Help, I need direction mid-game

[clut]

Hey, First post here.

I've been playing vanilla 1.29f for a while now, and I have to admit I stink pretty bad at this game, which came as a bit of a shock to me. I've generally been able to play most games competently, but this one, even when I manage to build what looks like a bit of an advantage, I generally get pillaged in war.

I've read through a lot of the topics and the articles on the site, which have improved my gameplay. I now have a little momentum going at the start of the game and I seem to be doing ok, until I hit the industrial age where I kinda lose direction.

In my current game, I'm sharing a continent with India, have just converted two of their villages, and there are 3 other civs elsewhere, but I'm kinda stuck with what to do next. I have a feeling if I go to war with india I'll get trounced somehow, so I'm holding off on that, but I'm just not sure where to go now....

any suggestions??

 

[onomastikon]

WELCOME!!!

If you want any meaningful suggestions, you will probably have to be slightly more specific.
Do you know the Monty Python "How To Play The Flute"?
1. Blow into mouthpiece
2. Move your fingers over the buttons so as to produce beautiful music.

Posting a .sav will probably do the trick!

 

[clut]

I dont know that, but I did watch Life of Brian for the first time the other day!!! V. funny, ok, here is the .sav

I've just taken two small towns to the south of my capital, but I just don't know where to go from here. I have no real strategy. I feel like I'm just researching techs because they are there to research, and the same with building wonders (which I've tried not to go overboard on.)

The only long term goal I had come up with is... Wipe out the Indians, then either build a FP in the southern half of the continent, OR sail to distant lands and build a FP on another continent to try and stake a claim elsewhere.

 

[k-a-bob]

I generally get pillaged in war.

Based on this quote alone, I can bet that you build 2-3 defensive units per city and don't have much of an offensive force and you send about 5 units to attack their cities.

Yes? No?

I generally try to secure my starting landmass ASAP - at least by the end of the Middle Ages - using cavalry. In my last game, I was able to take control using about 25 archers/swordsmen against spearmen/swords.

To be successful in warring, you must have a good standing (offensive) army. % units can win you one, maybe 2 cities, but then it will stall and you will be stuck dealing with the counterattack. With 25 good offensive units and continuing to replace them you can take care of anyone else. By "good" I mean your attack number is >= their defense rating.

By the time you hit the IA, this becomes much more difficult, so you will need more units and artillery units - especially if they have infantry.

This way you can then choose what you want to do (domination, conquest, space, UN) to win the game.

 

[clut]

% units can win you one, maybe 2 cities, but then it will stall and you will be stuck dealing with the counterattack.

That pretty much describes the situation I usually face. I can take 2 or 3 enemy cities, but I never know whether to keep them or raze them, so I keep tham as it seems a waste not to, but that makes my war effort harder as I've then got to fortify units there to quash the resistance.

I thought it was a timing issue, maybe I was starting war a little late, as they've had time to expand, thus giving me more cities to try and conquer, but I can't do it any earlier because I don't have the time to build up both a good offense and defense.

 

[k-a-bob]

but I can't do it any earlier because I don't have the time to build up both a good offense and defense.

That is the mindset you need to get out of. I can't look at your save right now, so no details from me. But, if you have a strong offense, there is no need for defensive units. It took me a long time to figure that out in practice, but the enemy will not be willing/able to enter your territory if they see a stack of 20 offensive units heading through their territory - so that means you don't need defensive units everywhere.

Build some for your border towns maybe, but the center of your empire is unreachable usually, so there is absolutely no need for units stationed there (except MP - but I'm usually in Republic). In fact, in the last GOTM, I left almost all my cities undefended and my offense took over the whole pangaea.

It's a hard habit to break, but once you do, you will see your warring skills increase exponentially.

