Recent content by 30+

deleted.

Players aren't about to give up their Steroids. Lot's of people like deficit building and other exploits as well. Just the way it is for some people. DMOC said it best: Common AI beelines: -Monarchy/Feudalism -Calendar -Construction/Engineering -The religious techs -Scientific...

I'm simply trying to be neutral. Just because I think something is a crutch doesn't mean someone else won't disagree and prefer building it. That's why you notice I don't like the Mids, ever, but at the same time 100% see why someone else would like them.........hence I defended them although...

I would still need monarchy...via trade of course because happy caps for me are 4/3. 7 happiness with a lack of other happiness resources just aint cutting it. Even that much sweeter with a Philo leader and Pacifism. Pulling in 100 GPP in the mid BCs is nice. I have no problem using my UU...

Agree with Johnny on most except the coast part. In most of my games I have the HE finished before 500 BC. 1. High production is good. There are plenty of games I have the HE in my capital because after the HE is built I am able to produce War Elephants in 1 turn as an example. 2. In...

I used to play entirely with Gandhi and SE/FE when I first started playing and it seemed people were really hung up on SE and Mids. Like somehow you cannot use an effective SE if you don't use the Mids. I just don't buy into it and think the Mids are a crutch. That's just my choice. Many...

@ corpse Financial could easily average 4c per by 400 AD......if you remember my Incan game in a different post I had 5 cottages already bringing in 5c each by 600 BC with 11 population, almost 12 (with low food tiles too) at 275 BC. There would be 41 turns until you reach 400 AD (from 600 BC)...

You already know I am anti GW and Pyramids ^^. Besides, if you happened to be playing against 7-18 Civilizations all prioritizing the GW the odds are you wouldn't be the one to get it. Of course, even building it in my scenario, you would still be in for a tough game.

@ pope A normal Philosophical leader will normally produce 4 (on average) GS by 400 AD (with COL). You would definitely already have started education by this time (or at least been on a beeline nearing it) and if you bulbed, could have easily researched Liberalism. This means you would have...

To be honest, in a lot of games you have the game so handily in the bag that you don't even bother building Oxford or other buildings. You just keep making non stop troops and steam roll the competition by 1400-1700 (standard). If you had been settling all your GS then you would lose all those...

^^. Yep. Imo, the absolute hardest game (with normal conditions..not raging barbs, always war, agg AI, etc) to play would be the largest possible map, with the lowest amount of water, on one single land mass and limit the human to a conquest or domination victory while the AI's had all...

Boo! lol. That's why I like fractal or pangea :). Fractal gets me the water/navies and pangea gives you the other stuff fractal lacks which is.......more war!, more diplomacy due to lots of neighbors!, AI's expand much faster than on other maps! Since AI's don't battle as well as humans...

Fractal/Pangea with normal/epic speed. Additionally, I'm not a big fan of Space Race, Diplomacy, or Culture games. They are boring imo. You can simply build 6 cities, settle people, use good diplomacy, and hit enter until you win the game. Not hard to accomplish on any level.

Worker, warrior, settler at size 2 in order to beat the AI's 2nd settler out, then SH warriors while growing to size 4 (happy cap), settlers/warriors/workers as needed until I hit my 1000-800 BC target city number of 5 (if I have the room).

I forgot about that aspect ^^. Wow, that's huge right there. Just think how many more beakers per turn your entire empire would be pumping out with those bonuses....and for 500-800+ years or 25-40+ turns. You could have easily gained 5,000+ more beakers than a settled strategy just on a pure...