i'm dying to know...

[biggrumpy]

how in the blue hell is it possible to be competitive in an emperor or deity level game?

some background:

1. i do just fine on monarch level games -- the AI has a slight production/etc advantage, but it's not insurmountable.

2. over the last week or so, i've tried about 10 emperor level games and usually get to around 500AD before i get fed up with rampant and utterly stupid amounts of AI cheating.

3. in one game i tried warmonger style with persian immortals. i was doing quite well until the whole world, which was nearly on par with me on technology, suddenly skipped about 10 techs and went from swordsmen to riflemen -- overnight.

4. if i try to be peaceful, i have at least 4 or 5 civs declaring war on me by 0AD.

5. in my most recent attempt, an archipelago game, i focused on building the lighthouse from the start, and beat the AI to it. I settled a few islands, and basically set up a wall of galleys to give me advance warning when the AI inevitably attacked.

to my suprise and disgust, the british showed up where the *** only *** possible approach was over a huge distance of "ocean" squares -- not "shallows," not "seas," but "oceans," which are guaranteed to sink galleys, lighthouse or not (remember i'm the one with the lighthouse). then, suprise suprise, 1 swordsman proceeds to kill two hoplites fortified and in a walled city (the chances of that are like hitting the lotto).

here's my complaint -- it's one thing to allow the AI to produce faster. that's fine. but allowing them to play under an ENTIRELY different ruleset is not very fun. allowing their GALLEYS to travel halfway across the world on OCEAN squares (and yes, i scouted extensively to make sure there were no sea or shallow routes, and they never passed my wall of galleys) is just stupid.

so i've seen the high score board and it appears that people are able to win on emperor and deity (although some of those scores are fairly inflated -- i'd be shocked if they didn't mod stuff). my question is: how? warmongering doesn't work, peacemongering doesn't work, science-hogging doesn't work, diplomacy doesn't work, and i haven't yet found a combination of the above that works. what gives?

 

[JoseM]

Just play monarch... its more fun. I started in regent then moved to monarch and then moved to deity, but i saw that it was impossible to win in deity so i didnt dare to try emperor, thats why i play only in monarch, is more fair and at the same time very competitive, but really fair and fun.

 

[Zachriel]

Pack your cities closer together. This may reduce their late game effectiveness, but this is meaningless if you have already been overrun by the enemy. In the short run, this will increase your number of cities, production and military defensive capability.

Also, larger maps with fewer Civs are easier as your rivals may not find you right away giving you time to catch up.

I prefer Monarch and Emperor games, as I'm not fond of the city packing strategy.

 

[cegman]

I have crossed the ocean once yes I stopped in it twice and survived

 

[Zouave]

Originally posted by biggrumpy
. . .i get fed up with rampant and utterly stupid amounts of AI cheating.

3. in one game i tried warmonger style with persian immortals. i was doing quite well until the whole world, which was nearly on par with me on technology, suddenly skipped about 10 techs and went from swordsmen to riflemen -- overnight. . .

A lot of us got fed up with AI cheating long ago. I did when playing on an accurate World Map as the Chinese, and my new caravel discovered a GERMAN ocean-going galley off the coast of Alaska. I paid for the German's world map, and there was no way it could have gottten there. It was just TELEPORTED there from almost ten thousand miles away. And that was at REGENT level.

AI cheating? Beam me up. Scottie.


NOTE: Civ 2 made itself clear in how the human would face tougher ODDS in combat as we went up in level. Fair enough. It did NOT secretly cheat and break its own rules.

 

[biggrumpy]

hmm city packing is an interesting idea.

i usually play with the max number of civs and on large maps -- that's why it's next to impossible to build wonders. maybe i'll half the number of civs and try it again.

i don't mind that it's hard -- the challenge is cool. i just think the player and the AI should have to use the same rules -- these magic boats the AI gets are incredibly lame.

so who are these people winning on emperor and deity? are they all modding stuff?

 

[Jaygatz]

There was a thread about the teleporting galley phenominon.

Basically, what happens is that if a galley is in enemy territory, and the enemy asks you to leave, and you leave with the <your unit will be moved automatically function> sometimes the galley can end up halfway around the world.

If you notice, its usually the civ with the lighthouse that does most of the meeting, so I think its a bug and not deliberate cheating.

