Another round of newbie questions

[Tone]

Warlord has 3 content, not 5.

I meant that you can have 5 citizens without luxes or without building temples, colosseums, etc. 3 born content and 2 MPs which, if you've looked at Rocha06's save, you'll appreciate that he'll* probably have. You're right though; it wasn't clear that that's what I meant but I hope that it's unerstood now. Can you believe that I'd actually edited that post to cut down on the waffle! I obviously trimmed it a bit too much.

Comments about 20K are certainly valid but you and I know that what we do for 20K games breaks the 'rules' of how to play effectively for other types of VC. My suggestion to Rocha06 (based upon looking at the save) is that cities rarely go over size 5 in the early game to encourage a more rapid expansion and to place the first few cities with 5 tiles of the capital is valid IMO. This is in order to recognise how productive you can be in the early game by not placing your 3rd city at a distance of 9 units.

The Sir Pleb link is a good one. So good that I've still got it saved as a direct link in my favourites, but be wary that he does abuse the lack of any penalty for negative gpt spending with insufficient funds in his treasury. Do that on Warlord (or soon to be Regent) and you'll get punished, Rocha06!

*assumption made here-sorry if it's wrong!

 

[Rocha06]

can I bribe them into a war with someone else), etc. Not a simple question.

You can do that?? How??

One question regarding war alliances: I remember one game where the Mayas and the Aztecs were at war with each other...later they signed a peace treaty...after a while, I tried to make an alliance with the Mayas against the Aztecs, since they this history...but they refused and it didn't matter what I was willing to give them for that...so, what are the factors that influence an alliance?

 

[Rocha06]

I meant that you can have 5 citizens without luxes or without building temples, colosseums, etc. 3 born content and 2 MPs which, if you've looked at Rocha06's save, you'll appreciate that he'll* probably have.

Not sure what you mean...what are MP's?

but be wary that he does abuse the lack of any penalty for negative gpt spending with insufficient funds in his treasury. Do that on Warlord (or soon to be Regent) and you'll get punished, Rocha06!

Not sure what mean here either...spending more money that you have (with the Shrinking! in red letters)? Is that it?

 

[vmxa]

You can do that?? How??

One question regarding war alliances: I remember one game where the Mayas and the Aztecs were at war with each other...later they signed a peace treaty...after a while, I tried to make an alliance with the Mayas against the Aztecs, since they this history...but they refused and it didn't matter what I was willing to give them for that...so, what are the factors that influence an alliance?

This can be a several things. You could have a bad rep and they do not want a deal. It mostly is an indication that they intend to attack you soon. It could also mean that they see you as too weak to ally with.

 

[vmxa]

Not sure what you mean...what are MP's?



Not sure what mean here either...spending more money that you have (with the Shrinking! in red letters)? Is that it?

MP's are military police. If your form of government supports MP's, each one in a town has a pacifying effect up to the number allowed in that form.


Yes in Chief level games, spending more than you make and you do not have enough piled up, does nothing. In other levels the game will sell off items or disband units to make up the difference, unless you are in anarchy.

 

[Tone]

You can do that?? How??

One question regarding war alliances: I remember one game where the Mayas and the Aztecs were at war with each other...later they signed a peace treaty...after a while, I tried to make an alliance with the Mayas against the Aztecs, since they this history...but they refused and it didn't matter what I was willing to give them for that...so, what are the factors that influence an alliance?

This can be a several things. You could have a bad rep and they do not want a deal. It mostly is an indication that they intend to attack you soon. It could also mean that they see you as too weak to ally with.

Also could be that they have signed an MPP together. If you have an embassy with at least one of them, you can check this out using the Diplo screen (F4).

The bad reputation that vmxa mentions is a complicated issue. There are plenty of threads in here if you want to do some research or you could read this article from the War Acadamy.

Also, as vmxa has already said, MPs are military police. The reason why I allowed for two additional content faces above the three already given at Warlord level is that in the early part of the game you will be in Despotism which allows a maximum of 2 MPs. Just be careful if you then revolt to something like Republic later in the game. (I'm not saying don't use Republic BTW!)

 

[Aabraxan]

You can do that?? How??

