberty settler, so I build the scout before monument. I find El Dorado really early and use the money to buy another scout and settler. I rush my 2 closest neighbors with hoplites and start empire building.

I'm #1 on tech, hammers and pop. The Iroques have quit the game so I'm up against one good player, one noob, and one AI. For unknown reasons the AI declares war on the noob and he spends the rest of the game fighting AI and we can't effectively ally against the strong player. Then the strong player proceeds to surpass me in tech, hammers and pop. Once he is 2x my manufacturing he rolls in with tanks & artillery against my artillery & cavalry (there was a lot of flat ground near our border so I thought cavalry would be good in defense). I manage to bulb mech inf before dying but it's too late.

My start was favorable (el dorado, 3 capitals) and I still lost. I do sometimes win good players playing the liberty tree, but I never win with honor (no pun intended)

 

[MasterMishi]

even with lib it is unlikely you will rush all of the civs, one will out build you while you kill the others.

 

[BuilderFTW]

Honor is not a great idea for ffas, the liberty bonuses are so strong. They make up for the combat bonuses you get from honor. Think of it like this, are the combat bonuses from honor worth an extra city(+50% settlers too), a worker(and faster tile improvements), (later on) +1 hammers per city, and (more later on) a free great person?

 

[MasterMishi]

once you filled liberty by medieval era often good to go honour if you plan to spam xbows and knights for win or push early ren with cannon musket

 

[BuilderFTW]

Yes MasterMishi is correct, what I meant to say was that it is not a good idea to START with honor. After you finish liberty, you have plenty of paths you can go. Legalism for free opera houses, piety for happiness+golden age, honor for stronger fighting, patronage for cs, rationalism for strong tech etc.

 

[Adreno]

Made some really interesting strategy decisions in 2 NQ FFAs today.

The first one was a 6-player pangaea where I got good lands for my 5 Persian cities isolated behind Egypt. Once the map was obvious I instantly told my neighbor I would prefer peace with him because of the isolation, and offered to protect him if he was attacked. The deal was not as good for him because he only had room for 2 cities in good locations, but we made nice

Germany settled really close to Egypt and started building a huge army around Landsknecht time. I traded borders with Egypt and put 2 of my best units on the front line, then told Germany my army would protect Egypt. I continued with "France would make an easier target for you" - which was true, more open terrain and 1 army to fight instead of 2... But then I warned France that Germany was about to attack him

And sure enough, Germany decided to invade France, and the 2 fought it out for a long time. Eventually France succumbed and we scrapped the game because of lag, but I was in a really good position to win the game had we played it through.

The other game was a 4-player NQ FFA on Pang, I got Aztecs and my capital was 8 tiles from China (wtf?). There was a lot of Forest and Jungle so I thought I would Jag rush him down while I still had the advantage. I went liberty and started pumping Jaguars from both my cities. I microed XP on barbs so that all my jaguars had their heal ready after 1 attack on Beijing. I was sure it would be enough, but no, China was prepared. By the time I took the city to 2 hit points all my units were either en route or dead.

At this point I teched Iron Working and discovered no iron anywhere on visible earth, so I purchased 4 iron from Russia for 6gpt after some haggling. After my wounded units were healed I upgraded and marched on Beijing again. Peace of cake against warriors and archers, right? Guess again. As soon as I get to their borders, China, without iron on their lands, upgrades warriors to swords.

We fought it out until China deployed a Citadel and all hope of a resolution was lost. I suggested to China that we make the game interesting by turning on the arms dealer who was supplying both parties. To my surprise he accepted the offer so we didn't have to grudgewar in stoneage for the rest of the game. We stayed in pretend-war and beelined towards xbows while Russia was trying to invade America. Because of their war, Russia was not prepared at all and we took Moscow with massive force, then continued on America and called it a game.

Teamplay can be amazing in FFAs. Turned a win from a position of certain loss.

As a sidenote, this is why I prefer 6-player FFAs over 4p. In a 4p game the incentive to warr is huge. If you can conquer your neighbor in early game, you're pretty much set to win. In a 6-player game you can conquer 4 capitals and still lose because someone is outbuilding you and it's going to be spearmen versus tanks. Or if you're Lord Appleton you can conquer 4 capitals and build tanks at the same time.

 

[Adreno]

Puppeting versus annexing?

I got into this discussion with eml_joe yesterday and realized annexing isn't the only choice of play. So far I've always puppeted captured cities and annexed them later on. It would be wasteful to annex a city while it is in resistance - unless you are razing. After resistance I watch my happiness and annex cities if it's possible without tipping over the 0 happiness or -10 happiness barriers. Then I micro hammer squares and get the courthouse up.

Cost-benefit analysis, feel free to add in:
+ Permanently lower unhappiness
+ Can choose tiles to work
+ Can choose production
- Temporarily higher unhappiness
- Hammers spent on courthouse
- Culture cost of future policies rise (how much?)
- National wonders get delayed

Basicly the argument for keeping puppets is faster social policies, you get culture, gold and science in exchange for some additional unhappiness (how much exactly?)

How do you guys usually play? Is it common to keep puppets in MP games?

As a sidenote, I sometimes annex a city near the beginning of renaissance to delay social policies so that I can spend my next SP on freedom or rationalism.

 

[Tabarnak]

Puppeting versus annexing?

How do you guys usually play?

