GOTM-04 Final spoiler - everything else!

Well I'm not submitting my game, but may as well put a write-up anyway :). I don't think I'd be eligible to submit because I had some hardware problems which forced me to reload the game a couple of times (though I tried to be honest about it and retraced the same moves as far as I could remember them).

First serious emperor game (albeit on adventurer level) and I certainly learned a lot from it - in particular how powerful a small sea-based empire can be for science.

My overall strategy was to go for a cultural win, including building lots of early wonders.

Like just about everyone else I was planning to settle my first city in-place, but luckily I moved my adventurer-bonus worker onto the other hill to start mining first - and he immediately saw the fish to the East. So I moved my settler east and founded the city there instead to get the fish. I think for the adventurer game that's a particularly suitable location because early production isn't as important.

I then sent the two archers westwards, between them covering the fertile strip of land to the west. One of them discovered Alexander, the other headed NorthWest and got destroyed by barbs. OK I was silly - the archer got injured by a bear. But there was a goody hut right there, and on the other side of it an English scout (about 0.1 health, obviously recovering from a similar fight). My archer was on 1.7, but I didn't want to risk the scout taking the hut so I went in. Of course, they were hostile, archer died immediately. My one consoling thought was that the English scout probably died too! So having thus thrown away 25% of my adventurer bonus in a single moment of stupidity…. Anyway the loss meant I had to abandon plans to nick a worker off Alexander. I had another barb lurking near Delhi just as my settler was to head off so I needed the remaining archer back home (Funny that - if I'd been playing on contender, I'd have found a way to get by with just a warrior back home, but now I have the archer, he's essential).

Early research - I originally planned to do polytheism first but when I saw it would take 17 turns I abandoned the idea on the assumption I had no chance of beating the AI to hinduism. So I did fishing first so I had the option to use the sea-tiles to maximize science as appropriate. Then bronze working. As soon as I had fishing, I had Delhi build work boats. With two work boats and a mine, I could then build a settler quite quickly (10 turns as it turned out) without chopping those two meagre forests around the start location.

The adventurer-bonus settler headed off to found Bombay as soon as I had the terrains scouted out. SouthWest, by the river, as on the screenshot. The river location was to keep science high while upping production. That worked well - and by the time I had bronze working, Bombay was so close to completeing Stonehenge that only one chop was needed to finish it off.

Madras was trickier. By then I was worried about science, so I sent the newly built settler out just to sit on the intended site until I had polytheism and so could start building the parthenon - which I pulled off with some chopping. Notice the site I chose - it misses the copper. I spent a fair few minutes after I got BW trying to figure how to site the 3rd city to get the copper - since it was going to be a wonder-producing city and needed the production. But bottom line - if I couldn't get the wheat square in the radius, there was no way to get food up enough to make much use of the copper and hills anyway.

After polytheism I researched masonry, (to get the marble for the parthenon) and to get the great lighthouse. Chopped the great lighthouse in Delhi - no more forests there at all now. Lighthouse plus 3 coastal cities *really* helped my science. Less good news though - Oracle got built in a faraway land before I'd even started researching priesthood. And Bombay was only ¼ through building pyramids when someone else built them. Not having stone hurt.

By now I was getting hungry for land and getting severely boxed in by Alexander. My first three cities were earmarked as cultural centres which meant I needed somewhere else for my military production, plus I eventually wanted 9 cities for the cathedrals. So I got Delhi to build a boat and settler and sent them off with an axeman, and they started sailing round Spanish territory.

Since I wasn't ready to go to war, I decided to try to expand along the coast. So I then sent another settler up to where Bangalore is - along the coast NW of my main empire area. I was worried about distance costs so wanted to just hold the land and have a settler ready to land-grab those bananas and dye later on, when I was about to get calendar. But I got there the very turn that Alex's settler was arriving. Phew! One turn later and Bangalore wouldn't exist.

I also quickly sent some axemen up to pester a barb city just past Bangalore. I could see there was no way I could capture it immediately - barb archers fortified in a city on a hill, one with city defence 1 and 2 promotions too! - but I hoped to fortify my axemen up in some neighbouring jungle, allow barb attacks to promote them enough to build the heroic epic, and capture the city immediately after a failed AI attempt had weakened the defences. The plan worked beautifully. Razed the city coz it was too close to Bangalore and immediately founded Lahore, further along the coast.

