Civ Old Timer Has Questions About Civ3... Answer Them Please!

I see that the article itself is a bit dated and rather incomplete. However, my strategy on Monarch already emulates a lot of what is said, and as such perhaps the climb to Emperor won't be so problematic anyway: I focus on building units early on, have at least two settler pumps, sword or horsie rush, early wars until I have a big, safe landmass. Culture building only when strictly necessary, wonders only when strictly necessary, early switch to Republic and aggressive use of the luxury slider. All of that was more or less covered by me, but I think on Emperor I should be more aggressive, to make sure there are no powerful AI's near me, just buffer and rump AI's between me and the other big AI's.
 
Also, an important question: when you're big and late, when you have to upgrade your Muskets to Infantry, for instance (I wait until I can have INF), do you upgrade manually and prioritize Leo's, or do you simply produce new units to replace the old??
Reading your comments here, I get the impression, that your style is more the "warmongering style" as opposed to the "peaceful builder style", correct? ;)

In that case I would say: you need neither Muskets nor Infantry... ;) If you are attempting to win a game in warmonger style, you want to attack, not defend! So my advise is: up to Monarch level, you don't need any defensive units. The AI is so incompetent, that it won't get a chance to attack you, if you play your trumps right. Just build Horsemen (or Knights), and conquer the world. On Emperor/Demigod, you need perhaps a handful of defenders to protect the valuable attackers against the occasional counter-attack, or to protect an important choke-point or a vulnerable flank.

(I'm currently playing a Demigod game, where I built 4-5 Pikemen and the rest of my army consists of ~30 Knights, no artillery-type units. Artillery was not necessary here, as I managed to attack, before my opponents had Feudalism (or I managed to disconnect their iron, before they were able to build a significant number of Pikemen), which means, my Knights are up against Spearmen and there is no need of artillery. True, I lose a Knight here and there, but replacing the lost Knight (70s) once in a while still takes less resources than if I had to build upfront let's say a force of 10 Trebuchets (300s). Plus consider the two factors, that these extra Trebs would cost me 20gpt in maintenance, and would slow down my advance. In a Republic, speed is the most important factor. You need to break down the AI's resistance, before a) the AI can build many defenders, and b) your war weariness reaches an annoying level. BTW: if you want to compare your approach with the result of that of other people, you can play the same game: it's COTM 164 (Inca, Demigod, but very good start position for the human player, so it plays more like Emperor than Demigod). You just download the 4000 BC .sav file, play it according to the GOTM rules until end of September and submit it. The download site, upload site and the rules of the GOTM competition are available on the GOTM homepage.)

On Deity and Sid, of course you need more defenders. But it depends on the terrain and the strategic situation. E.g. on an archipelago map, with no safe crossing before Navigation, I may need no defenders even on Sid, because the AI simply can't get to me...

But leaving the question of whether or not you need defenders aside, that still leaves the question of whether to upgrade or replace your attackers. And my advise is to always upgrade. Going back to the above-mentioned Demigod game: more than 20 of those 30 Knights were upgraded from Horsemen. Once I reached Chivalry, I set research to 0%, and then upgraded all Horsemen, while my core cities were busy building important improvements like Marketplaces, Aqueducts, Barracks or Courthouses. Basically, while my shields went into civilian build-up, my gold went into the military, so I was able to continue warmongering, while at home a peaceful build-up phase was going on... (And I had already earlier upgraded all my military police 3/3 Warriors to Swordsmen - and later Medieval Infantry - and used them to capture the first few cities of a direct neighbor, while my Horsemen force was still in preparation. This is what allows early wars, while at the same time not neglecting your civilian build-up too much. To give you a rough estimate of what I mean by "early": in this particular game I switched from Despo to Republic around 1400 BC, and now it is 200 BC, and I have already eliminated 2 of the 3 AIs that share the same continent with me. Attack on the last AI has already started, and I also fomented a few wars on the other continent, so the AIs will already deplete their stock of units against each other, before I will begin my invasion of the other continent... :satan:

Upgrading is definitely the way to go, if you want a big army quickly. In some situations (e.g. shield-scarce start locations) it may even be best to do the "disconnect-connect" tactic to build up a large army quickly, because it is the best way to use both, your shields and your commerce, for producing units: you have a warrior and 6 workers on your iron hill. Every turn, the warrior pillages the iron, then you set all cities to produce Horsemen, and then the 6 workers connect the iron again. Interturn, whenever a city completes a Horseman, you zoom into it and upgrade it to Knight immediately.

With regards to Leonardo's: I don't prioritize it. If some nearby AI builds it for me, I'm happy, but if not, it's no big deal. And most often, when I play for a military victory, the game is over, before any AI manages to research Invention and build that 600s wonder... So waiting for Leonardo's would only slow down my victory date... :D
 
Universal Suffrage is still a waste of time: I forgot the exact numbers, but it decreases War Weariness by like 2%. In most cities, this is lost due to rounding effects, so for all practical purposes, the Universal Suffrage has zero effect... Complete waste of time.

It decreases war weariness by exactly 1 which at size 10 equals 10%. Given how abundant production can be by that time and that we are talking about large or huge maps the choice to build this wonder may well be (barely) rational.
Also, an important question: when you're big and late, when you have to upgrade your Muskets to Infantry, for instance (I wait until I can have INF), do you upgrade manually and prioritize Leo's, or do you simply produce new units to replace the old?? Thanks.
I am very much in favour of disbanding the old units and building new units from scratch. But there are exceptions. The most important exception is knights to cavalry. For only 30 gold this is a good deal and time is of the essence then.

