Help winning on Noble....while I'm young..

[I_suck@CIV4]

Hey everyone,

Since I'm new here a quick introduction. I don't really play games much anymore but years ago I was quite into RTS games. Since then I tend to appreciate more games that involve more planning and not so much quick reflexes. I guess I enjoy the thinking process but I am not willing to "practice" my game plan per se. Anyway, I've gotten quite addicted to Civ4 and I've been lurking here for quite some time so I thought I'd post some thoughts and questions. Be warned that this is a long post so be patient and let me know if something isn't clear.

Here's the thing, I'm actually quite impatient with the game (I only play the quick game speed). I think it is primarily because I usually have a game plan figured out at the very start and I want to see if it is a good one. Unfortunately considering it takes 6+ hours to finish a game I very rarely get through an actual game. Even though I feel comfortable playing on noble I've actually only won the games on 2 occasions that I can remember (on any difficulty!). So yes, as soon as I feel I have a strong lead and would need to go for the victory conditions...I stop and go again and try to fix mistakes. I've won a time victory once (either chieftain or warlord difficulty) and the last time I played on warlord I consistently had 2x the points of the second highest civ. I also played a duel on noble recently and won in about 1 hour, this being my first and only victory on noble.

Now the questions

My primary issue is that I don't seem to know how to win within a reasonable amount of time (I mean game time now not actual time....but yes actual time too I suppose). I read through Sulla's walkthrough and I noticed that he won at around 1700AD. I on the other hand only seem to be capable of a time victory. I tried to figure out why and I think it might be because I for the most part don't really know which technologies to research after the early part of the game. I usually play either Gandhi or Ashoka (I stick to them because dealing with the options they give me is enough for me for now). At the beginning I usually try to grab Buddhism and the Oracle (selecting code of laws when it is complete as I believe most of you do..). Then I tend to go for a military resource if I was unable to find copper nearby(I chop rush the Oracle) and invade someone grabbing a few of their cities. At this point I tend to just beeline for Liberalism because it grants another free tech. I'm not really sure if this is the best option. After liberalism I simply don't have a clue and tend to beeline for Communism because of State Property.

Civics:


Slavery for me is a must.

Only lately I've realized how good Bureaucracy can be so if my capital is good I use it.

State property

I use hereditary rule if I just happen to research feudalism but it's not a priority.

I use the "military" civics if I'm at war (Police state, vasselage, theocracy) although I don't target the techs that enable them.


Specialization of Cities:

I try to have production and science cities + one GP farm although I rarely have a city with enough food for one.

My plan for wonders:

Oracle >> my first city, whatever it is..

Oxford University >> Research city
Colossus >> Research (water city obviously..)
Great Lighthouse >> as above

Heroic Epic and West Point >> production (I have never built the west point because I've never had a unit with 6 promotions )
Red Cross & Iron Works >> second production city
Parthenon >> Production (because its bonus applies to all cities I don't have to add it to my GP farm, so I put it in the city that will build it fastest)

National Epic >> GP Farm
Great Library >> GP Farm ...I know most people put it in the science city but I decided on this because I believed the GP points added to the GP farm city would be more beneficial than the + multipliers in the commerce city.

I rarely build them but pyramids and pentagon would also go in production cities. The rest of the wonders I'm pretty much not interested in.



I have also experimented a bit with a Specialist Economy. I have to say I just don't understand how you guys get so many beakers this way. For example:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=191068

400+ beakers

Let's see..10 scientists at 6 beakers each + the gold on the tiles so lets say.. 80 gold. So how many multipliers must there be to get it up to 400?? I just don't understand

Warfare:

Having previously played RTS games I guess one could say my style initially was a tad aggressive. I used to try to eliminate one opponent very early but then I realized that doesn't work as well for me because of the war weariness. This tends to come back to bite me the second time I go to war since it doesn't build up gradually all over again. I also don't really understand how some of you seem to be at war all the time and don't have that problem. And then you say that unhappy citizens are REALLY REALLY bad. Anyway as I played more my approach evolved to this:

I do NOT try to kill off one of the civs early anymore. The primary reason being that they always seem to build some small crappy cities everywhere and by the time I track them all down my economy is crap. Also, even if I'm successful it's hard to maintain all the captured cities and if I raze them there is the possibility of one of the other civs building a city in the same space. Instead, the first time I go to war is right when I can get some catapults and either axemen, horse archers or elephants. At this point I usually have 3 or 4 of my own cities that are doing well so I can support the army and the captured cities. I also like this approach because I think that thinking of my position in the game in terms of the number of enemies left is somewhat misleading. I find that thinking of it in terms of land controlled to be a more accurate. So if I kill one guy, but I have to share the space with other civs because I could not fill the space quickly enough...is not very beneficial (I think). On the other hand if I eliminate an opponent and fill that space all by myself and can maintain the new cities I feel I have a much bigger advantage.

