Civ4(warlords); Questions of an Idiot

[aelf]

Napoleon. Charismatic Musketeers are nice.

 

[Admiral Kutzov]

now for something totally different...

Liberalism, a trap for the unwise or a boon to the savy? Think monarch or above (not that I play above monarch, just a whim)

You spend all that time getting it and voila, you're first. Do you buy astro or nationalism or something else?

Or do you ignore it? Put the coin into banking/guilds and crank the economy?

Or burn to guns and cavs?

I know, it depends...

but in general, what do you do?

Liberalism appears to be a trap. I'm working up to a rant, but need more info.

As always, advice appreciated.

 

[PublicEnemy]

now for something totally different...

Liberalism, a trap for the unwise or a boon to the savy? Think monarch or above (not that I play above monarch, just a whim)

You spend all that time getting it and voila, you're first. Do you buy astro or nationalism or something else?

Or do you ignore it? Put the coin into banking/guilds and crank the economy?

Or burn to guns and cavs?

I know, it depends...

but in general, what do you do?

Liberalism appears to be a trap. I'm working up to a rant, but need more info.

As always, advice appreciated.

I just posted in the ALC pre game thread that I think the Liberalism beeline is boring. Trouble is, when you add the civics to the free tech it's often too powerful to ignore.
Civ4 is a great and challenging game, but it's also become quite predictable. I bet most of us do certain things almost automatically now, regardless of the situation of the current game.
Liberalism beelineand the Oracle slingshot are obvious examples of things that players can become addicted and find themselves doing game after game.

 

[martin031]

I was thinking the same thing Publicenemy. The funny thing to me, is when I play my games,and I win the lib race, I now grab Nationalism because that is what I see everyone else do. But I don't really know how to leverage it into an advntage. I used to grab astronomy because it was expensive and allowed oversees trading, as well as a valued AI tech that i can back fill techs by trade. But sometimes I wonder if I would be better off not bothering with it and get something more useful.

 

[cabert]

now for something totally different...

Liberalism, a trap for the unwise or a boon to the savy? Think monarch or above (not that I play above monarch, just a whim)

You spend all that time getting it and voila, you're first. Do you buy astro or nationalism or something else?

Or do you ignore it? Put the coin into banking/guilds and crank the economy?

Or burn to guns and cavs?

I know, it depends...

but in general, what do you do?

Liberalism appears to be a trap. I'm working up to a rant, but need more info.

As always, advice appreciated.

Liberalism is really a very good way to leverage a SE = fast early tech advantage, slowing down a bit when the techs are too expensive to be lightbulbed.
For this, you need good tech trading, since you'll have to "defend" your advantage to be first to liberalism, but still get some side techs to make the beeline worth it.
For example, you'll lightbulb philosophy, paper and education.
You won't trade education until you're 2 or 3 turns from liberalism, then you'll get the prereqs for something better than fishing .
A few usual "free tech grabbings" :
- astronomy : you will have traded for everything leading to it with philo or paper, so it's a pretty good tech to grab (map dependant) for a pretty easy trading plan. This is one of the "0 risk" grabs.
- Nationalism : the prereq for this one are Civil Service & Philosophy (or divine right). So in the usual beeline to liberalism, you'll have all the prereqs. No need to trade anything . This is a "0 risk" grab, but to leverage it you'll need to either draft lots of troops, build the taj Mahal or rush to constitution/democracy or rush to military tradition. Many options, and easy to leverage (taj mahal with marble is cheap). It's one of the best easy grabs, because of those many options.
- Gunpowder : available with education, so "0 risk". It's not a good grab, because of 2 things. 1) It's cheaper than liberalism. So what's the point to research liberalism and grab a free tech with costs less than lib? 2) It's tradable for education very often (AI researching guilds/gunpowder).
- Printed Press : available with Machinery and Paper. You need paper for education, so you just need to trade for machinery. No too hard to do . A good grab too, since it works in good synergy with free speech civic for a quick economic boost in a cottage economy.
That's the end of the "easy grabs".

