Deity -- when to call the rush vs. liberalism push?

[stuckatnoble]

So, I understand that a common principle is that on deity, if you can't block off enough space in the early game (to win liberalism / get enough research momentum), you have to bust your way out with an early rush.

It seems like this is a decision that has to be made fairly early so that longer-term strategy can be set in motion.

I have a few questions:

1. How many cities (assume average land/food) do you need to have to not be pressured to bust out?

I know it really depends on your tech rate, your land and resource quality, the tech speed of AI, the amount of AI warring amongst themselves, etc., but just want a ballpark idea.

2. Do you know of any good Let's Play Deity videos that show a successful early rush? Most games I've seen that ended in wins were able to block off 5-7 cities in the beginning.

It seems that more than 50% of my games I've tried, I was unable to block off enough space. Then, if I didn't have any resource advantage (ivory / iron / etc.), an early rush generally would net me only a few cities (if that), and then I fall behind in tech.

It also seems like almost a necessity to bribe another AI on your target, otherwise you are going up against someone 1v1 who has more land to leverage against you, especially if you don't hold resource or military tech advantage.

 

[Grashopa]

I'm not a true deity player as I only play forum games which don't resemble random so much. However your bpt comes from your capital and the rest of the cities are just whipping units - its more of a production issue I think.

Perhaps you aren't packing your cities close and cottaging the capital?

Does anyone know of a forum game with something like a max 3 city deity start without horses or something? That can't be 50% of games can it?

 

[sossos]

War is the best investment, and I always try to start war as early as possible. The closer the AI is, the earlier the game can be won.

1. How many cities (assume average land/food) do you need to have to not be pressured to bust out?

I hope I can start war with 1 city, but normally the AIs are too far so I have to build 3~4 cities by myself.

2. Do you know of any good Let's Play Deity videos that show a successful early rush? Most games I've seen that ended in wins were able to block off 5-7 cities in the beginning.

I don't know as I didn't watch any Let's Play Deity video before. Here's a deity game I played recently.

random start, no ancient uu, small space, no resource advantage, axe+catapult rush, no bribery, win conquest victory at T186.

http://hof.civfanatics.net/civ4/game_info.php?entryID=27450

 

[Fippy]

Traits also important.
PHI..exceptional strong for Cuirs, if you are experienced enuf to get scientists for bulbing and also great merchants for upgrading HAs or Jumbos. In that case you can break out late and take more cities with your upgraded units instead of whipping many Cuirs.

Pyras are also very strong (and so also IND) for late deity breakouts (Rep. beakers + police state whipping).
In both cases ~3 good cities + few fillers can be enuf.

You can make up for not much land with quality wonders (GLH also) and high GP generation, if we look at an overall picture 3 big Pyramids cities can surely get you Cuirs or other advantages faster than 6 totally average cities (without Rep.).
But it's important learning how first, techs like currency drop in priority while CoL (Caste) will become hugely important. CoL >>> CS (Bur. Cap can also help) >>> bulb Edu (2x), bulb Philo and also Paper if you can create many scientists..
tech Nationalism and do not spend time on stuff like Currency, metal casting (wait for trades on these).

Overall i like HAs best (leaving out UUs) if rushing early, important here will be high focus on only 2-3 cites and not settling stuff that will not contribute towards your rush.
Same concept, you need quality not quantity.

 

[stuckatnoble]

Thanks guys. Yeah I need to work on being better at bulbing.

1. How many libraries are you running GS in early game?

2. What's the best strategy to getting great merchants? Golden Age with a GS / Caste System / Pacifism -> starve city with National Epic?

-------

Last game only managed to eek out 2 bulbs with a non-Philosophical leader (Darius).

Settled 5 cities that were decent food / meh production before I got boxed out. No horses, no ivory. One science capital + 3 farm/mine/whip cities + 1 commerce/whip city (since it had FP and gold).

Two nearest neighbors were quickly twice my land so I didn't even consider an early rush.

Then the AP banned trading with my only tradeable source of horses, as well as lost me some good tech trades I otherwise could have done.

