Can't Beat Immortal!

[consentient]

Hey Pirate, I'm new to this forum and also trying to master Immortal difficulty. I find Emperor to be too easy for domination, and too frustrating to play defensive because the AIs don't have enough cash and seem quite unwilling to war with each other much. So I've been trying to get used to Immortal.

My advice, for what it's worth, is to realise that early warmongering is actually surprisingly quickly forgotten.

EVERY game I play at Immortal I try to steal a settler (or two) from and AI, and one (or two) from a CS that's not as important to my plan (e.g. Maritime when I've gone liberty, or religious when I have a natural wonder).

And EVERY time, by turn 75 or so, the matter is completely forgotten.

And once I've prepared for the turn 60-90 DoW from the local bully, I usually push him back to his cities and take one or two. Again, the warmonger penalty from this can be worked around, by getting support from others beforehand, or by liberating a CS he has conquered, etc.

Just don't go conquering cities willy-nilly unless you're Attila, because then it truly will go all wrong for you.

If you want to win domination on Immortal, it's probably no more difficult than on Emperor or King as long as you have a solid start. I'm not so good I don't re-roll a terrible start, but a decent liberty start (I'm not much of a believer in this tradition opener stuff, for what it's worth) and some early UUs can propel you forward nicely.

Try Arabia as a flexible civ that can trade AND fight well in the early game.

And like others have said, NEVER build on flat land, try not to forward settle the aggressive AIs, and once you've got a couple of settlers out, build 3 archers/CBs for every city with your capital while the new cities are building granaries and libraries. Once you have the libraries go for the national college and then assess whether you can push research forward towards a peaceful win or whether you have to tech your troops up - nothing worse than trying to repel swordsmen, horsemen and CBs with warriors and archers.

The early game is trying to catch up to the AI as quickly as possible, so don't build any buildings you don't need, forget wonders completely with the exception of Pyramids (if no one else has gone liberty they can't build it) and possibly The Oracle, which the AI doesn't favour as much, but before building either of these get the army in order.

I'm doing a lot better at the early game than I was two weeks ago - it's keeping my tech lead from industrial into modern that I'm struggling with.

Best of luck, and if you want to PM to swap notes on Immortal, I'm up for that

 

[beetle]

Every game I get attacked earlier and earlier. I feel like if I try to train any more units than I do I won't be able to get any buildings, workers or new cities. I have tried liberty and tradition open. I seem to get attacked earlier and earlier every game! Also I'm playing marathon.

I too am struggling with Immortal. The early DOW can be tough, but it is predictable. That map you shared seems crowded to me. I switched away from Pangaea because I was never getting space. Aside from marathon, have you changed other settings?

In the image below I counted 25 enemy units on the next turn. I just don't see how it would be possible for any player to have prepared for that before hand.

I think you could survive that attack with just 4 CBs (two in cites, two behind cap). Enemy does not have siege nor horsemen. Mostly its warriors and archers, which will disappear fast. With no mobile units, your CBs can use terrain to avoid the melee units.

By the way, Napoleon is the biggest scum bag ever. Is there any other civ that always declares war on you one turn after someone else?

I have taken to picking my enemies. I don't mind the warmonger opponents, but I just don’t enjoy games where ICS types spam my space.

In the screenshot above, you have both cities settled on flatland, where you have pretty good hill spots for both. In this particular case, rome had to be 2 tiles to the south, and Antium - on top of the copper near the gems north of Rome or on top of the copper on the coast, east of Rome.

Good advice, but it would be improved by removing the snark.

Hey Pirate, I'm new to this forum and also trying to master Immortal difficulty. I find Emperor to be too easy for domination, and too frustrating to play defensive because the AIs don't have enough cash and seem quite unwilling to war with each other much. So I've been trying to get used to Immortal.

I am also trying to master Immortal difficulty. Emperor seemed too easy, but I may go back to it because I am losing more than half the time.