One question regarding war alliances: I remember one game where the Mayas and the Aztecs were at war with each other...later they signed a peace treaty...after a while, I tried to make an alliance with the Mayas against the Aztecs, since they this history...but they refused and it didn't matter what I was willing to give them for that...so, what are the factors that influence an alliance?

When I said "bribe them into going to war," (or however it was that I phrased it), I was talking about getting one AI to enter into a military alliance with you against a second AI. Sometimes a bit of gold or an obsolete tech is enough to get an AI into a war with another.

Not sure what mean here either...spending more money that you have (with the Shrinking! in red letters)? Is that it?

The "Shrinking!" in red letters in your domestic advisor screen relates to your gold per turn cash flow is. That's a separate question of how large your treasury is. You could have $4K in your treasury, but if you're at -1 gpt, it's going to say "shrinking." You won't lose any units or buildings for that. It's when your treasury falls below zero that you'll start losing stuff.

 

[Rocha06]

Ok guys, I tried again last night...lemme try to explain this scenario. First of all:

Russians
Warlord
Middle Age
Went right for Republic. Alphabet/Philosophy/Republic.
Built Mausoleum Of Maussollos (it wasn't hard and it could help get to Golden Age...although it didn't)

When you see this, it doesn't look that bad...but a few turns after this last save, the Zulus started a war with me. I should've seen it coming, they had no more room to expand and I was positioning my units near their cities.

Their army overpowered me, too many...which to me was funny because they didn't have a lot of money (around 40gp...maybe they spent it all on building this friggin army). I should say that I wansn't very concerned with military in the beginning, I just wanted to expand and research. Even though I did get into a fight with the scary Egyptians, before Middle Age, because they were building cities near mines...the nerve...so I razed two of their cities. I didn't conquer them because I wanted to expand Northeast, since it was a safer and unconquered territory and it had a lot of luxs. Later we signed a Peace Treaty (which included one minor tech and 7 gp...I thought it was ok and they had just positioned a few units near my capital, I got scared).

And, about Northeast...I know what you're probably thinking, I built a city too far. Not quite. I won that city from a goody hut and I just thought I should keep it, even though it was located in a really bad place. No space for irrigation and I had to create a colony to get the iron there, which I ended up getting from the city closest to the Zulu.

Anyway, after this, the Zulus simply kicked my ass and stole two of my cities (the Northeast one and the one closest to them, to the East). The whole thing got crazy, the Celts put a city right above my capital and also started to fight the Zulus...which was helpful, but not enough. Damn, they had a LOT of units! I got sick and turned it off and now I'm here.

To tell you the truth, it was doomed from the beginning. I think my starting spot was terrible. No lux (only got fur with my second one), while the Zulus had a lot of them. Which meant I had to spend some money on the lux slider and/or turning civs into clowns...which might have prevented me from spending more money on military. And the Egyptians were breathing down my neck.

So gimme your thoughts. What could I have done? I know, I should've paid more attention on military and maybe I should've abandoned that city from the goody hut (even though I don't know how to do that).

 

[Tone]

So gimme your thoughts. What could I have done?

Well I don't see many cities and I see very little around your capital. I thought about this and decided that perhaps you are not sure what I meant before so I extracted the world seed number from your save and recreated the 4000BC save. (I wasn't sure about SGL, respawn AI and cultural linked start settings so I switched them all off. I set AI aggression as normal.)

This is not fantastic start but you do have a food bonus tile and a few bonus grass tiles.

That fish in the lake is worth 3 food in Despotism (4 in other governments) and food is power so why did you move?

I played the first 80 turns up to 1000BC. I was going to post a log here but I decided instead to attach the text file and my 1000BC save. This is a screenshot from around the capital. The marsh, jungle and desert halt development in many directions but you can still get a core set up in that space. I admit that I had the advantage of having seen much of the map beforehand but I forgot much of it once I got into the game.

You probably think that those cities are far too close together. If so feel free to space yours out a bit more but please, please, please develop your core first. Those early cities were producing 2spt @size 1 which is enough to cope with any AI aggression and ensure that the commerce created from those cities was not lost to corruption. Notice that I'm researching Currency and only need Construction and Map Making to get into the MA and I'm the tech leader. IIRC I've only just built my first Lib-early tech pace is to do more with the number of cities than what you have in them.

