Builder or Warmonger?

[mtakil]

The simple fact is, this game loves those warmongers more. being a 100% builder, one can only win easier level games, or only in some limited ways.

I'm definitely a builder at the start and warmonger towards the end. I usually play Ottomans, and after I get Sipahi I build lots of them in a turn. Then I start conquesting civilizations one by one. I use Sipahis, and then Tanks and lastly MAs. Maybe Nukes.

This plan usually screws up in Deity and Sid, since AI has definite advantage in research&production, and they usually have lots of Infantry when I get to Military Tradition.

 

[brennan]

Well I myself am definitely a builder. I like to have all improvements in a city if possible, once this is achieved then it goes onto pure military production. This idea that having Cathedrals and temples somehow injures your economy seems a little odd to me; if you have 20 cities with 20 temples the 20 gpt upkeep is hardly a big deal is it? The extra happiness helps stave off war weariness and promotes WLTKD, which reduces corruption. The happiness benefit of Cathedrals/Collosseums is greater and the expense is negligible compared to the income of a well developed city.

The second notion I find odd is that builders don't wage wars. There are several periods in any game where, even using a 'build everything' approach, you will end up with all your core cities doing nothing but pumping out units, for example in my current game I land-grabbed 16 cities which, by halfway through the Medieval Age, ALL had every improvement I could build and were churning out a mixture of Knights, Muskets and Catapults. I researched Military Tradition, upgraded to 30-40 Cannon and 60 Cavalry and went on to double the size of my territory in a series of short, brutal wars. Another Couple of wars saw me exterminate the French in 10 turns once I developed Tanks, then boot the Scandinavians off 'my' continent with the arrival of Modern Armour.

Right now I have approximately 30-40 'Core' cities, all with maxed populations of 20 to 40+, all of which have everything from coastal fortresses to Manufacturing Plants. There is nothing to do but build military for the rest of the game (its only 1902). Canterbury is building a MA every turn, I made 2 leaders on my last turn. I rule, basically.

This to me is fun. The total dominance of my civ at this stage can only increase and fills me with a smugness that is hard to beat

Next time around I fancy trying a more military game, I'd like to see how many Leaders I can get and how early I can achieve Conquest. But this would definitely be a break form the norm.

 

[eldar]

I used to be an incurable builder, and didn't survive very well above Regent.

Then I played a few SGs with Dman, and now I'm disappointed if my "neighbours" don't find themselves on the wrong end of a stack-o-Horses sooner rather than later

However I can now beat Emperor.

(The builder in me is still there. I nearly always get basic infra ready in my cities, as if I'm planning to play the long game. I was so proud of one game recently where I got to the end, and discovered the only structure I'd built in on of my core cities was a barracks!!)

 

[brennan]

I guess I really love the long game. Its Huge maps against 15 other civs every time. With a fair start you can always claw your way up to supremacy on Monarch. Haven't played Emperor for a while, maybe next time.

I note that all the really high-scoring games in the HOF rely on massive, early expansion through conquest, you can only score highly by either finishing early, or growing to become very large - and the earlier you do this the better. In either case military expansion is necessary.

I prefer to be a Warmonger at the end of the game, by which time my armies are usually far superior to my opponents, and I can use them more effectively as well...

 

[Drakan]

What was that supposed to mean?
I believe Deity requires either total war or total peace. And I've chosen peace. I'm such a nice guy

It meant that, indeed, there are other builders at Deity.

 

[Pentium]

Good.
Replying to your first post: I believe EXP trait helps you more with early contacts than AGR on a Huge map. Both would be great, but I just can't start a game without a SCI civ. Just can't.

 

[Moonsinger]

A builder says "Build libraries and temples, don't overlap your cities it looks ugly and they won't grow to maximum size. Research your way to victory with an SS win or go for a major, late war". We like having lots of improvements, we may well limit ourselves to playing on Monarch, hell some of us plant forests on unused tiles just because it looks good. Huge maps allow for bigger empires and more opponents to defeat (eventually). Games are slow and largely peaceful and last for ages.

I have always been a builder. In fact, I probably have build a lot more cities and improvements than most people around here. Of course, SS launch is usually the basic requirement in most of my game. Even if I don't play to win by the SS, I would still build it. Yes, it's usually on a huge map with all victory conditions enable. Most of my cities are huge and beautifully set next to the stream of endless meadows, rivers, and farms. Birds singing on every trees and livestocks dancing on every fields! All land have been irrigated, no mining of any type and no factory of any type! Most importantly, my people have lived in perfect harmony for eons. Citizens of all different races and colors are all happily living and working side by side toward the exploration of space. The universe will be the playground for their children and grand children. Isn't that a worthy goal to shoot for?