EVERY game I play at Immortal I try to steal a settler (or two) from and AI, and one (or two) from a CS that's not as important to my plan (e.g. Maritime when I've gone liberty, or religious when I have a natural wonder).

I am saving worker-poaching for when I take on Deity...

My advice, for what it's worth, is to realize that early warmongering is actually surprisingly quickly forgotten. And EVERY time, by turn 75 or so, the matter is completely forgotten.

It is definitely worth taking advantage of the one-free-DoW. Sometimes it’s a CS, sometimes a neighbor. Sometimes it’s late game.

And once I've prepared for the turn 60-90 DoW from the local bully, I usually push him back to his cities and take one or two. Again, the warmonger penalty from this can be worked around, by getting support from others beforehand, or by liberating a CS he has conquered, etc.

Agreed, the early “surprise” DoW is very predictable. If you are ready for it, it makes the game quite interesting. Even when you are not looking for a DV, it is nice to have units with lots of xp.

And like others have said, NEVER build on flat land, try not to forward settle the aggressive AIs, and once you've got a couple of settlers out, build 3 archers/CBs for every city with your capital while the new cities are building granaries and libraries.

Yikes! My army is half that size. Maybe I should practice Emperor DV more! I don't think the cap has to always be on a hill. Also use rivers defensively, but they do not count towards your “pointy stick” rating.

I'm doing a lot better at the early game than I was two weeks ago - it's keeping my tech lead from industrial into modern that I'm struggling with.

I really struggled with the early DoW, but that is mostly okay now. (I reload when I blow that, so I am getting better at judging how many units I need.) My biggest obstacle is the run-away civ on another continent. Even when I feel like I am doing things well, the games I win are the ones where I manage to snag Hubble, and the SV is only by the skin of my teeth.

 

[consentient]

I am also trying to master Immortal difficulty. Emperor seemed to easy, but I may go back to it because I am losing more than half the time....My biggest obstacle is the run-away civ on another continent. Even when I feel like I am doing things well, the games I win are the ones where I manage to snag Hubble, and the SV is only by the skin of my teeth.

Thanks for sharing. I've taken two elements out of what you wrote. Firstly, congratulations on winning SOMETIMES on immortal. I've only won once, and that was with a dream start with Attila, who I feel is borderline broken OP.

If you can do science victory or cultural victory on Immortal then you're way ahead of me.

For sure the runaway civs are the most difficult challenge to deal with. I've watched a number of videos and either the player used war heavily to bring about those victories, in which case the warmonger penalties mean that, in effect, it was a domination victory that 'bailed' as culture or science since they had so much power - or - there are elements of the game that simply aren't present in my games.

A number of successful deity and immortal videos that I've seen are where they have no aggressive neighbours or those neighbours were distracted. MadDjinn does a great job of always keeping Shaka busy with others in his CV with India, but it just never works out for me when I do it, and I have a LOT more units than he did.

To be honest, what I want to see is a video of a player winning on Immortal or Deity and having a hard time of it. It's a bit demoralising to see the Deity players making it look difficult. I want to see them making it look hard!

 

[dragonxxx]

beetle, you are maybe right, but the dude is clearly ignoring the fact, that he is playing bad and only blames the game for that. While I agree that my comment is is a bit sarcastic, learning how to settle properly is sometimes the difference between winning and losing

 

[beetle]

he is playing bad and only blames the game for that

That happens on this board, but I did not get such an impression from OP.

learning how to settle properly is sometimes the difference between winning and losing

Absolutely, maybe even more than just sometimes!

I've taken two elements out of what you wrote.

Which two elements of my reply do you think might be helpful? (Just so I can maybe improve my commentary.)

I've only won once, and that was with a dream start with Attila, who I feel is borderline broken OP.

If you can win with Tilly consistently, you are ahead of me!

As Tommy sez: Player >> dirt >> civ.

