Big Difference between Noble and Warlord?

jimbob27 said:
I don't think persisting with noble is nessesarily the best thing to do. You can quite easily make an intermediate difficulty just using the custom game options.
<SNIP>

tweaking a warlord level game to make it harder is obviously not very far from tweaking the noble level game to make it easier!
So basically i agree with you, but would choose noble level (to get used to the pace) with all favourable settings.
Like choosing your favourite leader, on a smaller map, at epic or marathon speed.
 
blitzkrieg1980 said:
Okay, I've played a bunch of games on warlord setting, and usually I'm in the lead by at least four or five hundred points with a great tech lead and superior military/economy. So I decide, "hey, it's definitely time to move on up."

So as soon as I move up in level, I'm behind on tech / land with a sickly economy and just enough military keep my butt covered, but definitely not enough to win any sort of war. I lose three times in a row (once space race, twice time), and then decide maybe I'm not ready for Noble.

When I move back, it's the same warlord game I had last time of me kickin absolute ass. Is there any way to edit the xml to make warlord a little more difficult or make Noble a little easier because I don't enjoy struggling to survive just as much as I don't enjoy total omnipotence.

Has anyone else noticed this large difference in difficulty from Warlord -> Noble?


Micromanagement is your friend.
 
I'll second jimbob's advice about playing on different settings. Take the same leader and play three games on three different maps-- Hub, Oasis, and one of the Continents settings should do nicely. Hub takes early war off the table; even if you make it to the next spoke, maintenence costs will kill ya. Oasis (or Lakes) is a land heavy map, and if you don't defend early, the AI or Barbs- or both!- will make you pay. (It's also good at learning how to pace expansion.) Continents is all about variables, and adjusting on the fly. Are you alone? Next to Monty? On a big continent, or small? Once you can win take the same civ through three different settings, you should be about ready to handle the next level.

drkodos, my biggest hang up wasn't the score- I learned to ignore that fairly early- but the GNP graph. It used to irritate the heck out of me to be out-teching the AI handily, and still be third or fourth in GNP; made me wonder if I was doing something wrong. Now I only use it to keep an eye on builder AIs like Mansa or Gandhi, who can actually leverage terrain improvements almost efficiently. Took a long time, though.
 
drkodos said:
Excellent point and well stated.

I think we are so conditioned to think of scoring, in almost all games, as the absolute barometer of success. No doubt, the scoring system in CIV is not that. It really only reflects a fraction of the components that go into a winning game (unless one is going strictly for a time victory!).

Now, be that as it may, I still tend to allow the score to control my visceral responses in too many game situations.

Damn those pixelated numbers. :p

What makes me lose hope though during a game usually occurs like this, on my continent, there is a serious power struggle and I manage to get the upper hand through blood and sweat. Then I discover the other continent and the weakest civ on that continent has 6 techs on me! Plus a runaway civ on the other side of the world that is 9 techs on me! And keep in mind I am the leader on my continent. That was a 18AI game though.
 
biggest thing to remember when moving up in levels...build fewer wonders and build more troops...especially early in the game...it can be a tough lesson to learn for some...
 
braindrain said:
biggest thing to remember when moving up in levels...build fewer wonders and build more troops...especially early in the game...it can be a tough lesson to learn for some...


Seconded, I recently made the jump to noble and I found the same thing. What I found (and most of this has been mentioned already) I needed to do was
1. build more units, enough for a good defense And an attack force, A.I.'s are much more aggressive when they smell weakness.
2. more siege weapons, plus more siege weapons.
3. more city management, watch which tiles are being worked, you may have different priorities
4. fewer buildings, not just wonders either. If you don't need it, build more units instead.
5. money money money. get more of it.

That's my experience, I'm finally winning handily at Noble now instead of fighting tooth and nail. :goodjob:
 
What's great about Civ is that as you move up the levels you need to play the game in a totally different way to win. I'm in the process of the noble to prince jump and currently I'm getting creamed because I'm still trying the techniques that allow me to domminate noble. The same thing happened with the warlord to noble jump.

In terms of dealing with this (I know it's already been said but it's a universal tactic for level jumps) the first step here is to stack the odds in your favour. Generally avoid random and pick the settings that you find easiest to face with your style of play. Smaller maps are also good for numerous reasons but especially because it'll cut down game time. Shorter games mean more time practising and developing skills.
 
Slade19 said:
Yeah I'm conceding to that.

I'm an old school civer. 2 units per city was enough unless you want to wipe someone off the map!

That game was the first time I've EVER been attacked without warning by another Civ. And I'll be the first to admit it was probably because I had 2 warriors guarding my capital, maybe an archer or two in my outlying cities.

A favorite strategy of mine is to rush to get the Pyramids/Great wall at all costs, and then use those 2 HUGE benefits to go into passive super-commerce mode and just out tech everyone. Since I have the great wall, Barbarians are a non issue which is why I essentially leave myself undefended. Somewhere around 1700 or so, I'll be SO far ahead in the tech tree that whatever military unit I do have access to is going to have a 3:1 or better str score against most defenders and I can then have my way with the planet.

This is the first time that didn't work. It was actually quite sad... the guy attacks me with horse archers and axemen and whatnot. I had access to mid-tier gunpowder units but because I didn't have ANY production cities available to me, I had to draft to defend myself. =/

The only city with any production was my capital (obviously). Unfortunately, because of the overall crappiness of my location, it was just too far away to be of any real use. Even with roads all over the place, it took 6+ turns for units to get from the only production city to the front line.

EDIT: Moral of the story? Listen to the guy above me and BUILD UNITS on higher difficulties!
EXACTLY how i play and why i fail so far at Noble :D
but i am improving my game ;)
 
Top Bottom