Heroic Epic + Ironworks = Overkill?

[DarthJaxon]

During the late game, I usually go with:
HE + WP
To pump highly promoted Armies. Of course pre-WP/HE i use Vassalage.

IW + WS
To pump my empire with Cash!
I never go to war w/o cash, and i usually build my armies over time, meaning i plan a war many turns ahead - unless of course another warmonger attacks me first Most of my games i'm the wealthiest. I wonder how to translate this in real life

However, i can't say this is a strict rule, after all, many things can happen in CIV.

BTW, guys, THIS IS MY FIRST POST Im currently playing on Monarch Level.

 

[Beamup]

Welcome to CivFanatics!

But... you're utterly wasting the Ironworks by using that city to build Wealth?!? Please tell me it isn't so!

 

[a4phantom]

Welcome to CivFanatics!

But... you're utterly wasting the Ironworks by using that city to build Wealth?!? Please tell me it isn't so!

Beamup I've admired your signature for a generation of Civ now.

 

[Beamup]

*Takes a bow*

Glad you like it.

 

[DarthJaxon]

Welcome to CivFanatics!

But... you're utterly wasting the Ironworks by using that city to build Wealth?!? Please tell me it isn't so!

Beamup,
Thanks for the welcome

You got a point, but i just love to build cash, hahah
50% of hammers goes to producing gold, so you're right - i do waste the rest of the hammers, but look at the awesome per turn gold figure it produces! Cash is *very* useful for a protracted war, with research not going below 90% - I dont do on&off war, i usually finish the enemy civ off once war is declared (except for his last city, since there is that negative point for razing civs, right?).

OTOH, IW could also be useful in coastal cities to build lotsa battleships for inter-continental warfare.

 

[a4phantom]

As far as I know there's no penalty for finishing off a civ other than that you can't demand tech in return for a cease fire. In fact, leaving a rump empire hurts you because the cities you've liberated have unrest due to silly and self detrimental desires to return to the arms of their native oppressors, I.E. London will always want to return to England until you take the last English city.

That's why I take a "Punic Wars" strategy to dealing with other civs. The first war should gut them, take their capital and big production cities, military resources (iron, horses, copper), and basically reduce them to third world status. Then sue for peace and get some techs. When the ceasefire is over and you're not under threat from anyone else, attack again. Take all decent cities and all reachable luxaries and food resources. If you can't finish them off before war weariness sets in or you have to regroup to face another threat, make peace although you probably own't get any techs the second time around. The third war should be just a mop up operation, finishing off distant or useless cities you skipped before.

Question: If the Incas and Chinese are friendly, do the Incas get madder at me for declaring war on the Chinese twice than they already were for doing it once?

 

[MestreLion]

You got a point, but i just love to build cash, hahah
50% of hammers goes to producing gold, so you're right

Its actually worse than that: when you produce gold, only half of your base production goes for gold. That means no IW bonus. No forge or factory or power either.

Say you have a city with 30 base hammers, and it has IW, forge, factory and power.

If you produce anything but research, gold or culture, it will have 30 + 25% (forge) + 25% (factory) + 50% (power) + 50% (IW) = 75 hammers

If you produce Gold, it will be 30 / 2 = 15 gold

So youre not wasting only 50% of your production, youre actually wasting 80%! Think about it.

 

[a4phantom]

MestreLion,
FF2 was the best nonCiv game I've ever played, although it was always sad when Cecil the dark knight with the sudden death sword became the purple haired wuss.

 

[MestreLion]

Question: If the Incas and Chinese are friendly, do the Incas get madder at me for declaring war on the Chinese twice than they already were for doing it once?

Yes. You get a -1 penalty every time you start a war with a friendly (or pleased) civ of his. I once got a -6 from everyone just for attacking 2 civs multiple times.

FF2 was the best nonCiv game I've ever played, although it was always sad when Cecil the dark knight with the sudden death sword became the purple haired wuss.

FF4 (FF2 in american notation, i usually follow japanese because it makes much more sense) is surely one of the best games ever . And you´re the first who finds out about my avatar being Cecil (i use it in about 6 other forums).

As for not being a Dark Knight... well, actually i was quite moved when he became a Paladin... you know, he fought his inner ghosts and the enemy within... and prevailed.... quite touching... but maybe im just a purple haired wuss too

 

[a4phantom]

Yes. You get a -1 penalty every time you start a war with a friendly (or pleased) civ of his. I once got a -6 from everyone just for attacking 2 civs multiple times.