Anyway, I know this is a lot but if anyone can shed any light on any of my predicaments I'd really appreciate it.

Cheers

 

[VoiceOfUnreason]

At the beginning I usually try to grab Buddhism and the Oracle (selecting code of laws when it is complete as I believe most of you do..). Then I tend to go for a military resource if I was unable to find copper nearby(I chop rush the Oracle) and invade someone grabbing a few of their cities. At this point I tend to just beeline for Liberalism because it grants another free tech. I'm not really sure if this is the best option. After liberalism I simply don't have a clue and tend to beeline for Communism because of State Property.

First thought / Second thought

I'm working on further sequels; the object is to help new players focus and streamline their thinking. Not sure how it would do for time, but I think you'll find it stronger than your current habits.

Let's see..10 scientists at 6 beakers each + the gold on the tiles so lets say.. 80 gold. So how many multipliers must there be to get it up to 400?? I just don't understand

Not too important at this stage - but that's not what you asked. Part of the riddle is how many super scientists and super priests are attached to the city - is that really just one of each? The next GP costs 1800 points, so where are all the earlier ones?

But usually at that point in the game: +25% Library +25% University + 50% Academy + 100% Oxford + 25% Observatory

I also don't really understand how some of you seem to be at war all the time and don't have that problem.

Culture slider is one answer. Destroying the enemy before the war weariness gets bad is another.

 

[MarigoldRan]

Hey everyone,

Since I'm new here a quick introduction. I don't really play games much anymore but years ago I was quite into RTS games. Since then I tend to appreciate more games that involve more planning and not so much quick reflexes. I guess I enjoy the thinking process but I am not willing to "practice" my game plan per se. Anyway, I've gotten quite addicted to Civ4 and I've been lurking here for quite some time so I thought I'd post some thoughts and questions. Be warned that this is a long post so be patient and let me know if something isn't clear.

Here's the thing, I'm actually quite impatient with the game (I only play the quick game speed). I think it is primarily because I usually have a game plan figured out at the very start and I want to see if it is a good one. Unfortunately considering it takes 6+ hours to finish a game I very rarely get through an actual game. Even though I feel comfortable playing on noble I've actually only won the games on 2 occasions that I can remember (on any difficulty!). So yes, as soon as I feel I have a strong lead and would need to go for the victory conditions...I stop and go again and try to fix mistakes. I've won a time victory once (either chieftain or warlord difficulty) and the last time I played on warlord I consistently had 2x the points of the second highest civ. I also played a duel on noble recently and won in about 1 hour, this being my first and only victory on noble.

Now the questions

My primary issue is that I don't seem to know how to win within a reasonable amount of time (I mean game time now not actual time....but yes actual time too I suppose). I read through Sulla's walkthrough and I noticed that he won at around 1700AD. I on the other hand only seem to be capable of a time victory. I tried to figure out why and I think it might be because I for the most part don't really know which technologies to research after the early part of the game. I usually play either Gandhi or Ashoka (I stick to them because dealing with the options they give me is enough for me for now). At the beginning I usually try to grab Buddhism and the Oracle (selecting code of laws when it is complete as I believe most of you do..). Then I tend to go for a military resource if I was unable to find copper nearby(I chop rush the Oracle) and invade someone grabbing a few of their cities. At this point I tend to just beeline for Liberalism because it grants another free tech. I'm not really sure if this is the best option. After liberalism I simply don't have a clue and tend to beeline for Communism because of State Property.

Civics:


Slavery for me is a must.

Only lately I've realized how good Bureaucracy can be so if my capital is good I use it.

State property

I use hereditary rule if I just happen to research feudalism but it's not a priority.

I use the "military" civics if I'm at war (Police state, vasselage, theocracy) although I don't target the techs that enable them.


