Ask Me Anything

[Gothic_Empire]

This is a FANTASTIC re-design of the colors. It has a few flaws, but it's what I use:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=549830

One Color Civs is also good, but I prefer the above mod.

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=107667542

 

[mavol6]

how do you deal with early game mine luxury start?, im having problems with food and growth.

 

[Funak]

how do you deal with early game mine luxury start?, im having problems with food and growth.

Hopefully you don't have to rely on your luxuries for food. Considering how few luxuries actually provide positive food-income you're pretty much always going to have to rely on farms and bonus-resources for food.

 

[crdvis16]

how do you deal with early game mine luxury start?, im having problems with food and growth.

Internal food trade routes can help too if you're able to do without the gold/science bonuses of external routes.

 

[moonrgr]

Which mod do people use with CBP modpack version? Any suggestion is welcomed.

 

[Funak]

Which mod do people use with CBP modpack version? Any suggestion is welcomed.

I do not use the modpack, so I don't know. Sorry about that

 

[tu_79]

Which mod do people use with CBP modpack version? Any suggestion is welcomed.

I just use Infoaddict and map scripts mods, they work fine.

 

[tu_79]

I came to ask for number of cities, but I couldn't resist to answer moonrgr.

On the topic.

When I'm playing Progress I try to settle as many cities as I can before other civs pick the location. As I've read in several threads, CBP allows for a continuous growing empire without the annoyances of BNW. But I've also read that a too fast settling hurts development.
Which are your guidelines deciding when to produce a new settler?

 

[Funak]

I came to ask for number of cities, but I couldn't resist to answer moonrgr.

On the topic.

When I'm playing Progress I try to settle as many cities as I can before other civs pick the location. As I've read in several threads, CBP allows for a continuous growing empire without the annoyances of BNW. But I've also read that a too fast settling hurts development.
Which are your guidelines deciding when to produce a new settler?

Honestly? I mostly play on maps with extremely limited space, so I tend to just settle cities as fast as I can and deal with the consequences later on.
Don't get me wrong, settling too quickly can and will definitely put you behind, but the earlier you get your new cities up the earlier they can become productive members of your empire. The one real issue with massive early expansion is getting attacked by your neighbors, both because you steal all the space and because you're clearly neglecting your military to build settlers, that is probably my biggest guideline on when you build a settler actually.
If you think you can get away with settling another city(in a decent location) without getting attacked by a neighbor and losing a city, then go for it.

 

[crdvis16]

Honestly? I mostly play on maps with extremely limited space, so I tend to just settle cities as fast as I can and deal with the consequences later on.
Don't get me wrong, settling too quickly can and will definitely put you behind, but the earlier you get your new cities up the earlier they can become productive members of your empire. The one real issue with massive early expansion is getting attacked by your neighbors, both because you steal all the space and because you're clearly neglecting your military to build settlers, that is probably my biggest guideline on when you build a settler actually.
If you think you can get away with settling another city(in a decent location) without getting attacked by a neighbor and losing a city, then go for it.

I've found that mass settling can often put you dangerously close to the trap situation where your gold and happiness go negative, stalling out growth/production/science and making it harder to get back to positive. I've found this to especially be the case if your tiles end up being low gold for whatever reason. I think mass settling takes a lot more planning and you also have to recognize if you are about to fall into that trap. I don't think I've really mastered it myself and most of the games where I've successfully mass settled it has simply worked out because of dumb luck. It might be too situational to really be able to lay out in a strategy guide.

 

[Funak]

I've found that mass settling can often put you dangerously close to the trap situation where your gold and happiness go negative, stalling out growth/production/science and making it harder to get back to positive. I've found this to especially be the case if your tiles end up being low gold for whatever reason. I think mass settling takes a lot more planning and you also have to recognize if you are about to fall into that trap. I don't think I've really mastered it myself and most of the games where I've successfully mass settled it has simply worked out because of dumb luck. It might be too situational to really be able to lay out in a strategy guide.

This used to happen to me a lot before, but now happiness is generally a lot easier to manage.

That being said as I explained in my post I mostly play on maps with limited space, so my mass expansion usually can't go above 5 or 6 cities at most (and usually less than that)

 

[pandasnail]

I see you play on crowded maps, and I think you play on the highest difficulties, and I'm curious if you think its possible to stay caught up or close on Culture with Authority in that situation. Not asking about the tree at large, just keeping up at Culture with less camphunting. Not even really asking for tips, just wondering if you think its possible/likely, or part of the sacrifice and the choice (or to play as Poland or whoever and keep up that way).