 

[D9phoenix]

I so far have survived one deity game till 2050.. i had 1 city left when forced retirement came. Seems to me the best odds you get in deity is maps with very little land coverage. The less land there is The more you can cut down on the computers ability to cheat.

As for the wonders, you just have to set up a city ( not your palace) to start building a palace. Then when the Wonder you want to build becomes available just change the palace out for it.

 

[romelus]

i've won a ton of emperor games on various settings. haven't really seen any rampant ai cheating in any of them. combat results sometimes are stupid, but i tend to notice them more when they happen. one important thing is that you have to be smart about who and when to fight. i usually have to give in to one ai demand early in the game, when i am not yet ready to take it on. as soon as i have a good stack of offensive units i declare war on a neighbour and try to have active trading or pacts with other known civs so they won't jump in to gang up on me. this is quite necessary on pangea and continents. on islands i can often defend against the entire world while unifying my island.

on 1.17 emperor was quite easy because techs were cheap to buy and you had lots of cash from 100% tax. 1.21 might be different. stay in wars and use monarchy until the end. try to fight manageable wars and don't be too stubbourn to give in to a stronger civ - your time will come

 

[biggrumpy]

i'll give it a shot, rom.

i've messed around a little today and it seems that emperor is very do-able as long as you limit the AI civs to maybe 5 or 6. i've been playing on large/huge maps against the max number of opponents which pretty much guarantees you're at war with 4 or 5 people, and of course you'll never build a wonder.

basically, you have to survive into the late industrial age before you can overcome the huge lead the computer has. if the civs are spread out decently well you can make it. when 2 other civs are in your back yard from the start you're just screwed.

 

[damunzy]

Maybe the number of A.I.s is what has been killing me. I have been playing with 16 on Monarchy and Standard sized map.

 

[Lt. 'Killer' M.]

In my experience, the less land per civ there is the better a humans chances. (unless the AI gets so far ahead that it is two military steps ahead).


Best way to win Deity:

Tiny map, pangaea, 19 civs. Play the Persians. Attack with Archers if to get at Iron if you don`t have it, otherwise produce Immortals only. Raze som small cities to get a few workers and connect all lux. When cities grow, build a temple, maybe later Library to stop culture flips.

Pile up 6 to 8 (version 1.16) or 20 (version 1.21) Immortals. Can be done only with densly packed cities. Kepp out of war until then!

Now GO! Don`t stop, don`t change government until you control at least 60% of the world. Use leaders for armies. Don`t be affraid to attack different islands if they exist. Population-rush 1 defender and temple in every captured city, then rush Immortals until city is size 1 (prevents flips), then produce Immortals. never stop producing them!!!!!

That way, you can get so far ahead that the AI doesn`t even dare attack you with Cavalry!

Remember to press all their money and tech from the AIs before you exterminate them!

Good luck!

 

[No.Dice]

The higher levels depend on a successful early war. Sue for peace once they're on the run, and take their techs with you. 20 turns later finish the job, and collect the rest of the tech and any communications you missed.

Its worth mentioning that you do not build wonders before the industrial age without a leader. Let your enemies build them and then take them from him.

I usually play on huge pangaea maps, with all civs present on emperor difficulty. Its a little rough, and i'm sure theres a more efficient way of doing things, but the following will usually give me enough swordsmen to defeat hoplites in size 6 cities. Though, the Greeks are not your first choice for an early war opponent.

A 4-6 city swordsman conquest is very strong. Use a dense build, your capital and your next two cities will be built within 1-2 tiles of each other. Usually after its first settler, the city will make a granery, which will complete right about the time the city reaches size three. From here, two size 3 cities (usually your capital and 2nd city) will produce one worker each, while your third city is working on a settler. The settler will go and settle on an iron source, while one of your workers builds a road to it. The other worker is building a road towards the enemy capital. Your initial worker is mining/roading the squares around your core.

Provided a good start with a generous amount of bonus grassland, my capital and its two sister cities can have graneries, temples, and barracks, and time to spare to produce a few swordsmen before 850 BC. Your iron city (4th) won't have time for a granery, and will build a temple and then a barracks and start swordsman production. If the iron is too far away, this city can produce a settler which will build a city in a more favorable position. It generally will not become productive enough until the first war is over though. When in this situation, its better to avoid early war and concentrate on expansion.

Usually i'll cripple my opponent, sue for peace, taking the current world map and the majority of his tech. I'll use the next 20 turns to catch up expansion-wise and then mop up, taking the rest of my opponent's tech.

