China or Greece on higher difficulty? Possible?

[Illusion13]

It seems like, both these civs are based on building up, which doesnt seem to fit anything above Monarch, which the only way seems to be to massively sprawl over the entire map, and hope to overwhelm your enemies with huge weaker armies.

Anything useful about the traits? Is it even possible to beat anything above Monarch using these two civs? Cause the traits dont seem beneficial...

 

[vmxa]

China is very strong for Emperor games and plays fine on DG. Above that it depends. I am not a big fan of Greece, but having a pike very early is not all bad. Often you are able to avoid the use of them as the AI does not like to attack them, who does?

 

[Illusion13]

Hm... but the AI will tech so fast that the Hoplite wont even last much... Right?

 

[Spoonwood]

Both come as possible. In fact, I had a good game on a large Deity map with Greece going where I had a tech lead/parity in the early industrial ages, but I got bored with it and quit. Although I can't really demonstrate such, it seems easier to play builder-style than warmonger on "higher" levels. To get some ideas on how to play "higher" levels builder-style see Drakan's article http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=122419. I have a write-up of a Deity Mayan game here http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=281173. You can also check out my Persian 5 city standard sized map game for some ideas here
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=283144&page=2

 

[Spoonwood]

Hm... but the AI will tech so fast that the Hoplite wont even last much... Right?

No. The Hoplite lasts as your best defender at least until you... the human player... gets Gunpowder. Longer if you have no potassium nitrate or you can't trade for it. I can't say what you would consider as a fast tech pace, but in my opinion, the AIs won't get to Gunpowder all too fast at any level below Sid, e.g. the AIs didn't get Gunpowder until 280 A.D. in my Mayan Deity game. Sid seems like a different story though.

 

[Mursi lives]

At middle level (emperor, DG) I would rank China and Greece best and 2nd best non-agri civs.

It seems like, both these civs are based on building up

Certainly true for Greece (and the hoplite is the perfect UU for building play ) but China is rather based on ... crushing

Industrious workers will give you early mines (early shields!) and early roads to the neighbor civs.
Half-priced barracks and early shields will give you early vet archers or horses for early conquest using the early roads.
Early conquest and industrious workers will give you a big and well-developped territory when chivalry comes.
A big number of productive cities producing riders will end the game.

 

[Optional]

Illusion13, is this a first attempt at Emperor for you? I know you're coming from Monarch. Have you read Ision's article about this move up? http://civfanatics.com/node/170. It does give some good pointers.
I expect you will find Greece a bit easier for keeping up with the higher tech pace on Emperor.

 

[vmxa]

Hm... but the AI will tech so fast that the Hoplite wont even last much... Right?

Well you have many responses, but here is mine. The AI will not tech fast at emperor, only faster than it would at Monarch. You should be able to stay right with them on self research under most conditions.

One of the things that makes it seem like they are running away early in tech is huts and trading. In a pangaea or a continents game you would expect them to get the AA techs fairly fast.

They will have contact at a decent stage and trade techs, so you could well be behind near the end of the AA or the start of Middle Ages.

This may even be a number of techs, if you are not able to trade some as well. It is just a temporary condition, IF you play fairly well.

You can play in any number of fashions, the two most often seen is builder and warmonger. You could play some variation of those, just so long as you are managing things well.

Frankly I was in love with Riders when C3 came out and played them out to deity just fine. PTW made a few changes, but still China was very strong.

I used China a number of times in C3C, but since there were so many new civs, I have not used them a lot in recent times. I think China and Persia were used so much that many just decided they were stale. That does not make them weak.

None of the civs will be good enough at Emperor, if you insist on misusing workers and building too many structures too soon.

 

[Illusion13]

Heh well I just want to get a bit more in depth into strategy... I MIGHT start an emperor game soon though, but the last monarch game, as vmxa know, took me something like 3 years (breaks in between off course) to finish off, so... PAIN.

Regeant is the level where all bonuses are 0 to both human and AI right? So the human will tech better simply because he/she is a better player?

I like playing Greece because, obviously on lower levels it is the best builder/techer Civ. And it also leaves the AI at bay while you hoplites are still in. All this will probably go down the drain as difficulty goes up.

I like playing China well, cause I am Chinese =.= but thats probably not all, since the Rider does perform very well in crushing blows. Once again, this may go down the drain as difficulty goes up.

And I guess I could say that both the Hoplite and the Rider come in useful times, unlike some of the other UU. For one, as Incan in my last game, I was rather angry with the fact that the Incan UU, the scout, has really done me nothing good, and its life span is only that of a few turns. And UUs like the Panzer, F-22, come in so late that it wont be useful...

 

[rysingsun]

I was rather angry with the fact that the Incan UU, the scout, has really done me nothing good, and its life span is only that of a few turns.

Not long ago I won a multiplayer game by walking into my enemy's capital with an Incan scout

 

[Illusion13]

yeah but what are the chances of that happening =.="

 

[Spoonwood]

I like playing Greece because, obviously on lower levels it is the best builder/techer Civ. And it also leaves the AI at bay while you hoplites are still in. All this will probably go down the drain as difficulty goes up.

As I (Doug.Lefelhocz) tried to indicate playing builder/techer still does NOT have to go down the drain as you move up levels. In fact, I'd argue most people *would* find it easier to play builder style *if they cared to play that way* (most people around here seem not to). As VMXA pointed out on Emperor keeping with the AI in tech works out as quite feasible given that you manage your workers well and build intelligently (think libraries, markets, and courthouses where you need courthouses). Worker management and how many workers you need may not come as all too familar to you, so I advise to look around here... for instance http://www.civfanatics.com/content/civ3/strategy/cracker/civ3_starts/index.htm If you check Drakan's thread referenced, you can also find a game where I played on Deity as the Byzantines and fought a single war with the Japanese that they started and I didn't take any of their cities. The Greeks play at about the same level tech and building wise as the Byzantines.

Sorry if I seem harsh, but I don't know how many people around here seem to totally ignore comments that you can play "builder" style at higher levels and still win. It seems all too common. You certainly don't have to play "builder" style and most war academy articles end up written more for warmongers, because most people apparently *want* to play "warmonger" and do NOT want to play "builder" style. That's fine. But, just because most people play warmonger, that doesn't mean that builder style comes as less feasible or necessarily harder.

 

[iambenben]

i thought it was possible to win on all difficulties with all civs, otherwise they wouldnt include some of the skills of some civs

 

[vmxa]

It probably is possible, but some civs are harder to win with at the higher two levels. You will see many Sid games using Iroq on continents and pangaea and Byz on islands. You don't have to, but it easier.

The one thing I would say about builder style is that it does not mean the same thing to every one. The post you see where they are struggling at Regent or Monarch are being played with what I would call a builder style.

It is just that they are not doing the things that would work. They are lacking one or more of the points mentioned so many times. Worker use or too many structures too soon are the biggest issues.

I try to point out that you do not have to but every structure every where as soon as you have the tech. Not that you should never build them, well some you should never build.

The other issue as I see it is that games of "builder style" played out on levels like deity are going to call for a fair amount of trading skill, not found by Regent/Monarch players.

Along with diplomacy skills. These skills are learned and will take time or training, but the posters losing at Regent have not put in that effort.


You some times see them talk about having played for a long time, but never beat Regent. In all walks of life I heard a similar refrain, " I have done this for x years". My response often is so what, you are doing it inefficiently.

As I tell the boss lady, I am not impressed by how hard you work, only by how much you accomplished. If you can get the job done without breaking a sweat, that is fine by me, if you worked like a dog and the job is still not complete, what good is it?

 

[Spoonwood]

Very true VMXA.