Specialization of Cities:

I try to have production and science cities + one GP farm although I rarely have a city with enough food for one.

My plan for wonders:

Oracle >> my first city, whatever it is..

Oxford University >> Research city
Colossus >> Research (water city obviously..)
Great Lighthouse >> as above

Heroic Epic and West Point >> production (I have never built the west point because I've never had a unit with 6 promotions )
Red Cross & Iron Works >> second production city
Parthenon >> Production (because its bonus applies to all cities I don't have to add it to my GP farm, so I put it in the city that will build it fastest)

National Epic >> GP Farm
Great Library >> GP Farm ...I know most people put it in the science city but I decided on this because I believed the GP points added to the GP farm city would be more beneficial than the + multipliers in the commerce city.

I rarely build them but pyramids and pentagon would also go in production cities. The rest of the wonders I'm pretty much not interested in.



I have also experimented a bit with a Specialist Economy. I have to say I just don't understand how you guys get so many beakers this way. For example:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=191068

400+ beakers

Let's see..10 scientists at 6 beakers each + the gold on the tiles so lets say.. 80 gold. So how many multipliers must there be to get it up to 400?? I just don't understand

Warfare:

Having previously played RTS games I guess one could say my style initially was a tad aggressive. I used to try to eliminate one opponent very early but then I realized that doesn't work as well for me because of the war weariness. This tends to come back to bite me the second time I go to war since it doesn't build up gradually all over again. I also don't really understand how some of you seem to be at war all the time and don't have that problem. And then you say that unhappy citizens are REALLY REALLY bad. Anyway as I played more my approach evolved to this:

I do NOT try to kill off one of the civs early anymore. The primary reason being that they always seem to build some small crappy cities everywhere and by the time I track them all down my economy is crap. Also, even if I'm successful it's hard to maintain all the captured cities and if I raze them there is the possibility of one of the other civs building a city in the same space. Instead, the first time I go to war is right when I can get some catapults and either axemen, horse archers or elephants. At this point I usually have 3 or 4 of my own cities that are doing well so I can support the army and the captured cities. I also like this approach because I think that thinking of my position in the game in terms of the number of enemies left is somewhat misleading. I find that thinking of it in terms of land controlled to be a more accurate. So if I kill one guy, but I have to share the space with other civs because I could not fill the space quickly enough...is not very beneficial (I think). On the other hand if I eliminate an opponent and fill that space all by myself and can maintain the new cities I feel I have a much bigger advantage.

Anyway, I know this is a lot but if anyone can shed any light on any of my predicaments I'd really appreciate it.

Cheers

On this point, bolded above, you are completely correct. BTW, this is why Feudalism is useful, so you can vassal the half-dead civ with the crap cities. That way you get a buffer zone and a +1 happy.

 

[MarigoldRan]

If you're going for war, the Pyramids is very nice. The downside is it slows down your initial attack, but Police State is the perfect antidote to war weariness.

For medieval wars, unless you're Ragnar or Justinian (who have the two best medieval Unique units), you pretty much need the Pyramids to keep the war going.

 

[MarigoldRan]

Finally, you need to learn about beelining Curraisers/Cavalry. These can shorten a game by a thousand years. If you can get 20 Cavalry before the AI gets rifling (which is very easy to do on levels lower than Immortal), you win.

That's it.

 

[pigswill]

Maybe you win at a later date because you're playing on quick speed.

 

[AutomatedTeller]

Quick makes war very very difficult, because it's hard to keep a tech lead. try normal or epic.

 

[vicawoo]

Your game analysis is very good.

Try improving your early game, often by skipping wonders and religion and improving worker/city micromanagement. If I end up with an empire roughly 25 turns ahead of you by turn 100, then my victory times as well as all my other dates will move up by those 25 turns.

Learn all out war and all out recovery.

And a mediocre rush may be worse than good peaceful expansion, but a good rush might beat the peaceful expansion (though not always). Micromanagement changes the relative efficiency of various strategies.
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=8805380&postcount=5

There are more resources in civilization than in RTS games. Food/hammers lead to more food/hammers as you might expect, but commerce/science doesn't. Rushing and expansion in the short run decrease your commerce/science, so you have to learn to recover, that is how to use your larger empire to generate science.

Generally 2 move units a tech age higher than the opponents are the fastest way to get win. Especially on quick speed, which does not lend itself to slow warfare.

