How do YOU fight the expansion urge?

[Bleser]

I'm still adjusting to Civ IV after being an avid Civ III player for so long. I think my biggest problem is expanding too fast.

Here is the question: How do you fight the urge? If I am about equal or a little behind in tech, my mind wants to say to build an army and take over your neighbor - that way you'll have more cities which should equal more beakers. I know I have to build courthouses and the FP to reduce maintinance, but even after this is done, I seem to be in the same or even worse position than if I hadn't started the war.

Often I say I'll just raze a couple cities and then sue for peace just to weaken my neighbor - but when I see more weak cities within, I can't help myself but to keep going until I run out of units and overrun my enemies.

If expansion is out, how do you ever get the upper hand in high-difficulty games? I only play on Monarch now, and I have a difficult time in winning because some guy halfway around the world sits there and beats me to the space race. In Civ III the larger empire generally was the tech leader - Civ IV seems to be the oppostie. If war is not the answer, how do you get an advantage?

 

[automator]

Take that urge to crush the enemy and run with it. Raze all those cities and chase down his settlers. DESTROY. Then keep destroying. Settle the devastated area when you financially can.

 

[HectorSpector]

Here is the question: How do you fight the urge?

Count to ten.

 

[Bleser]

Take that urge to crush the enemy and run with it. Raze all those cities and chase down his settlers. DESTROY. Then keep destroying. Settle the devastated area when you financially can.

...but if you financially can't now, watch your other neighbors settle there first. This is the part that sucks and makes me not want to raze ALL their cities... I'll just have to fight for the same locations twice.

 

[Galileo44]

Don't feel that you have to completely destroy an enemy the first time. A crippled AI can do next to nothing. So, when fighting an early war (before CoL and Currency) limit yourself to six or max eight cities (standard size). This scales with map size. So, fight your opponent for 2 or 3 of the choice cities instead of keeping 3-4 cities that aren't paying for themselves. Don't capture a city that you wouldn't settle yourself at that time. That being said, when your economy is pulled up by infrasturcture, have fun finishing off that pesky rival.

 

[krozman]

you fight the urge by not razing the cities, and realizing you lost the game because of it. Do that about 5 times and you'll learn.

I play on standard maps, and even on immortal i've never needed more (or less) than six decent cities, three of which i've selected from my neighbors. this includes easy space race victories.

 

[Nestorius]

It just sort of happens by itself, when I realize I'm 0% science and 200 turns to Code of Laws.

 

[bitplayer]

It just sort of happens by itself, when I realize I'm 0% science and 200 turns to Code of Laws.

Same here.

 

[Bleser]

you fight the urge by not razing the cities, and realizing you lost the game because of it. Do that about 5 times and you'll learn.

I play on standard maps, and even on immortal i've never needed more (or less) than six decent cities, three of which i've selected from my neighbors. this includes easy space race victories.

I know this is a very broad question and sorta the point of this entire message board, but how do you out-research the AI with only six cities?? Just great city specialization or what?

 

[Bleser]

Here is the current game I am playing for everyone to scrutinize... I'm Rome and just finished off the Mongals and Chinese. Now I control nearly 1/3 of the world and am ages behind the tech leader (Ghandi)! I must be doing something terribly wrong.

To save this game, should I just build units and raze everyone in site, or should I hope to catch up in tech? (Note: the Space Race victory has been turned off for this game. I wanted to "play" with the more advanced units a bit. )

 

[Pete2006]

Here is the current game I am playing for everyone to scrutinize... I'm Rome and just finished off the Mongals and Chinese. Now I control nearly 1/3 of the world and am ages behind the tech leader (Ghandi)! I must be doing something terribly wrong.

To save this game, should I just build units and raze everyone in site, or should I hope to catch up in tech? (Note: the Space Race victory has been turned off for this game. I wanted to "play" with the more advanced units a bit. )

Why are you building a monestary in a city producing 4 beakers and Sci Method is right around the corner?

Why are you building a temple in a city 18 happy faces from its' happiness limit? Ditto for all the colosseums...

Did you auto your workers? Your cities are way too small for this point in the game. Where are your windmills? I see a bunch of mines that can't be worked because there isn't enough food.

Heroic epic should have been built a thousand years ago. Rome and Guangzhou both produce more hammers than Beijing so why are you building it there?

Your science rate is too high. You should have expanded a long time ago. Rome is Organized. Use the trait to your advantage.

Cyrus and Isabella only combine for 8 cities. She has the Jew shrine as well. Take them out. Stop building unnecessary crap and build some units.

Why did you attach a GG to a maceman with a cover promotion? What a waste... Trebuchets should get CR prmotions. Build them out and Cyrus is history. He has elephants so I really don't understand why you are building knights.

Tons of other problems but I'm too lazy to go through them all.

 

[Bleser]

Why are you building a monestary in a city producing 4 beakers and Sci Method is right around the corner?

Why are you building a temple in a city 18 happy faces from its' happiness limit? Ditto for all the colosseums...

Did you auto your workers? Your cities are way too small for this point in the game. Where are your windmills? I see a bunch of mines that can't be worked because there isn't enough food.

Heroic epic should have been built a thousand years ago. Rome and Guangzhou both produce more hammers than Beijing so why are you building it there?