Lost liberalism by 5 turns and by the time I self-teched to cuirs, my most reasonable target had rifles. Did I mention the AP also cut off my horses? =P.

Also by this time, one of my neighbors had vassaled two other AIs, one of them being a peace-vassal by Gandhi.

 

[Ironlungs76]

2. Do you know of any good Let's Play Deity videos that show a successful early rush? Most games I've seen that ended in wins were able to block off 5-7 cities in the beginning.

Hi, AbsoluteZero from CFC (aka Chris67132 on Youtube) has a variety of Deity rush tactics.

YT channel:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCgT_HmP4nlz5wECKOkIlj9Q

A decent early rush with Ghandi, for example:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dkfi9iaPVB0&list=UUgT_HmP4nlz5wECKOkIlj9Q

Hope this helps.

 

[MegaLurker]

Assuming we're ignoring unlikely scenarios and UUs, the only reliable rush is horse archers. If you do it just right it will hardly slow down your tech pace at all. You'll be attacking by ~1000BC, done (at least the first, crippling phase) by ~500BC, get good, brokerable techs for peace, have leftover units for Hereditary Rule happiness and barb city capture. In the perfect scenario your target is first to Alpha, gives it to you for peace, you broker it around for monarchy/IW/sailing/math/backfill and are still one of the tech leaders. One of the common strategies for the HA rush is to research writing before HBR (works great if you have a relatively soft target, or not if you're creative or philosophical), so your economy is already well established. You don't need to have a superstrong leader or a great start.

Elepults are reliable but I don't really consider it a rush if you're still fighting well into the ADs, they start later and they're much slower, bigger hammer investment, etc. Going elepults will usually, in my experience, mean giving up on Lib unless you really know what you're doing with a Philosophical leader and/or have really strong land with tons of forest, a great capital, slow global tech rate, etc. You might still be finishing off your targets when an AI wins Lib with elepults, at which point if you don't have a significant land advantage already you almost have to continue warring with trebs to get there.

 

[stuckatnoble]

Yep that's what happens to me with elephults. By the time I can get a decent stack out of 4-5 cities, the AI tech rate is often so fast that I'm often going up against longbows and macemen which really slows me down. If I can't bribe someone else in or dogpile someone, I pretty much only can take a few cities.

Probably am not getting to Construction fast enough, pumping out units fast enough and picking my targets well enough...

 

[Fippy]

Thanks guys. Yeah I need to work on being better at bulbing.

1. How many libraries are you running GS in early game?

2. What's the best strategy to getting great merchants? Golden Age with a GS / Caste System / Pacifism -> starve city with National Epic?

-------

Yep Caste + Paci mainly, libraries play no big role (often only really needed in your Cap).
If a city has huge food + you can afford whipping one, but they should be bigger and ready for when you get Caste.
Overall food wins early often, cos you are not getting bonuses on GP generation yet.
With PHI you can start earlier with libraries, so there they can be better (and awesome with Pericles, or just good with all Cre leaders).

Early Great Scientists (2 would be ideal) are great for an Academy and then also having one for Philo bulbing ready. Without PHI that can be hard, and sometimes i have to choose between Academy or earlier Philo.
That's connected to your libraries question again..i would say only experience can give you a good feeling for balancing between growing and 2 early scientists.

But what all this shows..there are many other important thingies you can do with cities on deity, besides building workers and settlers. You will not want too many workers and settlers with this strategy, and that's why learning high difficulties can be so hard for many..you should forget much of the earlier advice you received (like o m g you need more workers and 6 cities by 1AD).

Aesthetics yep i forgot, with marble (or IND or maybe better both ) wonders like Parth, Glib and also NE of course compliment this strategy.
More so if you can also get music (needed for Mil. Trad. later and good for trading).
Teching Aest. for your first trades (Alpha + cheaper stuff like sailing, IW and if you are lucky Poly + Med) is rather standard on deity.