Simplify, if you're trying to learn how the game fits together, wonders tend to be a distraction because of their atypical benefits and first come benefits. A wonder built a little bit too late has 0 value except for failure gold, which makes little sense from a strategic point of view.

 

[Optical]

Quick makes war very very difficult, because it's hard to keep a tech lead. try normal or epic.

This is probably one of the most important things pointed out so far. Gamespeed does affect gameplay.

EDIT: And I didn't start getting reasonable normalised scores for ages after I started Civ, so keep trying

 

[I_suck@CIV4]

Thanks for the replies guys. That was very useful. So I guess based on your replies and those 2 tutorials the main points I should consider are:

Forget wonders for now
Forget religion for now
Focus on city improvement and initial empire building

I can do that

Olaf and AutomatedTeller:

Thanks for pointing that out. I will definitely keep it in mind. Although, so far I've never really had a problem keeping the tech lead but it sure does feel like warfare takes a long time.

Now a few more questions. These are mostly based on the tutorials posted by VoU:

Having read those tutorials I'm not quite sure I understand why Animal Husbandry is such a high priority. I would think that which techs you research at the beginning would depend on what you find in the fat cross. Are we just looking for horses for the military later?

Civil Service - a number of times in that tutorial it is mentioned that it should be considered fairly high priority (after the big 4 techs) if you are going to be building a large empire so that you can help pay for it. How exactly does it help pay for the empire? Are we now trying to found Confucianism and spread it or are we doing it for the courthouses?

Currency - Why is this considered an important tech? Is it to build a market? I am currently avoiding all buildings that have to do with in favour of (libraries, universities) my reasoning being that they only multiply that last ~10% of commerce being converted to gold since everything else goes towards research. Even though I've read a number of tutorials explaining the difference between the two maybe I'm not understanding the difference between commerce and gold. As far as I can tell gold is relatively useless as it's only used for:

paying maintenance
buying techs (which I rarely do)
upgrading military (which I rarely do)

So, considering that I always run a cottage economy and try to keep my slider up high (and my gold as close to 0 as possible) I think building a market would only multiply the gold from that last ~10% of commerce that is being used on maintenance. The rest goes towards research. If I were to build a market would that mean that I could move my slider up higher? Keep in mind I am playing Vanilla so I don't know if this makes any difference...

Also how does city specialization factor into this. I probably shouldn't be asking this since according to the tutorial it is not necessary to beat noble but I'm curious. If we have one slider which is applied to all cities, I cannot maximize the gold from the moneybags city and research from the science cities at the same time. I have to choose. The obvious choice for a cottage economy would be to keep the science slider as high as possible which is what I'm currently doing. However, that means that in the $$$ city (holy city /w banks markets whatever) I am only making....how much? 1$ for each city with the religion so lets say 10 cities. Plus the multipliers. Am I right in thinking that this city even with all the multiplier buildings could never produce more than maybe $10,$20, $30? It seems kind of silly to be building all these multiplier buildings to multiply these paltry sums. The only other way I can think of that this may be used is if you are running specialists for research and take the research slider down because you intend to...I don't know...buy techs or something.

Again, I really appreciate the responses everyone. I've been bottling up so many questions over quite some time.

Cheers

 

[MarigoldRan]

1. *Cough.* Pyramids is good. *Cough.* If there's one Wonder you want to get to speed up the game, that's the one.

2. You need currency for the +1 trade routes for EACH CITY. Free money is always good. Especially if you have a lot of cities. From conquest.

3. The more you war, the more you need marketplaces.

4. City specialization basically boils down to this:

Will this city eventually get a University or a Bank? If the answer is a yes, then it's a commerce city. Otherwise, it's a production city. Or a draft city. Or some sort of crap city so that you have a border between Shaka and you.

 

[pigswill]

With high research slider a market doesn't generate much cash, its principal use is increasing happy cap.

In the middle part of the game (e.g. 1ad-1500ad) capital city with bureaucracy will probably generate a high portion of your income (research or gold). The other thing with CS is it allows chain irrigation, particilarly useful if you've got a grain resource that needs irrigating.

With high research slider you'll need something like a shrine, settled GMs or corporation headquarters for a cash city (or all of them in the same city).

