Buildaholics Anonymous

[xRei]

The AI's biggest weakness is his inability to manage wars effectively. One of the human player's biggest strengths is to manage wars more efficiently. The two go hand in hand.

Sadly true. The AI quite adept at handling diplomacy(For the most part), twinking it's resources for maximum gain to achieve whatever lame goal it has(Oh look Mansa is leading tech. Wow.).. But all those things only require simple precalculated responses to specific factors..

The complexities of war can't be emulated by AI. Moreover, the AI in Civ4 is even stupider than it should be really.. Yes, that's right Monty, keep sending your UU and axes at my fortified units on forest hills plzkthx.

 

[Aldor]

I have only won one conquest victory yet...tiny pangea map on settler level

A few days ago I played a game as the japanese, I was on a continent with most other civs in the game, almost all of them aggressive (greeks, mongols, inca) and the poor americans. This became a war game for me, and I took out all of them except the greeks. I started the war, but eventually managing SOO many cities became too much...fun stopped and I quit that game. Could have easily won I think, but I guess conquest and huge empires just aren't for me.

But I learned a bit in this game: units become MUCH better if you actually use them. A swordsman with city raider 2 or better has no problem taking out archers even with a wall or cultural defense. So...TRAIN your units in fights against weak civs (or barbs if you can), even if you don't take them out

Also, its almost always a good idea to join someone else's war (of course only if they don't go against your allies). Gets your troops practice again, and you don't NEED to capture cities...just help your friend, and you both can profit!

 

[Perfect_Blue]

I was always focused pretty solely on building before Civ4. But with this new game... I just... Unleash the Mongol Hordes!

Yep, Keshiks are where its at. I can cut off a mid-ranged (12 or so) city's entire production with just two of them! Burn and move, burn and move! And its forward to victory. It's been great to change it up.

 

[Rast]

A few days ago I played a game as the japanese, I was on a continent with most other civs in the game, almost all of them aggressive (greeks, mongols, inca) and the poor americans.

Sounds like my current game... I started on a continent with myself, Ceaser, Genghis, and Mansa. Needless to say, Mansa didn't make it very far that game - no dominating tech for you!

 

[oopsy poopsy]

The only thing I'd like to say is that I do agree that Buildaholics should try aggressive civs to start warmongering. The first response may be right about it's value vs. other traits, but for a builder trying to switch to war I think it's a good idea. I definitely started civ games as a builder type and I think the main motivation is that I wanted to use all the interesting stuff that was offered, so I had to keep building the new improvements I'd just got with my tech. With aggressive and barracks you start off with the chance to use quite a few more interesting promotions and it can help motivate the builder into wanting to use his/her units. Also, the avoid libraries point for a builder has merit. I wouldn't worry about builder types neglecting them in their big commerce cities, but avoiding using them all over is the key for a builder trying to adjust. All I'm trying to point out is the tips weren't necessarily the overall best strategy for anyone, but some are very good tips for pure builders trying to make the switch.

IMO if someone's a pure builder, then trying some warmongering is a good idea for all sorts of reasons. It can really help you to want to be more efficient and that leads to trying out and learning how to really use some of the smaller points of the game; whipping, when to revolt and to what civics, teching with a purpose, city specialization, GP management, etc... (now many will say these aren't smaller points and they're right but hopefully you get what I mean). When you start having to figure out how to build and maintain a large military you have to find new ways to build your empire, which forces you to go deeper into the game.

 

[Myxer]

Hi. My name is Myxer and I'm a buildaholic.

I have to agree with Mabellino, his approach to the game is the same as mine (for a second I thought I had typed the post in my sleep it was so similiar), to the point I often asked myself if I shouldn't be playing SimCity instead of Civ. So actually after reading his post last night, I started a new game with the Mongols and have already wiped out the Greeks and Germans (playing Noble standard size on Inland Sea map) before 700AD. Couple of questions to help me become more efficient.
1) When taking the cities of your enemies, what is the better option to Install the Gov, or Raze the City? Since you can't really see what's inside the city how do you determine if it's worth it or not (outside of how it's already built up) and how do you keep these new cities from being an immediate drain on your economy?
2) I keep seeing in the forum the reference to using Slavery to help out, but I guess I'm missing seeing how it's so beneficial. I've searched for this question before, but I think there's just too many postings to track down it's explaination.

Thanks for letting me know I'm not alone out there with my problem

 

[Perfect_Blue]

I think the point of whipping those new cities (and sometimes older ones) is to drop the population back down to a level where they're happy, while at the same time boosting one's production momentarily.

 

[PublicEnemy]

1) When taking the cities of your enemies, what is the better option to Install the Gov, or Raze the City? Since you can't really see what's inside the city how do you determine if it's worth it or not (outside of how it's already built up) and how do you keep these new cities from being an immediate drain on your economy?

Look at the tiles in your fat cross, they will be the deciding factor on keeping the city or not.


2) I keep seeing in the forum the reference to using Slavery to help out, but I guess I'm missing seeing how it's so beneficial. I've searched for this question before, but I think there's just too many postings to track down it's explaination.

