Different strategies on different playing levels

[Siegmund]

What aspects of your game are different depending which level you play on? At first glance, it seems not too much changes.

I have noticed a few things, though, and would be curious to know what other ones the rest of you see.

Monarchy: on Chieftain/Warlord switching to Monarchy to get the extra food production is one of my early-game goals - perhaps my first goal, unless I urgently need Mathematics to stomp on a neighbor. On King level, I sometimes don't even bother with monarchy -- it's a race to develop Republic and Religion and build Bach before civil disorder gets completely out of control, and I am not too eager to see my cities grow superfast. Possible exception if I have a bunch of waterfront cities and can take advantage of the 1F3T ocean squares once I have 3F squares.

Wonders: I am accustomed to never building the Great Library since I seem to always be ahead of the AIs for techs. Likewise I rarely bother with the Great Wall since I am often trying to get gunpowder quickly. I suppose the emphasis on these two shifts depending on the game style, more than on level - but the higher levels make the science game more challenging.

 

[Zwelgje]

For me it's like this:
Whenever I play one of the 3 lowest levels I go for science and all it's wonders. I like to build all wonders then and just let the cities grow as big as possible.
At the 2 highest levels I really hate the civil disorder. So what I do is keep the cities small with 2 defenders in them. By doing that you can let them be size 5 (with 1 elvis most of the time) and they're just pumping out units at crazy speed. Also in the higher levels I don't research that much, I go to knights and sails and that's enough to conquer the world.

 

[Wil]

At higher levels, the conquest strategy is a good bet. To do otherwise is much more risky. I never could win an emperor game with sciences and wonders. Only lastly did I realize you should just do as the addict says.