Harder To Win On EPIC or MARATHON...Or...

[Slynky333]

...is there no difference?

I'm guessing strategy is a bit different as in STANDARD pace, you might not build a certain combat unit knowing it would be obselete pretty quickly but under the slower progression, I would guess it's more useful not to skip.

(I've always played on STANDARD speed).

 

[Seven05]

It's a little different. In a sense it's easier because the AI is so bad at combat and unit or city losses have a more substantial effect. Getting beat by one turn for a wonder is a lot more annoying and trying to hold off until you get that one tech you need may take a lot longer than you expect. Slingshots give you a much greater advantage for a much longer time so civs like the Babylonians feel more potent and putting more effort into specialists than your used to doing can greatly improve your game.

You will find use for a lot of units that you basically ignore in faster games. Longswords, Lancers, and Cavalry are all good examples. The industrial and modern ages will take more than a blink of the eye to pass as well. This also makes UUs feel a lot more important, Greece can be a monster in Marathon games because your Hoplites and Companion Cav will be superior for quite some time and you just may actually find a use for B-17s and Zeros.

Production bonuses from social policies also feel a LOT more powerful, the amount of time you can save in new coastal cities is substantial even with +3 hammers.

Anyway, the biggest difference in my opinion is definately combat. Production, gold and research costs are all increased but units have the same 10 hit points so you can cripple a Civ's military for a long time with one good turn of combat.

 

[Slynky333]

It's a little different. In a sense it's easier because the AI is so bad at combat and unit or city losses have a more substantial effect. Getting beat by one turn for a wonder is a lot more annoying and trying to hold off until you get that one tech you need may take a lot longer than you expect. Slingshots give you a much greater advantage for a much longer time so civs like the Babylonians feel more potent and putting more effort into specialists than your used to doing can greatly improve your game.

You will find use for a lot of units that you basically ignore in faster games. Longswords, Lancers, and Cavalry are all good examples. The industrial and modern ages will take more than a blink of the eye to pass as well. This also makes UUs feel a lot more important, Greece can be a monster in Marathon games because your Hoplites and Companion Cav will be superior for quite some time and you just may actually find a use for B-17s and Zeros.

Production bonuses from social policies also feel a LOT more powerful, the amount of time you can save in new coastal cities is substantial even with +3 hammers.

Anyway, the biggest difference in my opinion is definately combat. Production, gold and research costs are all increased but units have the same 10 hit points so you can cripple a Civ's military for a long time with one good turn of combat.

Thanks for your reply.

It all sounds logical.

I just started a game on EPIC and was wondering if I made it easier, harder, or no real change worth speaking of.

 

[LostInTime]

Marathon feels much easier than the rest. (many of my Deity games feel like Immortal games when doing it on that mode)Don't know if there is such a big difference between epic and normal though, depends if you warmonger or not I guess mostly.

The main reason Marathon is easier, is the better promoted army you get. Like for instance:
- Build 3-4 archers in the start, defend/attack from safe spots. Get 3 range and 2 attacks. Kill everything. Upgrade to xbows. Kill everything even faster. You don't even need siege, these things do just fine even against rifles.

The range promotions feels kinda broken when doing Marathon, and you can always trust the AI to throw tons of stuff against you so you can level them up early on as well.

If you can stand doing a pure peaceful Marathon game, I guess it could be as hard as a normal one.

 

[Slynky333]

Marathon feels much easier than the rest. (many of my Deity games feel like Immortal games when doing it on that mode)Don't know if there is such a big difference between epic and normal though, depends if you warmonger or not I guess mostly.

The main reason Marathon is easier, is the better promoted army you get. Like for instance:
- Build 3-4 archers in the start, defend/attack from safe spots. Get 3 range and 2 attacks. Kill everything. Upgrade to xbows. Kill everything even faster. You don't even need siege, these things do just fine even against rifles.

The range promotions feels kinda broken when doing Marathon, and you can always trust the AI to throw tons of stuff against you so you can level them up early on as well.

