deity vs. lower levels

[the argus]

i had been playing civ 2 on and off for a few years before, quite recently, finding this forum. in that time i had managed to win on deity albeit not before the year 2000 and i never bothered to do anything but conquer the world (the spaceship thing never appealed to me, though maybe someday). but i had only won on deity with either a small or regular map and i wanted to win on a large map. (oh by the way, this is against the AI, I don't do the against human players thing). Faced with failure after failure (i can get ahead but can't stay ahead) i came here and learned many many many things (thanks everyone!) i'm still not able to win on large map (mostly, i think, for lack of patience) but this is not why i post. (all this was context for my question)

why doesn't everyone (here at least) play on deity? it seems many people on here are far more knowledgeable than i am about the game, but they play on the lower levels.

is it because the game is too annoying on deity (the AI cheats and its too hard to keep people happy)?

or is it because I cheat and I'm actually not that good? my cheating consists of saving the game after every turn and going back if the game doesn't go well: i.e. a goody hut is a stupid tech or barbarians, my catapult loses to a warrior, or i forget to rush build a wonder when some other Civ is about to do it. i don't go back EVERY time things don't go completely right- that would be too tedious- but i certainly do it alot- enough to make me feel guilty enough to mention it- should I be talking to a therapist?- maybe anyone who plays a game enough to come to a place like this needs to- but i digress...

I'm sure others cheat to varying degrees and there have been threads about it, BUT i haven't been able to find much on why everyone doesn't play deity. so again is it because they don't like deity or because i need to stop cheating? or some other reason?


...[off to the side whispering to myself: "gee i hope i didn't offend/alienate anyone with that therapy crack... in other news, my neck sure does hurt from playing that game for 5 hours straight without moving from the chair last night...."]...

 

[Prof. Garfield]

The great players that are currently active posters are all for democracy, but there are the players that are not for that kind of thing. Currently, the people who shun early conquest will find the most info around here without going very far back. Those who read the succesion games will find a huge wealth of information. It takes time to become an great civ 2 player, and a large part of staying at the lower levels is fear. The higher levels seem to instill great amounts of fear in the lower level player (it did for me).

 

[Old n Slow]

I often play at Prince level and I'll just as often set up a game, go to cheat mode and grant my fledgling civ the knowledge of Fundy + a few other techs. Then while I'm still fog brained in the morning eating breakfast I'll be "playing civ" with little or no brain activity drilling in all sorts of bad habits while otherwise pursuing mindless fun.

All too often I'll play too fast and too carelessly, so these "games" allow for that sort of outlet.

 

[ElephantU]

I wonder what the general proportion of players is that play "just to conquer" versus those who explore the other elements of Civ2 - research, empire building, diplomacy, economics, etc? Might be another case of the 80/20 rule...

Yes, Argus, you are "cheating" a little too much. Reloading even "bad" combat outcomes or unfortunate huts prevents you from learning how to deal with Civ's little hindrances. But I would guess that most players don't play Deity because of the greater unhappiness difficulties rather than anything else. Yes, there is an additional element of AI "cheating", but you could also look at that as an additional "handicap" against the overwhelming advantage of the educated human player. The closest level to an "even playing field" is King level, where the "slimmer" AI food, research and production boxes are equalized.

What do you need to work on to do better at Deity level? Primarily, it is a matter of planning for and preparing for unhappiness before it becomes a problem. The greatest tool you have is your human mind, which can learn the intricacies of this magnificent game far beyond what was programmed into the AI logic back in the mid '90's. The single area which the AI neglects the most is TRADE - I usually try to get Trade right after getting out of Depotism (into either Monarchy or early Republic), then go find AI civs either via Marco Polo or exploration and set up trade links. Build a Super Trade City that can power your research and income. Set up Trade Routes to other civs and give away The Republic to pacify them and increase your trading payoffs.

Don't be afraid to experiment with ideas and techniques you learn from the forums here. I remember losing lots of games early on - losing is really a far better educator than cheating to win. Read as much as you can, both here at CFC and over at Apolyton.Net (they have an excellent Great Library in the Strategy forum there), especially the older Strategy threads. Ask questions fearlessly - the best person I saw doing that recently was SCLOOPY, whose "Brand New Grandma" thread is a treasure trove of helpful advice. Join the Game Of The Month group, download the current game and play on your own up to AD1, then post questions on the Spoiler thread. Read through some of the Succession threads, especially any that talk about "D+1/2/3..." as these games are "enhanced" Deity level and get even more into dealing with happiness issues.

Most importantly, though: Enjoy yourself. If you cannot handle Deity yet, play a few games at one level above where you are comfortable, then do some research on the problems. Try a game or two where you aim for getting a SpaceShip launched. Try a game where you have only One City (a REAL learning experience!). Try a game where you build no wonders. And when you get frustrated, go back to Warlord level and stomp on the AI a bit!

BTW, welcome to CFC! Good to see another committed Civ2 player!

 

[Specialist290]

There was a time when I feared Warlord, but that was before I came to this site...

I've started a couple of games on Prince (and am actually doing well on some of them), but I'm still mostly a Warlord player. I have tried one or two games on Deity, but let's just say I was a bit intimidated after the first 40 turns...

 

[Ace]

After reading Sid's manual, and playing the obligatory one game at chiefton, I played a lot of warlord games and had advanced to prince level, when I made the amazing discovery (to me), that at diety you always start with two none settlers!! That was it, I have always played at diety since then, except for gotm games and the occasional warlord or prince game, just for a change of pace.