You can use a more risky tech pattern, if you feel lucky or if you play at a lower level.
Moderate risk grabs :
- Constitution. You delay liberalism while you research nationalism. I'm not convinced this is a good move. Of course the price of constitution is higher than the price of nationalism, but delaying the advantages of free speech and free religion for this is a price I feel is unwelcomed. It may be a good move in a large SE economy.
- Military tradition. Same move, different goal. You trade for music, research nationalism, grab MT and start rushing cossacks (would you beeline to MT with any other civ?).
- Chemistry. You trade education for gunpowder and Engineering, who needs muskets when you can have grenades? Given the chance (= an AI is willing to trade gunpowder for education), it's a brilliant move . You can also research gunpowder yourself, which is still a good move, but more risky.
- Economics. You delay liberalism while you research banking. Not a brilliant move, since economics cost less than liberalism, but the double prize (free tech, free great merchant) and the "new era" effect on civics (3 civics change at the same moment ) is quite enjoyable. And the risk is really moderate. With a bit of luck you can even trade banking for paper or philosophy .
After that you enter the vast domain of gambling.
Biology?
Steel?
physics?
democracy?
communism?
I don't like the "deep beelines", they have this risky and gamey feeling . I may try a biology beeline someday; just to get a feeling on those tricks, but I don't think it should be a normal game. Above Prince, it doesn't seem possible anyway.

 

[Jorunkun]

Funny, Cabert's (very erudite) post illustrates exactly what PublicEnemy is complaining about - that in the standard game, there are only so many plays worth pursuing. And the liberalism beeline is probably chief among them in the mid-game.

To remedy this, I have been playing on large maps lately. Having more opponents reduces the likelihood of you succeeding with any of the me-first wonders and beelines, but this is countered by the fact that there are more civs to trade with. I've been getting a lot more varied games with these settings.

Back on topic, do you guys see any risk in pursuing liberalism in a tight tech race (wrt opportunity cost in case you lose)? In my book, the race is on when you get to the paper and philosophy stage. If you are neck to neck with a strong techer here, do you still pursue education - and if not, what are alternatives?

 

[cabert]

Funny, Cabert's (very erudite) post illustrates exactly what PublicEnemy is complaining about - that in the standard game, there are only so many plays worth pursuing. And the liberalism beeline is probably chief among them in the mid-game.

thanks for the erudite
And that's what makes me dislike the high level games. If you don't follow the standard path, you're toast.
But up to monarch, it's no big deal if you're not fist to liberalism, there are ways to overcome a little tech backwardness .

To remedy this, I have been playing on large maps lately. Having more opponents reduces the likelihood of you succeeding with any of the me-first wonders and beelines, but this is countered by the fact that there are more civs to trade with. I've been getting a lot more varied games with these settings.

When I get myself a 2nd GB ram, I'll try it too .
In the meantime, I enjoy the "variant games" more.

Back on topic, do you guys see any risk in pursuing liberalism in a tight tech race (wrt opportunity cost in case you lose)? In my book, the race is on when you get to the paper and philosophy stage. If you are neck to neck with a strong techer here, do you still pursue education - and if not, what are alternatives?

Education is still a good tech if you plan for a longer game.
Of course, if you want to finish the game with HArchers, it's not very useful .
If I feel I'm going to lose the liberalism race (provided I even tried to get it, but it's often so), I go for engineering and trebuchets and make the techer feel sorry .

 

[Giaur]

@Jorunkun:

You can't tell (almost always) when some civ is beelining to Liberalism and when to Economics. So I would risk this racing. Besides Liberalism is valuable trade tech. Not many civs get this Tech fast.

edit: And AI's research advantage can be lowered by producing wealth&research ...

 

[aelf]

And that's what makes me dislike the high level games. If you don't follow the standard path, you're toast.

Not true. What is standard? Once I thought that an axe rush was 'standard' in high level games, but I've done one axe rush in the past 4 games on Emperor/Immortal.