 

[onomastikon]

Just a small note here, I cant see your save now because I am not at home, but just a comment: k-a-bob has good tips there. "However": how you impliment this will depend on what you want to do. I am not a warmongerer, and I find capturing 1-2 cities per war just fine with me, since usually these are the only strategic goals I set; I do not find it necessary to have the goal to control my landmass (especially if playing largish continents) by the end of MA, at least not on Emperor. But this is also because I dislike playing the game as a wargame, since I find it a poor wargame, and prefer to build.
Also, keeping wars short helps greatly; once out of monarchy and/or despotism (depending), I try to keep wars to 10 turns or less. (You can always re-declare again later.) This works wonders for your happiness and resources.
So while Bob may be right, you may find yourself also increasing in skill by learning to
- set simple, short-term military goals, if any
- learn to trade

 

[nullspace]

The only long term goal I had come up with is... Wipe out the Indians, then either build a FP in the southern half of the continent, OR sail to distant lands and build a FP on another continent to try and stake a claim elsewhere.

Ok, at least you have a good goal to work towards. So why are you ignoring it? You should be doing one of two things: building knights/upgrading horsemen or researching towards cavalry. A stack of 10 knights with constant reinforcements to replace losses would conquer the Indians with no problem. Or, if you get cavalry before the Indians get gunpowder, you'll have an even easier time. Instead, you're building (as far as I can tell) completely random improvements.

Other than that, you're doing most of the typical newbie mistakes. Your cities are way too far apart. Territory is not power, population is power, and you could fit much more population in your territory if you have no more than 3 spaces between adjacent cities (at the very most). You also need many more workers so that all your citizens are working improved tiles. And finally, you need to explore and contact other civs so that you can trade with them and simply find out what's happening in the world. Nice number of offensive units in your army, though.

 

[Fried Egg]

That is the mindset you need to get out of. I can't look at your save right now, so no details from me. But, if you have a strong offense, there is no need for defensive units. It took me a long time to figure that out in practice, but the enemy will not be willing/able to enter your territory if they see a stack of 20 offensive units heading through their territory - so that means you don't need defensive units everywhere.

Build some for your border towns maybe, but the center of your empire is unreachable usually, so there is absolutely no need for units stationed there (except MP - but I'm usually in Republic). In fact, in the last GOTM, I left almost all my cities undefended and my offense took over the whole pangaea.

It's a hard habit to break, but once you do, you will see your warring skills increase exponentially.

That's not my experience attall...

I find that the AI normally ignores my stack in it's territory (unless it's looking particularly vulnerable) and sends offensive units into my territory to cause me trouble on my supply lines or even try to take a city.

I don't know how to explain why we have had different AI experiences though...

Besides which though, it is wrong to neglect defence completely because there is always the risk of being attacked by another player.

In the game I'm playing right now, I declared war on someone and then they got an ally to declare war on me and they've attacked me from my poorly defended rear!

 

[clut]

and they've attacked me from my poorly defended rear!

That's something I never want to have to say

That is the mindset you need to get out of

I'll try to lower the number of defensive units I leave back. ATM I normally leave a good 3 or 4 units on each city as I've been caught off guard before, but I guess I've learnt from those experiences had hopefully I'll be able to pre-empt nasty surprises a little better, meaning less need for such bulky defenses.

You should be doing one of two things: building knights/upgrading horsemen or researching towards cavalry

I don't know why I didn't pursue these earlier. It sounds pretty much like common sense when you say it, but there was just so much choice on the tech tree, and city improvements that common sense took a wrong turn

Your cities are way too far apart. Territory is not power, population is power

I tried to keep them fairly close, and I intended to move my palace to the more central city, reducing overall corruption, but I agree, there are too many open spaces. I read about RCP today, which was VERY enlightening, and although not very applicable to this game anymore I will definitely pay attention to in future games.

 

[ChuckDizzle]

Try reading some Sucession Games. Then you'll see some of the strategies you've read about in action. I don't have any specific reccomendations of SGs to read, but I'm sure some of the others do.

 

[k-a-bob]

That's not my experience attall...

I find that the AI normally ignores my stack in it's territory (unless it's looking particularly vulnerable) and sends offensive units into my territory to cause me trouble on my supply lines or even try to take a city.

I don't know how to explain why we have had different AI experiences though...

Besides which though, it is wrong to neglect defence completely because there is always the risk of being attacked by another player.

