how to have a sucsessful/fun start game with 117

[Selous]

i have it sussed! to get the AI to trade reasonably with u at the start of the game ... getting teck for teck and even teck and money for teck!! .... the AI GIVING ME good trade deals!!

i have always thought the best start game statigey was to get your settlers pumping as soon as u possably could BUT ... the past few games i have pumped out warriors untill i would have to stat paying for them then switch to settlers .... and keep warrior production up to the point of going broke ... THEN the AI seems to have a little respect and trades u some tecks

this is all with 1.17 patch ... it has made my start games actually fun rather than the AI trading like mad with each other and me being left behind in the dark ages with my crappy 2 starting tecks ... i get included in the mad dash for trading

 

[NY Hoya]

try playing as an expansionist and cranking out scouts. I almost always get at least one, sometimes two, settlers for goody huts and crank out 7-10 scouts before building another military unit or settler. This will give you a huge tech lead over the AI, even other expansionist AI civs. Even with all the AI tech trading, I find that I can maintain a decent lead through the first two ages. And in the AI power calculations, scouts are every bit as good as warriors, so rarely will an AI civ make demands of me.

 

[smallstepforman]

My current game has some insane trading going on (Emperor, Archipelago map, Large world).

1) Its 1500BC and I still haven't finished research on a single tech - I end up buying it from the AI before I finish research. I get stuff for as little as 1 gold, or my Territory map. My scientists are researching Gunpowder in 1500BC, since I just bought Invention for 1 gold.

2) I've come to meet every AI civ (all 11), even the Zulus via buying communications. The Zulus are the most isolated Civ on a really remote island. No way Galleys can reach the Zulus. How the hell did they meet the Romans (my neighbour) since I doubt the Romans had enough time to construct a Galley since MapMaking was discovered (seems to be only 10 turns ago), yet alone sail across the Oceans and meet the isolated Zulus. No other Civ knew of the Zulus.

In all previous games I struggle to buy a single tech, yet in this game I'm getting every tech for peanuts. Its 1500BC and we all have Invention - this is insane. My research rate still takes 40 turns because I haven't had time to build Libraries - and I'm a scientific Civ.

I think that the game gives more techs from goody huts when you play on an Archipelago map. It probably figures that since Civs are so far apart, it will be a while before Civs meet, and trading will be non-existant in the first half of the game. Thats why you get tech-advances from goody huts. The problem with this game is that we've all met each other really early (even the Zulus - bug in the game?) and traded techs like mad, and then find astonishing stuff in goody huts (someone found Invention).

At this rate, I cant wait to land on a yet discovered island, and find a goody hut which teaches me the secrets of Space Flight in 1300BC.

 

[loki]

uh... I thought you could not get techs from goody huts once you are out of stone age ???

loki

 

[Lab Monkey]

I really like this patch, it certainly doesn't warrant the bad press it's been getting. The tech trading is a bit bad, but in my current game I just put science spending down to 0% until the late industrial age and bartered for all my techs. Admittedly I was a commercial civ and had a good base of luxuries, but I'm now in the modern age, ploughing a lot of money into research and the most advanced civ in the game (regent level).
Much of your starting strategy will also depend on the land, something I've seen a lot of people on this forum forget. One of the reasons that I shut down science spending was because I was swamped by jungle, had no access to rivers, and was limited to a low population until I got electricity.

Also if you get the chance set yourself up against the most agressive civs. Currently I've got Japan, Germany and the Zulus at war with each oter as well as ganging up on Persia (they've already wiped out Rome). It proves that with this patch there is still hope!

 

[Lab Monkey]

Originally posted by smallstepforman

2) I've come to meet every AI civ (all 11), even the Zulus via buying communications. The Zulus are the most isolated Civ on a really remote island. No way Galleys can reach the Zulus. How the hell did they meet the Romans (my neighbour) since I doubt the Romans had enough time to construct a Galley since MapMaking was discovered (seems to be only 10 turns ago), yet alone sail across the Oceans and meet the isolated Zulus. No other Civ knew of the Zulus.

This is a bug - the discovery of more advanced forms of seafaring allows galleys (possibly owned by all AI civs) to cross oceans. I've seen galleys in convoy with galleons and even ironclads. Hope Firaxis clear this up.

 

[Selous]

Originally posted by NY Hoya
try playing as an expansionist and cranking out scouts. I almost always get at least one, sometimes two, settlers for goody huts and crank out 7-10 scouts before building another military unit or settler. This will give you a huge tech lead over the AI, even other expansionist AI civs. Even with all the AI tech trading, I find that I can maintain a decent lead through the first two ages. And in the AI power calculations, scouts are every bit as good as warriors, so rarely will an AI civ make demands of me.

as far as the AI is concerned your scouts are the same as warriors .... for that matter even tanks are as good as warriors ... but yea ... my point was unit count ... but very good point ... as scouts would be MUCH more useful than warriors at this point in the game ... the AI in 1.17 seems to have no respect for someone without HEAPS of units early game .... i guess the same would be true if u built heaps of workers also ... personally ... i dont really like it as it has changed the game so it BITES hard for anyone that builds settlers as soon as possable

 

[Moff Jerjerrod]

Don't mean to rain on anyone's parade but I thinks it's pretty sad that one has to resort to tricks and gimics to play Civ3 with 1.17f. It takes the fun out of the game having to set science to 0% and then wheel and deal like I'm at Wattoo's parts shop for techs. Is this what really happened in history? No forget that, is this what happened in Civ2? I don't think so.