To be honest, what I want to see is a video of a player winning on Immortal or Deity and having a hard time of it. It's a bit demoralizing to see the Deity players making it look difficult. I want to see them making it look hard!

Agreed, that would be nice! I would watch a tutorial game if save files were posted with it. Does anyone do that? I want to play their start, see if I can keep up.

 

[dragonxxx]

peddroelm recorded two deity challenges recently. you can check em out. the aavegames are in the respective threads.

 

[Pirate334]

update:
So I read a how-to guide for the tradition open and it helped a lot. Mostly it seems your priorities are to get out a few cities as quickly as possible and to work on defence as soon as possible. Anyway I'm in the lead now on my current game so it looks like I should get domination or science fairly easily. A lot of the advice on here was very useful as well so thanks everyone for that!

Now a response to consentient:

My advice, for what it's worth, is to realise that early warmongering is actually surprisingly quickly forgotten.

You say that but I took just two cities as a form of aggressive defence in the classical era and everyone was still hostile towards me by the industrial at which point they DOW on me.

Having said that you seem to be talking about stealing workers etc from CS, which is of course something I will do given the opportunity. Although I've never stolen a settler from an AI.

Just don't go conquering cities willy-nilly unless you're Attila, because then it truly will go all wrong for you.

I actually won my first game of immortal (a sweet prelude to losing the next 10 or 15) by conquering a neighbour's capital which had some useful early game wonders and that put me in second place (points) for the rest of the game until I went to first. I lost almost every unit though so it was pretty close and it was quite fortunate since we shared a large peninsula that was protected by mountains, jungle, hills and lakes.

And like others have said, NEVER build on flat land, try not to forward settle the aggressive AIs, and once you've got a couple of settlers out, build 3 archers/CBs for every city with your capital while the new cities are building granaries and libraries.

Building on hills for extra defence was not really something I considered, in fact in the past I generally avoided hills so I could build windmills later on. The other thing to note is that settling on a hill means faster base production which is very useful when trying to get out those defence units ASAP. Also, I wouldn't say never settle on flat land; if you're
settling a city that's at the "back" of your empire such that it's protected by your other cities I find it less important to worry about building walls or building on hills. If your other cities do get captured then the fact that you're on flat land is the least of your worries. Obviously this not the case if you're in the middle of the map and surrounded by aggressive civs on all sides, then every city is vunerable.

I'm actually training an archer first in each city I settle while developing my capital more at the start (still getting a couple of archers in the capital), but it's the same principle.

I'm doing a lot better at the early game than I was two weeks ago - it's keeping my tech lead from industrial into modern that I'm struggling with.

If you a decent enough economy (capital on coast is usually enough) then patronage, (philanthropy, consulates and scholasticism) will help massively with science. I try to spend my money on CS and unit upgrades only.


A response to beetle:

I too am struggling with Immortal. The early DOW can be tough, but it is predictable. That map you shared seems crowded to me. I switched away from Pangaea because I was never getting space. Aside from marathon, have you changed other settings?

This map was actually continents, and yes I change the settings all the time. I vary the resources a lot, sea level, maps, whatever I feel like. Small continents is a good one for more passive games. I like the forest map too because there is a lot of forest to chop down at the start and generally high production cities. Great for Boudicca as well.

I have taken to picking my enemies. I don't mind the warmonger opponents, but I just don’t enjoy games where ICS types spam my space.

I actually chose these AIs too. I like the aggressive ones because they make the game more fun, but mostly I didn't want Venice or Austria taking all the CS.

 

[beetle]

You say that but I took just two cities as a form of aggressive defense in the classical era and everyone was still hostile towards me by the industrial at which point they DOW on me.

Killing a civ (or a CS) means permanent hate. Was one of those two cities a CS? How many cities did you leave the AI with? With BNW, taking cities (especially from a small empire) contributes heavily to your warmongering score.