No doubt some other player could pick up that save and do better than me. I just did it to give an idea of what you could do. On reflection I'm a bit low on workers. (My excuse is that I'm not too well and so my thought processes are dulled. )

From your save a couple of comments. I'm not sure if you are irrigating most tiles at the start or whether you changed these after getting Republic. If you were irrigating the grass tiles at the start, you're wasting your time. There is something often referred to as the Despotism Penalty which results in any food gained from a tile being reduced by one if that tile produces more than three whilst you are in Despotism. (This also applies to shields and commerce BTW and is one of many reasons why it is good to get out of this government very early in the game.) Only irrigate grass tiles whilst in Despotism if they have a food bonus, such as game, cow or wheat. Standard irrigated grass is 3 food, but is reduced to 2 under Despotism so standard grass tiles and bgs should be mined early on. Many players stick to the 'mine green, irrigate brown' rule until they get to know the game a bit better.

If you read my game log (and you may not want to as it does go on a bit ) you'll notice that I lost a number of scouts to barbs. Barbs are fun to play with but do take away some of your advantage as an expansionist civ. You will pop a few more huts, increasing your tech progress a little, if you have Barbs on the next highest setting after off (can't remember what it's called) which means that you gat huts but no barb camps. The only barbs will come when the AI gets barbs from them. You may also want to consider beingthe only expansionist civ.

Anyway, my advice is to build more cities and place them closer to your capital.

 

[Rocha06]

Tone: I haven't read the entire log yet, but why so many Libraries? I thought you said they weren't that useful...I think I built maybe one on this game. Enlighten me...

I didn't know about the penalty on Despotism...

 

[Tone]

Tone: I haven't read the entire log yet, but why so many Libraries? I thought you said they weren't that useful

1. They are my cheapest culture and so they'll expand my borders. (I should switch the town way up north to a lib BTW.) Some of the southern towns are close to the Egyptian capital and will be under greater pressure soon if they don't expand their borders. If a city doesn't hold all of it's own 20 tile 'fat cross' and it shares a border with a rival nation, then it has a chance of flipping over to them. This chance is greater if my own culture is poor and/or the city in question is nearer their capital than mine.

2. They are useful in researching. Not sure if it's something I said or something I didn't say that caused this misunderstanding. A settler would be better at this stage but when food doesn't allow it then I'll build a Lib. Of course I could irrigate some of those grass tiles now that I'm in Republic but as I said, I have fewer workers than I really should so if I were continuing, I'd complete the Libs, burn off the population with a few workers or settlers as appropriate and then irrigate some of those bonus grass tiles. An alternative would be more troops but I don't have any resources connected up at this stage and if you build troops, they are a drain on your resources unless you use them.

BTW I've played this in a peaceful manner as that's what you were trying to do. However, Thebes looks like a nice area so I'd be looking to claim those horses in the south with the settler that's going down there, connect up the horses, build a few horsemen and take their capital over. Earlier on I may have even considered doing it with a few archers-I suspect 5 would be sufficient at this level.

 

[Rocha06]

Ok then...more questions...

1-Settlers: when is a good time to actually create one? Let's say I only have 1 city, the game just started...my population have just grown to 4 civs...should I waste those 2 new ones to create a settler? Or should I wait until I have like 6 or something?

2-Granarys: it's usually the first thing I build other than units...how do you feel about that?

3-Republic: it was my main goal but it took me quite a while to get it. Once I had it the other tribes were more respectful towards me, but since I had to spend 50 turns to get it (my research slider was at 60% or somethin') I was kinda falling back compared to them.

4-Research: apparently you traded techs like hell at the beginning...I know I asked this before, but isn't it good to let the other tribes stay behind you on the science race?

5-Luxs: I don't know if you noticed it, but the Zulus have a lot of luxs on their territory, especially grapes, which are great. Could you take 'em first, instead of the Egyptians? Their units are stronger, right? (that's the impression I got when they robbed my two cities)

6-Embassies: when is a good time to build them, and for what purpose?

Thanks again for your time!

 

[Tone]

1-Settlers: when is a good time to actually create one? Let's say I only have 1 city, the game just started...my population have just grown to 4 civs...should I waste those 2 new ones to create a settler? Or should I wait until I have like 6 or something?

