Article "Traits in ffa and Ironman"

[gavenkoa]

I was surprised by material from https://fastmoves.wordpress.com/2009/12/19/traits-in-ffa-und-ironman/

Charismatic was my favorite trait and its value only for

With the extra happiness you can go Math before Monarchy in a few more situations.

That exactly what I did: go for Alpha, Math, Currency and hope to trade for Monarchy. I played with Hannibal (Cre/Fin) a lot and went for Stonehenge because of extra +1Happines from Monument....

I knew about usefulness of Organized on a small maps.

I surprised by tactic for Philosophical: create a wonder builder city and settle GP hammers into it for "exponentially" growing GP points:

Since these GP provide you with more hammers this leads to an exponential effect: hammers => wonder => great people => more hammers => more wonders => more great people => more hammers => …

Probably this recommendation is because of Noble difficulty level of multiplayer. It is possible that conquesting of Wonders are more efficient in single player mode...

Overall article explains traits in a different way that I read on this subforum.

 

[sampsa]

You will do yourself a huge favor if you stop reading these random articles you find. I suggest you to get really drunk really fast to forget everything you've just "learned".

I will comment on this though:

I surprised by tactic for Philosophical: create a wonder builder city and settle GP hammers into it for "exponentially" growing GP points:

You can do some math trying to figure out how well mass settled do vs say bulbing, trade missions or golden ages.

 

[Fippy]

Hmm well those are for mp with special rules..
but even then it's full of questionable advice, like "Philo won't help you waging war".
Wrong, and if it's only for bulbing maths to reach construction faster than others.

 

[sampsa]

"Well, Expansive is of course for expansion."
"While fin is making cottage economies terribly effective it also kind of binds you to using a cottage economy, which can be a disadvantage."
"But it also is the most difficult to play and in its effect very dependent to how you use it." (about PHI)

 

[Fish Man]

You will do yourself a huge favor if you stop reading these random articles you find. I suggest you to get really drunk really fast to forget everything you've just "learned".

I will comment on this though:


You can do some math trying to figure out how well mass settled do vs say bulbing, trade missions or golden ages.

Seconded. This article (and the rest of the site tbh) kind of hurt to read. As a fan of MMA and combat sports it was like seeing someone who took 3 weeks of traditional tai chi "analyze" how they would knock out anyone in the ring. Knowledge of optimal game mechanics has improved so much since 2009 that trying to learn from this would be as if you were trying to learn physics from Aristotle; he had very roughly some good ideas about epistemology and empirical study but was otherwise way off.

Edit: "ironman" seems to be the old-school way of describing "no save scumming." Which...I think many players on this forum already do (except for me, with my incessant need for perfectionism but that's a personal issue). And in general, their grasp on some fundamental game strategies were not accurate to say the least - like for a fast space win, democracy being essential or keeping small and founding corps or getting factories up after superconductors (which straight up sounds like something an AI would do).

 

[gavenkoa]

Thanks for responses. I asked the question because conclusions contradict with what I read here dated by 2016-2020.

Knowledge of optimal game mechanics has improved so much since 2009

Unfortunately when I searched for Strategy guide in summer 2019 I found and valued https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/sisiutils-strategy-guide-for-beginners.165632

There are questions how to play Civ4 and usual modern replies are to watch Youtube AbsoluteZero & Lain Deity or lurking this subforum ))

There are no comprehensive collections of tips for Imm/Deity. And all game mechanic / formulas spread across obscure threads...

I think about writing one for integration it to Sevopedia that bundled with BUG mod and transitively in all others. For benefits of all players and be available in game.

 

[sampsa]

If you want to learn, watch Lain (not AbsoluteZero). You don't need to watch the whole game, openings say to T75 or something are a good place to start. You can watch at 1,5x speed if it's too slow for your taste. You can skip some parts if nothing is happening.

If you insist on reading something, read this: https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/beginner-help-the-basics.648469/. It says "beginner" and "the basics", but it goes beyond that. If you want to read more, read game reports on deity games, download saves, investigate them, try to play the same map and so on, the ways to improve your game are there. Unfortunately, there is no article that teaches you how to play, you have to learn yourself. There are many people here willing to help you. I always recommend Lain's videos, because they answer most questions if you just keep your eyes open.

 

[drewisfat]

The issue is virtually all advice "depends". If you try to copy smart play without understanding all the nuance of why it made sense the result will usually be bad. For instance it's probably true for most people who play on Monarchy that they're not whipping as much as is optimal. But simply telling them to whip more will do more harm than good, because at that level there's likely to be some gap in knowledge as it relates to improving food first, managing happiness, granaries, overflow, each pop taking more and more food to grow, having to put 1 turn into something first, how a decent food surplus is needed, how strong tiles (usually capital) should not be whipped away, the implications of workers/settlers stopping your growth, how unsustainable 1-pop whipping is, etc., etc.

Lain does a good job at thinking aloud which hopefully gives people a deeper understanding of the thought process. But even still, there was someone who posted on here a while ago about like mining all their sheep because Lain mined a sheep once.

 

[pi-r8]

Bear in mind those articles are focused on games played in competitive ladder multiplayer settings. The biggest difference is the turn timer- you only have a limited amount of time (like 30 seconds or less) to play each turn, so you're very limited in how much micro you can do. It's not like single player at all. The "fast moves" that the site is named after are so effective because players don't physically have the reaction speed to protect against them. Also, no tech trading.

Basically I think it's a good (not perfect) description of ladder multiplayer games. You can't compare it to someone playing deity single player and spending 5 minutes on each turn to perfectly micro all their cities and workers, it's a totally different style of game.