Having said that you seem to be talking about stealing workers etc from CS, which is of course something I will do given the opportunity. Although I've never stolen a settler from an AI.

It is not stealing workers/setters per se that is the issue. It is number of DoWs. Stealing a second worker after peace is much, much worse than stealing several workers under a single long war.

Of course, you can’t steal workers without a DoW, and the opportunity to steal a worker is usually sufficient motivation for initiating a DoW. The chance to steal an early settler (which, sadly, turns into a worker) is somewhat rare.

that put me in second place (points) for the rest of the game until I went to first.

The running point score is useful for ranking and tracking the AIs. The players rank is almost wholly irrelevant to your ultimate win or loss. If you are consistently ranking near the top, prolly it is time to bump up the difficulty level!

Building on hills for extra defence was not really something I considered, in fact in the past I generally avoided hills so I could build windmills later on. The other thing to note is that settling on a hill means faster base production which is very useful when trying to get out those defence units ASAP.

Unlike most on this forum, I very much value windmills, but the production they give is less than what you get from settling on a hill.

If you a decent enough economy (capital on coast is usually enough) then patronage, (philanthropy, consulates and scholasticism) will help massively with science. I try to spend my money on CS and unit upgrades only.

Most games I struggle with both happiness and money. I have not been able to figure out what I am doing wrong...

This map was actually continents, and yes I change the settings all the time. I vary the resources a lot, sea level, maps, whatever I feel like. Small continents is a good one for more passive games. I like the forest map too because there is a lot of forest to chop down at the start and generally high production cities. Great for Boudicca as well.

Okay, but for the game in OP with the screen shot, had you changed the number of civs/CS from default? Is that a setting which you regularly mess with? (I ask, because, more than any other option, it really screws with the core game mechanics.)

I actually chose these AIs too. I like the aggressive ones because they make the game more fun, but mostly I didn't want Venice or Austria taking all the CS.

Good calls!

 

[consentient]

Just to make it clear, when I say early warmongering, I mean that when you steal 1 or 2 workers form AI and 1 or 2 from an unlucky nearby CS, you do it all within a 10 turn period, then make peace and 50 turns later, no one cares.

You might only get 6 GPT for a lux rather than 7 but you can get 2-4 workers without spending hammers OR gold.

If I didn't do this, I would be even further away from beating Immortal.

 

[dragonxxx]

worker steals are far from needed to beat immortal. I was rarely taking more than one from a Cs and had no problem beating almost all games I played.

 

[Pirate334]

beetle, you are maybe right, but the dude is clearly ignoring the fact, that he is playing bad and only blames the game for that. While I agree that my comment is is a bit sarcastic, learning how to settle properly is sometimes the difference between winning and losing

What are you talking about? I have asked people for advice, I have asked questions about their advice, I have of course talked about aspects of the game I am struggling with but that is not the same as "blaming the game". I think my settling is fine apart from the fact I did not know that settling on a hill increased city strength. I have only been playing civ 5 for a few weeks after and this is the first civ game I've played, so please forgive a little ignorance on my part.

If you actually took the time to read the comments on here you would say that I have not ignored what anyone has said. Clearly ignoring the fact? Where do you get these ideas from?

edit: besides I'm about to win on immortal now anyway. I was only really struggling with the opening, I think the rest of my game is good enough.

 

[Pirate334]

Killing a civ (or a CS) means permanent hate. Was one of those two cities a CS? How many cities did you leave the AI with? With BNW, taking cities (especially from a small empire) contributes heavily to your warmongering score.

It took 2/4 cities. So yeah the capital had extreme warmongering penalty. I find the warmongering factors pretty stupid to be honest. It seems a bit of a waste to have early game UU if using them for anything good will cause eternal hate. Oh well, at least legions can build roads.

The running point score is useful for ranking and tracking the AIs. The players rank is almost wholly irrelevant to your ultimate win or loss. If you are consistently ranking near the top, prolly it is time to bump up the difficulty level!

