Mastering Realism Invictus - Hints and Tips.

[plasmacannon]

Too many barbarians breaks the gigantic maps. They spawn every 4 turns, and there isnt the economy function that early in game to support enough units. Makes for tedious grind and eventually I just quit. I love the historical aspect however, just wish every modpack didn't include barbarian simulator.

It sounds like you have Raging Barbarians turned on.
With that turned on, yes they spawn a lot. You should only build units early on and a carpenter, warehouse and hunters cabin.
It's where you gain your xp from battling units. You should be able to get some combat 4 militia and archers after upgrading your warriors.
Those militia work well when combined with your shortswordsmen when you build them.

 

[Gus Glenwell]

"It sounds like you have Raging Barbarians turned on.
With that turned on, yes they spawn a lot. You should only build units early on and a carpenter, warehouse and hunters cabin.
It's where you gain your xp from battling units. You should be able to get some combat 4 militia and archers after upgrading your warriors.
Those militia work well when combined with your shortswordsmen when you build them."

Indeed, it is turned off now. The barbarians are still really tough, and now they simply avoid combat with militia and destroy improvements. So I'm starting again to learn how to keep improvements from being pillaged so much. Seems the early game in this mod is much more intense than regular beyond the sword. I dropped difficulty to monarch as well. At least until I finish a game

Thanks for the tips. Love the game, love these forums.

 

[Gus Glenwell]

Actually, I think something is amiss. Every mod pack I load, despite raging barbarians NOT being clicked is absolutely raging barbarians. Vanilla game is normal, and just fine.

With steam version of Civ 4 I often have issues with mods. Some I simply can't use at all. Hard to imagine how this would make any difference though.

I'm used to immortal or deity level in vanilla, so I'm not inexperienced. (played since the first civilization)

Much respect to those who built this awesome mod though. If I can find a retail version of civ4 and beyond the sword disk I'll buy it and use instead. In the meantime I will have to stick to vanilla I suppose.

 

[Walter Hawkwood]

Actually, I think something is amiss. Every mod pack I load, despite raging barbarians NOT being clicked is absolutely raging barbarians. Vanilla game is normal, and just fine.

With steam version of Civ 4 I often have issues with mods. Some I simply can't use at all. Hard to imagine how this would make any difference though.

I'm used to immortal or deity level in vanilla, so I'm not inexperienced. (played since the first civilization)

Much respect to those who built this awesome mod though. If I can find a retail version of civ4 and beyond the sword disk I'll buy it and use instead. In the meantime I will have to stick to vanilla I suppose.

You don't have to. You can actually roll back to non-steam version of Civ 4 on steam by right-clicking, selecting Properties -> Betas -> original_release

Generally speaking, K-Mod AI and a bunch of other tweaks make RI significantly harder than vanilla. As an author, I know the ins and outs of the mod, and I am not comfortable playing beyond Monarch (though I know people who play on higher difficulties). In general, having to concentrate on things you paid no attention to in vanilla (such as barbarian threat) takes some getting used to. So I feel like dropping to Monarch is a sound decision. Also, the number of barbarians is very dependent on actual map geography, with bigger land masses naturally generating more barbarians.

 

[Gus Glenwell]

You don't have to. You can actually roll back to non-steam version of Civ 4 on steam by right-clicking, selecting Properties -> Betas -> original_release

Generally speaking, K-Mod AI and a bunch of other tweaks make RI significantly harder than vanilla. As an author, I know the ins and outs of the mod, and I am not comfortable playing beyond Monarch (though I know people who play on higher difficulties). In general, having to concentrate on things you paid no attention to in vanilla (such as barbarian threat) takes some getting used to. So I feel like dropping to Monarch is a sound decision. Also, the number of barbarians is very dependent on actual map geography, with bigger land masses naturally generating more barbarians.

Thank-you! I'm really spending so much time in this mod I'm feeling guilty. I'm somewhat obsessed at this point; I've never been more challenged than I have in your mod.

I also was playing on the largest map possible with 18 players. I'm going to keep to monarch level or perhaps even prince, and choose the next largest map.

I want to quit so badly because I've been pulling my hair out, but I can't stop until I win a game at least on monarch. And thanks for the tip on steam as well. Might mean I can try out some of the graphic mods like bluemarble as well.

