GOTM-02: Pre-Game discussion

ainwood said:
We will run three different levels starting in a month or so - we've been doing that in the Civ3 GOTMs for a long time now.

Prince is OK - just practice, and read the articles in the strategy forums for ideas etc. The spoilers (opening soon) are a great place to post what you did and seek advice from other people - ask others why they did what they did, and try to work out how you could do better. :)


That's so true, I've learned more from reading then I have from playing... oddly enough :crazyeye:
 
I've ran a couple of test scenario's using the same conditions and from what i've read everyone is having similar problems to me, barbarians.

This map type is a great choice from the staff and is going to prove difficult especially on prince. So far i've found that i'm limited to very slow growth as you have to protect all your cities. Also i have to build even more units to protect my improvements:mad: . On the plus side almost all my units have good experience and later warmongering is made slightly easier.

It will be interesting to see what victory conditions people choose to go for. I get the feeling there will be a lot more spaceships than usual as the barbarians are bound to slow some players and prevent domination or conquest victories.

I also get the graphic problem where a thin line of map is revealed. I think it's just linked to the lake type maps. I've never seen it before, but it appeared in all 3 test games i've ran so far using the lake maps.
 
I can't wait to get this one started, which will be this weekend when I can do it start to finish in one sitting.

I started a game with the same settings last night, and also had barbarian troubles. This is going to be a fun game for sure. The only way to stop the barbarians from spawning so much is to either build tundra cities for the border expansion, or line the whole top/bottom tundra border with units, neither of which are worth it. Just enjoy being regularly raided and pillaged. I usually skip horse archers until I need it for knights, but I think this setting warrants having several early mounted units, just for dealing with those axemen.

The barbs were actually the least of my troubles in my game, since I started near Monte and Alexander, and they both joined in with the barbarians very early for a pillaging orgy.

Great choice of setting, should be fun and challenging even on Prince.
 
Looks like I am going to go for a philosophy rush here, and wow what a site :). Most likely going to build in place, unless something striking catches my eye in the one move of my warrior. I will try to get out 2 more quick cities encompassed with towns, and hopefully near some happiness and health resources to keep the super city pumping. This looks like a fun one! But about barbarians, why are they a big deal? I don't get it. Maybe I don't have a problem with them because I always build so many workers. Try this technique to stave the barbarian problems: Once your borders grow beyond what the city can harness, you can drop some housing or mines on the outskirts. Why? It may seem pretty silly, but actually barbarians will pillage them on their way, slowing them down and often giving you plenty of time to move troops into position to save the truely important improvements. Alternatively, a few early axemen can make barbarians into a blessing rather than a curse, as the battles give a few levels for free without the need of a barracks.
 
But about barbarians, why are they a big deal?

I think it's because of the way i play. I try and keep my rival civs on my side so i don't waste too much time securing cities. Then all my troops can be used for warmongering. It's risky but if you can get the others around you to your religion then they should not declare war.

I found my style of play just doesn't pay off with this scenario, mainly because of the barbs. I'll just have to learn how to play properly;)

It's seems like a really good choice of GOTM by the staff! (Especially as it's on prince).
 
Has the 4oTM staff given any thought on whether to ban or allow Moonsinger's "anarchy" exploit detailed in the strategy article forum? I was planning to go for conquest in this game, but if that exploit is allowed I think I would rather pick a different victory condition.
 
bradleyfeanor said:
Has the 4oTM staff given any thought on whether to ban or allow Moonsinger's "anarchy" exploit detailed in the strategy article forum? I was planning to go for conquest in this game, but if that exploit is allowed I think I would rather pick a different victory condition.
Disallowed.

Draft wording is that if you have -ve income and no gold, you must wait 4 turns after coming out of anarchy before you can revolt again. Do you think that adequately addresses the problem?

Also - can you get a 4-turn anarchy on a prince-level game?

We'll publish an official announcement on this later today - as soon as we're happy we've got the details correct.
 
ainwood said:
Also - can you get a 4-turn anarchy on a prince-level game?
Also, can you get a 4-turn anarchy in an Epic game? (Moonsinger was using Marathon).
 
ainwood said:
Disallowed...

Also - can you get a 4-turn anarchy on a prince-level game?

Hooray, I was hoping that would be the answer.

I definitely have had three-turn anarchies (sp?) in a prince level game, but don't know about four turns.

It sounds like your solution would fix the problem to me (for this prince-level game), but I would love to hear Moonsinger's opinion on the matter. If there is a way around it, it will probably take her three seconds to think of it. :lol:

Edit: the three-turn anarchy was Prince level/Epic.
 
From what I've read of her deity/HoF games, she couldn't have more than 1 consecutive turn out of anarchy or her entire army would have disbanded. On the 1 turn she was out, she was running -200 gpt or so @ 0% science. I think just requiring 2 non-anarchy turns before another revolution would be enough. To be honest though, I don't think I've ever pulled > 2 turns of anarchy in any normal game. It's a rare thing for me to need to change more than 2 civics at once.
 
This might be too fast to ban this technique. There may be similar techniques available to get around this, or that may have merit.

It seems exploitive, but there is a tradeoff - no commerce nor production. Maybe we should just ban forest chops which are way overpowered.
 
