WoundedKnight's Strategy Guide (Revised)

[ChiefMatt]

Great article WK, I have one question though about your suggested city specialization. What's the purpose of the culture specialized city? If you're going for a culture victory wouldn't it make more sense to spread those buildings out to the 3 targeted cities?

 

[WoundedKnight]

>I always chop outside the boundaries first, especially on monarch

Thanks for the tip; I didn't know this. Very useful.

>Woo. researching Fibre Optics in 1790AD and only 3 turns to achieved !!

The research you see here is actually slower than it would be because, playing as a philosophical civ, I canned state property and went back to mercantilism for the great people. Even with the Forbidden Palace and Versailles built, this added 127 in city distance maintenance, in addition to paying the relatively civic high upkeep of mercantilism and losing some trade revenue from the absence of any foreign trade routes. After inflation, I was paying between 220 and 250 a turn for the privilege of mercantilism. If I were to revert to state property, the tech rate would climb 10-15% -- but it's kind rather a mute point as the AI players are all about 15 techs behind. Plus I'm maintaining a large army that may be rather excessive: about 90 military units, which cost extra upkeep since I have pacifism.

>It's seems you have around 40 cities ?
>What the ratio cities construct / cities conquered

Let's see -- I have eliminated the Germans and Aztecs and conquered most of the Spanish (all but 2 cities) and all of the Egyptians but 1 city. 18 or 19 of the 40 or 41 cities have English names, so this suggests that the ratio of constructed: conquered is nearly 1:1. As I have nearly eliminated 4 rival civs, you can see that I constructed far more cities than any of my rivals -- putting my score at 2.5-3.0x theirs before the first war hit. Now after the wars it is approximately 5x.

>I see that the Oracle is generating 16 Culture ?????!!!! The manuals say the >oracle is generating only 8 culture..... Same for Stonehenge

Excellent observation. You are probably correct that it is likely an ancient wonder/tourist attraction like in Civ3. It does appear to be a real effect and is not related to cultural multipliers buildings as other wonders show their base cultural values while only the oracle and stonehenge have an increase. Probably an undocumented effect of CIV which other players will undoubtedly corroborate in time.

>One suggestion that would help me out greatly
>is if you would reference the technology(s) needed for the improvement
>upgrades and civics you reference early in the guide.

Thank you. Will try to get this in the next update.


>What's the purpose of the culture specialized city?

Specialist cities are generally not unique; I try to have about 3 military cities, several great people cities, etc. If you want a cultural victory, you need 3 cities. For a detailed strategy of how to consistently achieve a cultural victory on Monarch level, I recommend the thread of walkerjks here:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=138647

>farms are neccesary to get access to grains (rice, corm, wheat) and yield
>+2 food

I haven't commented on improvements needed for special resources, as I assume that the player will always build plantations for bananas, pastures for horses and cows, camps for deer, farms for rice, corn, wheat, without special note in the strategy guide.

I have noted that the yield of farms is +1 food, which increases to +2 with the biology tech...very late in the game. In the mid-game (pre-biology), windmills and watermills (only if you have state property for watermills) are a better alternative to farms as they offer the same +1 food bonus while also providing production and commerce (depending on your other techs).

 

[LeSphinx]

Thanks WoundedKnight for your replies.

Indeed, the privilege of mercantilism is at a very big cost! The bad thing is you can not have foreign trade routes. Have you check the difference with Free market. as you have around 40 cities, one foreign route for al your cities can boost your commerce and then indirectly your research /culture or gold according to your allocated rates.

I do not remeber which kind of victory you achieved with this game ?

Seeing the screenshot of your big great people factury, I generaly used (as describe in the forum the thread of walkerjks here: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=138647) a mix of this strategy with only one kind of specialis in each cities PLUS some appropriate wonders generating same great people type of the specialist type you have in your city. THe effect is huge and you are not link with the lucky factor. If you want a Great artist, you will have a 100% chance of getting one!

LeSphinx

 

[LeSphinx]

WoundedKnight, I've played another game using a biggest empire as I almost do.
So I expand quickly by attacking my first neigboord.
I had a big problem with maintenance and distant costs. I suppose you build Versailles and Forbidden Palace verzy quick ? around which dates?