I won't post again until I've beaten a game on monarch level, with at least 12 players. If I don't, eventually I will punch my monitor in the face and will be forced to stop playing

 

[Gus Glenwell]

I got it

I was far ahead and poised for a fairly certain win anyway around 1 AD. (had ownership of the largest chunk of the map by far, and cities were protected enough to keep from being conquered.) Played against 14 on monarch, huge map, .05realism time.

Unfortunately the sound stopped working in all the mods. (still hear music, but no battle sounds, voice sounds, or notifications) Is similar to other issues with civ 4 on steam i've had.

Any case, I did cheat a bit by using random seed function sometimes when I lost a battle. What can I say, I'm not a purist

Very great mod! I appreciate the tremendous work involved. I've learned a great deal as well concerning leaders and history I hadn't been previously exposed to. I'm pretty much in awe of this mod. Best of luck!

 

[CivEikka]

After playing again for this year, I've noticed the following:

- Don't get too far ahead in the scoreboard, you will get ruined by rebellions.
- Forts are mandatory in keeping your nation untouched.
- By that, get your self a group of workers (within army) that can build a fort in one turn to get the fort bonuses.
- In early classical age 2 archers are needed per city (for rebel slaves). When researching iron working it is useful to build/upgrade (building is cheaper...) a third archer which comes with the iron working.
- by researching serfdom the rebels jump from 3 -> 6, and the stack sizes are highers (depending on the size of cities). This can be negated with longbows, by building/upgrading one longbow per city. The single longbow can handle ALL the uprisings (when there is walls.. castle is a plus.)
- Researching coal mining/alchemy to reveal coal/sulfur is mandatory, as if it turns out you don't have the particular resource for the industrial age you will lose.
- three spies per city is ok for catching enemy spies most of the time.

But as I play the current SVN, I've noticed that the conquest victory is particulary impossible, and domination is quite hard also. Basically culture/space race is easily obtainable. (not bothering with the time victory or diplo, as the AI will pile up on you..)

 

[fyermind]

I'd love some advice about happiness in the early game. I've been playing with the default scaling tech costs, so founding a city is a huge hit to my tech rate unless I can get it large and high output, but with happiness cap of 5 after stonehenge + pagan temple, and Despotism +barracks, and walls, it's a pretty rough time. Should I give up on mids + stonehenge + statue of zeus, and go early religion instead? Is Republic better than despotism for civs with </= 5 cities and high production? None of the luxuries provide happiness, so early furs/precious metals/ etc. seem pretty unhelpful here. It sucks because there are such awesome ways to get lots of food and production from some early improvements, but I can't seem to leverage them because of the low happiness. (I play almost exclusively on deity but often WBing in some help at the beginning)

 

[CivEikka]

I'd love some advice about happiness in the early game. I've been playing with the default scaling tech costs, so founding a city is a huge hit to my tech rate unless I can get it large and high output, but with happiness cap of 5 after stonehenge + pagan temple, and Despotism +barracks, and walls, it's a pretty rough time. Should I give up on mids + stonehenge + statue of zeus, and go early religion instead? Is Republic better than despotism for civs with </= 5 cities and high production? None of the luxuries provide happiness, so early furs/precious metals/ etc. seem pretty unhelpful here. It sucks because there are such awesome ways to get lots of food and production from some early improvements, but I can't seem to leverage them because of the low happiness. (I play almost exclusively on deity but often WBing in some help at the beginning)

Oh boy Deity.
Try Monarch with a leader with the revolutionary trait (negative -1 trait). One advice is to found taoism if there ain't any gold/silver.
Playing isolated/on continent without religions is really hard. Can't really give any other good advice as I mainly play on Monarch/Prince.

 

[plasmacannon]

Oh boy Deity.
Try Monarch with a leader with the revolutionary trait (negative -1 trait). One advice is to found taoism if there ain't any gold/silver.
Playing isolated/on continent without religions is really hard. Can't really give any other good advice as I mainly play on Monarch/Prince.

The revolutionary trait (negative -1 trait) will likely get you attacked earlier if that's what you want. I usually don't, so I avoid this trait.
In most of my games, Taoism is nearly impossible to get because too many of the AI's go for it. Especially when we increase the number of AIs in our games.
I find it easier to play leader that's Charismatic (+1) or Politician (+2) and let others get the religions to cause them to gain the heathen religion penalties against each other. When the AI is revolutionary (-1) they tend to get war declared on them. Which is fine by me. Let the AI's duke it out, while I build up my empire and forces. I'll take out what's left.

Also, as you have probably found out, some leaders and empires are more powerful than others by design.
Include the stronger ones as foes for a challange. The weaker ones if it's getting tough.