I've pulled a 3 turn anarchy on prince before (epic speed) and I was only switching to 3 low upkeep civics. I think the anarchy period is longer if you change to higher upkeep civics, but I could be wrong.
 
Shillen said:
I've pulled a 3 turn anarchy on prince before (epic speed) and I was only switching to 3 low upkeep civics. I think the anarchy period is longer if you change to higher upkeep civics, but I could be wrong.

I don't think that it is, although I could be wrong, the length of anarchy seems to be affected by your size (pop, no of cities and maybe land area too, in some combination). Even on Epic speed (can't remember the difficulty, probably Monarch) I've had revolutions take 2 turns, just to change one civic
 
In the GOTM2 I had 2, 4 turn Anarchy switches.

Mostly due to switching to high cost civics and the number of em, swapping 3-4 civics at once.
 
Hi, I'm one of the newer folks to the game, only been playing the Civ series since Feb 2005. Was a Regent player in C3C, now busy mastering Noble level on Civ4! But then GOTM 2 comes out as Prince Lakes Epic, what is a poor ewok to do?!? :cry:

After reading the posts of many of the competent folks, I know I won't be breaking any new ground with the approach I'm going to take to this GOTM.

Anyway,

I played five practice games with Lizzie on Lakes (Epic_Trop_Low) out to 160BC/turn 528 to get a notion of what works and what doesn't, and on only two of those games did I compete well with the AI. I one case I started with lots of flood plains, in the second game the 2nd city got the flood plains.

There was quite a lot of variation in how close one started to other civs. Once Lizzie started almost on top of Isabella, and Ghengis almost on top of her. On other starts there was only one somewhat close neighbor. Barbs are worse the fewer close neighbors you have.

Also, Stone or Marble only appeared close to my lands once, so things may not work out for those folks counting on getting the Pyramids.

I will settle in place because I want the lighthouse later (waaaaaay later, I think) and because I'm too dumb to move... Ewoks have short legs!
Initial build will be Warrior - Worker, initial research will be Ag - Bronze, to get the Wheat tile up (want the food AND that hammer) and to chop out the next warrior pair/settler quickly. And then chop, and then chop, and then chop...

Next research will Hunt, Arch, Hus, Myst(for obelisks) ... I'll let others discover the religions, although I have to admit happiness is a big problem, and the growth limiter (after money, and barbs....). I want Bronze so quickly, I won't get a chance for a religion. Post Myst, I'm not sure, since Sailing is potentially a substitute for Pottery, and if the second city is down river, roads aren't immediately needed.

Barbs are a concern. I don't know if the best approach is to constantly chase them down, or just kill them as they come. In one practice game, one the of two better ones, I killed off two barb cities, keeping one, so did not have to settle. Early archery is certainly necessary, and if you don't see copper, you better find Iron, else doom awaits!

Also, the budget is a concern, as research generally got down to 60% by turn 528 in the practice games. It seems like you only get to settle/capture four cities, and still do research at a reasonable rate. When you get Alphabet, then you find out how you have really done vrs the AIs! This may be where the lighthouse comes in, as a kind of a late classical/early reinnaisance (sp) source of funds.

If stone or Marble shows up, settle it, and build Pyramid or Oracle. I did beat the AIs to the Pyramid in the one game I got handed Stone. Flexibility!! :crazyeye:

If Barb cities show up, take them, they are easy pickings. Keeping them may break the budget, however.

As for early conquest of a neighbor, I don't believe my skill level is up to it. If I'm in the top three scores, and one of my neighbors looks weak to my scouts, maybe then. The question is when to have a go at them.

As for my objective, I'd say at my skill level, surviving until I get Redcoats would be cool. Then Lizzie could rock. Thus, is my one and only fond hope!

-- We who are about to die salute you --
 
Hi guys,

Having only played Civ since CivIV (*yes, I'm a CIV virgin:blush:), this is gonna be hard. I'm not gonna bother with practice games - just go straight in and get a kickin', no doubt :D Not sure there's much point in planning befoer I start other than knowig I'll start with Agriculture on Tech, Warrior on Prod and Settle where I start. I've no idea what my starting warrior will find.. there might be gold, stone, marble etc. which will effet my strategy so planning's out the window. ;) This is my fisrt GOTM and also my first go at Prince. i've only just got the hang of Noble so this should be fun :D
 
By the way, has it been confirmed whether the lighthouse will improve the output of the freshwater lake as well as the saltwater Coast tiles?

Also, will that lake provide connectivity to future towns on the shores of the river heading south offscreen?
 
where should i put the savefile.. i tried in saves/gotm(my ownmade folder) and tried mods/gotm and use v1.52.
it says "The save file you have selected is protected to ensure that the assets in your mod folder have not been changed." and then drops back to windows.. HHEEEEEEELPP!!!
 
beestar said:
By the way, has it been confirmed whether the lighthouse will improve the output of the freshwater lake as well as the saltwater Coast tiles?

It will, but only if the town is on both the coast and the lake, I think.

Also, will that lake provide connectivity to future towns on the shores of the river heading south offscreen?

It will.
 
Back
Top Bottom