Shabbaman
rebuffing the rebels
when...if!
How to win. A short guide.
- Thread starter Ari
- Start date
- Status
MirandaCore
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2002
- Messages
- 53
If u have an older version (I can't get the new patches since I don't have the cd), u can win on diety by conquest even if u don't have a military. All u have to do is post 4 warriors each next to 9 or 10 of ur peripheral cities. Then give the cities to another civ as a gift. Then declare war on that civ and immediately take back ur cities. Since u just conquered 9-10 cities of the AI, the AI won't refuse ur envoy. In the peace process, trade those peripheral cities u just captured for the AI's cities. Then declar war again and repeat the process.
This strat is sooooo incredibly cheap, but then again, the AI is soooooo incredibly stupid.
This strat is sooooo incredibly cheap, but then again, the AI is soooooo incredibly stupid.
Portuguese
Vassalising Spain
I will exp it, but with 7~8 inicial cities...
Interesting, considering
I'm confused. If you only played 3 deity games, how can you post rule #1?
Some of the advice seems valid, but I prefer to actually build an empire, not just destroy/capture other cities. I think that's why I didn't like Age of Empires - I prefer to build.
Still, you gotta admit the discrepancy there.
And, in another post you said that the point is to WIN not to ENJOY.
Not for most of the people I talk to. Games are for fun. If the most barbarous win is fun for you, groovy, but it's still about having fun. Otherwise, why spend $40 on it?
wargasm23
Warlord
it would also be cool if you could watch replays of civ3 games like on warcraft 3
wargasm23
Warlord
VERY INTERESTING!! plz explain in more detail buddy.
thanks
Portuguese
Vassalising Spain
I think that strategy is quite more difficult if you have installed the patches...
Namagima
Chieftain
First, I just like to say your guide is pretty cool. I've been looking for some advice to give a friend of mine, who is brand new to the CIV universe. Personally I've found huge maps give me the greatest satisfaction of the overall game experience. I must admit I haven't played diety yet in CIV3, but that is just a matter of time.
Portuguese
Vassalising Spain
It's not so cool as it seems at first sight. Only work with the defined parametrers!!!
No, you can't do that with patch 1.29f!
satchel
Prince
I'm coming a little late to this party, but I've got to say that Ari lost all credibility with me with this statement:
I'm sure. You know, sweeping statements of your own superiority aren't going to sell your ideas nearly as well as thinking up quality ideas in the first place!
At any rate, you are certainly entitled to play the game in any fashion that amuses you, but for my money, your "strategy" takes all the fun out of the game - all of it - and leaves an empty shell of a "game" with absolutely no depth, one that I certainly wouldn't waste energy playing.
But you get higher scores than I do, so your approach just has to be more fun!
I'm sure. You know, sweeping statements of your own superiority aren't going to sell your ideas nearly as well as thinking up quality ideas in the first place!At any rate, you are certainly entitled to play the game in any fashion that amuses you, but for my money, your "strategy" takes all the fun out of the game - all of it - and leaves an empty shell of a "game" with absolutely no depth, one that I certainly wouldn't waste energy playing.
But you get higher scores than I do, so your approach just has to be more fun!
Darkness
Shadow creature
Ah, the wonderful world of sarcasm...
The thing about Ari's logic that misses on me: the point is to win the most effective way possible.
Then he sets the game up in a way that facilitates his goal.
Personally, I think this is akin to challenging a bunch of 5 year olds to the sporting match of your choice.
Yes you'll win, but so what? Do you feel successful winning at something stacked in your favour anyway.
The real satisfaction comes from winning at something that was a real challenge.
Then he sets the game up in a way that facilitates his goal.
Personally, I think this is akin to challenging a bunch of 5 year olds to the sporting match of your choice.
Yes you'll win, but so what? Do you feel successful winning at something stacked in your favour anyway.
The real satisfaction comes from winning at something that was a real challenge.
Portuguese
Vassalising Spain
To you, me and most CFC posters. Not surelly to him, though. 
But if he likes it that way...
But if he likes it that way...