 

[Sephykrowd]

Also, as you have probably found out, some leaders and empires are more powerful than others by design

Care to elaborate on that? I feel like most civs can be very powerful given a good enough starting position.

 

[2popbulb]

I too think that revolutionary trait is least harmful. AI's are cheating in diplomatic relations,even on Noble they give to each other up to +4(maybe more) first impression bonus so this -1 isn't that bad. I've seen AI's at Pleased while having -5 in diplomatic screen.
Fanatical is the worst since it'll take forever to get early great persons if your leader has this trait. Idealist,Temperamental and Poor commander give your troops negative promotion and this can be big disadvantage in combat. Isolationist and excessive are bad for economy. Arrogant trait will weaken your anti-spy defense which means that AI spies will be even more annoying than they usually are. Schemer trait gives you great general penalty and that means weaker army. Anti clerical will deny you a happiness resource(no temples and cathedrals). If your leader has barbaric trait your cities will need longer time to expand borders.

 

[plasmacannon]

2pop posted the negative traits. Some are easier to live with then others.
Have a Spy penalty? Build a wonder or buildings that generate spy points.
Have a Great General penalty? Carefully choose where you Great Generals go and you'll still get most of the same benefits.
Anti-Clerical loses 1 happiness from temples. Would this matter to a player who chooses not to go for a religion that game? Nope.

Some things are easy to spot, such as traits.
Humanitarians are generally weaker than Legislators, Creatives weaker than Conquerers.
Expansives can build cities quickly, so don't waste time building wonders if they are near, or you could find some of your planned city sites have already been taken.
Would you rather have a neighbor that's more like a Gandhi of Hindi or like an Ivan of Russia?

I shared this chart I created a while back. I forget where the post is now, so I'll share it again.
It is an excel spreadsheet sorted and showing which empires get certain early units I thought were important at the time.
For example, if you like Horse Archers, well, then you can't chose America, because they will never get them.
If you want Longbowmen to protect you cities, then don't chose Mayan, because they will never get them.
Also, just review the improvements. When England get a bonus on reef which we rarely build cities near and Russia gets +1 Food, +1 Production and +1 Commerce on Forest tiles, the most of any other empire iirc, then you can see some imbalance.
Now or have there ever been empires and countries always equally balanced in real life? No. Of course not and that is part of this mod.

 

[Eshiro]

Any tips for combat and conquering cities ? In warchief, the AI captured my capital city and cant reconquer it. It has 3 archers bit when i tried to attack with 3 swordsmen and 3 skirmishers, my chances are always 1 or 0 %. Cant comprehend the combat in this game

 

[uff1ee]

Lower the city's defences with siege units. Stock up on irregulars, maybe 3 per archer, sometimes more depending on the archers' promotions, with city assault promotion. Have the them bash against the archers to weaken the defenders, expect the irregulars to die, then send in your shock troops to take the city and get the experience. Also good to have some recon troops/cavalry for the aid bonuses. You can get lucky sometimes and the irregulars will withdraw from combat and gain experience.

The ability to take cities improves later in the game when you get bombards, but for the earlier game, you're almost always going to be taking significant losses. Make sure your greenest troops take the blunt of the damage. It's very easy to amass a lot of new irregulars.

 

[uplink]

Mkay kids I`m in a weird place with my game and need advice. Mostly I`m just baffled.
So I started a game as the Celts, quickly crushing my closest neighbor Poland followed by Japan. My empire got a bit too big while doing so, but I moved my capital and fully exploited their unique improvement, fortified monastery paired with monasticism and all that jazz. I was a medieval superpower really, easily defeating and vassalizing China and Rome,the two remaining opponents on my continent.

The year is now 1107 AD and I`m researching Critical Thought while my strongest opponent Austronesia is way ahead of me and already researching Medicine! It`s in the process of colonizing the globe and I don`t even have the technology to carry settlers to other continents. How did this happen? Now I know that stretching my empire out like that is the core factor I got left behind in the tech race a bit, but my funds to research ratio was never lower than 40% (usually when playing I try to keep it as high as possible) and I was ahead of everyone else I had met. Sukarno has progressive trait, that`s another 5% for him and I did have Theocracy for a while, that`s -5% for me if I remember correctly, but it`s my 26 cities against his 11, shouldn't my research output be higher all together?

And what the hell I`m supposed to do now? Any tips?