Personally I prefer Caste System to Slavery when I'm warmongering, if you're not creative you can put a couple of artists in the city to help the borders expand. After that a merchant or two will help your economy and keep the war effort going.

 

[Clovis]

Another buildaholic here.

My problem isn't that I don't like war, it's that I am impatient. I won't spend the time to organize my military into a good setup to start a real war.

So I should be patient, like this guy!

 

[Codeman]

recovering buildaholic.

i was a buildaholic in civ2. there wasn't a building or wonder i didn't build. i carried that over to civ3. this was okay on lower levels. as i began to play the higher levels i had issues. i started researching this forum for strats to win on the higher levels as i thought it had to be impossible. after much reading of various threads the game was like new. i could win at all levels. i have learned the best victories require a balance of building, warring, and tons of micro-management.

balance is key.

 

[Dusty Monkey]

Burn everything

You have a healthy war economy going and you dont want to spoil it - Keep cities with a lot of lumber because you can chop yourself a bigger army, cities without lumber are going to be count-productive until you are done killing everyone off so burn them down.

 

[mabellino]

Hi. My name is Myxer and I'm a buildaholic.

I have to agree with Mabellino, his approach to the game is the same as mine (for a second I thought I had typed the post in my sleep it was so similiar), to the point I often asked myself if I shouldn't be playing SimCity instead of Civ. So actually after reading his post last night, I started a new game with the Mongols and have already wiped out the Greeks and Germans (playing Noble standard size on Inland Sea map) before 700AD. Couple of questions to help me become more efficient.

Erm... that would be her approach and her post!

I'm glad you guys get what I was trying to say, was watching the thread degenerate into yet another war thread

I think slavery helps to make foreign citizens happy again, just pop rush a temple or whatever and the angry guys get used first! Put one turn of hammers in then poprush for 3 angry people, granted you get unhappiness for 10 turns but that's a small price to pay IMO.

 

[oopsy poopsy]

For razing or keeping, I end up razing quite a bit more than I keep if I'm warmongering. Usually the AI city placement isn't what I'd like if there in a place where I want to keep growing and since there are already improvements made, you can grow a new city fairly fast. I also really like mercantilism with slavery for war mongering (that's for kind of mid-game). If I'm on a landmass with a bunch of civs and don't want open borders, merc gives a free specialist (an artist until it grows, then usually an engineer). IMO I wouldn't use slavery to rush a temple at least in the beginning. I'd rather rush a granary or a forge if I'm keeping the city to get production or growth going better so that the city can build pop management improvements (temples, ducts, etc...) on it's own production. Of course it always is contingent on the specifics in each case, but I'd say pop rushing temples is rarely the most efficient use of resources (as far as I can tell).

 

[PublicEnemy]

Erm... that would be her approach and her post!

I'm glad you guys get what I was trying to say, was watching the thread degenerate into yet another war thread

I think slavery helps to make foreign citizens happy again, just pop rush a temple or whatever and the angry guys get used first! Put one turn of hammers in then poprush for 3 angry people, granted you get unhappiness for 10 turns but that's a small price to pay IMO.

If I'm going for domination, with the majority of cities that I conquer I don't care if the citizens are unhappy.
Chop rush a courthouse and put a couple of merchant specialists (with caste system) in the city, and let it starve if it must, as long as it pays for itself.

Only when cities with more potential are captured do I pay more attention. Especially if I can get the city to get some quick troops out to help the war.

 

[Bezhukov]

Even buildaholics need to pay attention to diplomacy to suceed on the higher levels, and getting to friendly requires common foes, which requires at least being prepared to defend your lands when allies ask you to join them in war. If you do, however, some juicy opportunities will usually present themselves.

 

[VoiceOfUnreason]

Inspired by this, I just played finished off a domination win on a level that normally gives me trouble [playing Saladin (Spi/Phi)]. My thoughts, with that game fresh in my mind.

1. Pick an agressive civ (second trait not as essential)

Not essential, but a good idea in this situation. (1) because barracks are cheap, so building them is cool (2) Free combat one opens up some important defensive promotions.

4. Repeat the mantra "Attack the neighbours, attack the neighbours" to remind yourself that your early focus is on pointy stick expansion.

The best city sites are enemy capitals.

5. Build at least 3 units for every improvement you want to build.

Of course, units are expensive. How do you build so many units and keep costs down? You USE them.

The goal here is to acquire and exploit an elite military, which means promotions, which means lots of combat.

Important lesson: there is more to life than City Raider! City Raider III swords are great for attacking cities, but aren't so great defending against attacks from cities. You want other units in the stack taking over the defense - units with Cover, Shock, Woodsman/Guerilla. Part of the implication here is that your stacks should be larger than you think - you want your 2:1 ratio when you are attacking AND you want enough defenders to keep them safe.

Accuracy catapults are a big big time saver. So splash those cheap cats and keep the ones that withdraw. When you have enough catapults that the defenses come down in one turn, consider other promotion lines as well (though my gut feeling is that you should really be creating more accuracy cats for the next stack). Combat is a lot more interesting when you aren't waiting for the walls to come down.

