I hate how impossible it is to warmonger now

[Bl01_Z]

I hate this inability to war at all in BNW. It seems like the only feasible conquest spree you can go on is towards at the end of the game. I hate that if you start conquering things early game in BNW things go up in flames like never before. You start becoming technologically backwards because of the investment you have to make into troops over infrastructure. You start to delve into unheard of levels of unhappiness. Instead of crippling your opponents like you used to early game in GnK or Vanilla, you end up being crippled by conquest. This takes so much fun out of the game because you have to build military and all you can use it for is defense and it feels like such a waste. Space to expand can be limited and I need more room. Im not saying warmongering must be as essential to victory as it was in GnK but it seems like any warmongering on Immortal or Deity basically cripples you for the whole game. I can do just fine on emperor but the AI is so unprepared for war on those levels its just a joke.

I love Siege Towers, Keshiks, and Battering Rams, and they all seem to be useless in BNW.

 

[glider1]

Ok I get where you are coming from. You do not actually think that it is impossible to warmonger, just impossible on immortal or diety. I agree that both those difficulties generally reduce the number of interesting ways to play the game. It is possible to warmonger but it is a very limited low chance of success option on those difficulties.

ok, Since you like war mongering and you did it on emperor, I suggest that you modify the handicaps file so that emperor level has diety levels of AI military. That way the AI will be prepared better for war, but at the same time you are not as crippled by economic disadvantage and limited options.

The handicaps file is setup for a majority of people and it has to capture those many players that just want to beat the game and then move onto another game. That is why diety is what it is. To give a player a temporary challenge and make them feel like they haven't been duped of their money buying BNW.

 

[Yzman]

Considering I have done 2 domination games in BNW that both started out very early on, they are not impossible. One was with the Zulu, other with Assyria. They are harder, but they are still manageable. You just can't go on a bloody rampage without keeping your economy and happiness in mind.

 

[Zenstrive]

Happiness and economy can be offset by the facts that:

1. once you go on rampaging, keep on rampaging to get money by conquering cities until nothing left in your citizen
2. rebellions are easily trampled by units stationed in cities.

 

[Aristos]

The handicaps file is setup for a majority of people and it has to capture those many players that just want to beat the game and then move onto another game. That is why diety is what it is. To give a player a temporary challenge and make them feel like they haven't been duped of their money buying BNW.

Wait...

so you are saying the game is now HARDER to dominate via military means yet it is therefore DUMBED DOWN???

Come on, man, I know you better. Let's get out of this innocuous debate and let's find time to work on CvTacticalAI.cpp ...

 

[Roblord]

I just finished a game as The Huns(on Prince) and I basically warred from the beginning. Yeah...early on your economy is in the tank, but by constantly sacking Barbarian huts and taking out every civ on my continent(Russians, Arabs, Polynesians, and Assyrians in this case), I was able to stay afloat. I had a huge military by the time I discovered the other major continent in my game. Carthage had their capital in a very difficult place to reach, so I waited to tech up to Artillery before attacking.(This was easy as I had no need to build any troops on my home continent as military City States were giving them to me and besides barbs...I had no threat at home.) Once I teched up to Artillery, I steamrolled the entire second continent for my first Domination win ever in Civ 5!!

 

[glider1]

I didn't mention anything about dumbed down Aristos you've put words in my mouth.

Diety is a challenge but it feels like an empty challenge. There are so many things you can't do on Diety that are potentially great ideas, but they are just not feasible because of the AI bonuses. Things like pushing religion for example or starting with different policy combinations.

 

[Funababbitt]

I am pleased to see more contributors commenting on the prolonged AI turns in BNW. And yet the potential war mongers among us have to think what it would be like if we had the massive armies that we saw in past editions. The necessarily smaller armies in BNW have a critical affect on war mongering. (I play huge/marathon)

The civs in BNW like to get more cozy than I have seen before. They appear to intrude right into my territory by way of random, disorganized expansion. Once a rival settlement is established early in the game, the difficulty of building an army for want of gold means that the unwelcome settlement could be there for a long long time, before I can muster the resources to capture or remove it.

With the smaller armies of BNW, I can take three artillery pieces and a few Cavalry or Musketeers and cut through an enemy civ's army like slicing cheese. I don't get the enjoyment of the "great battles" I remember from previous civs.

I also miss the sense of building to a climax. As there is a Superbowl in Football, or a Cup Final in soccer, I always enjoyed building up to that "final confrontation," my civ against a rival with a massive army to match my own. While it's possible for it to happen in BNW it's a diluted version.

A token army in BNW will put me in the red, Thus, I feel my choices moving up the tech tree are forced upon me much more than they ought to be. Pottery/Writing (Great Library), Iron Working, (as a Free Tech), (Colossus); Mathematics, Currency, Guilds, (Machu Pichu). Even with a tiny army of a couple of archers and two warriors, my "strategy" for avoiding double digit losses, is still to build "Wonders" so as to avoid the maintenance costs of a lot of smaller structures.

I think BNW is a great game. I wonder though, if I will continue replaying it the way I did Civ IV and its expansions. I do think the entire Civilization franchise is at risk of being damaged if it shuts down the war mongers too tightly. I will end with a paraphrase of Winston Churchill, "are we a nation of Sim Cities?"

 

[El Caballerion]

You can still be involved in wars, but I've noticed that you can't exactly 'Zergling rush' in the beginning. Instead, focus on early wars to kidnap workers and pillage improvements. Capturing cities is a big no-no.

 

[Snuffleupagus]

(I play on Emperor, for context)

I feel like warmongering was too dominate a strategy in previous versions. I really like the pushback in BNW away from feeling like I HAVE to build an army and conquer a neighbor or two early, or else all is lost.

I also really enjoy the late wars. Warmongering is very very possible in BNW, it just seems to come post industrial. I'm finally engaging in competitive late game wars, I don't think they are perfectly balanced (the AI is not great at using planes) - but it's a fun change.

Personally, I feel like a lot of people are really upset that the old strategies they used before aren't as effective (or at all effective) in BNW.

I have warmongered succesfully early, but only by taking *only* the capital city of a neighbor most of the world doesn't like - bu tI won't pretend it isn't way more difficult and less beneficial.

 

[TheHarshax]

I have not had a problem competing in early wars. The trick for me has been to pick a friend and get trade going ASAP. Pick an enemy. Use my army to cripple their trade routes. Buying units with that gold. Decimating their army and razing most of their cities. I generally play on immortal.