99% of my spawn

[Oberinspektor Derrick]

I'll also add in that I personally value production early a lot, and the reason for that is to hit a temporary power spike for unit production.
I see you had plenty of gold lying around, and personally I think you should have spent that early to buy the 2f2p tile right from the start when you could afford it.
With that tile (and any envoys at the military CS) you should be able to churn out a slinger a lot faster, as well as the following settler.
After that, you should have gone for pure warrior (and later archer) production with the added +50% bonus from Agoge.

This build order (2 city with early settler after slinger) usually works regardless of your victory condition, but it is imperative that you do it as fast as possible since your window of opportunity is short, so get those high production tiles!

 

[Oberinspektor Derrick]

This is not even close to true. You may have to accept that every once in a while (no more than 10%) you'll get a game over, but pretty much every opening is viable on deity. You could literally pick your first three builds at random and still be able to comfortably win any victory condition.

Now this is I don't agree with on the other hand, at least if we're talking about the military route (for claiming nearby cities in order to not get locked in).
"Any kind of build order" is just not true, unless you happen to run some very specific map conditions or leaders.

I tried mixing it up personally with the new heroes during christmas, and found that a delayed warrior rush (by getting a builder after the settler in order to boost concurrent eagle warrior production), then using gold to buy a monument in the second city while churning out more eagle warriors from the capital (and a hero in the expansion city), was just too late to get the nearby cities down before walls came up.
Tried it several times in fact, and eventually I just had to resort to the good old 2 city warrior (or eagle warrior in this case) rush with no deviations.
Walls just came up too early to "pick and choose" from viable build options, and not going to war was not an option in these games.

In the OPs case, it is also clear that he couldn't just "pick and choose" a random build order to salvage this.
It is clear that he followed an unoptimized build order in this case, and it cost him the game as it triggered an AI invasion from the east and west at the same time.

 

[greenOak]

Now this is I don't agree with on the other hand, at least if we're talking about the military route (for claiming nearby cities in order to not get locked in).
"Any kind of build order" is just not true, unless you happen to run some very specific map conditions or leaders.

I tried mixing it up personally with the new heroes during christmas, and found that a delayed warrior rush (by getting a builder after the settler in order to boost concurrent eagle warrior production), then using gold to buy a monument in the second city while churning out more eagle warriors from the capital (and a hero in the expansion city), was just too late to get the nearby cities down before walls came up.
Tried it several times in fact, and eventually I just had to resort to the good old 2 city warrior (or eagle warrior in this case) rush with no deviations.
Walls just came up too early to "pick and choose" from viable build options, and not going to war was not an option in these games.

In the OPs case, it is also clear that he couldn't just "pick and choose" a random build order to salvage this.
It is clear that he followed an unoptimized build order in this case, and it cost him the game as it triggered an AI invasion from the east and west at the same time.

That's because this was one of those rare cases where if you open with units you're probably screwed. Also, you definitely don't need to do early warfare to succeed on deity. More often than not I don't conquer a single city. Most maps allow you to peacefully get at 8-12 cities which is plenty enough to win. On many map scripts (lakes, terra (post cartography), highlands, seven seas, primordial to name a few), it is usually possible to peacefully settle over 20 cities on deity.

 

[Oberinspektor Derrick]

That's because this was one of those rare cases where if you open with units you're probably screwed. Also, you definitely don't need to do early warfare to succeed on deity. More often than not I don't conquer a single city. Most maps allow you to peacefully get at 8-12 cities which is plenty enough to win. On many map scripts (lakes, terra (post cartography), highlands, seven seas, primordial to name a few), it is usually possible to peacefully settle over 20 cities on deity.

My reply was referring to those instances where you cant peacefully settle 8-12 cities.

 

[greenOak]

My reply was referring to those instances where you cant peacefully settle 8-12 cities.

Which is uncommon on any map type. Even games where you are boxed in, you can get away with pretty much any build order so long as you don't get war declared on you in the first 50 turns. You can wait until knights (or even later) to do your offesnive wars.