Thanks, that means my Punic War strategy (crippling a civ in one war, taking technology for peace, taking one or two more wars to finish it off) is costing more than I'd realized. Eliminating a civ doesn't cost you anything does it? Someone asked on another thread.

FF4 (FF2 in american notation, i usually follow japanese because it makes much more sense) is surely one of the best games ever . And you´re the first who finds out about my avatar being Cecil (i use it in about 6 other forums).

That game had soul. And nothing Japanese makes any sense to this gaijin

As for not being a Dark Knight... well, actually i was quite moved when he became a Paladin... you know, he fought his inner ghosts and the enemy within... and prevailed.... quite touching... but maybe im just a purple haired wuss too

When you have to stand there and take it? Did you ever fight back? If so, what happened? The characters I remember feeling for (this was probably 10 years ago?) were Kain and the karate guy.

 

[carl corey]

Thanks, that means my Punic War strategy (crippling a civ in one war, taking technology for peace, taking one or two more wars to finish it off) is costing more than I'd realized. Eliminating a civ doesn't cost you anything does it? Someone asked on another thread.

Yeah, nothing happens when you kill them. But in one game I got -3 from a civ for attacking his "friend" 3 times. Sheesh, he only converted to the same religion AFTER the first war, ease up, will you?

The best ways to use the war-peace-war-peace strategy is to cripple most/all of your neighbours. Then you can calmly watch how they become angry but can't do a thing 'cause their three archers are occupied with hunting for food for their poor cities. If one of them DOES act up, well, that just means he's gonna be the first one to get assimilated.

 

[Eqqman]

Thanks, that means my Punic War strategy (crippling a civ in one war, taking technology for peace, taking one or two more wars to finish it off) is costing more than I'd realized. Eliminating a civ doesn't cost you anything does it? Someone asked on another thread.

It doesn't cost you any additional penalties, but all the 'you declared war on our friend' minuses remain long after their friend is dead and buried.

 

[a4phantom]

It doesn't cost you any additional penalties, but all the 'you declared war on our friend' minuses remain long after their friend is dead and buried.

Right, but you have one less civ angry at you and your newly liberated citizens lose all delusional hope of ever returning to their native oppressors, so you lose that unhappiness penalty.

 

[a4phantom]

Yeah, nothing happens when you kill them. But in one game I got -3 from a civ for attacking his "friend" 3 times. Sheesh, he only converted to the same religion AFTER the first war, ease up, will you?

Confused, are you saying that you can get a penalty from a civ that wasn't on good terms with the one you attacked when you attacked it if their relations later improve? I think I'm overreading.

The best ways to use the war-peace-war-peace strategy is to cripple most/all of your neighbours. Then you can calmly watch how they become angry but can't do a thing 'cause their three archers are occupied with hunting for food for their poor cities. If one of them DOES act up, well, that just means he's gonna be the first one to get assimilated.

Yeah, that's basically what I do. Why let Germany keep growing while I finish off Persia (although to be honest I was on the verge of disaster from an unexpected flanking counteroffensive when I signed that particular ceasefire . Where did all those cavalry come from?

Does anyone know of any articles or have any tips on how the AI strategizes during war (besides not well)? They seem to love the offensive, and will send lone pillagers (usually their best mounties, which seems wasteful when they need to defeat my main army to survive) or small groups into my territory even when I'm beseiging their capital. Other than that, does anyone know how the AI prioritizes where to send its forces?

 

[MestreLion]

Confused, are you saying that you can get a penalty from a civ that wasn't on good terms with the one you attacked when you attacked it if their relations later improve? I think I'm overreading.

If the civs are Pleased or Friendly against each other, you will get a penalty, no matter if they share the same religion or not. Of course, civs that share the same religion tend to be friends, so...

Im not sure what happen if their relation improves AFTER you declare war. But probably they were already Friends (or at least Pleased) before he declare.

 

[carl corey]

Confused, are you saying that you can get a penalty from a civ that wasn't on good terms with the one you attacked when you attacked it if their relations later improve? I think I'm overreading.

You're not overreading, that was what my comment implied. Though it might be, as MestreLion said, that they were already friends and I haven't noticed it before starting the war. :shrug:

As for AI tactics, they do like to pillage a lot, and in small stacks, at least up to Prince level. That makes their troops very inefficient and vulnerable. On the other hand, I won't go as far as to recommend letting them attack you just because of this. They're also stupid enough to go after any lone worker. That could make them separate chariots & mounted units from slower ones, and that means you can safely hunt the former down with spears. This still hasn't been corrected in Warlords, where it's even more important to get rid of the Chariots before they attack your Axemen.

