Condensed tips for beginners?

Hammers from the whip double with granaries, so I consider that building 1 UNLESS copper or a major food tile is 2 tiles out from my expansion city. Then monument comes first.
 
Where should I settle?
See attached pic
Without knowing what's to the east, I'd say 1N. You lose a flood plain by settling on it, but gain gold in the capital's BFC, which is HUGE, without putting any desert tiles in there.
 
On the higher difficulty levels, it's often best to kill off one or two of your immediate neighbours asap. (I normally use axemen, horse archers or elephants, depending on which resources I can get). identify the weakest one and conquer him/her, to expand your country and put military pressure on your rivals, and the plundered money should enable you to keep up technologically too. I only research military techs until the war is over.
I guess the best tip I could give to any beginner in civ4 is to be more aggressive, throughout the game, but especially in the beginning. Regardless of which type of victory I go for, I always try to conquer a weak civ early, and then establish the economy/culture.

I am going to try this at Monarch. I never needed to do it at lower difficulties. Would you please comment on the pros/cons of picking off just a couple of other civs key cities (eg. to get marble) vs. trying to wipe out his entire civilization (which I find often takes a lot of time even when you have the military advantage, thus allowing other spiritualists to get way ahead of me on research).:)
 
I am going to try this at Monarch. I never needed to do it at lower difficulties. Would you please comment on the pros/cons of picking off just a couple of other civs key cities (eg. to get marble) vs. trying to wipe out his entire civilization (which I find often takes a lot of time even when you have the military advantage, thus allowing other spiritualists to get way ahead of me on research).:)
Limited war vs. elimination

Limited war - pros:
  • Faster
  • Requires fewer units
  • Less chance of war weariness
  • May be able to extort techs (post-Alphabet) and/or gold (post-Currency) for peace
  • Reduces chances of counter-attack, pillaging
Limited war - cons:
  • Less XPs gained for your units
  • Fewer units built may mean your power rating remains low
  • Potentially earns you an enemy for the rest of the game
  • New cities and their tiles may be subject to cultural pressure
  • New cities may struggle with "we wish to rejoin our homeland" unhappiness
  • Declaring war multiple times on same civ will earn you multiple diplomatic demerits from their friends
Elimination - pros:
  • "Rejoin our homeland" happiness vanishes once rival is eliminated
  • Cultural pressure also vanishes with dead civ
  • Many units built = higher power rating
  • More XPs gained (could also mean more Great Generals earned)
  • One rival gone for the rest of the game
  • Fewer diplomatic demerits from DOWs
  • Land = power; more cities captured = more power, allowing you to spring back economically once war is complete
  • That feeling of satisfaction when the last city falls and the enemy is dead... :smug:
Elimination - cons:
  • Takes longer
  • Requires more units
  • May have to deal with war weariness
  • May have counter-attack, pillaging problems
  • Forgo chance to extort techs or gold for peace
  • As you noted, your economy may suffer longer if the war takes a toll on it (and it usually does)
  • New cities may face cultural pressure from other civs (Well, you gotcherself a veteran army now... go kill them too!)
 
Thanks. That analysis squares pretty well with my experience. In my current game, I have 5 good cities established, but land is now very tight. There is a barb settlement nearby, and either Stalin or I will take it out. It is pretty well protected at the moment. If I can take that plus one of Stalin's best cities, that gets me to 7 -- enough to go back to work on my Culture Victory. On the other hand, if I don't get much resistance from Stalin, I may go for his elimination.

Maybe that this the best policy -- delay the limited/elimination decision until you get into it and see how fast/slow it is developing in combat.

Another option you didn't mention is to take a couple of his cities, pillage the rest to cripple his economy, and then come back later and stronger to set him up as a Vassal State. I notice the AI likes to set up Vassal States. I have never tried it yet.
 
I just bought Civ 4 with BTS today, it didn't have a menu or a tutorial.
Pretty blown away and lost. HELP PLEASE:confused::eek:
Civ4 has a tutorial--it's not much, but it will get you started. Just load up Civ4 without BtS and then have a look through the menus, you'll find it.

After that, check out Sulla's walk through and my own beginners' guide (link below in my sig).
 
Just a quick question, if research is in progress towards a new technology, and then it is instantly completed (ie with liberalism or a GP's light bulb), are the beakers used for partially researching the technology gone for good or are they carried over and put towards the next tech?
 
all beakers invested in a bulbed tech are "lost" (you don't get them "back") but those beakers that would be added this turn will be added to another tech. If that's what you mean...
 
Hello there,

I was wondering. I play CIV BTS on Noble difficulty and always manage to be first or second in the score graph. I don't like playing agressive but I like defensive wars. So I figure, I wait till the AI declares war on me. But this doesn't happen that often (in most games it doesn't happen before 1400 AD). Is this normal or does it mean I should move up on difficulty?
 
Hello there,

I was wondering. I play CIV BTS on Noble difficulty and always manage to be first or second in the score graph. I don't like playing agressive but I like defensive wars. So I figure, I wait till the AI declares war on me. But this doesn't happen that often (in most games it doesn't happen before 1400 AD). Is this normal or does it mean I should move up on difficulty?
 
A big factor that determines whether an AI will be willing to declare war on you is the relative power of your two empires. Check the power graphs, and if you are very strong in power compared to most civs then you are probably not getting attacked simply because other civs fear you.

If you are winning games consistently it could be worth moving up a difficulty. Prince provides a pretty good challenge.

Depending on the gamespeed, no AIs attacking you before 1400AD can be fairly normal.
 
You can either have less military (and lose defensive wars) or build more units and check "Agressive AI". Agg AI is a great option to have more action in the game but often, the AI is teching very slow. Toy around with the option and difficulty to find the settings you like most :goodjob:
 
I would be glad if you answer my question...

In the older games, civ 1,2 if you wipe out a civilization, you would get a score penalty, does it happen in Civ 4? or can you just march through your enemies?
 
As far as I know, there is no score penalty for wiping out civs. However I think there is a unique bonus multiplier given at the end of the game if you win by conquest instead of any other victory type. i.e. killing every other civ. Considering that to win by conquest also usually means you will have a high score because of techs, population and land, conquest victories normally result in the highest of scores.
 
ok thx...

I heard somewhere that Sid Meier likes to win peaceful victories :) and put in a penalty for eradicating all civs, in civ 1 and 2, not sure about 3 thou
 
Back
Top Bottom