It not 'a waste'!!! Settlers and workers are the most important units in the game. Early in the game, I'll build the settler if I have the population. In many towns that means starting before you reach size 3. I completed the first settler from Moscow before it reached population of four and even with the granary it never got above size 4. If you let your towns grow too large you'll have to do something about it. I wasn't worried about happiness because my cities never grew very big.

2-Granarys: it's usually the first thing I build other than units...how do you feel about that?

I build them in cities that are going to build a lot of settlers or workers. I don't build them everywhere as 60 shields in every city is quite costly IMO.

3-Republic: it was my main goal but it took me quite a while to get it. Once I had it the other tribes were more respectful towards me, but since I had to spend 50 turns to get it (my research slider was at 60% or somethin') I was kinda falling back compared to them.

I used philosophy to get Republic as my freebie. I popped Alpha from a hut (but could have traded a few turns later if I hadn't) and then researched Writing>CoL>Phil enabling me to choose Republic as my free tech. You'll notice that many civs are not happy with me if you look at the save. This is because I am in a different form of government to them. In your game they became happy once you got it because you switched to their government. I'm not worried about them being a bit unhappy. The trades I made earlier will compensate slightly for this but I have a lot more towns than them, I have a lot more cash, I have a tech lead and my military may only be a few warriors but it compares well to them. If you look at the power graph in F8, I'm strong. If anybody takes me on, I'll hold them with what units I have and outproduce them in getting new military units with my greater number of cities. Meanwhile I may set up an embassy with any neighbours and use my cash and/or techs to get a couple of allies. They'll wish that they'd never picked a fight if they tried it in this game.

4-Research: apparently you traded techs like hell at the beginning...I know I asked this before, but isn't it good to let the other tribes stay behind you on the science race?

They are behind me. No one but me has Phil, CoL, Rep, Lit and I'm just about to get a monopoly on Currency. Only one civ has Poly and some don't have Writing or Maths. How much of a tech lead are you after?!! I traded for techs as my experience is that if you do get a tech from a hut, it'll probably be one that someone else knows if that option is open. I also traded just to take their cash and keep them happy with me. Note that I traded for Poly when Egypt had a monopoly on it. That is not normally recommended as the price drops if more civs that know the tech. However I was after getting techs through huts as already explained and I could afford it. I know what you mean in that trading techs too much can cause you to lose your advantage but no trading can be a lot worse. If you have a number of scouts out there, trade, trade, trade is my advice. If I had played that game on a bit more, I would have gifted the three other scientific civs all the way into the MA and then traded for their freebies, using Republic if I had to. It's a bonus that none of them are on my back door so I can still use my tech advantage to dominate in my own area.

5-Luxs: I don't know if you noticed it, but the Zulus have a lot of luxs on their territory, especially grapes, which are great. Could you take 'em first, instead of the Egyptians? Their units are stronger, right?

The Zulu are quite strong in the early game and will get a GA if I attack an Impi and lose. They are also militaristic and so will get more promotions plus will be more likely to have vet units as barracks are cheaper for them. They can wait IMO as the Egyptians are closer and so their cities will be less corrupt when I take them over. I'll take the Zulu on when I'm stronger. The way research is going it won't be too long before I could have knights (or even just Medieval Inf.) and they'll walk all over the Impi. I would consider getting an alliance with the Zulu when I attack the Egyptians just so thay don't stab me in the back. They may also cause them to waste their GA by encouraging them to build loads of units to attack Egypt, rather than building settlers and better infrastructure, and then losing them because they can't afford to keep them all. A GA in Despotism is never as effective anyway due to the Despot Penalty. Yes, the luxes are nice and will enable that AI to grow strong but I'm growing faster than them, the luxes are not essential to me and they're a bit far away at the moment. However the Egyptians are on my doorstep.

6-Embassies: when is a good time to build them, and for what purpose?

If I want an alliance because I've been attacked, I'll have to build one. If I'm concerned about relations with another civ (and in this game the Zulu is a good example) and worried that they my attack, I'll establish an embassy if I have plenty of cash as it will improve that AI's attitude towards me. If I don't have the spare cash (and at the moment it is feeding the negative gpt research) then it'll wait.