 

[Enfant_Sauvage]

I agree that even reaaly bad starts can be beaten on deity. But at what cost ? If I had to build units, chops a few ones to defend myself that means I can't build some key wonders, or setup some faith economy monumentality and the game is already boring to me. I can win pretty much every game on Deity but a game with a bad start looks too boring to me. I attempt to get quick victories and I noticed that it is harder than before. My PB on science victory must be something like a T195 (normal speed) with Korea which is not bad not that good. If I have to defend myself and use an alternative build order that means that the game will be slower and I don't want that. Why will a T240 (normal speed) Science victory be pleasant if I can do better ?

 

[Oberinspektor Derrick]

I agree that even reaaly bad starts can be beaten on deity. But at what cost ? If I had to build units, chops a few ones to defend myself that means I can't build some key wonders, or setup some faith economy monumentality and the game is already boring to me. I can win pretty much every game on Deity but a game with a bad start looks too boring to me. I attempt to get quick victories and I noticed that it is harder than before. My PB on science victory must be something like a T195 (normal speed) with Korea which is not bad not that good. If I have to defend myself and use an alternative build order that means that the game will be slower and I don't want that. Why will a T240 (normal speed) Science victory be pleasant if I can do better ?

Agree, deity (in cases like the OP describes, and generally in cases where you need to take out your neighbour fast) has been shoe-horned too much at the moment.
Before the GS walls buff and recent AI behaviours buff (more focus on campuses, more focus on ranged units and more focus on walls) the opportunity window is too short at the moment to only leave a handful of early game build orders open as viable.
While I generally like most of these buffs in that it has made the game harder (apart from the walls), the consequence has been that the game has lost a lot of replay value for me these days.
Personally I just lost interest in the game now as following the same strict early game build orders becomes too repetitive for me after a while (while once you stabilized mid-game, the game becomes equally boring as you start pulling further and further ahead).
I could probably manage if walls were toned down significantly to civ 5 levels (and the AI got more late-game buffs), but that's unfortunately not the case.

 

[tsf4]

Maybe a more peaceful way to play higher difficulties would be nice. No one likes getting steam rolled or having to only build units to defend.

 

[Enfant_Sauvage]

Agree, deity (in cases like the OP describes, and generally in cases where you need to take out your neighbour fast) has been shoe-horned too much at the moment.
Before the GS walls buff and recent AI behaviours buff (more focus on campuses, more focus on ranged units and more focus on walls) the opportunity window is too short at the moment to only leave a handful of early game build orders open as viable.
While I generally like most of these buffs in that it has made the game harder (apart from the walls), the consequence has been that the game has lost a lot of replay value for me these days.
Personally I just lost interest in the game now as following the same strict early game build orders becomes too repetitive for me after a while (while once you stabilized mid-game, the game becomes equally boring as you start pulling further and further ahead).
I could probably manage if walls were toned down significantly to civ 5 levels (and the AI got more late-game buffs), but that's unfortunately not the case.

Wholly agreed on that point. This is why I still have fun playing the Game of the Month games, because I know the moderators are always making a fun game to play.

 

[Oberinspektor Derrick]

Which is uncommon on any map type. Even games where you are boxed in, you can get away with pretty much any build order so long as you don't get war declared on you in the first 50 turns. You can wait until knights (or even later) to do your offesnive wars.

That was hit or miss on the recent 20 or so games that I ran.
Some maps I might have been able to settle somewhat freely, but due to RNG involved with forward settling from the AI (staking out the good land in central positions) I saw no other good option to take the AI out early as war seemed inevitable with the way the map was laid out (as well as future loyalty issues on some of my poorly settled cities in the leftover spaces).
As for Knights I used to run those before, but found that they are rather lackluster in GS at the moment for purposes other than killing units (attacking walled cities is just a "no" from me with those).
Another problem with Knights now is that after the AI focuses more on tech, Knights are placed at that inconvenient timing window where the AI is often still pulling away in their tech lead (warfare with medieval era tech is one of my least favourite times to push atm).
I use Knights when I can, but they are not the same powerhouse that they used to be for claiming cities, unfortunately.

That being said, taking out an immediate neighbour is usually such a strong option for me that I find it foolish not to do in my games.
Most of my games are very comfortable wins once the dust settles after an ancient era rush, as you achieve both a lot of settling space, you get free cities (to make up for the cost of unit production), and you have a strong standing army to discourage further invasions.

