Civilization experiences

Adrian

Chieftain
Joined
Dec 28, 2001
Messages
1
Location
Bristol, England
Writing as someone who has spent years playing Civ I and then II to the detriment of my social life and eyesight, but never until now discovered this website, I thought I might pen a few my tips on how to play CivII for you to mull over or ignore:

1. Never ever play Call to Power - biggest waste of time ever.
2. Always play at least at King level, preferably at Emperor as otherwise the game is too easy.
3. Placing a city correctly is probably the single most important decision to be made. I always go for rivers or grassland, both with shield. Anything else and you spend the rest of the game regretting it and having to subsidise it.
4. With my first city, I will always build a settler then immediately switch to The Collussus, which is one of the best wonders ever. Use the second city to establish more cities in that time.
5. Up until around 1000AD if not later (if possible) I never build anything that costs money to upkeep except libraries, temples and maybe colloseums. Barracks, city walls and so on are a waste of money as 99% of the early game when money is tight they are not being used. If enemies get close to cities early on then buy a military unit or two, kill the enemy and disband the unit to save the resources.
6. There should be an option to get rid of wonders - certain ones are just too good (Leonardos Wshop, Collossus, Adam Smith)
7. Don't let cities grow to the level where they need an aqudect until around 1300AD, again it's all to do with cost saving.
8. Ships are a waste of time - one of my major complaints against the game is that ships are too expensive to build, maintain and they affect happiness. In reality the Great Age of Exploration encouraged the English, Spanish, French, Dutch & Portugeuse to explore for riches - civ doesn't encourage that. As a consequence I never expand off my homeland unless it is too small.
9. He who gets to Mobile Armour first usually wins. Focus everything on science until late in the game.
10. Why is there no fascism government? I understand the risks of nutters but it did occur in the 20th century and speaking as someone who always maintains a democracy as the other forms of government are so useless, it would provide a change.

Just some tips / questions. I have loads more to say but not the time sadly!

Adrian.
 
Originally posted by Adrian
3. Placing a city correctly is probably the single most important decision to be made. I always go for rivers or grassland, both with shield. Anything else and you spend the rest of the game regretting it and having to subsidise it.
Not necessarily. Sometimes a strategic location or special terrain will warrant building there. But yes, growth is key. Maximizing arrows is more important in my strategy, but I'll not pass up a good rivered grassland.
Originally posted by Adrian
4. With my first city, I will always build a settler then immediately switch to The Collussus, which is one of the best wonders ever. Use the second city to establish more cities in that time.
Good plan if the second city can produce settlers quickly.
Originally posted by Adrian
5. ...city walls and so on are a waste of money as 99% of the early game when money is tight they are not being used.
Actually, city walls require ZERO gold per turn upkeep! :p In the early game, money is never tight if you demand tribute and explore. I typically have 1,000s of gold before the switch to AD, even with extensive rush buying.
Originally posted by Adrian
6. There should be an option to get rid of wonders - certain ones are just too good (Leonardos Wshop, Collossus, Adam Smith)
There is, just alter your rules.txt file and forbid their construction.
Originally posted by Adrian
7. Don't let cities grow to the level where they need an aqudect until around 1300AD, again it's all to do with cost saving.
I'd rather have an acqueduct and sewer built so that my city can be size 20 by 1300ad. The amount of gold and beakers you could be making on all those unused tiles is phenomenal! Sorry, but this point is a poor idea.
Originally posted by Adrian
8. Ships are a waste of time ...
Huh? Try racing for steam engine some game, and set out your fleet of ironclads. Just a handful of them are enough to wipe out all AI coastal defenders, as they are only phalanx or archers. Land your own units from the galleons, and you now own half the world.
The navy is a stong element in CivII! You can use ships to explore, carry diplomats to bribe barbarians (NON units!), carry your caravans to other continents (double payoff in gold and beakers), defend your coasts, kill off the neighbors, and more. Your game might be better with a dozen ships.
Originally posted by Adrian
9. He who gets to Mobile Armour first usually wins. Focus everything on science until late in the game.
I agree that science is the most important element of strategy, but the game should be over before the AI even gets conscription. Who needs armor then? Your cavalry or marines can wipe out all the AI musketeers and archers with little difficulty. Fighters having target practice against AI legions is fun, too. :D
 
Why do you build the colossus in your capital when you just have 2 cities?
This means that you just can build one new settler instead of two settlers. I think that you will get more extra trade if you build 2 new settlers ----> 2 new cities. Then you will have 4 cities and you can build settlers in all of them which means that you will have 8 cities soon. Im sure that all the extra cities will give more trade than that colossus...
 
I disagree with your idea that city placement should always be on the best resources. Yes, it is vital to ensure that you bag the 4 special points wherever possible, but founding a city on an isthmus and then back-filling with settlers can mean that you will control far more of a continent than you deserve to. The AI on the other side of the isthmus will throw units at it in vain and not really consider using boats to bring settlers around it. Meanwhile, you can fill all the space between your capital and this point with new cities and then have the choice of where to build them. It is very annoying though when you spot a 4-special point but on arrival with your settler find that the AI has already build a city in the wrong place. It can cost a fortune to capture it and then rush-buy settlers to put it where you want and I often end up just leaving it. :mad:
 
Agreed with Duke of Marlbrough...

Barracks ARE a waste in civ2.

Especially since each time they become obsolete, the maintenance cost increases by one! Thus I will build them the first time around if at war but only in a city or two, then go for Sun Tzu's for round 2, and then go without in the Modern Era when they cost 3 each for upkeep (no thanks!)
 
Yup, barracks are utterly useless, which is annoying if u put a city on auto. If i do I leave it to the military advisor and destroy EVERYONE! LOL HE HE:lol:
 
I agree. Veteran units are great! They greatly improve the capacity of your army. However, using barracks to get them is not all that great. Early on, if you really need Vet units, building one or two barracks and building all your units in those cities can be worthwhile. But, matching units to what duty is needed is much better. The AI is not anywhere near good at waging war. You can very easily fortify a Phalanx on a mountan and let the AI beat his head againt it. Teh unit will become a 'free' veteran. You can do the same for attacking units. Have them sit on the mountain with the Phalanx and attack any units that have a weaker defense value (like chariot attacking chariot). Pretty much guarnteed wins and an easy way to kill AI units.

That way you don't have to deal with the logistics of building units in barracks cities and then moving them to another city, re-homing them to that city, then moving them elsewhere.

A little later in the game you just build SunTzu's if you really want to wage an all out war. You can get that wonder around the same time your production is sufficient enough to actually build a decent army.

So, Barracks are somewhat useless because if you use selective unit combat along with defensive terrain, you can get the same effect for free (albeit, it may take a few comabts to get it, but it wll come). Then when you really want to wage war, just build the wonder that gives instant vet status to your units. At that point, the only benefit to barracks is that they heal your units all in one turn.
 
Barracks are preety useless especially in the early game

Much better to achieve veteran status by clever play, if your going to build a barracks do as has been suggested and put it one city and build your army their

The only time i really need my units to be vet are when i have leadership and they don't have gunpowder but do have city walls, but i normally make my dragoons vet by killing the AI's loose units it always leaves around ;)
 
Back
Top Bottom