Likewise, winning the Liberalism race is just a convenient thing to do in mid-game, but it still depends on play style and the situation in each game. If you're already conquering very well, for example, why bother with Liberalism, especially if you're up against weak but fast teching AIs like Mansa? Let them waste time on it while you pursue Gunpowder and Chemistry straight after Education and speed up the win.

 

[Admiral Kutzov]

Thanks all.

Back on topic, do you guys see any risk in pursuing liberalism in a tight tech race (wrt opportunity cost in case you lose)? In my book, the race is on when you get to the paper and philosophy stage. If you are neck to neck with a strong techer here, do you still pursue education - and if not, what are alternatives?

I turtle and build my economy, trying not to look too much like a :target:. If I feel I'm going to lose the race, I concentrate on getting cannons and ironclads and a railroad.

 

[Jorunkun]

@ Cabert: You realise that "erudite" is just a polite way of saying "he's a geek who spends way too much time on a computer game", don't you? (And look who's talking ... )

Anyways, interesting to see you juxtaposing education/liberalism with engineering. I'm always tempted to get the latter before the liberalism race, because trebs are so powerful. Maybe this is why I lose the race half the time - starting too late ... hmmm? When in the techtree do you guys start to focus on liberalism?

@ Giaur/Aelf: Agree that liberalism is still a nice tech to have even if you get there in 2nd place, but often my strategy pivots around getting the free tech to be first to cavalry (to leverage military advantage) or constitution/democracy (to leverage economic advantage) so being delayed s more than an inconvenience.

Would be interesting to have sort of a high level roadmap to the game's gambits and strategic "patterns" laid out on a timeline, wouldn't it? Wonder if this is doable ...

 

[cabert]

Not true. What is standard? Once I thought that an axe rush was 'standard' in high level games, but I've done one axe rush in the past 4 games on Emperor/Immortal.

Try to keep up in tech at immortal level without lightbulbing your way up.
Try to keep up in expansion without heavy warring.
The few immortal games I played felt really limited in options.
Emperor is different. I won a cultural victory without any conquest war (just a defensive one). IMHO, there are less tools working on the higher levels, making the options really scarce. Sure, it's good that you won a space race victory on immortal using Montezuma.
But it's all based on the recipe.

Likewise, winning the Liberalism race is just a convenient thing to do in mid-game, but it still depends on play style and the situation in each game. If you're already conquering very well, for example, why bother with Liberalism, especially if you're up against weak but fast teching AIs like Mansa? Let them waste time on it while you pursue Gunpowder and Chemistry straight after Education and speed up the win.

Try to keep up in tech at immortal level without lightbulbing your way up.
For a great person, there are 4 options (settling, lightbulbing, golden age and special). I have the feeling that 3 out of 4 options are useless in the higher levels.
Mind you I settled 3 Great Engineers in my HE city at immortal levels, while running a SE. Those guys give me a cannon per turn + 18 beakers/turn at epic speed, and it's certainly worth it. But it's a bit lame that all the wonders they could have rushed were already gone when I got the techs .

@ Cabert: You realise that "erudite" is just a polite way of saying "he's a geek who spends way too much time on a computer game", don't you? (And look who's talking ... )

IMHO all those reading these lines are spending too much time on a computer game. So I still think "erudite" is positive .

Anyways, interesting to see you juxtaposing education/liberalism with engineering. I'm always tempted to get the latter before the liberalism race, because trebs are so powerful. Maybe this is why I lose the race half the time - starting too late ... hmmm? When in the techtree do you guys start to focus on liberalism?

On immortal, straight after alphabet (or literature if I go for the Great Library). Same on Emperor. On monarch, I get myself some macemen before bothering with liberalism.
It's very rare that I lose the race.

@ Giaur/Aelf: Agree that liberalism is still a nice tech to have even if you get there in 2nd place, but often my strategy pivots around getting the free tech to be first to cavalry (to leverage military advantage) or constitution/democracy (to leverage economic advantage) so being delayed s more than an inconvenience.

Same for me

Would be interesting to have sort of a high level roadmap to the game's gambits and strategic "patterns" laid out on a timeline, wouldn't it? Wonder if this is doable ...

