I'm not a complete noob in civilization. I was very good at Civ 2 (I could play in harder than average levels and still win by), didn't get the chance to play Civ 3 for long (maybe half a dozen games) and never until Civ IV and the advent of simultaneus turns I played multiplayer.
So now me and two colleagues are playing a game in standard CIv IV, no expansions, with 5 or 6 computers. I'm not going to explain the detailed situation, but I have some questions:
I'm the chinese btw.
I pressed for military and before I had chu-ko-nus I
1- desintegrated the Aztecs for three of their cities (includim one holy city), the resources and the 'land coverage' and, now with chu-ko-nus
2- made a solid enough army to hold a combined attack of another player (the japanese) and the russians, who stand between me and the japs. In holding this attack I 'took the offensive' and conquered the russians capital, which happes to be another holy city. Profit.
OK, so now the other player (japs) have 'back attacked' the russians (who now hate the japs and love me cause we share the same religion and I keep giving them stuff).
I've shrinked my military to a size where I can still 'hold' an initial attack and, since everyone else is at war with everyon, I'm getting a nice lead on techs.
The WHAT WOULD YOU DO PART is:
- Would you mantain as long as you could this state of research-leading (the longer I keep like this, the farther behind I'll leave all others) or would you combine forces with an AI (which can't really be trusted, as any AI, either for the behavior or the competence in war) and wage war?
Attached bonus question:
how viable is it to make a small fleet (when your enemy has none) to take several minor groups of units to destroy terrain improvements and later on (sinde they're weak units) dimiss them (to deny the enemy the XP)?
I mean, my enemy sure does have defense in his cities that I can't surpass with such a small force, but I could surely run for the Iron, Copper and Horses and pillage. Is is worth the effort? (He will be at war with the AI).
Sorry for such a long thread and for probable english mistakes.
So now me and two colleagues are playing a game in standard CIv IV, no expansions, with 5 or 6 computers. I'm not going to explain the detailed situation, but I have some questions:
I'm the chinese btw.
I pressed for military and before I had chu-ko-nus I
1- desintegrated the Aztecs for three of their cities (includim one holy city), the resources and the 'land coverage' and, now with chu-ko-nus
2- made a solid enough army to hold a combined attack of another player (the japanese) and the russians, who stand between me and the japs. In holding this attack I 'took the offensive' and conquered the russians capital, which happes to be another holy city. Profit.
OK, so now the other player (japs) have 'back attacked' the russians (who now hate the japs and love me cause we share the same religion and I keep giving them stuff).
I've shrinked my military to a size where I can still 'hold' an initial attack and, since everyone else is at war with everyon, I'm getting a nice lead on techs.
The WHAT WOULD YOU DO PART is:
- Would you mantain as long as you could this state of research-leading (the longer I keep like this, the farther behind I'll leave all others) or would you combine forces with an AI (which can't really be trusted, as any AI, either for the behavior or the competence in war) and wage war?
Attached bonus question:
how viable is it to make a small fleet (when your enemy has none) to take several minor groups of units to destroy terrain improvements and later on (sinde they're weak units) dimiss them (to deny the enemy the XP)?
I mean, my enemy sure does have defense in his cities that I can't surpass with such a small force, but I could surely run for the Iron, Copper and Horses and pillage. Is is worth the effort? (He will be at war with the AI).
Sorry for such a long thread and for probable english mistakes.