Gamespeed

[Ecofarm]

I've noticed that stratagies are very influenced by gamespeed (and mapsize).

If I'm going to play a standard size map, I think I will need slower speeds. Otherwise, it just takes too many years to move an army and to provide emergency reserves from home.

Most people play on Marathon/Epic?

As a builder, quick speed is cheesy because that invading army takes 500 years to get to me, allowing me to produce alot of defense while he marches.

As a warmonger, marathon/epic is cheesy because I can get to someone before they have time to react/build defenses.

As tempted as I am to be able march my army 50 tiles in 1 year, I stick with normal speed.

I guess I would have a much easier time wamongering on standard size maps if I played a slowspeed. Instead, I usually play small maps (I'm a cheeseball too!)

I've won militarily on standard size with normal speed, but it was gruelling to see the enemy's stacks double in size while I was on the way. Besides, reinforcements comming all the way from home are worthless if home is 30 tiles away and gamespeed is normal. The enemy will produce twice as many troops while you are on the way.

I guess I need to learn that reserves should be pre-built and on the warfront - but then why not throw them in the stack too!? (Because they are "reserves"?) It's damn expensive to have reserves built and at the warfront if it turns out they are not needed. I'd rather stick with the ability build an army while it's marching (a chain of troops) and to provide emergency reserves from home - as unrealistic as this is. So it's standard+slow, or small+normal for me.

Mebe someday I'll play a quickspeed/huge map/4 AIs and laugh when they declare and start marching with swordsmen, knowing I will have nukes before they get halfway to me.

Note, I do not know the exact number of years/turn offhand, those numbers are for illustration.

What do you guys think? Are your stratagies (warmonger vs. builder / attacker vs. defender / etc) affected by gamespeed? And what should be considered 'reasonable' settings. I've noticed this especially in MP, where quickspeed is the norm. Attacking someone who is not your neighbor is flat-out suicide.

 

[cabert]

yep gamespeed changes everything!
on normal maps (= standard size !), normal speed seems right, but if you want to go cultural, quick speed is easier.

I don't like much the epic/marathon games. Too many turns where nothing actually happens.
When I play Epic or marathon, I tend to whip a lot more... just because I'm bored

 

[svv]

If you're making war, railroads are a lot more important on the faster speeds, especially if you're on a large/huge map. That's one thing I'm noticing playing the Earth scenarios at normal speed. Having a railroad along the silk road is essential to fortifying my Chinese army in attacking the Arabs.

 

[Nick53]

I've only ever tried normal speed and conquest/domination. Can anyone suggest a different gamespeed, landmass, civ and victory condition?

 

[Galileo44]

umm. Any combination is interesting. Try them. Especially the maps, they totally change the game.

 

[50_dollar_bag]

Marathon is a lot easier if you're warmongering, once you've destroyed you're opponents invasion stack it takes them a lot longer to reproduce an army. If it's taking you 2 turns on Normal to build an axeman it's going to take 5-7 on marathon, but the distance is the same. And when drafting, depending on the mapsize you can draft 3 units per turn(standard) on every speed, so that's 9 units marathon compared to 3 units on normal. Of course it takes three times longer to grow back you pop.

 

[slowrider]

Marathon is a lot easier if you're warmongering ...

Agreed, I like the longer games for warmongering. One of the main advantages you have over the AI is better concentration of forces and the relatively faster movement brings that to bear more effectively.

The other advantage is that the AI typically goes through "vulnerable" military phases and these phases last more turns in the slower games. For example I seem to be able to "make more hay" with a maceman/catapult advantage. The AI seems to be kind of slow researching CS and Machinery (they do seem to understand the longbowman thing though). I find an even bigger "gap" by beelining to grenadiers as the AI generally meanders toward riflemen then finally infantry. Grenadiers and cats can be murderous for a very long time especially against longbows (25% archer promotion not really needed) and even rifles where you get a 50% advantage (combine with the 25% gunpowder promotion) but you need to be wrapping things up before they get infantry.