 

[bengalryan9]

Maybe a more peaceful way to play higher difficulties would be nice. No one likes getting steam rolled or having to only build units to defend.

If only there was a civilization in the game that never has to worry about surprise declarations of war and could start building infrastructure while everyone else was worried about defending themselves...

The option is there if anybody wants it. Canada is as safe as safe can be.

 

[The Highwayman]

I recommend the Lakes template for anyone wishing to play a peaceful Deity game with room to expand to 12-16 cities. Of course it won't always be this way - one must play the land and recognize a potential threat and react accordingly. You can drop a civ to give more room overall, even though the AI could benefit more than you depending on the spawn. Peaceful play is my preferred style for culture and science games so it's definitely possible on Deity.

 

[MrRadar]

Maybe a more peaceful way to play higher difficulties would be nice. No one likes getting steam rolled or having to only build units to defend.

But you do get such starts. You do get wildly different starts. Some are those like in the OP, some are completely or semi-isolated, allowing for a very peaceful play. And you don't just keep getting 99% of one or the other kind, that's just fresh emotions and hyperbole.

If you don't want to get steamrolled at the start, here, I'm uploading my starting save for a Frederic game, as usual I took the first roll, the game is Deity, standard speed and size, Fractal map, no modes, an I put Khmer in, other civs random (I put in the Khmer, and no modes because I wanted to see what it is with their ability when they are controlled by the AI. Last game with the SS mode they had no relics. This game was similar, no modes, they got a religion, but still not a single relic. I'm starting to think they're bugged).

So here's the start:

Spoiler :

Would you take it if you rolled it?
I can tell you, you will have no early trouble from the neighbours. Still, watch out for some barbs. The starting area might not be very roomy, but it is safe and if you go places, you may find more space. There are some nice city states.
I've already completed the game, only got attacked mid-late game by a surprise war, but it was 0 danger war for me, which I just left going until the end, no other wars.

 

[Manol0]

"Your start is fine, you just have to play in this super optimised way, and if you don't do it this way, you deserve to lose"

This is the kind of answers you get most of the times in this forum;no matter the issue you dealing with. I cant tell why people is so aggressive here tho.

Don't train a scout first. Especially if you find an AI that close.

Correct me if I m wrong .. but if no scout Ancienter era = dark age on Classical era. Under the circumstances of the pic in my first post; how could I make new cities with 2 AI's so close to me??... even if I had succeed to defend my capital.

 

[Enfant_Sauvage]

Agreed on that. A scout can first meet city states and take goodie huts faster > that means more gold. With that gold you can purchase units or builder to chop units. scout > slinger > settler can be good but I'd say 2 x scout > settler is better. That depends if you have really good tiles to improve. For example with 2 luxuries in your first ring a scout > builder > settler can be efficient because you can sell your luxuries to AI's for extra gold. Even with an early military rush you want to Magnus chop your units instead of hard-building them.

The point is that claiming that you are not experienced enough is not relevant. This thread is a discussion about bad spawns not a thread about early openings.

 

[Manol0]

Agreed on that. A scout can first meet city states and take goodie huts faster > that means more gold. With that gold you can purchase units or builder to chop units. scout > slinger > settler can be good but I'd say 2 x scout > settler is better. That depends if you have really good tiles to improve. For example with 2 luxuries in your first ring a scout > builder > settler can be efficient because you can sell your luxuries to AI's for extra gold. Even with an early military rush you want to Magnus chop your units instead of hard-building them.

The point is that claiming that you are not experienced enough is not relevant. This thread is a discussion about bad spawns not a thread about early openings.

You are obviously off topic. That reply was an answer to another user who claimed that I could defend my city against 3 enemies (2 AI's and barbarians) by building only military units and avoid the scout. Not getting a scout drives you to dark age...so reasonably I wondered even if I managed to survive how could I expand in a dark age with AI's so close to me. That question had nothing to do about the opening tactics but how viable a bad spawn can be. Read carefuly next time before you comment or improve your english.

Moderator Action: Please watch your tone when posting. Trolling responses (like telling others to "improve their english") are uncalled for. Browd
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Enfant_Sauvage]

Meh... They were probably right about your attitude after all.

