Difference between difficulty levels

Expand Expand Expand! And more expansion. In the time you waste irrigating and roading the two squares leading up to your city I'll be half way onto my first settler in that city. that settler will build a second city Soon after, while you're probablly still building a defensive unit for your first city. By the time you get around to founding a second city I'll have 3 and at least one settler irrigating and mining. I'll crush you
devil.gif
.

Of course there are risks, barbarians could appear, and rapid expansion can leave parts undefended, though I would consider a minefield of cities to wade through a better defense of the capital then any irrigation it may posess. But those who don't take risks are doomed to rule mediocre civilizations. And I eat those for lunch.
chef.gif
 
Yes, in multiplayer, i got easilly crushed...
but in normal games, specially space runs games, it is, in my mind, a good strategy

------------------
Here's I am...
Circee@bigfoot.com
 
Its interesting but I find enemy unit roughly 2-3 times harder to kill under diety than under cheifstan and barbians get stronger, the more difficult the levels get. Yes, the production penalty is definately true and I also believe that research takes more beakers.

------------------
<FONT COLOR="blue"><FONT face="lucida handwriting">"And this is how it all began, where did we mess up?"
</FONT c></FONT f>

Check out Civworld Forms
 
Each city was supporting 2 settlers and this was well before AD. I love settlers, i wish they could take thier spades and bash some heads just to make them even better!

Hey maybe thats an idea for civ III a fighting settlers unit!

<IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/cwm40.gif" border=0>

------------------
Words of wisdom from the renaissance man x.

[This message has been edited by iccky (edited March 29, 2001).]
 
Back
Top Bottom