Playing on Prince, Legendary pace

 

[[Y]]

The more cities you have, the more research costs go up, so it's not uncommon to fall behind. If you want to stay competitive, you have to start micromanaging and building up cities to be commerce/research powerhouses, using great persons and the right improvements/buildings to emphasize them, with those cities the using their hammers to build research or gold as necessary.

Looking at your image, the cities I see are mostly about food and hammers, not commerce.

You also want keep to the civics that allow you to best deal with quantity of cities. I usually keep to Despotism, Merchant Princes, and Plutocracy for as long as possible.

And I keep from expanding constantly. I try to go through alternating waves of expansion and building up my cities. During expansion my research my drop to as low as 35%, but I try to get it back to ~70% before I return to expanding.

Oh, and learn to play tall, not wide. Avoid having many cities, especially with overlapping territories. Settle cities to maximize their purpose (research/gold/units) and don't be afraid to have gaps between cities of wasted tiles, or about trying to get every single resource. Focus on getting the resources that city specifically needs to achieve its goals.

 

[CivEikka]

My 2 cents: For cities it does not matter if the city can't work on all the tiles on the fat cross, you can make cities more closer together, this esspecially applies to early/midgame (1-10 population). It is better to have 4-5 cities which are closer together than 2-3 cities which are more further away from main land. But it is not set on stone. Like [Y] said, don't be afraid to expand farther to gain crucial resource early (copper/limestone(s)/horses/fish resources for health.).
Also merchant princes is really OP (guilds never get the love..), monarchy is better than despotism for happiness bonus, but it really depends which is more expensive, having to use culture slider for happiness/using monarchy civic over despotism. Plutocracy is nice, but so is civil service for building phaes/getting the -10% maintenance building with city rights.

Also for SVN the espionage is an issue also, so I can see you are not playing that (you would have constant civil war...)

 

[cammcken]

• Before switching into slavery or pastoral nomadism and taking the worker rate debuff, try to build some improvements first. Build a pasture or two before pastoral nomadism; build some mines or slave farms before slavery.
• Guerilla I - III is subtly one of the most improved promotion lines compared to vanilla. Unlike vanilla — which awards defense first, then defense, then offense plus something special — Guerilla in RI combines defense and offense in each promotion. If a city is placed on a hill, Guerilla can be compared with City Raider and City Garrison. The first two promotions of Guerilla are actually better than two promotions of Raider or Garrison. At three promotions, they are about even, while fourth-tier Raider and Garrison are significantly better than most single promotions and Guerilla has no fourth tier. This means for immediate gain, Guerilla is better in raw numbers. It can be used offensively and defensively, not to mention the usefulness it still carries in the field.

 

[Bobisback]

I know this is a super old thread, but figured I would keep the conversation going.

1. As cammcken mentioned, the Guerilla promotions are really strong. In an enemy city has hills beside it, it basically means your assaulting army cannot be counter attacked. My assault armies have one pikeman, and one longbowmen with maxed out Guerilla promotion. This makes then basically invincible on hills. Obviously with no hills around not as effective, but I found hills to be common enough to justify going this approach. Wrost case you can always use those units as city defence in a city built on hills.

2. Forts are super OP in this game, the immunity to first strikes make then a beast when attacking from those tiles. Basically every city I own has a fort beside it near where enemies are most likely to invade. Combine that with a stack of workers that can insta build a fort, you basically can have a very strong defence against even the biggest stacks of doom. Basically enemy stack comes in, by the time they kill your city defence you have a fort filled with a couple of city garrison archers, and the rest calvary, it can kill any doom stack in a turn or two.

3. Related to above, the immunity to first strikes is very very powerful. All cavalry should try to get to level 3 of flanking asap, as it gives this in the third promotion. You get a stack of 7-9 units, with 6 or so as cavalry and the rest as defence (pikemen/longbowmen) and have them all with level 3 flanking, basically means you can attack any city with a 90% chance for success on the cav (aka retreat/kill the enemy) combine this with the collateral of the cav and a stack of shock units, and you can take any city even if they have tier 3 city defence. Combine this with Guerilla promotion on your defensive units in this stack and a hill next to the city and it is super hard to counter. Even with massive doom stacks.

4. If you can somehow build a fort next to an enemy city then you can very easily take the city, the immunity to first strikes combined with shock troops is super OP (In fact i should look to see if there is a promotion they can get that would allow this). On the world map, as english this is how I conquered france with their huge city defence bonuses. Influance driven wars helps with this alot as well.