People say this sort of thing a lot, but the fact is, if you're first in points it means you have high tech, high population, lots of cities, lots of wonders etc. so it is a pretty good indicator even though it's not a deciding factor.

Not sure if I mentioned this but I was talking about my first time playing immortal. The main reason my points went up so much was because I gained about 4 wonders when I took his capital. I have (or rather had) been trying and failing to repeat this scenario in games since. I guess I just happened to have a really lucky opportunity first time.

Unlike most on this forum, I very much value windmills, but the production they give is less than what you get from settling on a hill.

Good point. I suppose windmills are more of a compromise to not being on a hill, rather than an advantage.

Most games I struggle with both happiness and money. I have not been able to figure out what I am doing wrong...

Again settling on the coast helps a lot, also +1 for every 4 followers of a religion helps (and usually I find it yields more than +2 for each city). But yeah, some games it's really hard to get any gold.

Okay, but for the game in OP with the screen shot, had you changed the number of civs/CS from default? Is that a setting which you regularly mess with? (I ask, because, more than any other option, it really screws with the core game mechanics.)

I hadn't changed it, I think I just happened to start very close to other civs.

 

[dragonxxx]

well at the start of the thread u were clearly whining about how impossible it is to beat this
take it easy and better learn standard speed. marathon is not good for begginers.

 

[beetle]

Thanks for getting back to my other questions. Seems to me you are doing those things all correctly. I am envious because you seem to be progressing much faster than I!

People say this sort of thing a lot, but the fact is, if you're first in points it means you have high tech, high population, lots of cities, lots of wonders etc. so it is a pretty good indicator even though it's not a deciding factor.

Yes, it is a good indicator that you are winning. It is not a good indicator that you can’t win. If you have high tech, high population, lots of cities, lots of wonders etc. before the modern era, mostly that’s an indicator that you are ready to bump up the difficulty level!

Again settling on the coast helps a lot, also +1 for every 4 followers of a religion helps (and usually I find it yields more than +2 for each city). But yeah, some games it's really hard to get any gold.

Yes, I love Tithe, coastal starts too. I still struggle.

 

[Pirate334]

Yes, it is a good indicator that you are winning. It is not a good indicator that you can’t win.

Oh yeah definitely. I didn't meant to imply the opposite.

 

[Pirate334]

well at the start of the thread u were clearly whining about how impossible it is to beat this
take it easy and better learn standard speed. marathon is not good for begginers.

Well that doesn't sound like me at all.

As for marathon. Meh whatever I like marathon, I don't care if it's not good for beginners. Besides I would say I'm more of a intermediate-beginner at this point.

 

[Acken]

If you make sure to hook every luxury/strategic fast and sell everything you should have good money for the first 100 turns. At some point roads will also raise that up and after T100 markets and banks will help you even further.

It's also a good idea to work some 3G luxury tiles. Especially in market cities.

 

[beetle]

If you make sure to hook every luxury/strategic fast and sell everything you should have good money for the first 100 turns. At some point roads will also raise that up and after T100 markets and banks will help you even further.

I am losing it after T100, not that things are great. I do need to get AH and IW in researched faster, because my opportunities to sell horses and iron seem way too short. I also don’t understand why I can’t seem to sell iron once Frigates are available?

The pain I really feel is never having money enough to rush buy Universities and Public Schools.

It's also a good idea to work some 3G luxury tiles. Especially in market cities.

What is 3G?

 

[Acken]

3G is 3 gold. Luxury tiles usually give 3 gold.

Remember iron requires bronzeworking not ironworking.

 

[beetle]

3G is 3 gold.

Of course! I am almost always working luxes. I will have to track my difficulties better and start my own thread. Also excuse brain fart on BW v IW.

After iron (temporarily) goes obsolete, what conditions must be met for friendly civs to start paying for it again (for frigates)?