Meanwhile in terms of techs, I tried a gamble for a religion, still having none. I had a great prophet, and hadn't joined him to a city coz - I didn't yet have any city that obviously needed him. Christianity had yet to be discovered. The prophet was offering to discover meditation for me (yeah right - anyone ever feel diddled? :) ), but if I could research meditation, priesthood, writing, and monotheism, hopefully he'd offer to discover theology for me. At this point my research was going at a fair rate - eg. monotheism would be 4 turns - so I decided to risk it. It meant leaving alphabet, iron working, agriculture and animal husbandry - all very urgent techs - in the hope of a religion.

Lost it. With 2 turns left to go on writing, someone else founded Christianity. In all that was something like 10-15 turns of very good research time wasted that seriously delayed my discovering alphabet. Not long afterwards, someone built the Sistine Chapel too - that's a significant blow to my hopes of a specialist-fuelled cultural victory. Anyway, after losing Christianity I changed tack and beelined for animal husbandry (2 turns) then alphabet (12 turns). As I expected, alphabet revealed I was well behind the average in terms of tech, but I still managed to trade a few things, picking up all the early worker techs I'd missed, plus iron working and mathematics. Had to trade alphabet to get them, but by then several other civs already knew alphabet so it wasn't much of a loss. With my eye on culture I then headed for literature - music - drama. Still looking to the cultural win.

Then I had my big break. A great scientist popped up in Delhi - offering to discover philosophy. At this point I could've really used an academy but I wasn't going to turn down the chance to get a religion of my own, especially with my great prophet still waiting for something to do. Taoism and Dao-Miai-thingy in Madras in one turn! I spread Taoism to Delhi and then used one of the real pluses of a spiritual civ. I didn't want to convert to Taoism long-term coz I'm still trying to butter up other civs. So I converted temporarily - just to help Delhi and Madras complete the hanging gardens and great library with Organized Religion, with the intention of converting back to no religion as soon as they were finished. (No religion because of diplomacy - I had no religion available that anyone else was following).

Got the great library in Madras, with some chopping, and - to my surprise, I managed to build the hanging gardens in Delhi without any chopping or poprushing. By now I could see my science was catching up with the AI - all those sea squares were having an effect. And I was very happy to see my civ score gradually moving up into 4rd place, not too far behind the leader Hatshepsut. At emperor level??? Wow!

That's about when I founded Calcutta. Not at first sight the most sensible place for a city, miles from my capital on another continent. But the thing is, Isabella withdrew open borders after I swapped to Taoism and that meant my galley/axeman/settler were trapped on a little peninsula - Isabella's borders blocking one way, and a glacier square blocking the other way. Now there was a city site with access to copper so it could defend itself a bit. AND I was about to build the hanging gardens if you get my drift.... That was too irresistable… Worked out quite well, Calcutta started paying for itself very quickly.

Diplomacy. I've struggled with it in this game. I know there's no point being friends with Alexander coz sooner or later I'll want his land. So I tried to be friends with his enemies, but - who are they? A lot of AI civs were pretty late making contact with each other, which didn't help. Elizabeth, on the other side of Alex's borders, was the obvious hopeful friend but it took a long time before I could get her to be pleased with me. I had Judaism spread to my cities very early but didn't convert coz noone else was running Judaism. Ditto Hinduism (Well Alex was Hindu, like I cared!). Isabella eventually came to like me too after I converted to her religion, buddhism (fat lot of good that did me - the entire time afterwards she still refused to trade techs with me because 'we fear you are becoming too advanced'. I guess on emperor level I can take that as a compliment :lol: )

Then had what I thought was a stroke of luck. Alexander finally declared war on the English. That's it! My chance to finally build my military then I can hopefully relieve him of one or two cities that I'm sure are nothing but a burden to him to maintain. I'll kinda be doing him a favour y'see.. (It's not just a land grab thing. My empire was very long and thin, wrapped around Alex, making my borders almost undefendable. I knew I had to do something about that soon.)