 

[Funak]

I see you play on crowded maps, and I think you play on the highest difficulties, and I'm curious if you think its possible to stay caught up or close on Culture with Authority in that situation. Not asking about the tree at large, just keeping up at Culture with less camphunting. Not even really asking for tips, just wondering if you think its possible/likely, or part of the sacrifice and the choice (or to play as Poland or whoever and keep up that way).

I do usually just play on Immortal, Deity just feels too limiting in most of the cases. I like being able to random civilization and pick whatever social policy tree I feel like, and that is a lot harder on deity.

I rarely go for authority, but when I do I don't really have much of a culture problem, I'm usually on 5 policies by the time the tradition/progress AIs gets 6. I mean sure you are behind, but not that much. The bigger issue I see is that I have a hard time progressing from an authority start, it feels like the only real viable option for a second tree is piety, but piety feels a lot stronger with progress or tradition.

When it comes to camps, I very rarely rely on them for culture, I might get to clear 1-3 of them unless I end up in a fairly isolated location. That being said getting a camp with your first warrior the same turn you pick up the authority opener is sweet.

 

[pandasnail]

I do usually just play on Immortal, Deity just feels too limiting in most of the cases. I like being able to random civilization and pick whatever social policy tree I feel like, and that is a lot harder on deity.

I rarely go for authority, but when I do I don't really have much of a culture problem, I'm usually on 5 policies by the time the tradition/progress AIs gets 6. I mean sure you are behind, but not that much. The bigger issue I see is that I have a hard time progressing from an authority start, it feels like the only real viable option for a second tree is piety, but piety feels a lot stronger with progress or tradition.

When it comes to camps, I very rarely rely on them for culture, I might get to clear 1-3 of them unless I end up in a fairly isolated location. That being said getting a camp with your first warrior the same turn you pick up the authority opener is sweet.

Thanks!

 

[Shiirn]

What are your thoughts on fairly cheesy abuse of ancient-era warmongering? I've basically forbidden myself from declaring wars in the ancient era as the AI can't keep up with a human's ability to properly strategize and position their units such that a simple pair of archers and pair of warriors can harass another AI nearly scot-free and cripple them for the rest of the game, as well as granting the possibility to snag some workers or pillage improvements. I play on Immortal and Emperor.

After farming up enough experience, or noticing the AI has picked up Mathematics, I simply snipe the capital and either peace out or dismantle their empire. With that kind of strat, my fourth city is usually my nearest neighbor's capital, which is almost always in a great location and partially improved already.

 

[Funak]

What are your thoughts on fairly cheesy abuse of ancient-era warmongering? I've basically forbidden myself from declaring wars in the ancient era as the AI can't keep up with a human's ability to properly strategize and position their units such that a simple pair of archers and pair of warriors can harass another AI nearly scot-free and cripple them for the rest of the game, as well as granting the possibility to snag some workers or pillage improvements. I play on Immortal and Emperor.

After farming up enough experience, or noticing the AI has picked up Mathematics, I simply snipe the capital and either peace out or dismantle their empire. With that kind of strat, my fourth city is usually my nearest neighbor's capital, which is almost always in a great location and partially improved already.

I tend to personally avoid all kind of cheesy play, from sniping wokers/settlers to doing harassment as you mentioned. I think it is a lame way to play but I guess people are welcome to play however they want.

 

[ExpiredReign]

EDIT: Content removed.

Not really strategy related so I removed it.

 

[DoctorDuke]

In general terms, on a given continent with two dominant Civs, whose ideology will eventually force the other to change? What are the major determinants and how are they weighted? ie Population, religion, happiness, treasury...etc?

 

[Funak]

In general terms, on a given continent with two dominant Civs, whose ideology will eventually force the other to change? What are the major determinants and how are they weighted? ie Population, religion, happiness, treasury...etc?

I don't think I understand the question. The only thing that can cause ideologies to flip is ideology pressure and there are only two ways to apply that, the first being the obvious tourism advantage and the other being voting to pass world ideology.

That being said even with a tourism-advantage there is no guarantee your adversaries will flip over to your ideology, sometimes the other civs just have the happiness necessary to soldier through the ideology pressure.


I do however still think I have misunderstood your question, so I'll ask you to be more specific.

 

[DoctorDuke]

The reason I asked was because I've settled into the impression that more was involved than just tourism and the vote...

Consider the situation where two equally sized Civs share a continent, and a border. If one has a dominant religion, will that not enter into the equation that determines the relative weightings of ideological unhappiness? And if not, then the logical extension of this is that Ideology will Trump Religion, which I don't necessarily have a problem with but I would like to know just to manage things better.