 

[Rocha06]

It not 'a waste'!!! Settlers and workers are the most important units in the game. Early in the game, I'll build the settler if I have the population. In many towns that means starting before you reach size 3. I completed the first settler from Moscow before it reached population of four and even with the granary it never got above size 4. If you let your towns grow too large you'll have to do something about it. I wasn't worried about happiness because my cities never grew very big.

But what if I have the chance to build a wonder like Statue of Zeus (not the case here), which is a pretty good one? Then I'm gonna need a big city so that my shield production increases. That's why I get worried about not letting my city grow, I think. It's a pain in the ass to build something on a small town, since it will take forever. That's why I end up letting at least my main cities grow...but I don't know if it's a good strategy. Apparently not, since I'm always losing...

My biggest problem with the game so far, aside from a lack of experience, is that I'm not looking at the big picture. I tend to concentrate solely on my tribe and I don't really pay attention to what the other ones are doing. That's why I'm always being surprised by a sudden new rival city close to my borders or an attack out of the blue. I rarely look at the advisors screen other than the first one (with the sliders) and the last one (research). Again, lack of experience. CIV games have a steep learning curve, I'd say one of the hardest I've even experienced on a PC game. That's why I'm so excited about it! Other strategy games like Age of Empires, Age of Mythology, Master of Olympus, etc. are a lot of fun but they are nowhere as deep or complex as CIV games.

Although, I have to say...playing those other games don't make me go to sleep hating and cursing the Aztecs or the Zulus or somethin'.

 

[Tone]

Wonders are fun but don't build them at the expense of your empire. All you'll do is build a fantastic wonder but be so weak that some AI will come along and take it from you. That's what you want to do to the AI! As far as I'm concerned, any AI that builds the Pyramids on the same landmass as me in my games is posting a big sign over their capital saying 'please attack me'.

Many players would actually advise you to not build wonders in the early game. If you want to build them, be my guest but first make sure that you have enough cities to still build more settlers, more workers and enough military units to defend your empire. The settlers will claim more land and that includes luxuries to keep the citizens in that wonder city happy.

Have you visted the War Acadamy on this site yet? There are loads of great articles, some of which I find myself revisiting for a knowledge top up. There is one on the dangers of Wonder Addiction that's a good read for any player that's quite new to the game.

In the meantime I'll say it again. Concentrate on settlers, workers and the odd military unit in the early game. Develop your core well and at this level you'll be free to take a few liberties, such as building a few wonders.

 

[Aabraxan]

Rocha06,
I'm not going to try to answer all of your questions, because I'd just be repeating a lot of what Tone has said. I do have some additional comments, though.

1-Settlers: when is a good time to actually create one? . . . . should I waste those 2 new ones to create a settler?

Turn it around. There isn't really a bad time to create settlers. Granted, some times are better than others, but they're almost never a waste. Early game -- you'll need them to rapidly expand your empire until your borders bump into someone else's. Later, you will need them to fill in areas that have been, umm, "involuntarily vacated" by the AI . . . As they are the only unit that can create a new city for you, they're arguably the most powerful unit in the game.

4-Research: apparently you traded techs like hell at the beginning...I know I asked this before, but isn't it good to let the other tribes stay behind you on the science race?

It is possible to do both. For me, tech trading is, in essence, economic warfare. It's a means to: (a) get the techs that the AI has researched without having to do it myself; and (b) cripple the AI's ability to research, trade, support armies, etc.

5-Luxs: I don't know if you noticed it, but the Zulus have a lot of luxs on their territory, especially grapes, which are great.

Doesn't matter how many sets of grapes they've got. You can only use one of each type of lux for happiness purposes. The rest are useful for trade, but any given city will only get the happiness effect from the first set of grapes (wines) or the first set of spices, or the first set of gems, etc.

But what if I have the chance to build a wonder like Statue of Zeus (not the case here), which is a pretty good one? Then I'm gonna need a big city so that my shield production increases. That's why I get worried about not letting my city grow, I think. It's a pain in the ass to build something on a small town, since it will take forever. That's why I end up letting at least my main cities grow...but I don't know if it's a good strategy. Apparently not, since I'm always losing...

If you want to build all the wonders, that's fine. But you don't need to build them to win. You can win without them, or you could capture them. There are two articles in the War Academy on wonders that I recommend. They'll help you learn to judge the relative value of the wonders.

