Difficulty level - most recent poll

[Dr.Null]

Monarch to play for fun, Warlord to test while modding (I have to make it all the way to the end, no?)

You have reminded me that I need to get back to play-testing... which is to say, working on a mod.

 

[jarhead_leif]

I define "testing on warlord" as learning new strategies. How good is that, how good is this...which is waaaaay better of the two? Usually when learning new ways to micromanage cities and manipulate AIs.

 

[millerd91]

I play on Noble, unless I'm doing the game of the month. Playing on Noble is a good way to learn how to play the game without an advantage or disadvantage against the computer. When you think you have a pretty solid understanding of the workings of the game, bumping things up a notch by trying out a game of the month lets you get even better at the game. And if you do bad, but don't know what you did wrong, you can read about what other players did on the same map to give you ideas for future games.

 

[oddibe]

I generally play 18/Monarch/Huge/Pangea/Marathon/No tech trading/No Vassals/Random Unrestricted Leaders.

I have no idea what that computes to a difficulty level on normal speed, normal map and tech trading enabled.

I did play a couple normal speed/normal size random maps on Monarch and won them as well, but may have just been lucky. Huge/Marathon/No tech trading almost feels like a different game.

 

[Qgqqqqq]

Emperor, though mainly FFH2 now and might have slipped since.
As someone cleverer then me once said:

I play at [PREFERRED DIFFICULTY LEVEL] because its more of a challenge then [PREFERRED DIFFICULTY LEVEL -1] but doesn't require the hard work/min-maxing of [PREFERRED DIFFICULTY LEVEL +1].

 

[Apricottage]

I play on Immortal because I'm not quite good enough for Deity yet.

 

[FlyinJohnnyL]

I probably waited WAY too long to move from Monarch to emperor, and now I find that other than barbs, emperor pretty much feels the same as Monarch. I'll probably go to immortal as my new year's resolution.

I've always stayed at levels for too long though. Started out on Noble, quickly moved to prince when I came here in 2007, stayed there for a year, moved to monarch in early 2008. Then I re-discovered my x-box and stopped playing for 4 years until a couple of months ago. Now I'm finally doing emperor.

 

[UnforcedError]

Went with IMM as this is the level I usually play on. However, I do enjoy trying out optimized winning strategies on the lower levels as well. Can beat the odd Deity map too, but it is really too much work for me to play in general.

 

[TezaPsyborg]

I went for Emperor, though in reality it's Monarch, Emperor or Immortal. The higher your level the bigger the score you can rack up and I do like having a big score in my personal hall of fame. The higher the level the more the AI 'cheats' though, personally I would have prefered smarter AI with each level rather than the AI getting lower cost technologies and extra units but I guess there's only so much you can do with current programming...

 

[LeHam]

I like playing on Noble, but have recently moved up to Prince. Right now I'm playing a Monarch game with raging barbs and Ruthless AI. Yeah, I'm getting my butt whupped.

I don't think I'll want to move above Monarch, though. After that the AI bonuses get so high you pretty much have to go on huge conquest sprees to compete.

 

[fantsu]

With "always peace" ON I'm an Immortal player, otherwise Prince or Monarch.

 

[Ramesses-Rules]

I have some wins at Immortal now, but can't get anywhere playing anybody but Ramesses. My Ragnar experiments were a total failure.

 

[Pisskop]

Emperor when trying to challenge myself in vanilla. I hate how the ai gets obscene bonuses, however, so I prefer one of the ai mods. I typically play those on monarch for a good *(but consistantly winnable)* fight, or prince to mess around and have fun.

As always, my favorite civs are Persia, Viking, and France, with Rome and America in fourth and fifth, respectively. Burger King places a far sixth place.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Went with IMM as this is the level I usually play on. However, I do enjoy trying out optimized winning strategies on the lower levels as well. Can beat the odd Deity map too, but it is really too much work for me to play in general.

I'm still looking for low-effort way to beat deity. So far my only answers are "AP cheese" and "culture hoping not to get squished" which actually isn't as hard as it sounds with diplo abuse (I've won culture games with Ragnar as an immediate neighbor on deity).

I guess you could piggyback wars too.

The other excessively cheap way I've discovered that will occasionally work is to capitulate someone (say, early treb gambit), gift all cities back, gift them all of your metals, and SPAM THE CRAP OUT OF WARRIORS ---> gift them to vassal. Deity AI with their gobs of bonuses, 50% discount rate, etc can easily handle upgrading masses and masses of warriors, allowing them to over-stack even beyond other deity AI. That's when they start taking cities and snowballing. Oddly, if you don't make a demand or mis-treat them they never seem to break free . Eventually, AI will kill everyone you DoW and you will "win conquest"................................

 

[UnforcedError]

I'm still looking for low-effort way to beat deity. So far my only answers are "AP cheese" and "culture hoping not to get squished" which actually isn't as hard as it sounds with diplo abuse (I've won culture games with Ragnar as an immediate neighbor on deity).

I guess you could piggyback wars too.

The other excessively cheap way I've discovered that will occasionally work is to capitulate someone (say, early treb gambit), gift all cities back, gift them all of your metals, and SPAM THE CRAP OUT OF WARRIORS ---> gift them to vassal. Deity AI with their gobs of bonuses, 50% discount rate, etc can easily handle upgrading masses and masses of warriors, allowing them to over-stack even beyond other deity AI. That's when they start taking cities and snowballing. Oddly, if you don't make a demand or mis-treat them they never seem to break free . Eventually, AI will kill everyone you DoW and you will "win conquest"................................

I've seen AZ demonstrate this tactic and also tried it myself on occasion, but to me it felt more of a flavor-strategy and less like an efficient way to play the game. The AI just won't be able to use those units effectively IMO. They'll either sit around in cities or they'll end up being massacred by the other AI due to bad stack movement management. Or do you use this tactic with a better AI mod? (Agree a 100% on religious and culture .)

 

[shulgi]

I've seen AZ demonstrate this tactic and also tried it myself on occasion

His last game was pretty funny and lazy. He let his vassals take out the last two AIs while he just hit end turn over and over.

 

[civvver]

It depends on the settings since marathon speed pangea as caesar is quite easy on emperor while quick, huge as a random leader is not. Generally emperor, I have beaten immortal, but I also reload so I'm sure in a hof style random leader all standard settings game I wouldn't do so well.

 

[AdamCrock]

I play on chieftain since I excersie (waste) my super-power trans-human intelligence on paying taxes

 

[duckstab]

I currently play on Noble, because I'm more of a "narrative" player. I feel that playing at higher levels it becomes more "gamey" and thus, for me, less immersive.

Although I will note that warfare is lately becoming more predictable and less interesting. I haven't had to deal with a serious AI threat or faced a challenging defender in a while. I think I may try moving up to Prince soon, at least for my next warmongering game.

 

[AdamCrock]

I currently play on Noble, because I'm more of a "narrative" player. I feel that playing at higher levels it becomes more "gamey" and thus, for me, less immersive.

Although I will note that warfare is lately becoming more predictable and less interesting. I haven't had to deal with a serious AI threat or faced a challenging defender in a while. I think I may try moving up to Prince soon, at least for my next warmongering game.

War has become not-immersive ever since I've startert to read Tachy posts. I still have fun while pounding heavy stones via trebuchets and catapults but yeah it feels more "gamish" non-realistic not sacrifice of human life like the real deal Mabbe it's just the whole point ? We have wars feel like games becouse the real deal would blow our minds and it's surely to heavy to digest like that