LeSphinx

 

[Simetrical]

If you are not going for a cultural victory, I find that in most cases it is preferable to join great artists to border cities or captured cities instead of invoking the "culture bomb." Great artists produce +12 to +15 culture per turn, which is the equivalent of many cultural buildings (library = +2 culture, theater = +3, etc) and will quickly expand the city's borders -- in addition to any cultural multipliers the city may have (cathedrals, hermitage, civics, etc). In this way, you still continue to receive the commerce benefits of the great artist throughout the game, speeding your research and filling your coffers.

But say the GA produces +30 culture after everything's taken into account, a very generous estimate. It will take 134 turns for it to surpass the 4000 culture you could get instantly. Using more realistic estimates for (presumably less-developed) border cities, it will take 200+ turns for it to surpass the instant bonus. It thus seems to me that the culture bomb is almost always going to be preferable.

 

[WoundedKnight]

But say the GA produces +30 culture after everything's taken into account, a very generous estimate. It will take 134 turns for it to surpass the 4000 culture you could get instantly. Using more realistic estimates for (presumably less-developed) border cities, it will take 200+ turns for it to surpass the instant bonus. It thus seems to me that the culture bomb is almost always going to be preferable.

Remember that culture is just ONE aspect of great artists in a city. If your exclusive goal is culture, then do a culture bomb...but joining a great artist to a border city will adequately serve the goal of protecting your border of workable space and provide some buffer. Joining the great artist also adds a large ongoing commerce boost to a city (read: faster tech speed and more money) that is further augmented with specialty buildings (libraries, banks, etc). Border cities also often are high-maintenance (high distance maintenance and often high city number maintenance) and a GA can push them from balance-negative to balance-positive. For these reasons, I almost always prefer to join the great artist to a city rather than use culture bomb, UNLESS you are going for cultural victory or have an urgent need to get a huge amount of culture instantly (for example, a key strategic resource just beyond your city's reach that would come under your control with a "culture bomb").

>I do not remember which kind of victory you achieved with this game ?

Domination. This strategy is effective for most victory types: domination, conquest, spaceship (because of very fast tech and high productivity), etc. A culture victory requires some modifications that are addressed in walkerjks' thread previously cited.

>So I expand quickly by attacking my first neigboord.
>I had a big problem with maintenance and distant costs. I suppose you build >Versailles and Forbidden Palace verzy quick ? around which dates?

I often go for state property which makes both Versailles and FP irrelevant, but I build them in ASAP games when I play philosophical nations that want mercantilism (as in the screenshots I posted). These both affect only distance maintenance, not city number maintenance, and the effects are modest. In best cases, they only reduce my total city maintenance by about 25% (cutting distance costs to roughly half prior but leaving city number costs alone).

A more important part of the strategy is ensuring that economic development is commensurate with geographic expansion, allowing cities to grow in size and building as many cottages and other improvements with economic benefits (esp. watermills) so that your cities will pay for themselves and more.

If you expand suddenly and absorb a large number of AI cities, these cities of course will probably not be as well-developed with improvements like cottages and watermills as cities you have developed yourself. Therefore these cities may at first cost more than they bring in, until you have fixed them up with the appropriate improvements and the cottages have had time to develop.

Early war also poses some challenges for any strategy. If you insist on swallowing large neighbors very early -- before cottages in your home territories have become lucrative and before obtaining the techs and civics that increase their output have been discovered and adopted -- be aware that you may experience a big tech slowdown and some financial hard times.

While early war can offer some real benefits of productivity, it can hurt your tech and economy if your own economy is not sufficiently advanced. For this reason I am cautious about early war (My warmongering goes into full swing in the late middle ages -- as soon as I can get my hands on cavalry), although there are of course times when an early attack is too good to pass up.

I typically send workers in right behind my army in order to get cottage improvements growing ASAP. I also try to expand at a measured pace that allows development and economy to keep up. If you are absorbing a civilization nearly as large as yours, that will dent your expenses much more than absorbing one a half or a quarter of your size. It is also much easier to absorb cities later in the game than earlier.

 

[Gunner10]

Wonders

Interestingly, unlike CivIII, wonders seem to expire when YOU get the expiring tech, not when your neighbors do. So I sometimes try to hold off on trading for the calender tech until all my cities have experienced border expansion from stonehenge,

WoundedKnight, that is INCORRECT. I'm positive that in Civ III it only mattered when YOU got the tech that made your wonders obsolete. You're thinking of Civ I, where that was definitely the case, and (maybe) of Civ II.

Otherwise, absolutely terrific guide - my hat goes off to you!

One other question: I've come across a couple of mentions that railroad increases production of tiles in some cases, i.e. lumbermill. However, none of that is mentioned in the manual or civilopedia. Could you please confirm the exact details on that?

