TsimTsigal
Chieftain
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2023
- Messages
- 52
I'm not sure was it discussed (or intended), but different speed affects game a lot more than one could initially suggest.
Spent a lot of time trying to win my final American UHV, playing usually -3000/Regent/Normal unless the UHV is impossible this way (like Austrian or Khmer). Guides mostly recommend to start conquering Europe (especially Britain) early (and this is correct call, i finally won on Marathon by collapsing Russia and conquering/vassalizing most of Europe), but on Normal you barely have enough time to conquer all Carribean (can be neutraled by collapsing the Dutch who usually own islands but the Congress tends to randomly reshuffle them) and Mexico; after like five trials i finally decided to try Marathon... and i realised that Marathon is entirely different, much easier experience. Have played a few games (including AI only), and so far my observations are following:
1) AI usually forges much bigger empires, both in terms of spread and amount of cities. The most striking example is America: never seen Eastern Coast being colonized by American spawn on Normal, moreover, sometimes there is no colonies other than New Orlean (and maybe 1 more city around) and proto-Canadian cities, while on Marathon the North America is usually half-colonized, with 3-4 cities in flip zone alone. Ancient empires pretty much never found cities outside of their conquest areas on Normal, on Marathon i seen them expand in sensible ways (like Romans founding Hungarian cities, Persians settling more than Samarqand in Central Asia etc). Same goes for military expansion, on Normal world is a lot more static.
2) The world is more technologically advanced overall, especially in lategame. It's not exactly straightforward to reach Infantry or Tanks by WW2 on Normal (Prussian UHV on Normal required to beeline a bit, leaving me with only 10 turns to conquer Russia which surprisingly was enough), on Marathon, i see AI reaching them by WW2, let alone human player of medicore skill (humbly yours). I guess it's the main point there, technology on Normal seems to fall behind mostly in later eras.
3) A lot of UHVs are much easier on less tight time limit, including the fact the AI is generally less skilled on slower speeds that require forward planning, but also by the fact that movement speed is unaffected by game speed, which directly gives you more time in some scenarios and other benefits.
4) For some reason older denominations are much more "sticky" in (-3000) Marathons than Normals; with maybe half of games Protestantism remaining a small sectarian movement, and European civs quite often having a few Orthodoxes among them (not counting almost always Orthodox Russia; as a side note, modern Greece almost always becomes Muslim regardless of speed).
I'd like to hear other opinions on different speed experiences, and if points above are perceived or real differences.
Spent a lot of time trying to win my final American UHV, playing usually -3000/Regent/Normal unless the UHV is impossible this way (like Austrian or Khmer). Guides mostly recommend to start conquering Europe (especially Britain) early (and this is correct call, i finally won on Marathon by collapsing Russia and conquering/vassalizing most of Europe), but on Normal you barely have enough time to conquer all Carribean (can be neutraled by collapsing the Dutch who usually own islands but the Congress tends to randomly reshuffle them) and Mexico; after like five trials i finally decided to try Marathon... and i realised that Marathon is entirely different, much easier experience. Have played a few games (including AI only), and so far my observations are following:
1) AI usually forges much bigger empires, both in terms of spread and amount of cities. The most striking example is America: never seen Eastern Coast being colonized by American spawn on Normal, moreover, sometimes there is no colonies other than New Orlean (and maybe 1 more city around) and proto-Canadian cities, while on Marathon the North America is usually half-colonized, with 3-4 cities in flip zone alone. Ancient empires pretty much never found cities outside of their conquest areas on Normal, on Marathon i seen them expand in sensible ways (like Romans founding Hungarian cities, Persians settling more than Samarqand in Central Asia etc). Same goes for military expansion, on Normal world is a lot more static.
2) The world is more technologically advanced overall, especially in lategame. It's not exactly straightforward to reach Infantry or Tanks by WW2 on Normal (Prussian UHV on Normal required to beeline a bit, leaving me with only 10 turns to conquer Russia which surprisingly was enough), on Marathon, i see AI reaching them by WW2, let alone human player of medicore skill (humbly yours). I guess it's the main point there, technology on Normal seems to fall behind mostly in later eras.
3) A lot of UHVs are much easier on less tight time limit, including the fact the AI is generally less skilled on slower speeds that require forward planning, but also by the fact that movement speed is unaffected by game speed, which directly gives you more time in some scenarios and other benefits.
4) For some reason older denominations are much more "sticky" in (-3000) Marathons than Normals; with maybe half of games Protestantism remaining a small sectarian movement, and European civs quite often having a few Orthodoxes among them (not counting almost always Orthodox Russia; as a side note, modern Greece almost always becomes Muslim regardless of speed).
I'd like to hear other opinions on different speed experiences, and if points above are perceived or real differences.