In the game I'm playing right now, I declared war on someone and then they got an ally to declare war on me and they've attacked me from my poorly defended rear!

Well, if you have a fast offensive army (on horseback) then you can use a stack of those to "defend" against any invaders. The OP stated that India was the only other player on the continent, so any sneak attack from someone else would come from the sea - where you get a free turn to attack them, so there isn't someone to take advantage of a poorly defended rear .
I don't wait for the AI to attack me - they are always attacked by me now, instead of holing up in my cities, rebuffing them. Of course, if they ever get marines, this strategy obviously has to change

I guess my point with the AI not attacking was that they don't end up sending more than a couple units into my territory once I have invaded. Once you take one of their cities, this becomes the AI's priority - to get their homeland back.

@onomastikon:

If the land is overly inhabited, I don't always take the whole thing either. But if it is you and 2-3 others, what better way to win the game than controlling your whole island? You get a phenomenol research rate and probably have a decent amount of tradables.
Most of my wins are actually not domination or conquest.

And my wars never really go past 20 turns or so - a lot of damage can be done in that amount of time. Having a large offensive army is key to not being pushed around by the AI - whether you use it or not

 

[clut]

Try reading some Sucession Games. Then you'll see some of the strategies you've read about in action. I don't have any specific reccomendations of SGs to read, but I'm sure some of the others do.

Wow, just reading through a Sucession game and they are FANTASTIC learning material!!!! didn't realise they were documented that thoroughly, although I guess they'd have to be by nature.

Thanks for the tip!!

 

[onomastikon]

Well I tend to play differently, that is ok.
I tend to have a mostly defensive army, for two reasons:
#1: I can upgrade my spearmen all the way to mech infantry, while my swordsmen are soon obsolete.
#2 The AI misjudges me, thinking I am weaker than I am (because it gauges the strength of offense more than defense), and I like that. The AI will often make mistakes. I also prefer to fight a defensive war, crippling the AIs offensive units in my territory, and then send out a counter-strike with mounted units. I find that only a few swordsmen suffice for me, relying often on mounted units until tanks become available.

 

[k-a-bob]

Well I tend to play differently, that is ok.
I tend to have a mostly defensive army, for two reasons:
#1: I can upgrade my spearmen all the way to mech infantry, while my swordsmen are soon obsolete.
#2 The AI misjudges me, thinking I am weaker than I am (because it gauges the strength of offense more than defense), and I like that. The AI will often make mistakes. I also prefer to fight a defensive war, crippling the AIs offensive units in my territory, and then send out a counter-strike with mounted units. I find that only a few swordsmen suffice for me, relying often on mounted units until tanks become available.

Interesting. Do you let them attack a city - or do you try to head them off in open land? Do you find that they pillage your tiles or do they just leave them alone? I hate it when they pillage stuff - then I have to waste worker turns to get the tiles back up and running.

 

[Tesuji]

IMO, the best defense is artillery combined with attacking units. Those are the best attacking units too, so why build defensive units? Only one per city or so to keep border cities defended against surprise attacks is usually more than enough.

The reason is most attacking forces are stronger in attacking value than in defense value. So it's generally more economical to attack them than to let them attack you. Add bombardment to that, and you can easily defeat an army double or triple the size your defense. Make sure you use the terrain to your advantage though.

 

[Fried Egg]

IMO, the best defense is artillery combined with attacking units. Those are the best attacking units too, so why build defensive units? Only one per city or so to keep border cities defended against surprise attacks is usually more than enough.

The reason is most attacking forces are stronger in attacking value than in defense value. So it's generally more economical to attack them than to let them attack you. Add bombardment to that, and you can easily defeat an army double or triple the size your defense. Make sure you use the terrain to your advantage though.

Sure it's best to attack their offensive units before they attack you but it's not always possible. Sometimes, your attacking units can become vulnerable (especially if they're weakened after a successful but draining attack). Having a few defensive units around helps keep them alive until you can heal them again.

Also, because offensive units usually move around the map a lot quicker than artillery, I prefer infantry to guard the artillery who move at the same rate, and do a better job of ensuring they don't fall into enemy hands.