Back to the struggle at Monarch

[nate46]

@M60A3TTS

its more about focusing on one strategy than the buildings being totally useless. Temples and monastaries are good buildings if you're going for cultural victory. You're not. Philosophy and oxford are teching further and/or going for space victory. markets... well, they're rarely a good idea... sometimes you can build them in your GP factory city if you want a great merchant for some reason.

But if you want to win on higher difficulties, you need to pick one thing and do that, and ignore distractions. This game, you basically played like IRL Attila the Hun (this is what we told you to do, LOL). do you think Attila built any temples, markets, or cared about philosophy? probably not.

 

[sampsa]

They make better gp factories.

Depends on what you need, obviously (i.e. what stage of the game you are at). If you need a worker, then you build a worker. As I'm sure you know, often the best place for your first is the capital, as it gains most from a library.

also, should build your workers/settlers sooner than that in most games, unless you're going for a peaceful expansion strategy and you're pushing 8+ cities self-founded. If you're at <6 cities and but you already have a high food high pop city with a granary that's not your cap, you need to build settlers sooner than that...

I don't really know what to reply to this, as it doesn't directly address any of the points I raised, it's just rambling.

 

[nate46]

I don't really know what to reply to this, as it doesn't directly address any of the points I raised, it's just rambling.

Maybe i wasn't clear.

My point is that the situation you're talking about -- where you have a high food city with a granary to whip workers and settlers out of -- this shouldn't come up very often at all unless you're running a peaceful expansion strategy.

You should prioritize workers and settlers over granaries until you have about 6 cities/workers. Its rarely a good idea to build a granary anywhere when you are still short on workers and you have <6 cities.

 

[sampsa]

Maybe i wasn't clear.

You weren't.

My point is that the situation you're talking about -- where you have a high food city with a granary to whip workers and settlers out of -- this shouldn't come up very often at all unless you're running a peaceful expansion strategy.

You should prioritize workers and settlers over granaries until you have about 6 of each at least. Its rarely a good idea to build a granary anywhere when you are still short on workers and you have <6 cities.

Again, I kind of agree with this. However, it doesn't address my point, which was "after you have invested on a granary, it is nearly always sub-optimal to stagnate that city, as it renders the granary moot. If you want to slow-build/stagnate on a rather small size working high -tiles, just skip the granary (obv)."

So what you are trying to say is "skip the granary until you have 6 cities", which I'm completely fine with. What you can see from the screenshots is that OP has for example a size 3 city with a nearly full food bar that is slow-building a worker. That can't be optimal, with or without a granary. Another city is size 1 slow-building a worker working unimproved flood plain. It's very hard to believe there isn't a better way to get a worker out.

 

[Fippy]

Not slow building workers in size 1 cities with good potential is great overall advice.

In cities settled for 1 copper mine it's of course fine
They are perfect for growth stopping builds.
But even here you would want a worker for copper moving along.

My playing style is that not my # of workers compared to my # of cities matters,
but having them available when really needed.

Making a settler + worker combo for cities that would really benefit from growing on all their good tiles also has great learning potential, on high levels cities cost you and the guy i learned most from here early, Kossin, always used to say stuff like:
your workers appear not ready for that new city.

 

[sampsa]

Didn't mean to turn this thread into a meaningless argument with nate46. I think his main point that the early game is mostly about settlers+workers is a very important one. Granary is the best building in the game, but it doesn't mean that you should immediately build it when available. I'd also like to point out that expansive civs play a bit differently, as half-priced granaries are much more cost-effective.

I think OP will be winning immortal in short time, if he learns how to optimize the early builds. Always aim to work your best tiles and try to do it asap!

 

[Gumbolt]

Have you turned vassels off here?? You had no peace vassels??

 

[M60A3TTS]

Turn 190

Time to turn the lights out on Shaka.

Took Yaroslav'l that had culture flipped.

That caused him to move his SOD into our territory from Bulawayo.

Our own small force was waiting for it, which left this after the battle.

Rolled through his towns with no real trouble after that.

Not much in the way of garrisons as you can see.

Finished him off and converted to Christianity. Zara had a +9 relations for shared religion but now that it no longer mattered...

 

[M60A3TTS]

Have you turned vassels off here?? You had no peace vassels??

Vassals were on. I wasn't interested in any and the AI never took any.

Burning

More burning

Even more burning

The last to burn

The End

 

[M60A3TTS]

Thanks everyone for helping me achieve my highest score ever.

I'll have to re-read all these good points a couple times I'm sure. One of the big takeaways is you don't have to settle for crappy early cities when a kind AI has built some very nice ones that only lack a change in ownership. It almost seemed as though I was playing chieftain for a while! It did help that Sury managed to get dogpiled so I could go about my business quietly with Comrade Josef, and then reload for the next action.

 

[Jivilov]

@M60A3TTS
But if you want to win on higher difficulties, you need to pick one thing and do that, and ignore distractions. This game, you basically played like IRL Attila the Hun (this is what we told you to do, LOL). do you think Attila built any temples, markets, or cared about philosophy? probably not.

OK, but don't you need markets in your capital and core to beat the happy cap? Or are you suggesting that there's no need to go beyond size 4 if you're whipping out units? Pardon the dumb questions but you're dealing with someone who's never won a domination or conquest in Civ4 (just Civ3) . Thanks.