Btw, what's Manufacturing Plant? What's the tank? What's the nuke?

 

[CoolioVonHoolio]

id be a builder i guess because i build and build and build until a get cavalry and by then my citys are so well devoloped i build the cavalry in 3-5 turns and their usually not cavalry (their either cossacks or saphis) so i just mass produce cavalry and take over the world in a late war.

 

[Pentium]

I have always been a builder.

See? Builders don't always restrict ourselves to Monarch.

 

[brennan]

Most of my cities are huge and beautifully set next to the stream of endless meadows, rivers, and farms. Birds singing on every trees and livestocks dancing on every fields!

I want to live there! Dammit. And you sign out with wise words from Citizen G'Kar, grr Cold shower for me now...

My cities are the same, If land can be irrigated, it is. How do you get the cows to dance? Stick a cattleprod up their A**?

 

[Drakan]

Good.
Replying to your first post: I believe EXP trait helps you more with early contacts than AGR on a Huge map. Both would be great, but I just can't start a game without a SCI civ. Just can't.

Ok let's find a middle point ... how about Sumeria (agri + sci), would that do the trick for both of us in Deity ?

 

[Tone]

Most importantly, my people have lived in perfect harmony for eons. Citizens of all different races and colors are all happily living and working side by side toward the exploration of space. The universe will be the playground for their children and grand children. Isn't that a worthy goal to shoot for?

...but these citizens of all different races and colours; do they live in cities that have flipped to your side due to your civ's superior culture or have they agreed to become part of the commonweath of the world's most dominant civ due to the persuasive abilities of your mounted units?

Btw, ... What's the nuke?

Useful prebuilds for players like me when we try to get a quick win by space launch on Diety and Sid You of course will have stopped the opposition in their tracks *long* before they get towards Space Flight.

 

[Himalia]

I fundamentally want peace in the games i play (Except the Spanish as they always it seems have it in for me, nothing personal ment to anyone Spanish you have a nice country) So what i do is prepare for war as it seems to be the only way your gonna stop one.

 

[IglooDame]

I, Monarch player, build only in order to facilitate warmongering. If I'm on an island I look to push everyone else off it before I look elsewhere, and if I'm on a continent or pangea I try to shore up nearby luxuries/resources and defensible borders before getting violent. I try to have at least one Army before I'm too far beyond getting Feudalism, and once I get to the military academy (90% of the time built in my capital) I'm generally pumping out cavalry armies as quickly as I can. Anyway, with one or more MI, knight, or cav armies I'm almost always at war with someone, and when I'm not, I'm preparing to attack my next victim.

 

[Son_Of_Dido]

Well, Civ 2 made a compulsive builder out of me, and that's still the way I am instinctually.

But in Civ 3, the further I go up the difficulty ladder, the more of a warmongerer I become. Partly because of jealously (I'm still a bit of a Wonder Junkie, and it pains me to see the AI civs beat me to them), and partly because my first Regent game was with the Vikings, and it dawned on me that "hey, wait a minute. I'm the vikings! Why am I sitting around building courthouses? I should be loading up ships with angry axe-brandishing men and terrorizing the rest of the world!" And so I did, and things worked out all right.

What really helped (in both cases) however was learning not to get lazy and switch production to "wealth" in a bunch of cities just so I didn't have to worry about managing each city one at at time when I had 30 or 40.

 

[Choffy]

Well, Civ 2 made a compulsive builder out of me, and that's still the way I am instinctually.

I agree. In Civ2, I was much more a builder. First step, when settling a city was to create a temple due to huge unhappiness (and no luxury). Used to build a lot and go quickly to tank and then clean the world.

With Civ3, I learned to remove all productions from city and start early wars. I moved from a builder to a warmonger.

 

[brennan]

Good point. Has the luxuries mechanic removed the need to build happiness improvements?

 

[Himalia]

A few luxeries i find can allow you to keep that luxury bar right down to either 10% or 0 even under a Democracy. I would say it has to a degree.

 

[Evil Tyrant]

I probably tend towards builderism in that I usually don't go to war until medeival times, when my cities have grown large and generated a decent level of culture. Of course then I usualy remain at war for the rest of the game, largely owing to my habit of extorting as, much as possible from the AI, and declaring war when they don't give me the one gold I want.

 

[henry k c]

Builders should start with republic and then in the industrial age swithch to fascism for warmongering, because builders will likely to be small in # of cities at the time.