Eve of Destruction - save game

johncross21

Warlord
Joined
Nov 9, 2006
Messages
178
I would be grateful for some tips on my game play. I play noble regularly and win about 50% of the time (normally time victory).

In this game playing Victoria on Pangea and at Noble level. The major opponents are Babylon, Persia and Stalin. I took out the Celts, the Zulus and the Sumerians

Good relations with Babylon and Persia. At war with Stalin.

Huge amounts being spent on spying by the AI (not sure why)

This posting is the point late in the game where my lead was snatched and the prospect of victory turned to dust. I think if I went back to this point in the game I could win for sure but it goes against the grain.

The reason (perhaps you can guess) -

Spoiler :

I invaded Russia and Stalin capitulated to Babylon giving Babylon a big point score. I tried to catch up but could not. I think Stalin might capitulate anyway but from this point the position might be retrievable
 

Attachments

Score is not going to help you wi.....oh i just saw the year of the save. In that case score will help you win. Can you try to get a victory before time runs out Space/culture/diplo?
ps (i couldnt look at the save, dnt hav bts installed on this comp)
 
could win from this position but not in the way I played it :)

in retrospect I should have either -

* closed borders and made peace with Peter at this point

* or invaded peter and not stopped when he capitulated to hamarabi

as it is I let hamarabi make Peter a vassal which just goes to show that the AI isn't completely stupid. Hamarabi managed to cross my land to defeat and vasslise another Civ - and thus win the game

-----

started in London

game started not welly - bodged an axe rush ended up pillaging brennus to extinction and capturing two cities (oxford) but unable to capture his capital (southampton). it had 7 archers with garrison

dispatched him with invention of catapults and captured his island (renamed Jersey) with astonomy (for some reason he could settle an island without astronomy but I couldn't get there !)

the other AI's had from an early stage a huge lead in espionage, Peter particularly, so I spent a fortune on that in the late game playing catch up (perhaps not wisely). I didn't use my spies at all well. I forgot to post spies at first but eventually posted two in my frontier cities. Peter stole assembly line from me. bit cheeky

i was playing victoria and i got so many great generals I had them stacking up at one point. I had two cities with 2 instructors, 1 with west point. Both with academies.

don't appear to be producing enough troops although I have two cities churning them out most of the time. London isn't a great hammer site but has west point and iron works. Glascow (was Zulu but renamed) has mines and those statues. good war city

no specialists apart from free ones. don't really understand that part of the game. don't know where I'd put them

too many jack of all trade cities.

far too indecisive about attacking Peter earlier. he was way off the scale on spies so it was a mystery how many troops he had. but he kept on sending cossacks against marines so I hoped to whittle him down - but left the killer blow too late

I also got distracted into building a navy to surprise Peter. I actually captured one city (libyan) with a bombardment from the sea and a tank attack. I gifted it to persia (it would have flipped anyway) but the navy was too prone to air attack to cross half the map to attack peter. expensive waste of resources.

always nervous about having two frontiers but dealing with Hanarabi was a potential problem and his land was of variable quality so I headed east. liberated one of his cities from the zulus, nodwengu. rubbish city and easy plus point. fouled things up by accidentally invading sumeria after he had vassalised it. short war. I didn't want . but eventually it was called off by the AP. strange as babylon had AP but wouldn't make peace.

captured a city late in game (renamed Leeds) but couldn't exend its borders into russia (don't know why because I spent a fortune in coin finishing temples, globe etc)

razed two sumerian tundra cities I didn't like the look of and Babylon promptly settled there (ouch).

couldn't get research past 50% in mid game - had to switch most cities to wealth to catch up on tech.

help
 
I looked at your save... Why do you have unimproved tiles in 2037 AD? You should also send out a workboat to the clams near Jersey. You also have two unimproved clams near Southampton. One near Oxford. Oxford also needs a levee - it's on a river! Most of your cities don't appear to have factories either. You need to take advantage of the industrial revolution to speed up production or you will not be able to produce the late game units (tanks etc.) in any reasonable amount of time. Some of your hills have mines on them, but aren't railroaded. Railroads on mines increase hammer production by 1 so you should always railroad them. The same goes for lumbermills. Unimproved forest tiles is a big nono at this stage of the game (one near Southampton).

Fighters shouldn't be left idle if they're at full health - you should at least put them on intercept mode. You have a lot of resources that need to be improved like aluminum and coal - even if you have more than 1, redundancy is crucial in case one source gets sabotaged. Also, I don't get why you're spending on espionage. I'll play through for a bit and post the save.
 
Got a time victory. You just have to bribe HAmmurabi off of Peter by gifting tech, then go on and vassalize Peter. I declared on DArius at the end to kill time.
 
shuye

I notice you have all the cities except one building war. I feel pretty brutal if more than 3 cities are building units. is that typical game play or is it just when you are at war

when do you find time to build markets/libraries etc ?

notice also that you settled with Peter after one city and declared on darius - I tend to wipe out one civ at a time and don't stop till its done. is it better to fight shorter wars with limited objectives

john
 
shuye

I notice you have all the cities except one building war. I feel pretty brutal if more than 3 cities are building units. is that typical game play or is it just when you are at war

when do you find time to build markets/libraries etc ?
When I'm in war mode, I generally build military in every single city that has the production infrastructure in place. If I'm still teching, I may leave my best research and best gold city out of the production to concentrate on research but otherwise, it's better to go all out on war. That way, you can (hopefully) keep the war shorter and bulldoze the enemy faster. Long drawn out wars are no good for your economy and slow down your overall development. I wouldn't build markets/libraries unless I'm desperate for tech, or I'm in peace.

notice also that you settled with Peter after one city and declared on darius - I tend to wipe out one civ at a time and don't stop till its done. is it better to fight shorter wars with limited objectives

john

Given the time constraint of the time victory coming up, I didn't see any reason to continue fighting Peter. His military was broken, and it would take too long for the cities to come out of revolt for the land tiles to count towards the final score. Hence my decision to vassalize him. I made a :smoke: move against Darius when I declared war as I underestimated his military strength and lost a lot of units when I should have waited in the border city for his stack. Lesson learned.

Generally short wars are good, but you don't want them so short that you'll have to declare on the same civ multiple times (3 or more). You'll pick up unnecessary diplo hits with other civs that may outweigh the benefit of the war. You want your wars to involve overwhelming force though. And of course, if you can bribe an AI to join you, definitely do so as long as they won't vassalize the target civ. Hope that helps.
 
Back
Top Bottom