Timeline isn't such a big deal. Aelf has it right, it depends on who you're facing. If MM's around and techs peacefully, there is no way you can win a tech gambit without hurting him. 20 catapults will make him tech a lot slower .

 

[aelf]

Try to keep up in tech at immortal level without lightbulbing your way up.
Try to keep up in expansion without heavy warring.
The few immortal games I played felt really limited in options.
Emperor is different. I won a cultural victory without any conquest war (just a defensive one). IMHO, there are less tools working on the higher levels, making the options really scarce. Sure, it's good that you won a space race victory on immortal using Montezuma.
But it's all based on the recipe.

It's ironic that you should mention the Montezuma game because it breaks percisely the same conventions that you have raised. Not much lightbulbing was done in the game and only one neighbour (Louis) was conquered. A lot of the territory was backfilled. The only 'standard' thing done was cottage spamming, which some players do not see as the ideal strategy on Immortal. And, lastly, winning by space race is the perfect testament to how well we kept up in tech.

 

[OTAKUjbski]

Try to keep up in tech at immortal level without lightbulbing your way up.

This is why I feel winning the race to Liberalism is so justifiably vital: it's akin to a super lightbulb.

Consider a Great Scientist is worth 1500 + 3 * [ total population ]

If you can choose an expensive tech like Astronomy, Nationalism, Constitution, etc., then you've essentially gained an extra lightbulb which does not affect your pool.

Because of the gambit on the Oracle, I feel its value is not worth the risk if there is sufficient doubt you will complete it in time.

You spend all that time getting it and voila, you're first. Do you buy astro or nationalism or something else?

Or do you ignore it? Put the coin into banking/guilds and crank the economy?

Or burn to guns and cavs?

I know, it depends...

but in general, what do you do?

Liberalism appears to be a trap. I'm working up to a rant, but need more info.

As always, advice appreciated.

I use Liberalism to accelerate my teching to Democracy. I find that the penalty against all the other civs can be utterly disastrous -- especially for those civs unfortunate enough to not yet have Education or Astronomy.

By the time Democracy is discovered, it's not uncommon to see cities ranging in the sizes of 12-20. So let's say the average is 16. I think it's 4 for not running Emancipation .?. That's a 25% blow across the globe ... BAM!!!​

EDIT: If my , and (and strategy) can stomach it, I sometimes renegotiate and/or yank all my happiness resource trades in conjunction with adopting Emancipation.

Emancipation also tends to increase the perceived value of Democracy and the techs leading up to it, so it's also likely I'll find myself making much better trades with this leverage.


-- my 2c

 

[cabert]

It's ironic that you should mention the Montezuma game because it breaks percisely the same conventions that you have raised. Not much lightbulbing was done in the game and only one neighbour (Louis) was conquered. A lot of the territory was backfilled. The only 'standard' thing done was cottage spamming, which some players do not see as the ideal strategy on Immortal. And, lastly, winning by space race is the perfect testament to how well we kept up in tech.

OK you're one of those managing to win out of the box somehow at immortal level. There still was only a handful of options in this game.
Well played, sure. But not much fun IMHO.
I'm a bit civved out, as you can see .

 

[aelf]

OK you're one of those managing to win out of the box somehow at immortal level. There still was only a handful of options in this game.
Well played, sure. But not much fun IMHO.
I'm a bit civved out, as you can see .

I agree flexibility is greatly reduced, but I think it will get better as your skills improve and you acclimatize to the difficulty. I had the benefit of the common mind to help me in that game, which is easily equivalent to good skills. But, then again, it was played that way because of the circumstances.

Well, Beyond the Sword is coming soon

 

[Admiral Kutzov]

can a human vassal himself/herself to an AI? anyone ever tried to do that? the scenario where it would appear to make sense is isolated start, big island? Is this just an idiotic question?

 

[Ecofarm]

Let's put it this way: there are no stupid answers...

 

[Admiral Kutzov]

Hi all, thanks for the help. idiot questions is moving to a new thread. bts