Phantom Lord
live by the sword
First of all, I liked Ari's article. It's well written, a good read and probably a good guide on how to win on tiny pangea maps. Only thing I didn't like was the city trade thing because it exploits a bug, but the bug was fixed. Persian immortal rush on tiny map is a killer, no doubt about it.
But winning under these specific circumstances is only one aspect of Civ 3. Besides the city trade this tactic is playable. I've been researching some tiny strategies myself, with the difference of playing on continents and yes, all those strategies were aggressive in nature. Finally I got bored with playing on tiny, but I started playing a few conquest games on tiny because I was bored by cultural and spaceship victories on standard and large maps at that time.
Ari's tiny map strategie reminds me of rush strategies in multiplayer RTS games. Many RTS games are at least for a certain period of time dominated by rush strategies - until appropriate counter rushing and anti-rush strategies balance things again.
Civ is no RTS and will never feel like one, with or without its various mp modes. Therefore an attempt to use RTS type strategies in Civ may work under certain circumstances (if you can get to your enemy fast, which means small map, one continent, plus maybe a fast early UU) but there so many other possibilities that playing rush on tiny maybe is fun for only a few days.
95% of Civ were built to do something else with this game. Missing those 95% is OK if you like it this way, but maybe you've spent your money on the wrong game. If you like that style, get Total Annihilation. You will fall in love with the concept of Flash rushing and in no TA forum I know you'll get flamed for Flash rushing, it's a basic concept to open and maybe win the game on land maps. The advice to play TA instead of Civ is in no way meant to be cynical. TA is one of the greatest games of all times but rushing is simply more common in TA, altough you will miss some of the best parts of the game too if you rush exclusively.
I think real good Civ players (I'm not one of them, maybe an average monarch player) can adapt to every given map or culture in many different ways and to find out those ways and being able to win in different styles is the real fun of Civ. Why not go for culture win with the Zulus? Or no, let's try playing an indian warmonger instead.
Nevertheless Ari bought the game and if he gets his fun out of doing things the way he does, it's his choice.
And as I already said, I enjoyed his article altough it describes only a solution for one small aspect of Civ.
[edit: spelling]
But winning under these specific circumstances is only one aspect of Civ 3. Besides the city trade this tactic is playable. I've been researching some tiny strategies myself, with the difference of playing on continents and yes, all those strategies were aggressive in nature. Finally I got bored with playing on tiny, but I started playing a few conquest games on tiny because I was bored by cultural and spaceship victories on standard and large maps at that time.
Ari's tiny map strategie reminds me of rush strategies in multiplayer RTS games. Many RTS games are at least for a certain period of time dominated by rush strategies - until appropriate counter rushing and anti-rush strategies balance things again.
Civ is no RTS and will never feel like one, with or without its various mp modes. Therefore an attempt to use RTS type strategies in Civ may work under certain circumstances (if you can get to your enemy fast, which means small map, one continent, plus maybe a fast early UU) but there so many other possibilities that playing rush on tiny maybe is fun for only a few days.
95% of Civ were built to do something else with this game. Missing those 95% is OK if you like it this way, but maybe you've spent your money on the wrong game. If you like that style, get Total Annihilation. You will fall in love with the concept of Flash rushing and in no TA forum I know you'll get flamed for Flash rushing, it's a basic concept to open and maybe win the game on land maps. The advice to play TA instead of Civ is in no way meant to be cynical. TA is one of the greatest games of all times but rushing is simply more common in TA, altough you will miss some of the best parts of the game too if you rush exclusively.
I think real good Civ players (I'm not one of them, maybe an average monarch player) can adapt to every given map or culture in many different ways and to find out those ways and being able to win in different styles is the real fun of Civ. Why not go for culture win with the Zulus? Or no, let's try playing an indian warmonger instead.
Nevertheless Ari bought the game and if he gets his fun out of doing things the way he does, it's his choice.
And as I already said, I enjoyed his article altough it describes only a solution for one small aspect of Civ.
[edit: spelling]
wilbill
That Old Time Religion
Another somewhat narrow view. There are plenty of ways to fight corruption, but they involve building things other than swordsmen/Immortals.
wilbill
That Old Time Religion
double post, sorry...
- Status