 

[nate45]

>you should forget much of the earlier advice you received (like o m g you need more workers and 6 cities by 1AD

hey fippy, how many workers do you actually build, anyway? I see some advice on this forum "1.5 per city" and it seems crazy to me. I usually build like, 4 or 5 very early and then never build any more. Is that too many or too few? or depends?

>Teching Aest. for your first trades (Alpha + cheaper stuff like sailing, IW and if you are lucky Poly + Med) is rather standard on deity.

diety strats are so cheesy! part of me wants to forget that difficulty exists and just play emperor or something with "always war" turned on... I wonder if that would be easier or harder...

 

[stuckatnoble]

Yeah heh...part of winning at deity seems to be abusing whatever advantages you possibly can since you are clawing your way back from a hole.

I got my first win in Prince -> Monarch -> Emperor -> Immortal in the space of 5 days, but have lost every single Deity game since. Just a whole another ballgame and I'm not a very good player LOL.

 

[drewisfat]

I don't think they're cheesy, you're either using the fact that the AI is so overpowered to your adv. (i.e. tech trades) or you're abusing strategies that are strong on all levels, it's just on deity only the strongest strategies can win.

I think workers are "overrated" in the sense that there's a common recommendation to have more than you really need. Beginners don't build enough workers and work too many unimproved tiles, but experts have smaller cities working fewer tiles and overlap much more, so they don't need as many workers are "intermediate" players. I usually build 5-6 workers (on a typical pangaea) and more if I have room to expand, and less if I'm able to steal some during wars.

 

[sampsa]

Beginners don't build enough workers and work too many unimproved tiles, but experts have smaller cities working fewer tiles and overlap much more, so they don't need as many workers are "intermediate" players.

This. I suspect more advanced players swap tiles and plan whips better, so they don't just "end up" working unimproved tiles. For me one breakthrough was realizing that you almost never want to slow build a worker/settler (=only when you have a ton of whip anger and no happy cap increase in the near future).

 

[nate45]

I don't think they're cheesy, you're either using the fact that the AI is so overpowered to your adv. (i.e. tech trades) or you're abusing strategies that are strong on all levels, it's just on deity only the strongest strategies can win.

it just seems weird to me that the strat for winning is to sit around and tech trade your way up to dominance until ~1000 ad without fighting any wars at all. It's like--in what alternate universe were there no wars at all between 4000 bc and 1000 ad? Also the AI could destroy you at any moment for the first 4000 years or so, but it decides not to and lets you win. Also if they simply didn't do stupid things like trading you alphabet, you'd have no chance.

Basically the AI's are pacificists... and even the "aggressive" are basically hippies by historical standards. But if you want to win you have to play like a psychopath (i'll backstab them all once i'm done teching!)

I should just turn tech trading off and turn on aggressive AI and try to then see if I can win on immortal with a civ other than inca... I remember playing alpha centauri a few years back and when you first meet santiago she always demands not one but two techs to not attack you, on, like, turn 5. But then in this game, the AI is so stacked that an early war like that you might as well restart (and alpha is a way easier game overall... I want to say alpha transcend (highest) difficulty was easier than emperor for this game).

 

[Zholef]

it just seems weird to me that the strat for winning is to sit around and tech trade your way up to dominance until ~1000 ad without fighting any wars at all. It's like--in what alternate universe were there no wars at all between 4000 bc and 1000 ad? Also the AI could destroy you at any moment for the first 4000 years or so, but it decides not to and lets you win. Also if they simply didn't do stupid things like trading you alphabet, you'd have no chance.

Basically the AI's are pacificists... and even the "aggressive" are basically hippies by historical standards. But if you want to win you have to play like a psychopath (i'll backstab them all once i'm done teching!)

I should just turn tech trading off and turn on aggressive AI and try to then see if I can win on immortal with a civ other than inca... I remember playing alpha centauri a few years back and when you first meet santiago she always demands not one but two techs to not attack you, on, like, turn 5. But then in this game, the AI is so stacked that an early war like that you might as well restart (and alpha is a way easier game overall... I want to say alpha transcend (highest) difficulty was easier than emperor for this game).

