How do you play YOUR multiplayer games?
- Thread starter killaer
- Start date
Marquis Mark
Chieftain
I generally build my capitol on a hill whenever a choice exists. I play Germany and research hunting quickly to get archers and keep rushers off of me.
At this point I concentrate on making a GP farm (Phi/Cre as Frederick) and empire growth. I play a mid-late game, war-wise, as is appropriate for the Germans with their excellent Industrial-era UU and ability to spam GP and culture.
A lot of people like to get ahold of you in Ancient era, so I concentrate on keeping them off at this phase.
At this point I concentrate on making a GP farm (Phi/Cre as Frederick) and empire growth. I play a mid-late game, war-wise, as is appropriate for the Germans with their excellent Industrial-era UU and ability to spam GP and culture.
A lot of people like to get ahold of you in Ancient era, so I concentrate on keeping them off at this phase.
Lord Chambers
Emperor
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2001
- Messages
- 1,004
Before anyone posts their strategies, be sure to post the settings of your game. Perhaps in this format:
Map
Size
Speed
Number of players/AI
Your civ and the qualities of your leader
And then any other settings or options if people think they're important. Sea level, no razing, whatnot.
Map
Size
Speed
Number of players/AI
Your civ and the qualities of your leader
And then any other settings or options if people think they're important. Sea level, no razing, whatnot.
Lord Chambers
Emperor
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2001
- Messages
- 1,004
Pangea
Small
Normal
2 players/2 AI
English - Finacial/expansive
I won by expanding to the two most awesome city sites I could find. From these three core cities I began to built granaries, barracks, and two archers in each. By this time I was looking at grabbing some more territory, and sent a settler out to nab bronze. The Spanish AI got to it first. It was the only bronze in the area, and iron was no where to be found so I knew I was doomed without it. I began to pump chariots out, and went to war a bit premature, that is, without construction (read: catapults), since I had an easy shot at a Spanish worker. I spent the next several turns capturing the Spanish bronze city, then consolidating while building a handful of catapults. While marching through the jungles to Spain's next weakest city, I pillaged and harassed their units flowing from their capital. By doing that I was able to put my units in advantageous positions, and win the war with only two or three unit losses. I later went on to capture Madrid.
While I fought the war my human opponent and the other AI were expanding. I was very wary of attack from them, so I had extreme defense going on those other borders. Luckly they fought each other, after I was mostly done with the Spanish.
If they had attacked I'm pretty confident they'd have sacrificed a lot, because all my cities were founded on hills. There were only three that weren't, and those were Spanish.
How did I finance this war? I founded Confucianism and had one of my core cities pumping out missionaries the entire game. The shrine helped reduce the costs that was depleting my conquest booty.
I won by switching to theocracy, and since I had focused on growth in my core three cities (later my "core" had expanded to Madrid and that bronze city), I was pumping out double promoted units every 2 or 3 turns. That much firepower in the form of swordsmen and catapults can't be resisted. I cut through the remaning AI's country to the single city which held their bronze, iron, AND horses, and captured it. At that point my human opponent was finally conquered, and I had the game in the bag.
So this is a single account, but it summarizes my strategy. Multiplayer will = war unless it's a game between good friends that will be played over multiple sessions. With that in mind, build on hills. Build barracks. I always risk focusing on growth in new games, so I'm vulnerable to early attack. But of course that pays off by allowing you to go to war in a very determined fashion 30 or so turns after those few core cities are built. Once you have the war machine marching, don't let up. In single player I like to take over a country, then go peace and focus on tech for a while. There's no reason to in multiplayer since it'll probably be a smaller map. Finally, your fighting has to be efficiant. It's better to be patient if you don't have more than enough forces to capture a city. It's better to let an enemy unit run free, even if it means losing improvements to pillaging, if you don't have sufficiant forces to kill it that turn. If you never lose a unit (other than catapults of course) in war, you do two things. First, you keep getting more an more units, meaning you're more flexible on fighting the opposing army. Meaning if you have to make one unit run away because he's slightly wounded, that's fine because you could have another unit that'll swoop in the next turn and stop the enemy advance. Second, you don't lose strength by fighting, which is the major risk of waging war. Your massive army can be your defense in the unpredictable multiplayer area, whereas if you fight a costly war, you'll be scrambling when a new front opens up on you.
Small
Normal
2 players/2 AI
English - Finacial/expansive
I won by expanding to the two most awesome city sites I could find. From these three core cities I began to built granaries, barracks, and two archers in each. By this time I was looking at grabbing some more territory, and sent a settler out to nab bronze. The Spanish AI got to it first. It was the only bronze in the area, and iron was no where to be found so I knew I was doomed without it. I began to pump chariots out, and went to war a bit premature, that is, without construction (read: catapults), since I had an easy shot at a Spanish worker. I spent the next several turns capturing the Spanish bronze city, then consolidating while building a handful of catapults. While marching through the jungles to Spain's next weakest city, I pillaged and harassed their units flowing from their capital. By doing that I was able to put my units in advantageous positions, and win the war with only two or three unit losses. I later went on to capture Madrid.
While I fought the war my human opponent and the other AI were expanding. I was very wary of attack from them, so I had extreme defense going on those other borders. Luckly they fought each other, after I was mostly done with the Spanish.
If they had attacked I'm pretty confident they'd have sacrificed a lot, because all my cities were founded on hills. There were only three that weren't, and those were Spanish.
How did I finance this war? I founded Confucianism and had one of my core cities pumping out missionaries the entire game. The shrine helped reduce the costs that was depleting my conquest booty.
I won by switching to theocracy, and since I had focused on growth in my core three cities (later my "core" had expanded to Madrid and that bronze city), I was pumping out double promoted units every 2 or 3 turns. That much firepower in the form of swordsmen and catapults can't be resisted. I cut through the remaning AI's country to the single city which held their bronze, iron, AND horses, and captured it. At that point my human opponent was finally conquered, and I had the game in the bag.
So this is a single account, but it summarizes my strategy. Multiplayer will = war unless it's a game between good friends that will be played over multiple sessions. With that in mind, build on hills. Build barracks. I always risk focusing on growth in new games, so I'm vulnerable to early attack. But of course that pays off by allowing you to go to war in a very determined fashion 30 or so turns after those few core cities are built. Once you have the war machine marching, don't let up. In single player I like to take over a country, then go peace and focus on tech for a while. There's no reason to in multiplayer since it'll probably be a smaller map. Finally, your fighting has to be efficiant. It's better to be patient if you don't have more than enough forces to capture a city. It's better to let an enemy unit run free, even if it means losing improvements to pillaging, if you don't have sufficiant forces to kill it that turn. If you never lose a unit (other than catapults of course) in war, you do two things. First, you keep getting more an more units, meaning you're more flexible on fighting the opposing army. Meaning if you have to make one unit run away because he's slightly wounded, that's fine because you could have another unit that'll swoop in the next turn and stop the enemy advance. Second, you don't lose strength by fighting, which is the major risk of waging war. Your massive army can be your defense in the unpredictable multiplayer area, whereas if you fight a costly war, you'll be scrambling when a new front opens up on you.
Similar threads