 

[nate46]

OK, but don't you need markets in your capital and core to beat the happy cap?

you usually don't whip the cap or good science cities, but there are better ways to beat the happy cap than markets... esp on conquest heavy games where you've taken a lot of luxury resources.

each luxury resource = 1 happy.
representation = 3 happy. or hereditary rule = 1 happy per military unit.
forge = +1 happy from gold, gems, silver.

So if you have a couple calendar resources, gold and silver, and you're running hereditary rule with 2 military units in your city, you're probably sitting at around 13 happy cap, which is plenty even for your capital.

Markets are really expensive though, they're hard to justify building. You'll often build buildings/wonders in your cap while producing military units elsewhere. but markets are way down the list of things you'd want... The only time i build markets is if i want to run more specialists and i'm OK with great merchants, and I don't want to switch to caste for some reason.

 

[georgjorge]

Congratulations on a fine win, and on learning many new lessons from good players!

One word of advice only: Taking over the world with Medieval units produced en masse works on Monarch, it works on Emperor and can work on Immortal. On some Immortal maps as well as on Deity AIs develop big stacks and tech fast so you will mostly be able to take out only one or two AIs with Medieval units (and maybe need as many units for that as you needed for all the AIs here). This means you somehow have to keep a good tech rate while still producing enough units to conquer cities at a steady pace. Alternatively, you can get a tech advantage first and try to conquer everyone fast while it lasts. You'll see what I mean

 

[dutchfire]

Not sure if someone pointed this out earlier, but you should not build workers in size 1 cities.

Except your first worker in the capital

 

[pigswill]

Well played .

 

[Jivilov]

you usually don't whip the cap or good science cities, but there are better ways to beat the happy cap than markets... esp on conquest heavy games where you've taken a lot of luxury resources.

each luxury resource = 1 happy.
representation = 3 happy. or hereditary rule = 1 happy per military unit.
forge = +1 happy from gold, gems, silver.

So if you have a couple calendar resources, gold and silver, and you're running hereditary rule with 2 military units in your city, you're probably sitting at around 13 happy cap, which is plenty even for your capital.

Markets are really expensive though, they're hard to justify building. You'll often build buildings/wonders in your cap while producing military units elsewhere. but markets are way down the list of things you'd want... The only time i build markets is if i want to run more specialists and i'm OK with great merchants, and I don't want to switch to caste for some reason.

Thanks for your reply. Seems like playing for domination/conquest is in a completely different dimension from the diplo/spacerace route. Makes my head spin just thinking about it !

BTW (in post #68) MegaLurker says that M60 could've gone with Elepults, turning his science slider off and--making sure to have granaries and barracks in all cities--building only units and wealth the rest of the game. Reminds me of what Seriael said about "running the map" with Horse Archers, Praetorians, Elepults, Cuirrassiers, or Rifles (and Cannons?) in one great orgy of destruction and conquest.

So that's what it comes down to, eh? Just researching enough to get the appropriate military units and then going all-out? Seems awfully brazen, but what the heck--you only go around once in life, so might as well give it all the gusto you got, right?

Thanks again and happy gaming!

 

[nate46]

Thanks for your reply. Seems like playing for domination/conquest is in a completely different dimension from the diplo/spacerace route.

even for space, markets are are pretty bad. You mostly want to focus on production and tech. If your science slider is at 100% most of the time, you won't get much benefit out of a market. so might as well build gold which helps you keep science slider at 100%.

 

[Jivilov]

Yeah, that makes sense. Gotta remember that. Thanks.

 

[elitetroops]

So that's what it comes down to, eh? Just researching enough to get the appropriate military units and then going all-out? Seems awfully brazen, but what the heck--you only go around once in life, so might as well give it all the gusto you got, right?

If you are aiming at winning as early as possible, this is what all victory conditions comes down to. Research just enough to get the appropriate military unit/buil AP or UN/Build your spaceship/get whatever techs you need for you cultural victory, then win the game.

You should try to decide early how you are planning to win the game early and make an estimation for how much you will need to tech to achieve this. Your economy only needs to be good enough to take you to that tech target. The less you need to tech, the less infra you need in your cities. When you know your tech target, you can estimate if a building will have time to pay back before you reach that target. Once tech target is reached, if your evaluation of the game is correct, you don't need any further techs and it doesn't matter what shape your economy is in.

 

[Jivilov]

If you are aiming at winning as early as possible, this is what all victory conditions comes down to. Research just enough to get the appropriate military unit/buil AP or UN/Build your spaceship/get whatever techs you need for you cultural victory, then win the game.

You should try to decide early how you are planning to win the game early and make an estimation for how much you will need to tech to achieve this. Your economy only needs to be good enough to take you to that tech target. The less you need to tech, the less infra you need in your cities. When you know your tech target, you can estimate if a building will have time to pay back before you reach that target. Once tech target is reached, if your evaluation of the game is correct, you don't need any further techs and it doesn't matter what shape your economy is in.

Thanks elite. That's it in a nutshell: A laser focus is required, all else is superfluous. Much obliged for your succinct analysis of this complex game.