Why is it that 1.17f was made to curtail some exploits but replace them with gimmicy tricks to play the game? I sure hope that the next patch is not being made simply to stop people from exploiting the holes of the game. It seems like Civ3 from the get go was made with one thought in mind. How can we stop people from using tricks and cheats and exploits? I personally do not play games using tricks and gimmics. I play them to have fun. But by creating a game that goes out of it's way to give the human player a coronary yet provide the AI with massive cheats is not my idea of fun.

 

[gzollinger]

I have played multiple games with the new patch, and in a couple of games I had something similar to what you are talking about, where the computer would sell me all the tech's cheap! A couple of the other games, I couldn't get tech's cheap and had to switch and do my own research. I don't know what the difference was between the games, but it was significant.

 

[NY Hoya]

Moff, you're absolutely right. There has been a steady progression since the game first came out.

1. release
2. players figure out how to win and post strategies here
3. Firaxis decides that some of the methods players use to win are cheats/exploits (tech-trading anyone?)
4. Firaxis releases a patch to fix those exploits
5. repeat

I'd much rather that they devote time to improving gameplay with the patches instead of trying to close out exploits. 1.17 did a few things to improve gameplay, but tried too hard to cut down on user exploits, thus creating additional, unseen bugs in the game (i.e., the AI starving itself to death under communism)

 

[Moff Jerjerrod]

Originally posted by NY Hoya

1. release
2. players figure out how to win and post strategies here
3. Firaxis decides that some of the methods players use to win are cheats/exploits (tech-trading anyone?)
4. Firaxis releases a patch to fix those exploits
5. repeat

I'd much rather that they devote time to improving gameplay with the patches instead of trying to close out exploits. 1.17 did a few things to improve gameplay, but tried too hard to cut down on user exploits, thus creating additional, unseen bugs in the game (i.e., the AI starving itself to death under communism)

Well NY Hoya at least we know that Firaxis is reading the boards to see what we're all up to. It sometimes seems like they're just trying very hard to please everyone and end up pleasing no one. I'm quite shocked considering that we're talking about a product from game god Sid Meier. It's rather disappointing, like purchasing a Mercedes Benz and then finding out that that reputable carmaker gave you a lemon car.

 

[NY Hoya]

you're right, they do listen to us. I just get frustrated thinking about how we're all beta testing Civ3. That's not to say I haven't had a lot of fun playing the game, because I have. Let's just hope 118 gets it right

 

[Selous]

Originally posted by Moff Jerjerrod
Don't mean to rain on anyone's parade but I thinks it's pretty sad that one has to resort to tricks and gimics to play Civ3 with 1.17f. It takes the fun out of the game having to set science to 0% and then wheel and deal like I'm at Wattoo's parts shop for techs. Is this what really happened in history? No forget that, is this what happened in Civ2? I don't think so.

Why is it that 1.17f was made to curtail some exploits but replace them with gimmicy tricks to play the game? I sure hope that the next patch is not being made simply to stop people from exploiting the holes of the game. It seems like Civ3 from the get go was made with one thought in mind. How can we stop people from using tricks and cheats and exploits? I personally do not play games using tricks and gimmics. I play them to have fun. But by creating a game that goes out of it's way to give the human player a coronary yet provide the AI with massive cheats is not my idea of fun.

i wouldnt say it is cheap gimmicry ... just a different focus at the start of the game ... i still dont set my science rate to 0 ... i keep it as high as i can afford ... keep my income to 0
i just thought i would post this to help everyone that was getting hammered with the new patch .... but i do think this is a work around ... and i HATE work arounds .... like the leave your armys outside of citys so u dont lose them to a flip workaround .... i REALLY hated that one .... very unrealistic ... i guess this one could be called realistic also .... but i still dont like it

 

[Moff Jerjerrod]

Originally posted by Selous


i wouldnt say it is cheap gimmicry ... just a different focus at the start of the game ... i still dont set my science rate to 0 ... i keep it as high as i can afford ... keep my income to 0
i just thought i would post this to help everyone that was getting hammered with the new patch .... but i do think this is a work around ... and i HATE work arounds .... like the leave your armys outside of citys so u dont lose them to a flip workaround .... i REALLY hated that one .... very unrealistic ... i guess this one could be called realistic also .... but i still dont like it

Selous,

Yeah workarounds is a more accurate description. For kicks I decided to change my stubborn ways and play a game using some of these workarounds. I noticed a dramatic improvement in the outcome of my game so far. Having more fun now but still have the feeling that I have to use a workaround to play a game that should be more honest and straightforward.

As NY Hoya said, "Let's just hope 118 get's it right".