Didn't quite work - Trouble was, being all sea-based I simply didn't have any cities with very high production. Bangalore was the highest production city that I hadn't reserved for culture, but it was far from ideal (at most 10-12 raw production) so I built heroic epic there, resigning myself to accepting the best of a bad job. And then I made my fatal mistake. Kept seeing too many infrastructure things like libraries that needed being built, and I kept thinking, I'll just build this THEN I'll start getting my military up to attack Alex. I'm pretty sure if I'd resisted the temptation there and started building military ruthlessly the game would've gone very differently.

Of course Alex finished his war with the English, and all of a sudden he declared war on me. It was around 1400AD. Big stack of - I think about 10-12 knights/cats/maces on Bangalore, plus various isolated knights roaming my territory. I immediately bribed the English - they declared war on Alexander in exchange for military tradition. But it was too late. My pikemen took out all the odd roaming knights and I did have enough units in Bangalore to destroy the stack. Trouble is, another stack just as big arrived the next turn. Bangalore's defenders were still weak from the first turn and the city fell.

And at that point I abandoned the game. I could see where it was going. With my main military city gone (and with it half my army), and my empire now in three disjointed pieces, it didn't look very likely I could prevent Alex from totally shredding my Indians. And since I knew I probably couldn't submit the game anyway there didn't seem much point playing on to the actual defeat. Decided I'd already learned the main lessons from the game anyway. Like I can play on emperor with a strong science-based empire (yay!). But I really need to sodding learn to BUILD UP MY MILITARY. Till next time…








Oh - and one completely irrelevent but quite amusing thing. Sometime around 1300AD a galley exploring the tundra south of Spain discovered an unopened goody hut. I quickly got a scout there, dreaming of the advanced technology I might get. I got .....

wait for it....

A warrior.

Oh how my macemen and pikemen and knights must have felt inadequate next to this fine - umm - warrior, just added to my military.

About two turns later the new warrior got killed by a marauding barb archer.
 
Thanks malekithe and ADHansa for your explanations. The culture boundary doesn't look as odd anymore :goodjob:
 
godotnut said:
Wars? Bah!


Well done! :goodjob:

Did you go to war at all? I'm curious how you managed to expand quickly enough to build six cities without a war with Alex? In my game, he settled by the marble in 2760 BC. Did he head the other way in your game?
 
Alex settled by the marble in my game. Then his next city was by the river where the horses ended up being. I was cornered. In an early war i managed to raise one city, couldn't keep it as I would lose it back the next turn. Then there was a slow stalemate and I new everything was lost.

I hung on with the dream that the other continent might bring me land to inhabit. Isy smashed my dreams and then for the cheek of it declared war. I was resolute, desperate not to lose as I have done well in the last 3 GOTM's. 1670AD and Louis finds my lone city on Isy's continent and the show was over.

Very hard game, I didn't manage to take Alex's worker and then his city placements were very cruel. I like a challenge so I'm going to give this another shot.
 
not submitting since I lost the game :blush:
I was set on culture win, but didn't play well enough.

Playing standard setting I was lucky to grab the marble/copper area with 2nd settler. Found a 3rd city in the tundra to claim more nice resources. By that time I was grabbing a lot of early wonders and thus converted Thermopylae eventually.
I also found city#4 in the tundra with 2 crabs. I used a culture bomb there to fight off Greece and England.
All this made Alex pretty agitated and he attacked, but this was easily rebuffed as his attack was rather lame. Of course, the fool had fought Lizzy before that as well.
I stayed off any state religion and had good relations with about everyone except Greece and later France. Greece was declaring again later on, but my tech lead ensured I could ask Lizzy to join and together we wiped him out. Meanwhile I was pumping a lot of culture, but on emperor one can't just set culture to 40-50% since science suffers too much. Actually my capital and 2nd city were having no issue to get above 50000 culture, but the chosen 4th city was too slow and I didn't get any Entertainers for culture bombs despite high odds.
France eventually declared war on me bringing in a mere 4 Cav because they too were fighting Lizzy at the same time. Kind of stupid. I brought over 4 tanks that managed to raze 2 cities. This kept me from complete boredom of a culture game.
I was eventually beaten to a UN loss for Lizzy with around 65 turns left in the game. I would have been able to pull off a culture win, had I chosen a better city for culture #3. This way, I was stuck at 38k at the time of loss making 400cpt there.
I managed to grab plenty of wonders, but overall this click enter, enter, enter is nothing for a warmonger. Learned my lesson here.
 
ThERat said:
not submitting since I lost the game :blush:
I was set on culture win, but didn't play well enough.