Moderator Action: Foreign language portion deleted. This is an English language site, and we require all posts in a foreign language be accompanied by an English translation. Browd
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Oberinspektor Derrick]

You are obviously off topic. That reply was an answer to another user who claimed that I could defend my city against 3 enemies (2 AI's and barbarians) by building only military units and avoid the scout. Not getting a scout drives you to dark age...so reasonably I wondered even if I managed to survive how could I expand in a dark age with AI's so close to me. .

No it doesn't, unless you play with Dramatic Ages on.
If you do run DA, you aren't guaranteed a golden age (thus putting you in a dark age) even with a scout, and on normal a slinger first is usually plenty to get you over the dark age treshold.

Personally with such an aggressive start (as your neighbours are very close and willing to pump out military) I'd skip the builder entirely.
Going slinger > builder > settler delays the settler too much (even if it potentially boosts later production through improved resources/chops/civic boost to craftsmanship, and if the AI starts pushing you at about T20 you aren't getting that settler out before having to switch to military production - but you still have the option to buy some high-prod tiles with your gold to slightly make up for it (like that 2f2p tile you had, I'd buy that immediately in your game as soon as you could afford it).
While the builder is nice for boosting craftsmanship, you need units right now, and delaying the settler sets you back too much.

In even rarer cases (two hyper-aggressive neighbours like Montezuma/Chandragupta etc.) right nearby in open terrain you might have to forego the settler entirely, but that is a very bad situation to be in regardless and might mean a restart.

 

[Manol0]

No it doesn't, unless you play with Dramatic Ages on.
If you do run DA, you aren't guaranteed a golden age (thus putting you in a dark age) even with a scout, and on normal a slinger first is usually plenty to get you over the dark age treshold.

Personally with such an aggressive start (as your neighbours are very close and willing to pump out military) I'd skip the builder entirely.
Going slinger > builder > settler delays the settler too much (even if it potentially boosts later production through improved resources/chops/civic boost to craftsmanship, and if the AI starts pushing you at about T20 you aren't getting that settler out before having to switch to military production - but you still have the option to buy some high-prod tiles with your gold to slightly make up for it.
While the builder is nice for boosting craftsmanship, you need units right now, and delaying the settler sets you back too much.

In even rarer cases (two hyper-aggressive neighbours like Montezuma/Chandragupta etc.) right nearby in open terrain you might have to forego the settler entirely, but that is a very bad situation to be in regardless and might mean a restart.

But the city I was trying to defend was my capital and yes I had built only military units+ 1 scout. I beat Mayans but then Khmer came from the east and killed all my retreated wounded units. I had some damage in my units caused by barbarians.

 

[Oberinspektor Derrick]

But the city I was trying to defend was my capital and yes I had built only military units+ 1 scout. I beat Mayans but then Khmer came from the east and killed all my retreated wounded units. I had some damage in my units caused by barbarians.

In your game I would go through the replay/saves and check when the AI starts going aggressive (I reckon about T25 or so, usually when they see that your army value is low due to damaged units and because they built a sixth warrior to get themselves well above 120).
Assuming they declare on you on T25, you should try to tweak everything to be in a position where you have 2 cities and are free to constantly spam warriors from both cities.
In order to do so, you need to get the Slinger out as fast as you can, as well as the following settler.
The only real way I see that you can do so, is by buying the 2f2p tile asap - the tile will let you grow to pop 2 while giving you an extra production to shave off turns on both units.
In the meantime, use that slinger not to scout too far, and ideally together with your warrior so that if you run into a barbarian, you are in position to get the archery boost.
When you tech straight to archery (with the boost), you should be in position to upgrade/build archers as soon as the tech is up.
If you managed to get to two cities with constant unit production (warriors and later archers), that is usually enough to hold back an AI and take their cities in a counter attack.

The only factor here that complicates this is that there are two AIs targeting you (instead of one), which is why you need to pay very close attention to your army value in order to avoid triggering a surprise war at the wrong moment.
The reason this complicates it is that if one surprise wars you, he might hurt/kill your units and create a lower army value score, thereby triggering the second AI to surprise war you (which likely happened in this game, according to how you described it).
Either way, skip that builder as that means some serious downtime and reduced army value.
In your case it might even be the case that Slinger > warrior > settler might delay that surprise war, but I reckon Slinger > settler would work fine.
I encourage you to test this out though.