 

[Riothamus]

WoundedKnight, that is INCORRECT. I'm positive that in Civ III it only mattered when YOU got the tech that made your wonders obsolete. You're thinking of Civ I, where that was definitely the case, and (maybe) of Civ II.

Otherwise, absolutely terrific guide - my hat goes off to you!

One other question: I've come across a couple of mentions that railroad increases production of tiles in some cases, i.e. lumbermill. However, none of that is mentioned in the manual or civilopedia. Could you please confirm the exact details on that?

Nah, I'm pretty sure that in Civ III, it mattered when any civ got the tech.

But yeah, nice guide WoundedKnight.

 

[Lullaby]

Nah, I'm pretty sure that in Civ III, it mattered when any civ got the tech.

It was definitely when you got the tech. Else the usual Great Lib slingshots wouldn't have worked.

 

[Civthing]

I've also seen the "tourist attraction" part pf the culture on regular buildings as well. Either that or I'm missing something big in the culture department



There, you see the Library producing 4 culture when it should make 2.

The Temple, Temple of Soloman, Kashi, and Stonehenge are also all making double culture.

Civthing

 

[DaviddesJ]

One other question: I've come across a couple of mentions that railroad increases production of tiles in some cases, i.e. lumbermill. However, none of that is mentioned in the manual or civilopedia. Could you please confirm the exact details on that?

All of that information is in the terrain/improvements guide, in this same forum:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=144029

 

[lastchance]

A few things I would like to point out:
Slavery is incredibly underrated here. That happiness cap can be hit very early and very quickly in the early game, where warring is also the most effective, and Caste System + Emancipation aren't going to be there yet. Food + Granary + Slavery = war machine, which is enough to win the game right then and there.

Religion is important because of the happy and culture, plus Temple + monastary for priests and prophets, not because of relations from neighbors. You only need one or two real friends, and you don't need to have same religion, if they're not that type of evil religious civ.

Also, there should be a section on trade routes. In the early game, it's about 1 or 2 commerce per turn, per city, but once you meet neighbors and get astronomy for trade through seas, you can get about 2 or 3 trade routes each pumping 4-5 commerce per city, which pretty much pays for your research. Also, your yield will be much higher in coastal cities with harbor.

 

[DaviddesJ]

Slavery is incredibly underrated here. That happiness cap can be hit very early and very quickly in the early game, where warring is also the most effective, and Caste System + Emancipation aren't going to be there yet.

But isn't enslaving your citizens just going to make your happiness problem even worse? I haven't used Slavery enough (not at all) to know exactly how much unhappiness it generates, but, I was under the assumption that it would be a big problem.

 

[lastchance]

It's -1 for 10 turns, and it's a decently big problem, but when you already have hit your happiness cap or exceeded it, it's a nice way to gain troops/needed infrastructure.

Also, I'm a big fan of the BW rush with Axeman, and Slavery + Chopping greatly increase the strength of any early game rush.

It's much more situational than chop is, but I think it's a very strong rush.

 

[DaviddesJ]

It's -1 for 10 turns, and it's a decently big problem, but when you already have hit your happiness cap or exceeded it, it's a nice way to gain troops/needed infrastructure.

Is it -1 for each population sacrificed, or -1 for a single rush regardless of how many population it costs?

 

[lastchance]

I believe it's -1 per rush.

 

[Kaleb]

One other question: I've come across a couple of mentions that railroad increases production of tiles in some cases, i.e. lumbermill. However, none of that is mentioned in the manual or civilopedia. Could you please confirm the exact details on that?

Railroad gives +1 production on squares with a mine or a lumbermill.

Early war also poses some challenges for any strategy. If you insist on swallowing large neighbors very early -- before cottages in your home territories have become lucrative and before obtaining the techs and civics that increase their output have been discovered and adopted -- be aware that you may experience a big tech slowdown and some financial hard times.

too right!

am busy fighting a war of attrition with my neigbours the Aztecs. I am the Persians and wanted to see if Immortals were as effective at the early rush as some people say they are.

After making some quick early progress I got slowed down taking Monty's second city and am now after his capital. Got his last unit down to 0.0 health (!!!!) but he survived, and has managed to re-garrison a few more archers. So annoying.

I am sure to beat the Aztecs but it is taking much longer that I had wanted and I am having to miss out on organised religion or drop my tech to 50%! I am not losing out too badly compared to the Germans and Mongols who are next to me but I am worried about civ's further afield who may be bounding ahead of me.

what I would say is: only do an early rush to take a specific city/resource near your empire. or wipe out an opponent that you can destroy quickly (it normally takes longer than you think!).

