Different styles of play

[Red Ant]

Hi all,

I'm not posting much, but I read the forums a lot and I'm getting the impression that most people's style of playing CIV is very aggressive, meaning they'll usually end up conquering the world and generally viewing other civ's as "the enemy". While there's nothing wrong with that (it is after all a game, and you're free to play it any way you like ), I'm wondering, are there also a lot of folks who kinda like to play CIV more centered on building a strong country and trying to get on with the AI instead of always flat out aiming at annihiliting them?
Myself I don't like the idea of a world conquest game much. In fact I hate it when a civ gets destroyed totally, because IMO every time a civ bites the dust, the game gets a little more boring. I like having lots of different civs in my games, and I usually try to keep them alive as much as possible, even though I punish them harshly if the fools dare to attack me (which at some point, they usually do ). Speaking of which, I think it would be nice if conquered civilizations could re-emerge ... perhaps as the result of a successful revolt, or because the player grants them some kind of limited independence .... sort of like in Europa Universalis. Anyway, getting carried away, I was just wanting to ask if there are more people who fit the description of a "builder" more than a "conqueror".


Regards,

Ant

P.S. I don't want anyone to get the idea that I'm some flower waving, pink glasses wearing peace hippie.

 

[kevincompton]

Depends on my mood. I do enjoy building a culturally advanced empire. Acting as a world police i might punish overaggressive civs. But I also need elbow room and when a neighbor civ attacks you once, he will attack you many times and he needs to be destroyed.

 

[Red Ant]

That is true. It annoys me what ungrateful bastards the AI can be. Often I prop up an underdog by giving him free techs and money to keep him from getting overrun by a stronger civ, and then at some point he'll make an alliance against me with someone else.

 

[AbuHab]

I am much more of a peaceful builder type, at least later in the game. In the early game, I'm a major war monger who believes he has a manifest destiny to control his whole continent. (Although I have on several occasions allowed a peaceful AI civ to keep a couple of cities on "my" continent.) After gaining control of the continent, though, I wouldn't mind peacefully co-existing and working my way to a spaceship or diplomatic victory.

It's the AI's unreasonableness that always ruins this plan. First, the AI civs are totally greedy when bargaining for luxuries, which I absolutely need to keep my people happy. It's not uncommon for me to have to shell out 3 luxuries plus some cash in exchange for one of their luxuries. Second, if my military might dips below theirs, they almost always end up declaring war.

At that point, I figure, what the heck? I want their resources anyway, so I might as well send an invasion force.

So many of my victories end up being domination victories, even though my original plan was for a peaceful victory.

 

[AbuHab]

That is true. It annoys me what ungrateful bastards the AI can be. Often I prop up an underdog by giving him free techs and money to keep him from getting overrun by a stronger civ, and then at some point he'll make an alliance against me with someone else.

Heh, heh, just as in real life.

 

[crimson238]

I try to vary my victory as best i can by disabling all other forms. right now im working on a conquest victory.. too often though, i gert cultural victorie,s which are staisfying.. but sometimes you <i>need</i> blood.

 

[tenaciousH]

personally, agressive diplomacy and war are usually what keeps me busy, and i get really really bored if there are no competitive civs around to interact with.

 

[subbss]

I am definitely a builder. I have NEVER had a conquest victory. I have cultural, diplomatic, or sometimes domination victories.

 

[citizen001]

You can use respawn AI players for fallen civilizations to re-emerge.

I usually try to conquer the world because it is the challenge and satisfaction that grips most players when trying to do this.

 

[Manny Kant]

I am more of a builder, but as satisfying as it is to put a University in every city, lay rails on every tile, and try to be the good neighbor, the game seems to respect military might and sheer land size more. And yes, when I get bored (when there is nothing new to build for a while) I build up the military and go to war, but I always try to keep at least one civ as an ally through the ages.

 

[King Alexander]

..generally viewing other civ's as "the enemy".

But they *are* the enemy.

I'm wondering, are there also a lot of folks who kinda like to play CIV more centered on building a strong country and trying to get on with the AI instead of always flat out aiming at annihiliting them?

I consider myself as a builder in my own epic games, but I'll whipe out a couple of civs out of boredom if I have nothing else currently to build(so I can find new cities and continue on building ).

If I'm playing an SG, I'll be a lot more aggressive and I'll adjust to the team's plans.

 

[Scuffer]

It's the AI's unreasonableness that always ruins this plan. First, the AI civs are totally greedy when bargaining for luxuries, which I absolutely need to keep my people happy. It's not uncommon for me to have to shell out 3 luxuries plus some cash in exchange for one of their luxuries.