That's the gist of what I felt back when mastering Immortal. After that, taking the step up to Deity seemed kinda pointless. I want to manage a civilization, not play "how to best abuse the AI's colossal stupidity". Try K-Mod. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised.

 

[Fippy]

Nice excuse, of course war against weak AIs that have no clue how to move units = not abusing them I would play K-Mod maybe, but i am unable to accept the standard UI..it's so 10 years ago.

 

[Zholef]

Nice excuse, of course war against weak AIs that have no clue how to move units = not abusing them I would play K-Mod maybe, but i am unable to accept the standard UI..it's so 10 years ago.

I'm not exactly sure what you mean. Of course waging war against a dumb AI is not an abuse if you're supposed to do that, but sitting on an empire of cities guarded by nothing but warriors for 4000 years secure in the knowledge that nobody will attack me, because X is at friendly, Y is too dumb to use galleys to get around X's closed borders to get to me, and Z doesn't plot at pleased, feels kinda abusive to me. Even if it isn't abuse, I don't see how anything I said qualifies as an excuse. Unmodded Civ4 on Deity is plenty challenging, but that's true for lots of games. The process of overcoming that challenge needs to be enjoyable as well, and for me that joy already disappeared while mastering unmodded Immortal. If you do find it enjoyable, then good for you, I guess, but if not for K-Mod, I would have moved on to a different game. Also, K-Mod v1.42b includes most of BUG's features. What part of it is it that you can't do without?

 

[Mec AntiKythera]

I don't really see the distinction between using the economy to build an advantage or using an army to do the same. The phrase, "because you are supposed to do that," rings hollow to me. We are also supposed to build strong economies aren't we? Of course you should play how it feels right to you, I'm just saying that I don't follow the logic. The AI's "colossal stupidity" exists in war as much, if not more, than in the rest of the game.

I recently started a game in K-Mod to try it out. I missed the red fists and the display of a civ's number of cities in the score area. Can those be turned on? Don't think I want to go back to life without them.

 

[Zholef]

I don't really see the distinction between using the economy to build an advantage or using an army to do the same. The phrase, "because you are supposed to do that," rings hollow to me. We are also supposed to build strong economies aren't we? Of course you should play how it feels right to you, I'm just saying that I don't follow the logic. The AI's "colossal stupidity" exists in war as much, if not more, than in the rest of the game.

I recently started a game in K-Mod to try it out. I missed the red fists and the display of a civ's number of cities in the score area. Can those be turned on? Don't think I want to go back to life without them.

You can't follow my logic to that conclusion because that's not the point I was trying to make. I don't object to building strong economies and can only wonder what gave you that idea. Where the AI's colossal stupidity doesn't exist (or at least to a much lesser extent) is K-Mod. That's also why you don't need the red fists there. When I'm playing unmodded BtS and all the military I've got at 200 AD is five warriors and two chariots, then I'm close to Lib and keep an eye on the WHEOOHRN indicator to pull some diplomatic stunt (begging, bribing, etc.) in case somebody starts plotting on me. When I'm playing K-Mod BtS and all the military I've got at 200 AD is five warriors and two chariots, then I check if I'm really playing K-Mod because somebody ought to have conquered my territory long ago.

The number of a civ's cities is displayed, but it only counts the cities you can see. And the red fists are gone because the AI only says "WHEOOHRN if they are already at war, or if their war preparation is the only reason why they won't be bribed into war (which it usually isn't)." (source) Nor does it matter anyway, because you can't get away with cheaping out on military that much. If you're weak, hostile stacks will come.

 

[Fippy]

Was not directed at you Zholef, more towards the whole direction this tread took.
Not all "deity players" play their fun little games while hiding with only warriors in their cities That's just trying to help players who are new on that difficulty level, for some basics they could do if they like trying.

In my (rare now) fun games i play deity isolated, semi isolated (can be even harder), all warmonger maps, random personalities and stuff like that..
it's all about how you set up your games, but mine rarely play like you might think from the advice i give. Like i mentioned, i only do that to help learning players cos these basics are important on Deity (doing 1 thingy with full focus).
After you have learned that..you can move on to really funny playing.