BillChin (i think) mentioned in the war academy that 750 BC is a good target date to declare war for a swordsman conquest. Works for me.

Industrious is important since you'll need a road in place, stretching to the enemy fringe by about 750 BC. Swordsmen are too slow to attack without it. Its also important to connect that Iron to your capital ASAP.

Militaristic is great for the cheap barracks, and having plenty of elites around to get that first leader. Usually he'll rush the forbidden palace in one of the conquered enemy cities.

This makes the chinese my favorite choice for executing a similiar strategy. Other obvious choices are the Iroqouis and the Persians.

Thanks to BillChin, most of this i picked up from his posts.

 

[biggrumpy]

thanks nodice. i'll give it a try.

 

[JollyRoger]

Up until 1.21, I mainly screwed around on Chieftain and Warlord. For my first game with 1.21, I literally rolled the dice to select World Size (Huge) and Level of Difficulty (Emperor). Everthing else is random. I am playing with the default rules except I have toggled off culturally linked civs and restarting of civs.

Most of the world is four techs deep into the industrial age (Nationalism, Communism, Medicine, and Sanitation) & five civs have been eliminated in AI v. AI wars. I am the Iroquois and started with much jungle terrain (although I did have some decent terrain as around the jungle). I have been ranked in the top three civs for as long as I have had contact with a significant number of civs and at one point had the lead.

I did not have much luck with my Mounted Warriors. What has worked for me is having 4 luxury resources. My city improvement preference has been gold (marketplaces/banks), then happines, then science. This is the opposite build order that I used at the lower levels. With the exception of some misguided research at the beginning of the Middle Ages, I have bought and traded for techs. I have 1 tradeable source of furs and multiple tradeable sources of two other luxuries. I have also had, through trade, all 8 luxury resources. I am in democracy and am having WLTK days everwhere.

I generally wait until the AI collectively has two techs that I don't. I invariably find at least one civ that has one but not the other. I purchase the tech that this civ does not have and then trade (often straight-up) with the civ that is one tech behind. If necessary, however, I can afford to purchase 2 to 5 techs outright.

I have about 10,000 gold and may start doing some of my own research once somebody discovers Steam Power and multiple paths become open. The AI's are constantly warring with one another and the tech rate has slowed down since we entered the industrial age.

Since I switched to Democracy, I have resolved not to war until I have a very good reason and opportunity to do so. I have paid tribute and proactively traded with civs to avoid war. The leaders(and my neighbors), the Aztecs, outright attacked me and took a couple of cities before my turn. I resolved myself to a twenty turn war (bought some allies and also declared war on Elizabeth who had some cities on my east coast). War wariness only started to show on turns 19 and 20. The Brits were eliminated (I got two cities), I got one of my cities back from the Aztecs (the other was razed), and it took less than 100 gold to get out of the war after turn 20. I have stayed out of war since, but I expect more to come. Hopefully, I can catch the Aztecs without a strategic resource and knock Montezuma down to size.

The Aztecs have a huge lead. I am in third and closing in on the Egyptians. I got Leonardo's and just missed Adam Smith's. I have lucked my way into a strategy that has allowed me to remain competitive and given me the false hope that I might be able to achieve a Spaceship victory. A lot may depend on Strategic Resources. So my opinion is that Emperor is beatable, even on a huge map with lots of civs. I really don't think I will win my current game, but I have thrived long enough to not feel completely hopeless.

 

[Sullla]

Jolly Roger has the right idea. Winning on Emperor does not require an early war (though it can be extremely helpful), but it does require an exceptionally good knowledge of the trading system. If the AI is manipulated properly, even the smallest of civs can keep up in tech and stay out of wars. I recently completed a one city challenge (OCC) game on Regent and won easily by cultural victory through an excellent game of trading. If you are having difficulty on Emperor, learning how to get along and outsmart the AI in the trade window will benefit you more than trying to set up a map where you can use warfare to get everything you want. And of course the mark of a really good civ player is that they can use any civilization to win, not "tiny map, 16 civs, Persia, immortal rush" or "industrious needed to build roads there in time to attack." Over-reliance on the superpowered civs will drag you down - try playing the English in your next game!

 

[No.Dice]

Originally posted by Sullla
If you are having difficulty on Emperor, learning how to get along and outsmart the AI in the trade window will benefit you more than trying to set up a map where you can use warfare to get everything you want.