I have found that the key to being able to win a war quickly is CATAPULTS (which I am only just now producing and really missed) they enable you to reduce city fortifications and one you've done that thrown them in like sacrificial lambs to do some collateral damage and soften them up for the rest of your troops.

This means your hard-hitting troops (especially swordsmen) are more likely to survive and gain experience, making them progressively more effective as you go on to further cities.

It is also worthwhile bringing in cavalry with flanking upgrades as they can often be good at softening up defenders without getting themselves killed in the process...

otherwise wait for middle ages!!

 

[Nero's Wraith]

Solid and comprehensive strategy guide, WK. This is very similar to the style I play, and I have a few comments.

1) The Bureaucracy civic gives +%50 percent commerce, not gold, and I value it highly and think you should too. Because your capitol is usually your most well developed city with the most commerce, I find that it is not until the late game that I have enough towns in other cities that free speach is better for commerce. The hammer bonus are not a big consideration for me on when to switch, it is nice but not the reason to stay Bureaucratic.

Aside: rather than counting town #s in a large empire, multiplying by 2 and comparing that to my 1/2 my capitol's comerce (times building bonuses) and making the decision to switch, I save, change, compare and reload (if uneeded). I know this is lazy and may be considered cheating by some, but it's quick and easy, and if you do it during peace time is unlikely to give you "cheat gain."

2) I think it is usefull to think of the cottage-spamming that is central to your strategy in terms of the city specialization concept that is so widely discussed. You are essentially specializing almost all of your cities as comerce cities. You only need 1-3 GP generating cities generally, so everything else is production or commerce. Which is better? In single player (at least at levels monarch and below), research >> production because the advances that research gets you trump obsolete units or an extra building or wonder.

3) I think you have undervalued early war. Of course, everything CivIV is situational, and if you have a lot of land to settle then forgoing the Ancient Era war is fine. But, if you start close to 1 or 2 opponents or on the same continent, an early war or two can get you cities at a cheaper production cost than settlers. This is particularly effective with the Inca's UU, but I have used early axmen with other civilizations (obviously dependant on copper, though chariots or chariot UU could be used if you have horses) to the same effect.

Treat your Axmen or UUs as cheaper settlers, chop-rushing a barracks and then 5 or more to go take your neighbor's stuff. At prince and noble he may not even have a 2nd city if you are fast. As long as you keep a 2+ to 1 ratio of attackers to defenders you should be able to win without trouble against a computer, and as long as it's cheaper than settling cities yourself is a good idea. Often, I will be able to destroy 2 civs completely(gaining 2 capitols, maybe a couple of smaller cities that made it to 2 population, and some workers) before it becomes more profitable to settle.

War wearines appears to have an inflation factor, though I have yet to figure out how this works, but as long as you take a break between wars (if fighting more than 1), these early wars tend to go quick enough that there is *no* happiness effect (again, at least on levels monarch and below). There are a number of consequences to this quick warmongering which effect strategy:
A - Bigger capitol and early cities, as they grow while making units. Value of slavery up, as is importance of luxery resources, religion,etc.
B - Bad relations with neighbors you didn't finish off. Usually not a big deal because you still have a big army, and the computer knows it. No relations with civs you destroyed. May be harder to tech trade, so decreases value of Alphabet.
C - Don't get to place captured cities. While the capitols you capture will usually be in prime spots, as a whole may differ from a "perfect" divying up of the land.
D - More maintainence earlier. This is the biggest impact. On noble this can mean a momentary dip in your research lead and at higher difficulties longer until you reach tech parity (and then tech superiority). You will be running at a lower research % (often even into the mid and mid-late game), but you will have a bigger empire and will still research as fast or faster once your cities start to develop. Code of Laws for courthouses increases in value, as does Alphabet for profitable tech trading.

This is getting long, so I'll leave it at that. WK I'm interested to hear more about your tech prefrences, particularly when to go military vs. economic, for a building/wonder tech vs. improvement/increase tech(lots of overlap, but Electricity, Replacable Parts for example), and depth vs. breadth issues.

 

[jsol5]

Tagged for future reference.
Moderator Action: In the 'thread tools' menu, choose 'subscribe to thread' rather than spam in it to 'tag' it.

 

[qwestion2]

I love yur tips staategy thingy but u fergot ms koo is an important resource!