One way to think of it is how many turns worth of your economic output you need to invest. 90 gold for musket to infantry is expensive. But building a new infantry may take a core metro only 2 turns at a time when you need to worry about what to do with your abundance of production anyway. By that time i often build units just to disband them somewhere else for the shields. That is not very efficient, but it is more efficient than building wealth and using the cash for cash-rushing.

Upgrading is definitely the way to go, if you want a big army quickly.
If there is a rush, then yes.

Personally i prefer a more research-minded gameplay. How do i optimize the time of entering the modern age or completing the last tech needed for the space race?
 
It decreases war weariness by exactly 1 which at size 10 equals 10%
Wow, then it is indeed slightly more useful than I thought! Though size-10 cities are usually not the problem, when it comes to happiness -- the big metros make the most trouble, when war weariness kicks in. Level-1 is usually not a problem: if you capture an additional lux resource in your conquest, it takes care of that. Level-2, however, is more annoying. In a size-10 city, it means 5 of your citizens become unhappy, Universal Sufferage reduces it to 4, which is quite handy. However, in the metros, where it really matters, the effect is still neglectable, e.g. in a size-20, 10 citizens are unhappy, and US reduces that to 9. That's not that big a deal...
I still think, it is better to invest those 600 shields into 7 additional Cavalry, which will enable you to end your war more quickly, before war weariness even becomes a problem in the first place... :D
I have played games under Republic, where I conquered the whole world without ever getting more than Level-1 unhappiness for a dozen turns or so (until a favorable peace deal was agreed, or - even better- the source of the war weariness eliminated... :smoke:).

Regarding your other points: you are right. What I said, applies only to quick military games (Domination or Conquest). For other VCs of course other strategies need to be applied, as you point out. For example, if I aim for a science victory, I also do not keep a large army that drains my economy with up-keep and then invest further gold into it by doing mass upgrades... :) The gold is then better invested into research. And when going for a 100K victory, I also build units in the core cities and disband them for shields in the corrupt outer towns to get libs & temples more quickly. But as I said in the beginning: I had the impression, MPorciusCatoCivver's questions were aimed mainly at how to play the warmonger style successfully, so I described what I think is best for a quick military victory...!
 
I build wonders that dont expire and when I dont need more military units. (Which is ... almost never)
I love Smiths, Copernicus and Newtons, Hoover Dam and some others.
They should be seen as luxuries. Something you want, but shouldnt need; so they should not be a priority.

The most difficult part, still, is the opening game. Perfecting the start is what makes a difference.
 
The essential boils down to this: Newton's and Copernicus' if you're seeking to build Science, Templars perhaps if you need the military, Smith's, Hoover Dam and ToE absolutely essential in the Industrial Age. Sistine and JS Bach's essential if you need the happiness.
 
The essential boils down to this: Newton's and Copernicus' if you're seeking to build Science, Templars perhaps if you need the military, Smith's, Hoover Dam and ToE absolutely essential in the Industrial Age. Sistine and JS Bach's essential if you need the happiness.
No great wonders are essential for the human player to build. On Sid level, you would struggle hard to get any.
 
The essential boils down to this: Newton's and Copernicus' if you're seeking to build Science, Templars perhaps if you need the military, Smith's, Hoover Dam and ToE absolutely essential in the Industrial Age. Sistine and JS Bach's essential if you need the happiness.
It's not just science.
Newts and Copes allow you to lower the slider, making more money for units available.
 
I know Sid is very hard lol. That's why I never ever played on it. I would be content with mastering Emperor the next months, then trying Deity and that's all. But Sid is impossibly hard.
Sid is not impossibly hard, exactly. I'm definitely not an elite player, but I've got a bunch of Sid wins. The sneaky tricks used to win are just different than on other difficulties.
 
Yeah I've seen it. The 200+ unit AI trick where you take a city, gift to a neutral AI without ROP with your foe, take another while waiting for the huge AI army to teleport, and so on, until you make the AI army vanish, as well as things like building outposts to get your atillery and mobile units to attack core AI cities in one turn.

I think this is all unbearably gamey. I know the AI has tons of advantages on Deity and Sid, still, perhaps only some of these tricks are justifiable on Deity due to high difficulty; that's why I also prefer to play on Monarch and Emperor without most tricks, because I think they're gamey, gamey, gamey. Really, lol.

It's not that hard to defeat an AI rush on Emperor, btw. All you gotta do is turtle, lure the AI with an ungarrisoned town, funnel them, bash them with offensive units, then hide, then have them attack a walled city on a hill with barracks and a 6+ pikemen garrison. All of this works neatly so far on my two Emperor games. Then counterattack. You don't need most gamey tricks, *yet*.
 
Yeah I've seen it. The 200+ unit AI trick where you take a city, gift to a neutral AI without ROP with your foe, take another while waiting for the huge AI army to teleport, and so on, until you make the AI army vanish, as well as things like building outposts to get your atillery and mobile units to attack core AI cities in one turn.

I think this is all unbearably gamey.
Actually, I've not done these things. I just play on archipelago and let the AI drown in unit support, I leave my capitol undefended to draw attackers to it, and I don't invade anybody else until I've got an army to hide under. Still, I don't usually play at Sid. (I just hope one day to have the most games in the Civ3 HOF, and a lot of Sid slots are empty, so I've been trying to fill some of them lately.)
 
Actually, I've not done these things. I just play on archipelago and let the AI drown in unit support, I leave my capitol undefended to draw attackers to it, and I don't invade anybody else until I've got an army to hide under. Still, I don't usually play at Sid. (I just hope one day to have the most games in the Civ3 HOF, and a lot of Sid slots are empty, so I've been trying to fill some of them lately.)
Histographic losses are one way to get your numbers up quickly. They can take under 10 minutes. I managed a Large Monarch loss, and lower levels (I think it will post on the next update). Emperor level though I've gotten destroyed at when I tried it (just once).
 
Top Bottom