Medics are good - a unit not likely to be defending, so you don't lose it inadvertantly. Chariots are a nice choice here - it's an advantage that they move so quickly. Unit Healing Strategy Guide has details on healing rates. Park the stack in the city you just captured for an extra boost of healing (because you are pressing the attack with your other stack, right?)

Promoting your attacking units is easy - you attack. Promoting your defensive units is harder, because you can't defend at will. So seek out opportunities to promote your defensive units.

Example: city is defended by longbows. Sacrifice a catapult - the top longbow is unscratched, the others are beset with collateral damage. Sacrifice a second catapult - the top unit is still unscratched, the others get more collateral damage. Elite sword takes out the top defender. Mopping up is free XP for your defensive units/medics/catapults.

The science slider is going to be lower than you are used to, which is FINE - pointy stick research. You need the gold to pay for the cities you are capturing and unit upgrades. Elite units plus intelligent management can hold their own against the next tech level and AI management. (Given this, a specialist/super specialist science city is probably a good idea - those extra academies are worthless when the commerce is going to gold and culture).

Remember that you can only demand the techs you can currently research - if the AI will pay Philosophy for peace, don't settle for Meditation.

No state religion means that all religions deliver culture; captured cities pop to the fat cross that much sooner. In the mean time, Slavery means the starving citizens can be put to good use.

Wonders are very important - they tell you where to attack. Those hammers expended on the pyramids weren't used to build defenders. So go take it. The benefits of most world wonders transfer with ownership (Oracle, Taj Mahal being obvious exceptions).

Demand Tribute! Put those cities you haven't captured yet to work for you.

 

[VoiceOfUnreason]

Having said that, this is the lesson I would recommend (note to those who know what they are doing: the object here is not a maximally efficient domination/conquest game, but a domination/conquest game with good educational prospects).

Pick a land based map; it's a lot easier to walk to a fight than swim to it, and taking fleets out of the picture makes things a bit easier to manage.

Choose one of the Spiritual Civs, so that you can change civics/religions when you need to. Monty (Spi/Agg) gives you quicker lessons on promotions after Combat I. Mansa and Asoka both start with Mining. Mansa gives you cheap banks (which are nice when commerce is going to gold), Asoka cheap courthouses and cheap civics.

On reflection, I think Asoka is the right choice - you have to work with all standard military units, and free Mysticism means you can use obelisks for early culture (resist libraries!).

Goals

1. One of your first four cities should be an enemy capital.
2. Capture (do not build) the Pyramids
3. Capture (do not build) the Great Library
4. Build the Heroic Epic
5. Build West Point
6. Crush your enemies, see them driven before you, hear the lamentations of their women.

There's the stick, I guess it needs a carrot? Perhaps one library each time you achieve a goal?

 

[Perfect_Blue]

Sorry, double post....

 

[Perfect_Blue]

Crush your enemies, see them driven before you, hear the lamentations of their women.

You do know the ways of war!

 

[afireinside]

if u want to be aggressive, i think picking an agressive civ is a bad choice. A good decision would be to be expansive.
10% str isn't that helpful IMO. Its better to have more productive citys which comes from +2 health in all cities. Expansive with heriditary rule playing an agressive game is very key.

Yea you wanna fight the enemy but you dont wanan fight him until you settled all your land. "peace until theres nowhere left to expand.

This is a key point i think. Instead of building unproductive cities far away form the capital but near a resource, build cities as close as posible to you capital even though its not good land.
A problem for most builders is they have a perfect location city and build every posible improvement for it. If your close city only has tiles to grow to population 7, you wont need to be building libraries, adqueducts or coluseums. U can spend time on military units. Save imporvements for the capital or key cities.

Another issue is settling to far away. If you settle a land near your enemy which is far away, its maintenence is high, it wont recieve worker help from the capital anytime soon and it might not be conected in the trade network. A connected city immitately provides +1 gold through trades and makes up for maintenence, while providing a new source of shields and growth.

Have a city ( like one described above) that will always produce defense units. In preparation for war, your main cities shuold stop building imporvements and shuold instead build atack units.

During war, turn off research completely. You will probably gain a few techs as the war loot anyway. You need the money to upgrade all your units. Ud dont wanna be rushing to catchup when a enemy galley drops a horsearcher near your weakest city and all you have are warriors there. Upgrading is key, and its not that expensive when on 0 research your raking in a few hundred gold a turn.

Make many wars. dont build up for 100 turns for a war to anililate a team. Theres practically no point. And by that time you wil amass an army of outdated units. If you get guilds or rifiling early, build 5 -10 units and attack an enemy resource city or holy city. Then ransack their capital and force peace. Theyll be rebuilding while your planning the next attack 15 turns later.

o yea one last thing. GET SISTINE CHAPEL. How annoying is it when you capture a city and it has 12 population but 3 tiles to work. WIth sistine chapel ( +2 culture per specialist) the revolting citizens count as specialists. So if you capture a 12 population city. 2 culture times 12 citizens times 12 turns, is 288 culture when it comes under your control . Push those dam cultural borders back biach.