This is more a difference in playing styles rather than one method clearly being better than the other. Theres nothing a war monger can accomplish that a peaceful player can't, and vice versa. Both styles of play will invariably take you to the same point.

Outsmarting the AI in the diplomacy window applies equally to the warmonger.

And of course the mark of a really good civ player is that they can use any civilization to win, not "tiny map, 16 civs, Persia, immortal rush" or "industrious needed to build roads there in time to attack." Over-reliance on the superpowered civs will drag you down - try playing the English in your next game!

I agree.

However, you can't try to tell me that the more war-like civs don't lend themselves better to the higher end of the difficulty ladder. There isn't a cheaper/faster way of increasing your power on the histrograph, negating the AI bonuses, and catching up on your expansion than warmongering.

Not to say that i'll go to war every game using the same generic strategy, mimicking a dozen games before it. It all depends on what random map, climates, and civ the game deals me. The player who chooses the same civ, and restarts when his starting position isn't fertile enough is certainly lacking. It is another thing to recognize what type of game your civ best lends itself to, and taking advantage of it.

 

[God]

Although i have yet to play emperor, I have played a large map monarch and didn't bother with early wars. Expanded and then fortified my borders and started to improve my cities. I stopped the game to finish others and stuff but I'll get back to it.

The problem for me playing on levels where AI has advantage is the techs. I'm still using the old way of reasearching some techs myself, trading for others. In ancient era i usualyl trade for all of them, but I don't like to lower my science rate to 10% and then i find myself without 2000 gold to buy some industrial era tech.

How do you have so much money to constantly buy techs? Is it really worth just putting the science research at 10% through half of the game and buying all the techs?

 

[JollyRoger]

Money is not the only thing there is to buy techs with. Smart use of luxury resources and careful use of strategic resources can be very valuable. Maps and rights of passage agreements are sometimes helpful. I have been stuck between the Persians and Aztecs with the Zulus in the neighborhood. I had a RoP with the Persians before they got Iron Working and used it to sit a unit on their iron. Incredibly, they let me renew the RoP (in a complicated trade that involved tech, luxuries, RoP, and a miltary alliance) and sit on their iron another twenty turns.

If you don't have to have a tech as soon as it is available, but eventually want it, just be patient. At some point, a civ will have that tech, but not a tech that the rest of the world has. Go out and buy the new tech and trade it to that civ for the older tech. I got Medicine and Communism basically by buying Medicine (conveniently cheap since a luxury resource deal had just expired with the civ I purchased from) and then trading it to a civ with Communism but without Medicine. They even kicked in their meager amount of gold, some modest gold per turn, and their world map.

My civ has been backward as far as research capablities go (I built marketplaces/banks first), but now that I am improving in that area and the overall tech rate of the AI has slowed down, I may switch gears and start doing some of my own research.

 

[Amask]

Originally posted by biggrumpy
i'll give it a shot, rom.

when 2 other civs are in your back yard from the start you're just screwed.

Sometimes (from what I read I must think it was just luck) it is them who get screwed. I started emperor game as french on a large map with maximum opponents (imagine how good it is when you do not have neither iron nor saltpeter (it exhausted after I built 10 musketeers), and killed the English. Other were happy with me because every 10-15 turns I gave them world map and some small amounts of gold. This war gave me cities and some techs, so until middle of medieval ages I was Ok. Then I started falling behind, and once again decalred war on the russians - used my horsemen and musketeers (whom I put in 5 prebuilt fortresses - the border was 5 squares long, with mountains at the sides of it). The fortresses helped me beat the knights and longbowmen, and then I went and took one city. Then another city, and then everyone declared war on the russians. In 10 turns they were gone, and I got 4 techs for peace, and five cities. Then again was peace with me gradually falling behind in research. I then declared war on Iroquios, and immediately took two of their cities (my border was one square away). I used my artillery (about 15 units) to weaken them and thus a handful of infantry and cavalry - I finally discovered new source of saltpeter - didn't have any problems. This victory and following destroying of Iroquois gave me huge advantage. I was well ahead by the modern ages. Then I just quit as the game wasn't fun anymore.

Conclusions: fight if you want to live (and set the maximum opponents - they won't get a big advantage with their commerce bonuses if there aren't many cities). Be careful about declaring war and make sure other civs don't ally against you.