AH is good for animal resources obviously, horses are nice if you don't have nearby copper, its also one of the prereqs for writing. Early game you're also looking for resources for your second or third cities.

 

[Tortsch]

Civil Service - a number of times in that tutorial it is mentioned that it should be considered fairly high priority (after the big 4 techs) if you are going to be building a large empire so that you can help pay for it. How exactly does it help pay for the empire? Are we now trying to found Confucianism and spread it or are we doing it for the courthouses?

Be aware that you mixed up Civil Service and Code Of Laws here.

CS is for the reasons explained above.
CoL is great for the courthouses, because city maintenance will be one of the main resasons for your slider going down. Founding confucianism is nothing to worry about.

 

[urborror]

I'm at the point where I'm winning domination victories on noble around 1700--usually with armies of cavalry so large I prefer throwing them into suicide attacks vs. waiting for siege weapons (Two turns? Too slow!) It's the standard Civ-Mongol domination strategy, but maybe somebody new to the game doesn't know it.

The Knight (Guilds) /Curassier (Military Tradition) / Cavalry (Rifling) push is the key to early domination wins on easier difficulties. I don't take out any early neighbors, try to avoid building military units--I peacefully expand and build infastructure. Every city gets a library and granary and I go for early wonders of whatever kind and usually get some of them (sometimes you get a lot of them.) I've been playing with Khmer (double-speed libraries, granaries), which suits the early game perfectly.

I beeline for guilds and don't start building a real army until I get knights (usually this gives time to put forges in major production cities.) Depending on the circumstances, noble AIs might get rifling eventually (defensive riflemen will cripple your horsekrieg), but most of them won't. If you're not playing for the right offensive units, micromanaging your economy is quasi-futile (as many of the captured wonder-laden capitals defended by longbowmen attest to.) Since knights and cavalry were equally devastating in previous civ games, I think I always just took this offensive strategy for granted in Civ 4. I can't imagine not playing to get cavalry (then railroad, then tanks) as soon as possible.

I think the BC rush is for higher difficulty levels--you have to destroy a neighbor and absorb his lands, in costly, economy-crippling fashion, to offset AI bonuses (eventually.) It's probably even easier to BC-rush a neighbor on easier difficulties, but the economy-hit makes the game a little unfun for a while, I think.

 

[urborror]

One place where micromanagement makes a huge difference on any difficulty (it's almost like a special reward from the game designers to the micromanager) is the "Great Person Factory," though. If you don't understand the concept, you won't get many great people. If you do, you'll get lots, and that translates into golden ages, religious shrines, if applicable, speeded-wonders (with great engineers), or big money (great merchant trade mission), or enhanced cities, technologies, whatever. The GP dynamic isn't friendly to somebody who doesn't understand it (if GP-points were city-independent, there wouldn't be anything to understand, really.)

 

[Farm Boy]

If you're going for war, the Pyramids is very nice. The downside is it slows down your initial attack, but Police State is the perfect antidote to war weariness.

For medieval wars, unless you're Ragnar or Justinian (who have the two best medieval Unique units), you pretty much need the Pyramids to keep the war going.

I have found if anticipating a war building the Pyramids is generally a significant misstep. It costs a massive amount of hammers. "Slowing your initial" attack is not a minor drawback, it is pivotal. The hammers spent on Pyramids mean either less units on initial assault, or a slower assault leading to increased numbers of defending units and increased risk of the target acquiring longbows/castles. I know you generally play marathon speed Marigold, so perhaps this is where experience differs. Units on marathon move(relatively) about 3 times faster than on normal(closer to 6x faster than they move on Quick).

Police State is usually more of a desperation civic, especially if not spiritual and you need to burn anarchy to switch in/out of it. The extra hammers are useful but not pivotal and the upkeep cost is prohibitive. It is usually less expensive to remedy war weariness with the culture slider if necessary and targeted happiness buildings where needed. Even in a situation where the Pyramids have unlocked government civics early, you probably get more happiness mileage from Representation more cheaply while getting a bonus to your specialists that is useful during wartime and out. Do not underestimate the cost of multiple anarchy periods from repeated civic swaps. They are a major outlay.

Not to say Police State is useless, but about the only time I have ever had it pay is a late-game swap within a golden age with a hammer heavy economy during a domination victory condition push. Even then, if I had well developed towns a rush-buy economy would have probably been better.