Your science rate is too high. You should have expanded a long time ago. Rome is Organized. Use the trait to your advantage.

Cyrus and Isabella only combine for 8 cities. She has the Jew shrine as well. Take them out. Stop building unnecessary crap and build some units.

Why did you attach a GG to a maceman with a cover promotion? What a waste... Trebuchets should get CR prmotions. Build them out and Cyrus is history. He has elephants so I really don't understand why you are building knights.

Tons of other problems but I'm too lazy to go through them all.

Wow, that is what I need to hear. I really do appreciate it.

I guess I am stuck in the rut that I feel like a city should have all/most of the improvements available before building too many units (especially when not at war). I always say, "if a temple is five turns and adds culture, then why not?", but I guess this is the wrong thinking.

I'll start building units and razing away. Good call on the elephants... another problem of mine thinking that there is always one "best" unit, but another flaw of mine.

I appreciate your comments. More are welcome.

 

[Watiggi]

Don't fight the urge, play as normal. When your research starts to grind to a halt, you'll then focus on recovering. I too tend to have the "Oh crap, I am behind, I need to expand in order to catch up" attitude. Personally, that strategy still works. It's just that now it isn't the only strategy. If you expand, you'll be constantly balancing the cashflow until mid way through the tech tree. Then you will have captured Shrines and other wonders that open up the gold, which in turn, helps you to compensate for your expansion.

I play on Noble but I once played on Monarch and I went with the need to expand in order to survive (heh, I panicked and relied on what I know from previous games). I kept going and going and eventually caught up with everyone else. Mind you, I was attacking Musketmen and Grenaiders with Cats and Samurai and hovering at around -20 to -40 gold per turn deficit, but I got there. Expansion saved me Got 79K domination victory as well

 

[spoooq]

Im trying to go cold turkey by playing as Monty. Instead of searching for missing buildings, I try to ask myself at every production choice, "Whats the worst that will happen if I dont build this building? And how is this going to help me accomplish my goals?". Its difficult, but its slowly weaning me away from buildings and wonders.

 

[cabert]

you're at 60% research and backwards?
can't open the save right now but that sounds like:
- no tech trading on your part, loads of tech trader among the AIs
- lack of cottages (probably lack of workers?)
- wrong tech path?

Anyway, you're rome, don't bother about building, just crush them all

 

[Bleser]

Well, I stayed up too late last night (probably the most common thing to happen to all Civ players ) and quit building buildings and switched to building basically all units. I then invaded Persia and the Aztecs to the north and crushed them both in a series of three wars. Now it is just America and Spain left on my continent who only have eight cities between the two of them (I have about 20). I am controlling 47% of the world's population (~42% needed for victory) and 41% of the land area (~60% needed for victory). I'm going to freshen up my Cavalry groups and finish them all off!

I think my biggest problem is that I'm too much of a builder (as Pete2006 pointed out). I build unecessary building just so each city has all buildings. I need to focus on what I need, not having each city jammed with all buildings!

Thanks again for the advice everyone.

 

[Shillen]

I very much disliked the idea that you needed to expand, expand, expand in civ3. Even in civ3 I had to kick myself in the ass to do so when I didn't want to. So I honestly have no trouble with it in civ4. If anything I still want to expand less than I should in Civ4.

 

[krozman]

Civ4 is great because I know that even on Immortal, I can win with 6 cities. Expansion in Civ2/3 was so necessary that micromanagement became un-fun. Now I can micro manage my workers on marathon speed and I never really mind so much.

Oh, to answer your question, I tend to be a builder too. Really look at your happiness/health prior to building any buildings that provide one or the other. Otherwise they should be spent building research potential or units. Your worker should only be working a growth turn ahead of your city or providing resources/roads, so if you have 5 worked tiles and the next two are already improved, move on to the next city. It's ok to leave half of the fat cross unimproved in the early to mid game, especially if you can save your forests.

I usually have one really big city of production, and that becomes a wonder city. Because I play on marathon I have the benefit of scouting prior to any major growth. My second city is 95% of the time a place where I have stone or marble. If I have stone, I build pyramids and get representation, then speed my way to hanging gardens by doing math immediataly prior to alphabet. If I have marble, I get bronze and immediately path to polytheism and get parthanon. The reason is simple. If you have the opportunity to get wonders, and build them in one monster production city, you'll get a nice infusion of help that you need at the higher skill levels. And great people are fun.

Course, it's easier for a person like elizabeth for that strat, because cottages are the real and only reason you get away with it, and the extra 100% to GPP makes the strat viable.

 

[Bleser]

So does it make sense to keeping pumping out units instead of building something like an Aqueduct (before you need one) even though you'll eventually need one (even if it isn't for another 1,000 years)?

I guess I feel my army gets to a point where I don't need more units so I switch to building buildings in all my cities. Or should I just be at war or close to war ALL the time and razing my neighbor's cities?

 

[RushjobDK]

I expand in big bursts. Not by force, though. I try to cut off my enemies from areas with good resources by settling down with three/four cities in good strategic positions. I have to take a economical penalty for about 200 years, but that's ok. Usually I'm far ahead in the year 1 AD.