The first is on wonder addiction:
http://www.civfanatics.com/civ3/strategy/wonder_addiction.php

The second is a guide to the wonders:
http://www.civfanatics.com/civ3/strategy/greatwonders.php

As you move up in difficulty, you'll have to learn to live with building fewer and fewer wonders. A wonder takes a very productive city "offline" for a very long time. Naturally, if you're going for a wonder or cultural victory, wonders are very important. If you're going for all-out, warmongering conquest, those shields are probably better invested in military units.

 

[Aabraxan]

. . . any AI that builds the Pyramids on the same landmass as me in my games is posting a big sign over their capital saying 'please attack me'.

Ain't that the truth!

 

[MAS]

But what if I have the chance to build a wonder like Statue of Zeus (not the case here), which is a pretty good one? Then I'm gonna need a big city so that my shield production increases. That's why I get worried about not letting my city grow, I think. It's a pain in the ass to build something on a small town, since it will take forever. That's why I end up letting at least my main cities grow...but I don't know if it's a good strategy. Apparently not, since I'm always losing...

Only worry about this when you try for the 20.000 culture in one city victory condition. And then only for this one city.

But I advice you first try to learn to get a powerful start in general (excluding this special victory condition)

In a previous post I mentioned that it is better to spend resources on settlers than on wonders. And that it is good the AI players are "wasting" resources on wonders because they will be shooting them self in their feet.

In an other thread I mentioned the exponential growth factor.
1 city become 2 cities becomes 4 cities etc. It may start slow, but you'll quickly end with 20 cities, and then maybe 40, and then you can let them all grow to their growth cap at the same time. Boom! Instant empire!

If you build an early wonder, you'll end up with less cities early, so you will have a bigger gap to overcome at later stages.

 

[Aabraxan]

Rocha06,

In your save, it's 460 AD and you've got too few cities and they're too far apart. Looking at your empire, my guess is that you also didn't have enough workers, or didn't have them early enough.

Tone replayed the early start of your game from a builder's perspective. I've done the same thing, but from a war footing. I make no claim that my way is better, or even that I'm a great warmonger. I just want you to see the difference that can be had with rapid, early expansion.

Now, I don't know how to recreate a 4000 BC save, except for hitting Play Last World, but I did that and put in all the same civs that you had. It won't be quite the same, but may be educational nonetheless.

I also didn't keep a detailed log of everything that I did, but notice that my cities are closer together and that I've got more of them. I also traded tech pretty freely, without worrying too much about whether I was really getting what a tech was worth. Note that St. Pete's is out in the middle of nowhere, but that's because I popped it from a hut. I also had pretty good success popping techs from huts, but that's not a particularly reliable long-term strategy.

My strategy focused on building enough settlers and workers and on tech trading. I tried to get the settlers out and get cities founded. Once a city was founded, it needed to grow, and produce military units or settlers. Note that I haven't build even one culture building.

I'm not a local expert by any means, but I looked at your save and you had 5 cities by 460 AD. Note that I've got 6 cities by 975 BC, and a settler due in 1 turn. I've got just about all of the Ancient Age techs, and I've got everybody's gold. I haven't switched to Republic, but I have the technology. I can make the switch at any time. I still have to climb the masonry/construction/currency tree, and the tree up to polytheism. Once I do that, though, I'm on to the Middle Ages. Tentatively, I plan to research the currency line and trade for the techs up to polytheism. But I've got archers, horses, iron and curraghs. The curraghs will make more trading and contact easier, and I will be able to upgrade warriors to swords and build some horses and, of course, more swords. I'm connected to furs, which has a happiness effect for every town connected by my road network. Also, in the northeast of my empire, I've spotted 3 cows and gems. That's huge. I'll have another settler in 1 turn, and I'll send it up to the cows. The two cities up there will become settler pumps. I'll hook up the gems for more happiness. Once I switch to Republic, and get the settler pumps up, my empire will absolutely explode. I'll use my military to clear out room for my settlers.

Take a look and let me know if you have any questions.

 

[RFHolloway]

From reading this stuff, you might be thinking - why do they keep on about food and settlers. Food is important because it enables you to have higher population (and that means more shields and cash) settlers are important because it enables you to have more SURPLUS food. By focusing on both these things you significantly improve the speed that you grow.