 

[DrewBledsoe]

If the civs are Pleased or Friendly against each other, you will get a penalty, no matter if they share the same religion or not. Of course, civs that share the same religion tend to be friends, so...

Im not sure what happen if their relation improves AFTER you declare war. But probably they were already Friends (or at least Pleased) before he declare.

I have been paying particular care checking everyone's diplo relations what with vassalge etc now a huge change in later game, and I'll swear that even "cautious status" when you attack another civ results in a -1 penalty.***

Imho this needs a fix, either / or both:-

a) If you attack a civ, then you ONLY get a penalty with its "friendly" civs, its vassals, and those who share either a perm alliance or defensive pact, NOT those who are pleased and definitly not those who are "cautious"

b) The "you attacked our friend" penalty should disappear over time, maybe modified to the individual leaders trait, e.g Monty might forget quite quickly (whats another war to him:?) but Mansa would remember for a long time..


*** This is monarch lvl aggressive AIs, so don't know if that affects things....

 

[a4phantom]

You're not overreading, that was what my comment implied. Though it might be, as MestreLion said, that they were already friends and I haven't noticed it before starting the war. :shrug:

Ahhh, I thought you meant they'd become friends after the religion switch.

As for AI tactics, they do like to pillage a lot, and in small stacks, at least up to Prince level. That makes their troops very inefficient and vulnerable. On the other hand, I won't go as far as to recommend letting them attack you just because of this.

Yes, and even if you're laying siege to their capital they still send their strongest attack units to pillage. Dummies.

They're also stupid enough to go after any lone worker.

Really? I haven't noticed this since before Civ3 Conquests, I thought they'd fixed that!

 

[carl corey]

Really? I haven't noticed this since before Civ3 Conquests, I thought they'd fixed that!

Nope, they haven't. I was playing with Shaka and was at war with Monty when Julius Caesar dropped by with a couple of Praetorians & Chariots. I assumed he wasn't there just to say "hello" and started building Crossbowmen from all my cities. I still had workers choppig around my newly captured cities.

He declared war on the next turn! First time I've ever had to face Praetorians. I whipped Crossbowmen from every city. In the meantime two of my workers finished chopping and two of his chariots attacked them. That meant moving away from their stack and into my territory. Now, consider that my main force was Axemen and some catapults, with only two Crossbowmen around. AND I have Impis nearby!

End result: the two chariots died an ignoble death at the hands & spears of two of my Impis. Lost a couple of Axemen to Chariots, but then the Praetorians died to my Crossbowmen and the wounded Chariots were easy to finish off.

What would I have done in it's place? Forget about the workers, and concentrate on the city OR use the stack to cut off my city. The AI practically gave me two free wins...

The "best" worker steal I saw was a Jag+Archer by Monty in another game. Still, considering that the Archer had City Garrison, and the city was the capital AND on a hill, was it wise to come after a worker especially since my whole stack is right next to it?!

 

[a4phantom]

Nope, they haven't. I was playing with Shaka and was at war with Monty when Julius Caesar dropped by with a couple of Praetorians & Chariots. I assumed he wasn't there just to say "hello" and started building Crossbowmen from all my cities. I still had workers choppig around my newly captured cities.

He declared war on the next turn! First time I've ever had to face Praetorians. I whipped Crossbowmen from every city. In the meantime two of my workers finished chopping and two of his chariots attacked them. That meant moving away from their stack and into my territory. Now, consider that my main force was Axemen and some catapults, with only two Crossbowmen around. AND I have Impis nearby!

End result: the two chariots died an ignoble death at the hands & spears of two of my Impis. Lost a couple of Axemen to Chariots, but then the Praetorians died to my Crossbowmen and the wounded Chariots were easy to finish off.

What would I have done in it's place? Forget about the workers, and concentrate on the city OR use the stack to cut off my city. The AI practically gave me two free wins...

The "best" worker steal I saw was a Jag+Archer by Monty in another game. Still, considering that the Archer had City Garrison, and the city was the capital AND on a hill, was it wise to come after a worker especially since my whole stack is right next to it?!

I like parking a Cover promoted Quechua outside an enemy city and letting the AI waste archers attacking it. They'll keep two to defend the city and attack with the rest, even if I have 10 other Quechuas about to attack.