 

[lymond]

ha..I remember those ladders. There was some not so nice folks there.

 

[sampsa]

@pi-r8 I understand. What I don't agree with though is that having to play fast massively changes the evaluation of different traits or strategies.

 

[gavenkoa]

I don't agree with though is that having to play fast massively changes the evaluation of different traits or strategies.

I think the most controversial is Expensive.

What about non-ancient start with extra gold / tech / settlers? And limit in 100-150T? Or declaration of win if only 2 cities are conquered?

Do other traits have enough time to pay off vs Expensive?

 

[sampsa]

It's expAnsive. Like in, to expand, though the trait itself has nothing to do with expansion.

I think the most controversial is Expensive.

In what way?

What about non-ancient start with extra gold / tech / settlers? And limit in 100-150T? Or declaration of win if only 2 cities are conquered?

I don't understand a word you say.

 

[gavenkoa]

In what way?

The article valued Expensive over Philosophical. Isn't controvercial?

When you have limited number of turns (game lasts to the conquest of 2 cities) authors found having granaries from 1-pop whip beneficial.

I am not saying that they are right. I just curious if they are ))

I don't understand a word you say.

On Deity start you have only Scout and probably starting from Ancient Era.

In their games they can start with gold / 3 settlers / workers in Modern Era. Doesn't that change value of traits?

 

[gavenkoa]

The article valued Expensive over Philosophical. Isn't controvercial?

https://civilization.fandom.com/wiki/Classical_Era_(Civ4) has Currency.

Unlike for the Ancient Era where you are limited to 6-7 well developed cities or 4-5 early developed because of support cost / research rate trade-off with Currency you can fund 4-6 more cities.

So starting from Classical Era cheaper granaries of Expensive trait allow to grab and hold more space. This can compete with Financial trait, though it is a pure guess ))

 

[sampsa]

The article valued Expensive over Philosophical. Isn't controvercial?

In a pile of nonsense, everything can be viewed as controversial.

When you have limited number of turns (game lasts to the conquest of 2 cities) authors found having granaries from 1-pop whip beneficial.

I am not saying that they are right. I just curious if they are ))

Why do you care about games that last until the conquest of two cities? Yes, cheap granaries are good and EXP is one of my favorite traits.

In their games they can start with gold / 3 settlers / workers in Modern Era. Doesn't that change value of traits?

Yes, if we completely change the way the game works, the value of traits is not the same. Again, no reason for you to care about it though.

My first comment was even more spot on than I realized. Do yourself a favor and stop reading stuff that is completely irrelevant for you. Or go play ffa/ironman MP.

https://civilization.fandom.com/wiki/Classical_Era_(Civ4) has Currency.

Unlike for the Ancient Era where you are limited to 6-7 well developed cities or 4-5 early developed because of support cost / research rate trade-off with Currency you can fund 4-6 more cities.

So starting from Classical Era cheaper granaries of Expensive trait allow to grab and hold more space. This can compete with Financial trait, though it is a pure guess ))

OK.

 

[gavenkoa]

Do yourself a favor and stop reading stuff that is completely irrelevant for you. Or go play ffa/ironman MP.

Oh, now that clear.

Last question: what is about starting game from non-Ancient Era? Do we loose fun?

I think game optimized for Ancient Era start and can imaging that research tree imbalanced later on. No trade-off for worker's related techs, no wonder races, less religions, etc (can be wrong, never attempted).

I think anybody will refuse to talk strategies for https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/caveman-2-cosmos.288570/ because of non-standard settings. I stopped to play K-mod for this reason.

 

[sampsa]

Last question: what is about starting game from non-Ancient Era? Do we loose fun?

I don't know.

I think game optimized for Ancient Era start and can imaging that research tree imbalanced later on. No trade-off for worker's related techs, no wonder races, less religions, etc (can be wrong, never attempted).

For me, the early game is most interesting and I don't understand the point of later Era starts. If someone likes it, then why not.

I think anybody will refuse to talk strategies for https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/caveman-2-cosmos.288570/ because of non-standard settings. I stopped to play K-mod for this reason.

Well the thing is, C2C is a different game. K-mod to a less extent, but even that changes a lot and I don't like many of those changes. I see nothing wrong with the unmodded game.

 

[pi-r8]

@pi-r8 I understand. What I don't agree with though is that having to play fast massively changes the evaluation of different traits or strategies.

Well, it's not just having to play fast, although that is a big difference. It's also:
multiplayer: instead of a dumb AI that will be friends with you for having the same religion, the humans will just kill you if you ever don't have enough military
no tech trading: you can't bulb some advanced tech like education and trade it around for everything else, you have to research everything yourself
hard to do trade missions since everyone will kill your great merchants on sight, unless it's a team game
generally smaller and fewer cities, since you have to focus so much on defense. So each settled great person is proportionally worth more
often a city elimination limit, so you die as soon as you lose two cities. If not, there will be a turn limit, so you're trying to max out your score

What else from the article do you think was bad advice? I think most of it makes sense when you think in terms of hyper-aggressive multiplayer play.

 

[pi-r8]

https://civilization.fandom.com/wiki/Classical_Era_(Civ4) has Currency.

Unlike for the Ancient Era where you are limited to 6-7 well developed cities or 4-5 early developed because of support cost / research rate trade-off with Currency you can fund 4-6 more cities.

So starting from Classical Era cheaper granaries of Expensive trait allow to grab and hold more space. This can compete with Financial trait, though it is a pure guess ))

I think (not sure, been a while) that in classical era all new cities start with granaries. So actually Expansive is nerfed. It's a great trait in ancient starts but less good in more advanced starts.
Imperialistic gets better though, because settlers are more expensive.