 

[30+]

I am a warmonger too but I only play normal (sp) and of course quick in mp. I have never even played a marathon/epic game to the end. I started an epic game one time but it just takes sooooo long to research or even play a game....so I exited and restarted. I like to start and finish a game in the same sitting, which usually takes me from 2-5.

 

[Mutineer]

It is generally accepted that you give yourself advantage when playing marathon/epic. AI does not know how to make war properly and in war is the biggest human advantage.

Slower speed let you make mach more use of your units. Play normal for true Civ expirience.

 

[50_dollar_bag]

Marathon can be a bit daunting, especially when you see 30 turns research at 100% science. But I find myself micromanaging a bit more than I would on Normal. On normal I tend to just rip through the turns and forget the little things.

 

[Harbourboy]

I always play at least epic. Normal or less just seems silly to me, because so many mid-game units become obsolete before you've even had a chance to build any.

 

[Idlenessss]

Yeah anything but marathon or epic and its not even a game. No point in ever starting a war. Most of my epic speed games are within that 2-5 range, via micromanaging you can drastically outech everyone and end the game long before modern era.

 

[jeremiahrounds]

i think there has to be a relationship between map size and game speed. For example the current HOF game is using a huge all land map (no oceans!) at fast game speed starting at medieval. And time of moving units across that much land is a huge factor if you dont have rail road. Its alot different than if it had been a marathon.

PErsonally though epic + huge maps == goodness.

 

[Ecofarm]

What mid-game units become obsolete before you get a chance to build any? When you get a military edge, take advantage of it with slavery or lose the opportunity.

There is a point to starting a war on normal. Go check out the thread "Builders plz help w/suggestions". It's on normal speed, I almost always play normal. I rushed with nums (requiring HBR!), and took out a civ at 600bc. In general, I think your second or third opponent should be gone before 1000ad, or you've lost (on monarch/emporer and normal gamespeed).

For those of you who think war is difficult on normal, go try MP. People cry if it's on normal, and demand to play on quick. I think it's because they like to sit back and build/tech in the safety of 100year turns (defender gets huge advantage to production while enemy is marching - compared to normal).

 

[fed1943]

I like marathon (I know it is unbalanced).

And if one wants to be a good player... just play all speeds, all maps,all of

everything...if enough time and will.

Best regards,

 

[axident]

I like marathon (I know it is unbalanced).

And if one wants to be a good player... just play all speeds, all maps,all of

everything...if enough time and will.

Best regards,

I agree. I started off as marathon-or-nothing, then tried normal which felt way too fast to me, but it's made me into a more efficient player. I also experimented with map sizes/types a lot. Warmongers who rely on marathon-speed should try out normal speed sometime for more of a challenge. After a few dozen games, I've also won via every victory condition now, though the cultural one was by accident, and being familiar with how to win via every method also makes you a better player.

 

[KMadCandy]

i think there has to be a relationship between map size and game speed. For example the current HOF game is using a huge all land map (no oceans!) at fast game speed starting at medieval. And time of moving units across that much land is a huge factor if you dont have rail road. Its alot different than if it had been a marathon.

PErsonally though epic + huge maps == goodness.

a lot of my games are epic/large. but i'm trying that HoF game too. i've never tried medieval but the quick speed is actually throwing me off more. it's bizarre compared to epic, i have no idea how i'm doing in comparison to how i ought to be!

everybody should try each speed at least once is my recommendation now, might help you get a feel for how things you'd never consciously thought about affect how you play. if you try it and hate it right away, then hey, skip it, you learned something, you learned that it's not for you!

 

[svv]

everybody should try each speed at least once is my recommendation now...

I refuse to try "fast."

 

[KMadCandy]

I refuse to try "fast."

*giggle* ok. i do admit that i am not the boss of you! this applies to all "you"s except hubby.

 

[Harbourboy]

I will stick to epic, because otherwise I will get confused, which isn't hard.