...

Meanwhile I was pumping a lot of culture, but on emperor one can't just set culture to 40-50% since science suffers too much.

After researching music for the big culture catherdrals and drama for obviously the culture rate, stop researching altogether.

I finished the game in 1941 with a cultural victory and the most advanced unit I had was a maceman :)

(of course, after wiping out alex, I never fought another war and was pleased/friendly with everyone)
 
then what do you do the whole game? press enter and wait for 50k? This was really the last time I tried this, it's too boring for me.
In C3C we started culture + AW game, now that was fun
 
Contender game

This is my first emporer game and GOTM I played.

I had a farely uneventful start except that i was boxed in by Alexander. So I only had three city's the whole game.

My first war was round about 500BC with victoria. Who was eventualy whiped out by Alexander. I was building up my forces to take on Alexander and all of a suden Isabella who was supposed to be my friend decided to invade my round about 1750AD. I would have handled this invasion but two turns later Louis declared war and now I had to fight on two fronts after about another two turns my only other friend Alexander also declared war and they whiped me out after about 5 turns. It was a spectacular loss.

I will probably not be submitting my game.
 
Right, I'm determined to learn from this. Haven't kept detailed logs so heres the game in brief:

Saw the resources around the start and thought that maybe emperor wasn't so bad after all. Then I saw Alex. I had wanted a city 3 squares west of the copper, for the marble, but he settled there, so I settled on the copper, then got stonehenge in Delhi. Determined not to get boxed in, I started churning out axeman. I had a fairly successful, but far too long war that took me into the ADs, razing two cities and hanging on to Athens. I accepted peace, but was so horribly behind everyone that I decided to build a load of catapults and attack Alex again in an attempt to get more cities. He had longbowmen. I retired around the 1400s.

A question for experienced players - is it possible to have a profitable offensive war before construction? I focused so much on churning out axemen that I couldn't possibly keep up on anything else, and even with city raider 2 I had ~30% odds against the archers in his walled cities. I lost so many, and by the end of the war I was well over 1000 points behind Vicky in score.
 
Dolphan said:
A question for experienced players - is it possible to have a profitable offensive war before construction? I focused so much on churning out axemen that I couldn't possibly keep up on anything else, and even with city raider 2 I had ~30% odds against the archers in his walled cities. I lost so many, and by the end of the war I was well over 1000 points behind Vicky in score.

Certainly, but I think you're better of fighting cities with swordsmen with cityraider promotion. Just bring a few axes to fight the units outside the cities. I defeated Alex with that stategy.
 
Dolphan said:
A question for experienced players - is it possible to have a profitable offensive war before construction? I focused so much on churning out axemen that I couldn't possibly keep up on anything else, and even with city raider 2 I had ~30% odds against the archers in his walled cities. I lost so many, and by the end of the war I was well over 1000 points behind Vicky in score.

Not sure I count as 'experienced' since I abandoned GOTM4 and would probably have lost if I'd carried on :) but I certainly have managed offensive wars pre-construction in other games. It's a lot easier if you're playing a militaristic civ coz then you can get cover promotion quite quickly, but that doesn't exactly help in GOTM4. Generally if I'm doing an early war, I'll pick my targets carefully: I'll ignore the capital city which is usually well guarded, and try instead to take outlying cities that typically have just 2 archers in them. For the same reason I often ignore cities on hills. Also keep an eye out for reinforcements arriving that you can pick off, and pillage selected improvements (not always all improvements - eg. I sometimes deliberately leave horses intact as in many situations I'd much rather the AI builds horse archers that I can pick off in the field than more archers that end up fortified in the cities). I bring as wide a variety of units as I reasonably can to the battle, keeping an eye on what I'm up against, and select a variety of promotions carefully in accordance with the opposition too - probably no more than half my units get city raider. And I don't even *try* to attack a city unless I have enough units to be confident of taking it in one turn. (At 30% initial odds that probably means around 2 good attackers to every defender). In most cases swordsmen and horse archers can do a reasonable job against fortified archers, as long as the defensive bonus isn't huge. Also I try to predict what the AI is doing - not too hard with experience. eg. Even in the heat of the battle the AI often stupidly marches a settler-archer off to resettle somewhere. If the AI looks about to do that, then it's often worth not attacking the city until the settling party have left: Much easier to pick off that archer outside :lol:
 
Originally Posted by The-Hawk

Did you go to war at all? I'm curious how you managed to expand quickly enough to build six cities without a war with Alex? In my game, he settled by the marble in 2760 BC. Did he head the other way in your game?