I usually try to get at least 4 or 5 cities total producing things that i want. If i annex one it's often the best production site(love to capture an early HG ). Over that point i find more or less useful to annex cities.

I will not annex cities if(even if i want to) :

-A national wonder isn't finished yet or very close to be started
-My happiness/unhappiness level is too low
-The city is too low in pop. I wait him to grow a bit and keep forests to rush a courthouse
-I have to wage an important war close to that city

 

[Adreno]

How does city count in general, or annexing puppets, affect GP generation?

 

[Kyp Durron]

Made some really interesting strategy decisions in 2 NQ FFAs today.

The first one was a 6-player pangaea where I got good lands for my 5 Persian cities isolated behind Egypt. Once the map was obvious I instantly told my neighbor I would prefer peace with him because of the isolation, and offered to protect him if he was attacked. The deal was not as good for him because he only had room for 2 cities in good locations, but we made nice

Germany settled really close to Egypt and started building a huge army around Landsknecht time. I traded borders with Egypt and put 2 of my best units on the front line, then told Germany my army would protect Egypt. I continued with "France would make an easier target for you" - which was true, more open terrain and 1 army to fight instead of 2... But then I warned France that Germany was about to attack him

And sure enough, Germany decided to invade France, and the 2 fought it out for a long time. Eventually France succumbed and we scrapped the game because of lag, but I was in a really good position to win the game had we played it through.

The other game was a 4-player NQ FFA on Pang, I got Aztecs and my capital was 8 tiles from China (wtf?). There was a lot of Forest and Jungle so I thought I would Jag rush him down while I still had the advantage. I went liberty and started pumping Jaguars from both my cities. I microed XP on barbs so that all my jaguars had their heal ready after 1 attack on Beijing. I was sure it would be enough, but no, China was prepared. By the time I took the city to 2 hit points all my units were either en route or dead.

At this point I teched Iron Working and discovered no iron anywhere on visible earth, so I purchased 4 iron from Russia for 6gpt after some haggling. After my wounded units were healed I upgraded and marched on Beijing again. Peace of cake against warriors and archers, right? Guess again. As soon as I get to their borders, China, without iron on their lands, upgrades warriors to swords.

We fought it out until China deployed a Citadel and all hope of a resolution was lost. I suggested to China that we make the game interesting by turning on the arms dealer who was supplying both parties. To my surprise he accepted the offer so we didn't have to grudgewar in stoneage for the rest of the game. We stayed in pretend-war and beelined towards xbows while Russia was trying to invade America. Because of their war, Russia was not prepared at all and we took Moscow with massive force, then continued on America and called it a game.

Teamplay can be amazing in FFAs. Turned a win from a position of certain loss.

As a sidenote, this is why I prefer 6-player FFAs over 4p. In a 4p game the incentive to warr is huge. If you can conquer your neighbor in early game, you're pretty much set to win. In a 6-player game you can conquer 4 capitals and still lose because someone is outbuilding you and it's going to be spearmen versus tanks. Or if you're Lord Appleton you can conquer 4 capitals and build tanks at the same time.

Isn't teamplay not allowed in NQ FFAs?

 

[Adreno]

Isn't teamplay not allowed in NQ FFAs?

When the balance of power allows for it, teamplay is ok. It's explicitly mentioned in the rules. This means that 2 weaker civs can team up against a strong opponent, but 2 strong civs can't team up against a weaker one.

 

[vinnvegas]

Some good strategy tips here.....thanks to all. Long time SP player, hope to try MP soon. But I have so many questions! Here are three, if anyone has time to respond:

1. Is there any combination of SP settings that closely parallels an MP game, for practice purposes? At deity and immortal, I have tried duel, pangea, quick pace, domination, turn timer with no CS, barbs or ruins. Also, immediate DOW by me at first contact. But at both deity and immortal, games seem to collapse into just one strategy option: spam units or die!

2. Is there time in an MP game to open Tradition first (+3 culture), then Liberty and then later (after Phil) to go back to Tradition for Legalism (4 rel buildings, costly but big culture boost)? Or is culture/social policies mostly a non-issue?

In advance, thanks for any available advice!

I can't speak to your 1st question, but I have gone back and forth on the tradition opening. I loved the boost to growth that tradition gives but I feel like the the free great person from finishing liberty is a greater advantage. There are times in MP where I will switch back to tradition from liberty but only after the 3rd cultural level-up. my opening is alomost always
1.monument
2.granary
3.GL
I use liberty for a worker then go for the settler. I work pop to 4 then level growth to stagnation and pound as many hammers as I can get while chopping. This usually gets you GL.

I only switch back to traditon at this point if I feel an early rush coming. I dont know how everyone feels about oligarchy, but it has saved me many times from early rushes.

 

[Adreno]

Last update before G&K. I think I'll start new strategy & story threads for it. It's a new game after all



Decent city location, no? Settled on river hills next to a mountain = observatory + water mill + garden + 1prod. The hills, rivers and the mountain make it very defensible. City radius has river on nearly every tile + 3 unique luxuries + 1 tradeable luxury + granary resource + 8 hills + 4 jungles for science! I would not connect the bananas; 2 science is better than 1 food.



SUPAH CANNON! The upgrades you see are +75% rough terrain bonus, +45% against cities, +1 attack per turn, +1 range. After upgrading to artillery I was able to shoot TWICE in RANGE OF 4. How sick is that!

If you want to follow my thoughts on civ search for threads started by me in 2-3 weeks.

GG,
Adreno out