Forget about Key Civs

[molesworth]

I have recently played my first game with the knowledge of key civs and tech gifting. I did not build Great Library as I became aware of its liabilties from reading criticisms of it in the "worst wonder" thread. As you may know these are that it can prevent you channeling research in the direction you want to go and that you can become "too far" ahead of the key civ.

I played the game with only five rival civs (me + 4 AIs), as a playstation player this is my usual number as it takes too damn long otherwise! Knowledge of key civs and how power rating affects research beakers has improved my understanding of the game. However with less than 7 civs (which may come about even if you start with 7) it is very difficult to put this understanding to practical use.

My conclusions from this game (which I abandoned in the 1860s or there abouts as I forgot to complete Adam Smiths allowing AI to beat me to it!)
are: 1/Great Library is of use, and: 2/ Variations in research beaker costs caused by altering power relations to Key Civ are annoying but tech gifting to overcome it is pointless.

These are my reasons: Great Library allows you to get most of the early techs early in the game so you are not wasting time researching feudalism in the 19th century for example. Also it means you can get access to a more complete range of wonders earlier which you can then build at your convenience. I guess some may argue you can achieve this by strategic tech sharing/gifting although I am always reluctant to give rivals any tech.

As to beaker costs changing in relation to Key Civ, I think that with enough wonders (acquired quickly courtesy of Great Library) it is possible simply to continually boost research levels and to overcome this effect by "brute scientific force" as it were.

I know these views go against what seems to be prevailing wisdom according to what I have read here in civfanatics and also negate the value of an awful lot of research that has been done. This is not to deny that such research has been worthwhile as it has greatly increased understanding of Civ II and given us all more options when playing the game.

Look forwards to reading your opinions and playing GOTM soon when I get my PC version of Civ II. Perhaps then I will be forced to take into account Key Civs and acknowledge liability of Great Library - lets see!

 

[TimTheEnchanter]

I have recently played my first game with the knowledge of key civs and tech gifting. I did not build Great Library as I became aware of its liabilties from reading criticisms of it in the "worst wonder" thread. As you may know these are that it can prevent you channeling research in the direction you want to go and that you can become "too far" ahead of the key civ.

The problem isn't getting too far ahead of your key civ, having the GL doesn't let you really get much ahead of anyone. The problem is that you should be researching at such a rate that you are already ahead of the AI civs, and that it will be of no benefit because there is rarely a tech you would want at that time that two other AIs will have researched, that you can't get through diplomacy.

I played the game with only five rival civs (me + 4 AIs), as a playstation player this is my usual number as it takes too damn long otherwise! Knowledge of key civs and how power rating affects research beakers has improved my understanding of the game. However with less than 7 civs (which may come about even if you start with 7) it is very difficult to put this understanding to practical use.

True with less than 7 civs, it is quite possible to get your tech rate killed if your key civ isn't there.

My conclusions from this game (which I abandoned in the 1860s or there abouts as I forgot to complete Adam Smiths allowing AI to beat me to it!)
are: 1/Great Library is of use, and: 2/ Variations in research beaker costs caused by altering power relations to Key Civ are annoying but tech gifting to overcome it is pointless.

These are my reasons: Great Library allows you to get most of the early techs early in the game so you are not wasting time researching feudalism in the 19th century for example.

You really lost me right here. Feudalism is one of the main reasons I hate the GL. I incrementally rush buy things all game. Spending gold on things that help you like settlers and caravans (and ships and units in a conquest game) allows you to reap rewards much sooner. For much of the game the cities building those things do not generate more than 10s per turn - even if moderately sized, they are more focused on trade than sheilds. Therefore in order to maximize the benefits of rush buying, I want the ten shield unit available as long as possible. Feudalism obsoletes the warrior, taking away the 10s unit for rushbuying. Unless I am in a conquest game, I do not want to learn feudalism until I have at least learned gunpowder (which also kills the warrior). And if I AM in a conquest game and pursue Feudalism for Sun Tzu and/or Knights, I definitely do not want to start my conquest after two other civs already have feudalism (and thus Pikemen). If you actually want feudalism, getting it third is way too late.

Also it means you can get access to a more complete range of wonders earlier which you can then build at your convenience. I guess some may argue you can achieve this by strategic tech sharing/gifting although I am always reluctant to give rivals any tech.

This sounds like a huge part of your problem. Working cooperatively with the other civs will advance your own civ faster. You, being the human, can do more with this cooperation than the AI can. If you use it to get what YOU want, when you want it, it will benefit you far more than it will harm you. THis is how Marco Polo can be so much more valuable than the GL. But if you don't share techs, you will not be able to do as much as fast.

As to beaker costs changing in relation to Key Civ, I think that with enough wonders (acquired quickly courtesy of Great Library) it is possible simply to continually boost research levels and to overcome this effect by "brute scientific force" as it were.

But you should be focusing on the wonders that give you this brute scientific force. If you focus on building this wonder-driven science engine quickly - without getting research-slowing off track techs, you will find that most wonders are at your disposal because you ultimately research those techs far sooner than the AIs (rather than getting them third). Plus, who needs King Richard when you've got 1000 beakers per turn from one city - you'll have howitzers fighting against muskets in no time. Also keep in mind that once you get your science going, once you finally need feudalism, you can research it in a turn or two, rather than wasting 10 turns on it early in the game.

I know these views go against what seems to be prevailing wisdom according to what I have read here in civfanatics and also negate the value of an awful lot of research that has been done. This is not to deny that such research has been worthwhile as it has gretly increased understanding of Civ II and given us all more options when playing the game.

Look forwards to reading your opinions and playing GOTM soon when I get my PC version of Civ II. Perhaps then I will be forced to take into account Key Civs and acknowledge liability of Great Library - lets see!

Just recognize that following only some of the advice (focus on key civ, don't build GL) but not all of it (Stay away from useless/harmful stuff like Feudalism early, focus your research on your goals, use diplomacy and tech gifting/trading to your advantage) you are going to see sub-optimal returns in your game.

 

[Ace]

And if you really want to ignore the Key Civ stuff, just play as the purple civ. Than, when you are supreme, you are your own key civ! Also, since the purple civ is placed last, it has a slightly better chance of getting a free tech or three to start the game off with.

 

[Weird_bug]

Er, sorry to sound like a total idiot, but what's a key civ?

 

[Peaster]

WB - I am sure you are not a total idiot, but if you are, that is easily corrected by regular visits to the Great Library at

http://home.tiscali.cz:8080/cz045662/civ2/glindex2.htm

scroll down about 25% for the "Key Civ" thread. You might also check Elephant's thread "Tips and Tricks for New Players", which probably explains this concept more simply (but I haven't checked).

 

[ElephantU]

The basic idea is that there is one of the six opponent civs that is your "Key Civ" that your tech differential is calculated against. If you have lots more techs than they do, you have to research more beakers than "usual" for that number tech. If you have less than them, your research cost is less. The KeyCiv is recalculated every turn, and is based on your Power Rating versus the civs in color order (White-Green-Blue-Yellow-Cyan-Orange-Purple). So if You are Supreme your KeyCiv is Purple; if you are Pathetic it is White. See Peaster's link for more details.