It was clear from the start position that I was on a peninsula. So, aware of the potential for getting boxed in (and thus not being able to found six respectable cities), I moved my settler west to start the game, looking for fresh water and a strategic block-off point.

When I saw that spot next to the river with deer and marble, I knew where my capital needed to be. The copper that turned up later when I researched bronze working was just gravy.

While building Stonehenge for the culture and to increase my capital's population, I chopped a settler and founded my second city to the northwest to grab the wheat (I switched to building the settler to grab the shields from each chop, then back to Stonehenge to keep my population increasing). When the borders of my capital expanded for the second time, I had closed off the peninsula and could settle east at my leisure. Barbarians did me a favor and settled that great position on the coast with the clams, sparing me the need for a settler there.

I did later find myself in two brief wars with Alex before Hereditary Rule (his favorite civic) and a couple of gifted techs rendered us pals. I then played him and Victoria against each other diplomatically, which kept me out of any subsequent trouble, and slowed both of their research down enough that I could squeeze out some good tech trades with them.

BTW, while the oracle-slingshot strategy can be useful in some situations, it's overrated, and not of much use to a cultural victory anyway. Going cultural, the Parthenon--with its Great Artist points and overall great people boost--is a lot more useful.
 
Redbad said:
Certainly, but I think you're better of fighting cities with swordsmen with cityraider promotion. Just bring a few axes to fight the units outside the cities. I defeated Alex with that stategy.

Yeah, I did switch to swordsmen as soon as I got iron working, but that was quite a ways in (after I captured Athens). I think I should probably have stopped after capturing Athens and maybe stuck down a bunch of cottages, concentrated on grabbing Alphabet and taken advantage of Vicky's 'pleased' - the best point in the game was when she gave me metal casting on a whim.
 
Dolphan said:
A question for experienced players - is it possible to have a profitable offensive war before construction? I focused so much on churning out axemen that I couldn't possibly keep up on anything else, and even with city raider 2 I had ~30% odds against the archers in his walled cities. I lost so many, and by the end of the war I was well over 1000 points behind Vicky in score.
Well I agree that taking Athens with Swords & Axes was painful - if your odds are 30-50%, you have to make sure to have *at least* twice the number of defending archers in offensive forces before you attack. It may take 2 turns, you'll most certainly lose more than half of your forces, but you'll win. Other defenders don't matter much.

A "profitable" war...now that's difficult. What I've learned from this gotm is that a sword-archer war in the long run can be economically profitable, provided you manage your empire wisely. Courthouses, cottages, Forbidden palace - and probably most importantly: Make your capital a science factory with specialists (lib, academy, Great Lib, maybe monasteries, if possible Caste System & Representation & Beaurocracy)! A low science rate does not necessarily mean you fall behind in techs, even on emperor.
/edit: Alphabet is crucial - if you didn't have it by 1AD, then that's probably the main reason why you fell behind.

Strong military can also be profitable for you economy, because the AI will give you tribute more often and far less often attack or demand tribute.
 
Just submitted my 2nd loss in a row, but on the bright side, thanks to the strategies I've read in these forums, this was my best game of civ 4 yet. In short...

Played Adventurer class... the 2nd settler didn't help as much as I thought it might due to the upkeep costs - I probably should have anticipated that better.

Got going, and decided to use what I've leared about city specailties to create a GP city in my capital and a development city for my 2nd. Expanded to abut against Alexander and didnt' see a way to get past his army, but all was peaceful. Got a great merchant, sent him way east, and snagged something like 1500 GP very early in the game.

Set research to 100% and decided to make a spaceship run (which I've never done on any level).

Things went well. Got the Pyramids which greatly helped the research cause. I was smaller than my competitors, but building a lead in science (much to my surprise on this difficulty level!)

Was running in 3rd place but in the top group in terms of order of magnitude - it was pretty close and I popped into 2nd a few times.

