I still can't get over protective trait

[TheMeInTeam]

The game I spoke about was the video I linked to, settling on a plains hill with a stone makes a lot of wonders possible, both mids + hanging gardens were easy on that map in multiple playthroughs.

Its definitely not 100% possible, but the likelihood of building the mids or great wall is very high if you get to settle on a stone plains hill. It didnt require any degree of luck, it worked for me multiple times as that was my very first Deity game and I played it several times for practice.

"I cite limited anecdotal evidence in an ideal scenario where the odds still aren't 100% in attempt to counter your argument that pursuing something isn't reliable".

Well, OK. I cite a game where pyramids went 2400 BC. That's all well and cute, but it's not really helping the reliability issue. Every wonder is a risk, it's just a question of how much. I already said you could have good odds on them sometimes, on occasion even the best odds available out of all your choices. It's still not reliable though, only probable.

It's not sensible to get too hung up on any one game. I've seen plenty of pre 1500 to pre 1800 GLH...on immortal. On deity it's not like it'll go more slowly. I've seen pre-2000 BC mids on immortal...how are you getting it that early? If you so much as do anything other than worker ---> mids you stand a chance to lose them. That isn't reliable, it's a gamble. Potentially worthwhile? Absolutely. Reliable? No.......

However it does make basing a strategy around a wonder somewhat of a gimmick ploy where one hopes to get lucky. Then again, I suppose that's true of civ in general though.

 

[vranasm]

^^ in this sense is every battle a risk... doesn't mean you won't attack at 60% odds...

to be honest I saw mids going before TGW like in 1 in 50 games (maybe even more...then 50)... that makes it what? 2% odds?

The only wonders you're safe to get are on Pangea-like maps (you see every tech) from techs the AI's don't have.
And to be honest that would mean basically all early game wonders irrelevant.

 

[bhavv]

^^ Winning wars at 60% combat odds seems to be a much more unreliable strategy than building the GLH on Deity, judging entirely by the chance of success and how fast the AI will get new war techs .

So why even bother taking a chance on war at deity level when it has such a low reliability? Building the GLH or Mids with stone is still a safer gamble than trying an axe or HA rush since the AI can get to longbows incredibly fast. Also you might start right next to Mansa Musa, thus all war tatics are unreliable because of one Civ in the entire game that cant be rushed with my Summerian Vultures .

All victory conditions seem unreliable on Deity, the chance to pull of a win is so small, so why even bother playing Deity? Im trying to adapt to and apply the information that players who are better than me are giving.

 

[Iranon]

Oh, total chance of victory should be quite high on Deity for strong players, and most Immortal players should be able to get above 50% as soon as they get accustomed to the change of pace and unlearn a few things that no longer work..

It just pays to plan for setbacks on Deity. Pushing hard for a predetermined strategy and optimising competently isn't guaranteed to be enough any more. High-impact wonders are only realiable if you drop everything else for them (Boring for the Apostolic Palace, not worth it for anything else). Rushes and even chokes can backfire spectacularly (even if you win militarily, crippling one AI might turn another into a monster as they take better advantage of the free space.).

At the same time, you can turn Deity bonuses to your own advantage. Suck up to someone and milk them for free tech and money. Stir up AI vs AI wars and take the cities away from under the winner's nose. Let vassals and colonies do most of your work for you.
Immortal bonuses don't offset AI incompetence, Deity bonuses do. Dropping back to Immortal can actually make me rant "Foools! Do I have to do everything yourself?!"
And one thing that remains reliable if you don't mess up early on is a military advantage in the Renaissance/early Industrial that's enough for a strong position in the late game.

I hope this makes sense. In short: individual plays are less reliable, keeping your options open and pushing for openings becomes stronger in comparison.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

^^ in this sense is every battle a risk... doesn't mean you won't attack at 60% odds...

to be honest I saw mids going before TGW like in 1 in 50 games (maybe even more...then 50)... that makes it what? 2% odds?

The only wonders you're safe to get are on Pangea-like maps (you see every tech) from techs the AI's don't have.
And to be honest that would mean basically all early game wonders irrelevant.

You fight most likely 100's of battles in high level warfare, so failing on some high odds attempts won't be game changing.

You can only succeed or fail each wonder 1 time per game (not counting building it for multiple instances of fail gold that is). If one bases their strategy around a wonder, they're betting against, say, 20% odds not happening as opposed to 20 instances of 20% odds not happening in a row.

Yes, every move and attack in civ IV has intrinsic risk due to RNG. With wonders, it is much higher. Usually.

So why even bother taking a chance on war at deity level when it has such a low reliability? Building the GLH or Mids with stone is still a safer gamble than trying an axe or HA rush since the AI can get to longbows incredibly fast

Yes, in pointing out that wonders are not reliable, I did not mean players should instead attempt an even more risky and often borderline suicidal strategy as an alternative . Renaissance wars are pretty reliable on deity, but early rushes? One better hope that "regenerate map" button is reliable!

Good players (better than me) can win fairly consistently on standard-settings deity. I never got the AI to damage but not take cities and wind up giving me freebies like Iranon speaks about, maybe I'd win more often than ~1/5 non-cooked, non-ap cheesed maps that way.

 

[bhavv]

Yes I've been trying lots of early game rushes atm on Deity level for the HoF challenge ... They all FAIL big time, the AI gets longbows far too quickly after I've already bankrupted myself with a horde of Axes or HAs. I've found it much safer to focus on either the GLH or Great Wall first, and to wait for Catapults and either HAs / Jumbos or Macemen / Berzerkers.

The key is picking non IND AI Civs, and Hannibal makes a very good choice for either the GLH or great Wall because he starts with mining + fishing (or anyone else with these techs). I'm playing as Ragnar atm trying to get to grips with Deity level conquest, and I hate it very much compared to GLH or GW + rex.

I've been able to build GLH as Ragnar in every game so far if I manually pick Civs with neither IND or Fishing. So in the early game on Deity, for me the best option seems to be expansion + either GLH or GW.