If you are the smaller civ, you can demand far more than you are giving, there's an article somewhere that explains it. Either way, those luxuries you have came free with the land, and are doing you no good unless you are trading them.

 

[morchuflex]

I personnally find war to be so poorly implemented in most Civ-likes (except Master of Magic / Orion) that I never declare it.
But to play peaceful games, you need to stack the deck a little. I almost always play on large, archipelago maps with 80% water. This isolates civs and reduces warfare to a minimum. And if I can build the Great Lighthouse, I'm almost sure I'll find enough room to build a dominating empire without noticeable mayhem. Try it if you have always played on pangea: you'll be surprised, it's almost a whole different game.

 

[earthguido]

I have played few games up to now, and always ended up winning by domination. I really like to keep the game going in a peaceful way as much as I can, but when war is declared on me I usually wipe the enemy out. In CIV 1, 2 and SMAC I liked to win by spaceship (or trascendence in SMAC) but I found CIV 3 to have a much more agressive AI (maybe it is only me). I consider myself to be the definition of a builder, I'll build almost every improvement in every city until there is no other thing to do, road and railroad every tile, place cities in every little corner of the map and make them grow as much as I can, I even put some cities to build wealth or bombers (as a prebuild) until a new tech appeared with new improvements to be made.

But no matter how peaceful I behave, AI always end declaring war on me. I even got declared war by civilizations with cavalries when I already had Modern Armors... My problem is that when I got declared war I just conquer all of their cities, then I win by domination. I guess I should just raze them or abandon them and keep building the spaceship. I am trying now in Monarch (first time) and AI has 2 civs more powerful than mine (Romans and Persians). Romans just declared war on me and I counterattacked and took 5 cities, then granted peace. I will try leaving things as they are.

I do not know why I wrote all this, the fact is that I also like the builder style over warmongering. But please try Morchuflex's advice, it will give you more isolated civs with less warmongering. Wars will be fewer and shorter, though it will be more difficult to you to defend your cities.

 

[danwhit]

Archipelago can be used as a crutch when switching between difficulties. It will keep the AI off your back and allow precious chokepoints(perfect for greatleader farming). But like a real crutch, if you use it too long you won't get better

 

[homeyg]

I used to be a builder, winning Diplomatically almost every time, until I got fed up with it and got a few Conquest victories (I had never won as a warmonger before).

 

[Thorfin39]

My favorite style of play is the 6 week to 2 month epic.. usually on a 270 by 270 or greater with Archepelego (80% water) and 29 civs, There is never a lack of enemies, but prevents all 28 other Civs from ruining my day.. I often add three or four clusters of one and two square islands to the map in the middle of the oceans, usually with a resource or two to make them a bit more strategic.. I am playing one now where I have a mid sized island I am sharing with Korea, Persians and Inca (I am the Germans, should be a rocking war) Carthagianians are attempting to settle on a couple of open areas on my south coast.. Best guess is Inca have about 12 cities, Persians nearly 20, Koreans about 20 and I just started New Berlin (changed the name to Aachen) I prefer a game where I must be proficient in both land and sea war.. and I like to build, make those guns or butter decisions..

 

[alamo]

From what I can tell, there's really no option to be a builder on Monarch. If you're not preparing for war then you'll get bullied and/or crushed.

By the time you get a strategic edge and ramp your war production, then why de-mobilize? Domination or conquest is not very far.

 

[DementedAvenger]

If you are the smaller civ, you can demand far more than you are giving, there's an article somewhere that explains it. Either way, those luxuries you have came free with the land, and are doing you no good unless you are trading them.

I believe the AI calculates the worth of luxuries by the amount of happy faces it will create. So if you are a much bigger civilization, you stand to gain more happy faces and the price goes up.

There is a way to take advantage of this. If you have marketplaces in most of your cities and over 5 luxuries, a great (and cheap) way to lower the cost of another luxury is to purposely pillage 2 or three of your luxuries so that when you trade with the AI, you only stand to gain 2 happy faces per city instead of 4. This can effectively half the price of your luxuries. If you keep 3 workers on each squares you pillage, you can rebuild the road on the same turn.

 

[alamo]

... purposely pillage 2 or three of your luxuries so that when you trade with the AI...half the price of your luxuries....rebuild the road on the same turn.

That is a sneaky exploit!

Of course you'll have to pillage all extra source and be careful to not pillage the ones being traded - I think you'll loose access before your exports get cut.