If you can stand doing a pure peaceful Marathon game, I guess it could be as hard as a normal one.

LOL... given the prospective choice of sticking my head in the freezer and watching my breath condense or executing a purely peaceful marathon game...hard choice.

 

[ColinTH]

Both Seven05 and LostInTime have made some very good points.
I do think alot depends on whether you are keeping up with techs or not, if whilst playing Marathon you fall behind in military techs, then the AI will have a longer period of time to batter you!

 

[Hustapha Thool]

If you are going to play marathon, play larger maps. If you are going for domination, the game might be a bit easier, but with large or huge maps, especially non-pangea, Marathon is really a bit tougher. See how easy it is to get a cultural win, especially if you have 2 or 3 super-powers.

 

[Mods]

I did a purely peaceful marathon game once

 

[Ravellion]

I did a purely peaceful marathon game once

So when do you think you will start your second game of civ 5?

 

[vexing]

marathon is easy mode. all you have to do is exploit the AIs inability to deal with war.

 

[spfun]

What vexing said...

 

[Slynky333]

Thanks for all the input / comments.

 

[Teutorian]

At lower difficulties the argument is there for marathon being easier. I'm a marathon play addict and really kind of forget what it's like to play standard.

I've been playing on Deity lately and one thing I will say about marathon is if mistakes in building your civilization are made they can be very costly if not outright crippling. Deficient economies or falling behind a neighboring war monger in technology on deity is crippling because it's not something that can be fixed quickly. If your civilization falls into a state of unhappiness or an economic slump it's something you're stuck with for a long time which will hurt more. Things need to be more thoroughly thought out because oversights in build order or technology research are something you're stuck with.

And that's why I prefer marathon, actually. Pulling ahead and falling behind are both more significant than in standard because of how many turns of troop movements will take place under each scenario.

I like marathon because it's more realistic. When Europe arrived in North America they have advanced technologies the natives lacked. This was true when they reached the shore line and it continued to be true when they reached further inland.
In standard play if you have gunpowder and reach a civilization that doesn't, they'll have it before you're finished with them. In Marathon the state of a civilization when you have relations with them, war or peace, is the state of their civilization and that's just that. No rapid changes.

 

[Sonereal]

I like Marathon for the same reason (and Eternity from A New Dawn for the same reason). Slow games mean you'll be stomping around with the same units longer and that if the AI outtechs you at some point, it'll hurt. Especially if they have rifles or something.

 

[vanjito]

In marathon, if/when you reach an upper hand position it's all over - beeline iron/steel, make units and upgrade with sold lux, crush all, end.

But it tends to be always the same...

 

[Sonereal]

In marathon, if/when you reach an upper hand position it's all over - beeline iron/steel, make units and upgrade with sold lux, crush all, end.

But it tends to be always the same...

Depends. I don't play to win most times (even my Wake, Russia! story was just me screwing around and stumbling my way to three victories). Marathon is easier though because a curbstomp war at that speed is game-breaking. Heck, I once went through enemy territory just trying to pillage as much as possible to make up for the fact I won't get any money (second war). It would take the AI the next several dozen turns just to recover.

 

[Soronery]

Quick pace=hardest
Marathon=easiest

 

[Hustapha Thool]

Quick pace=hardest
Marathon=easiest

Seriously? Where are all these marathon huge map deity wins?

 

[Ravellion]

Seriously? Where are all these marathon huge map deity wins?

A lot of people don't like to play marathon, so your argument that lack of recorded/discussed wins equates to it not being easy, holds no water.

The same arguments that were used in Civ4 still work - the slower, the easier, because it is more forgiving of small mistakes, and you press temporary advantages for more turns.

I played a marathon game with Greece, and defeated 5 Civs with Hoplites. I could not have done that on standard speed.

 

[starrywisdom]

Seriously? Where are all these marathon huge map deity wins?

The average player doesn't play huge maps anyways...so your point is invalid.