As to "cheating", reloading is a no no in a serious game, but in a "just for fun" game, I have been known to reload if barbs show up too often in huts, or the ai wins a battle that is totally outrageous, like a barb warrior defeating a fortified archer. And I gleefully admit to toggling the cheat mode active when things go dreadfully wrong (on those few rare occasions) and creating dozens of nukes and blasting everything in site, just for the hell of it, before starting a new game. That is a good way to relieve one's frustrations and improve your mental health.

 

[mardukes]

I play diety all the time though I've never won there--I suck. I can't figure out the ODO years on any other level. But I try to restart only on slipups like moving a piece west instead of northwest or when forgeting pieces that needed to be moved before others--my mistakes not game activities. Of course, as I never win I have no compunction about just starting a new one if things break bad on me.

 

[ElephantU]

There are lists of when the years change, such as in the CFC War Academy. The basic idea for OEDO years is that it is every four turns. Just adjust it for when the number of years per turn changes. Note also that size of the map will change the "normal" year gaps as well.

What is your biggest problem at Deity level: unhappiness, excelling the AI in research, or military strength?

 

[mardukes]

What is your biggest problem at Deity level: unhappiness, excelling the AI in research, or military strength?

I rarely have more than 1 red face per, say, 8-10 cities so my guess is no problem with happiness.

I'm competitive in advances overall but not always first and often behind in the spaceship track so I say yes to research. It is possible that I entice the AI to advance too rapidly by keeping my rate too high but, I swear, if I didn't do so I would not develope spaceflight before the 21st century if at all.

Even when I'm ranked strongest I don't have more units than 2 times my number of cities unless I've been barbfarming or otherwise gathering NONE units. I am in awe of the numbers of units some talk about in this forum--not considering the spread out garrisons the only units I ever have numbers in is transports (maybe 6-8) and fighters/stealth fighters (perhaps a dozen.) I can go to land war with 2 howitzers and only have the problem of staying at war. So I plead ignorance on the military question.

I don't get overrun, I get out spaceshipped. The closest I got was landing 1 year too late and I didn't have the power to get to his capital.

 

[Prof. Garfield]

Play power democracy. It will let you outdo the comp without much difficulty. Read up on Andu's Starlifter Power Democracy. It works.

 

[ElephantU]

Now that you have identified your problem, focus your efforts on improving it. Read up here at CFC and over at Apolyton.Net on research, especially on the use of trade. Shoot for getting up to one tech per turn before 1000AD, then shoot for two techs per turn. It is doable, if you structure your empire to achieve it. But there is a lot to learn. A good overview would be Solo's "Early Landing Strategy Guide" in the Strat forum at Apolyton.

 

[mardukes]

Now that you have identified your problem, focus your efforts on improving it. Read up here at CFC and over at Apolyton.Net on research, especially on the use of trade. Shoot for getting up to one tech per turn before 1000AD, then shoot for two techs per turn. It is doable, if you structure your empire to achieve it. But there is a lot to learn. A good overview would be Solo's "Early Landing Strategy Guide" in the Strat forum at Apolyton.

Could you help me out and point again to the identified problem, please.

 

[Stegyre]

I'm competitive in advances overall but not always first and often behind in the spaceship track so I say yes to research. It is possible that I entice the AI to advance too rapidly by keeping my rate too high but, I swear, if I didn't do so I would not develope spaceflight before the 21st century if at all..

I cannot speak for the noble pachyderm, but I'd say this is the chief problem. With a well-developed SSC/STC or good use of caravans/freight (which is what I assume you use all of those transports for), you should have a substantial tech lead over the AI by the modern era. (If you make efficient use of BOTH these methods, you are probably one of those elite - clearly not me - who negotiate two advances in a turn. While EU talks of getting such rapid advances, in my own diety+ games, I usually rely predominantly on the SSC, with minor supplementation by caravans/freight. With the small number of cities I prefer (3-6), I get advances at the rate of approximately 1 every 3 turns, and this is still sufficient to have a significant lead over the AI -- to the point that my ship is launched before any of theirs are even a distant threat.

Even when I'm ranked strongest I don't have more units than 2 times my number of cities unless I've been barbfarming or otherwise gathering NONE units. I am in awe of the numbers of units some talk about in this forum--not considering the spread out garrisons the only units I ever have numbers in is transports (maybe 6-8) and fighters/stealth fighters (perhaps a dozen.) I can go to land war with 2 howitzers and only have the problem of staying at war. So I plead ignorance on the military question.

I have the same sort of approach to units/military. This approach is fine if you are trying to win by spaceship (as I typically do). Winning by conquest is a whole different ballgame. (Nice to have two games in one.) But (1) you've already been directed to some very good sources on that; (2) that doesn't seem to be your main focus, anyway; and (3) I'm sure not qualified to advise you on the subject. (I do some conquests, but it's definitely the very easy big-tech-lead-build-lots-of-howies-and-stealth-fighters-take'em-over-one-by-one-until-no-more-are-left; I'm definitely not the master of put-together-a-strike-force-to-take-out-a-civ-in-one-turn.)

 

[ElephantU]

Could you help me out and point again to the identified problem, please.

In your own words:
"I'm competitive in advances overall but not always first and often behind in the spaceship track so I say yes to research... I don't get overrun, I get out spaceshipped..."

 

[A+ombomb]

The ai "cheating" isn't necessarily a bad thing for the human player. You just need to learn how to manipulate their pronounced growth/expansion rate to your advantage - namely trade. Trade on deity is extremely profitable, as computer's often have large cities to trade with very early. Use this knowledge, and black clicking for their cities, to bring in the gold! Money makes the civ world go 'round.

 

[Archer 007]

I working my way up.

 

[mardukes]

In your own words:
"I'm competitive in advances overall but not always first and often behind in the spaceship track so I say yes to research... I don't get overrun, I get out spaceshipped..."

But wouldn't that be the symtom not the problem?