Alexander was beating up on the English when he canceled his agreements with me. Odd, I thought, but perhaps a wise move by him to prevent me frm settling in the aftermath, which I'd have done. Then, randomly and totally without warring, a "Pleased" Louis, who was also in dead last, attacked me. Wierd I thought.

My musketmen defeated his horse archer and catapult assults, but only after loosing an outlying distant city. He got musketeers next but I was able to sue for peace. All was well again.

Realized that I was 1 space away from oil, and would later find I had no coal either. I did have Uranium on the cold island to the SE.

Peace ended with Louis and 10 turns later he attacked again. WTF is going on, I wondered. My Riflemen easily thwarted a giant army of horse archers, catapults, spearmen, and a few musketeers. Why would he attack under such circumstances?

Sensing that I had to do something to put an end to these ramdom attacks, but unable to mount a counter-offensive due to the distance between me and Louis (remember that Alexander canceled my right of passage agreement), I decided to make a b-line for Nukes. Surely that would scare off any would be invaders...

Built the Manhattan Project and got Rocketry on the same turn (how's that for timing). Started work on 2 ICBMs. Waited a few turns and rushed them to completion. I was feeling pretty good about having 2 nukes pre-1900 (just before)

On the very same turn Alexander suddenly attacks. Alexander, who was a good 4-5 techs behind me came storming, unprovoked, across my boarder with a collosus of an army, mostly of knights and cannon (interesting combo).

*HOLY CRAPBALLS* -- everything suddently became clear! Alexander likely gave something to last-place Louis in order to get him to attack me. In the mean time, he blocks my route and conquers a weak England. He settles that territory while prompting a second invasion by Louis on me. Then, when he's amassed an insurmountable army, as tech backwards as it was, he strikes at me.

I had 5 or so SAM infantry in each of my 4 core cities. They had no chance. He was attacking with 8-ish cannon at each city up front, and that weakened even the infantry to the point of cracking. I nuked Athens. I nuked Alexandria, I rushed more nukes and nuked a total of 7 (!!!!) of his cities. I can't believe that I'm friggin' dropping A-bombs out of the sky and I'm being overrun by knights and cannon. He would not give up.

There's no telling how many of his knights and cannon my SAMs took out, nor how much destruction 7 ICBMs did to a civilization that had only recently gotten the cannon. It didnt' matter. Never bring a knife to a gunfight, and don't expect a nuclear arsenal to stop a human wave.

Perhaps it was my getting the Manhattan Project and Nukes that angered Alexander - but I believe it was actually a fine example of AI strategy which really outsmarted me in this case. I didn't realize the game alexander was playing until it was much to late. Bringing my friends Egypt and Spain (2nd and 3rd place respectively) couldn't save me.

I retreated to the small island where I had two icy-cold cities. A world at war delayed my demise until 1998 when one city was conquered by the French (what a slap in the face), and Alexander took the last. Alexander was only a few votes away from Diplomatic victory and that would have been secured with my defeat.

A fun game and a good learning experience, despite being in over my head difficulty-wise.
 
Wow Armageddon that's one hell of an exiting game.:eek:
And for those A-bombs: nomen est omen ;)
 
Well I have very little to say except that I have submitted my embarrassing defeat. Around 1760 I think it was, pounded into submission by a put-the-boot-in Vicky after centuries of back-and-forth conflict with Alexander.

My first Emperor game and I felt rather outclassed. Think I need a bit more practice .....
 
What's the deal with people not submitting thier losses? If you're going to go through the trouble to write up a report of your game, just go ahead and submit the save! Don't be embarassed - I'm 1-2 in my GOTMs, and my win (GOTM2) came only on a bit of flukeish diplomacy that allowed me to win from 4th place via diplo victory.

I mean heck, I was overrun by knights despite dropping 7 nukes. If you can find something more embarassing than that, than I challenge you to submit it! :king:
 
I'm not sure I'd be allowed to submit my loss anyway - I quit with still a couple of cities left, didn't have the latest auto-save [I went back to replay the beginning to see what I should have done], and so when it came to continuing the original losing game and finish being conquered I couldn't actually get the AI to replicate some of the moves it had made. So while it's a loss, it's not precisely the loss that would have happened in the uninterrupted course of events (Alex kept one city he had originally razed). Not that it makes much difference, but spoiler rules rule it out.

Chances are others weren't too careful about keeping their losses unspoilt and submissable either.
 
Top Bottom