Txurce
Deity
I decided to try Immortal playing the same type of game I employ on Emperor: continents, standard speed, space race, next to no puppets, SPs spent immediately, no prebuilds (only just learned about them!), and city number ranging from 3 to 6.
This was all done with the Balance mods, plus Tech Diffusion, Harder Free Tech, Tech Oveflow, Liberation and Emigration. I think this will roughly mirror the upcoming patch.
Ive now played six games, using the same basic strategy: REX up to the city limit for resources (settler 2d build); steal workers if possible; Tradition/Liberty, Patronage, Rationalism; try for Chichen Itza and Taj Mahal; pop instead of gold (TPs only in desert/tundra), maritime CS alliances for a specialist economy; basic beelines for civil service, astronomy, printing press, and fertilizer.
The big difference between Emperor and Immortal for me was (surprise) the AIs increased production, which led to quick significant tech and unit leads. This in turn resulted in increased aggressiveness against me. I also found that the AI was more successful in attacking other AI on Immortal, even with the mods buffed city defenses. And they use better tactics, including brutal culture bombs.
This led me to break down my basic approach to two strategies: builder with next to no puppets, counting on geography and diplomacy to hold off the AI; and moderate puppeteer with an aggressive start, crippling enemies before they became too strong.
I won both games where the city/puppet total varied from 8 to 11, in which I quickly attacked a strong civ with Egyptian chariots or Indian elephants, then moved on to the next civ, eventually upgrading to knights for the third, never allowing any civ on my continent to build a head of steam. In both games victory was never in doubt, and I launched in the early 1800s.
I split the four games where I had 5-6 cities (including two puppets once) but did not launch any pre-emptive strikes. I only achieved the two wonders in the first game, so that wasnt a critical factor.
In the two losses I felt I was doing fine, then realized by the Renaissance that I was way behind in tech to the local big boy. This foe ramped up for the usual late-stage expansion, and I was powerless to stop him (much modern armor vs a few MI) in either game, losing in the late 1800s.
The two wins had me last in everything except literacy (4th and 2d in that). The last one had my pop at 20% of the biggest power. What they had in common was good defensive geography. I was able to establish choke points in conjunction with CS, and then hold off the inevitable, endless attacks with steady efforts at DOW bribing. Interestingly, I found that by the end of each game an expected attack from the ravenous local bully never came, and the only explanation seems to be that I had a sufficient contemporary force (all I had!) right on the chokepoint border. I launched in the early 1900s in both.
The two chokepoint wins were by far the most fun, since I was often under attack, and on the verge of being swamped once or twice each game. This is what I play for, and my pre-set limits deliver it. In my next games Ill be trying to find a way to win consistently without pre-emptive strikes or chokepoints.
I'd be curious as to what ideas others would have to improve under the same basic ground rules.
This was all done with the Balance mods, plus Tech Diffusion, Harder Free Tech, Tech Oveflow, Liberation and Emigration. I think this will roughly mirror the upcoming patch.
Ive now played six games, using the same basic strategy: REX up to the city limit for resources (settler 2d build); steal workers if possible; Tradition/Liberty, Patronage, Rationalism; try for Chichen Itza and Taj Mahal; pop instead of gold (TPs only in desert/tundra), maritime CS alliances for a specialist economy; basic beelines for civil service, astronomy, printing press, and fertilizer.
The big difference between Emperor and Immortal for me was (surprise) the AIs increased production, which led to quick significant tech and unit leads. This in turn resulted in increased aggressiveness against me. I also found that the AI was more successful in attacking other AI on Immortal, even with the mods buffed city defenses. And they use better tactics, including brutal culture bombs.
This led me to break down my basic approach to two strategies: builder with next to no puppets, counting on geography and diplomacy to hold off the AI; and moderate puppeteer with an aggressive start, crippling enemies before they became too strong.
I won both games where the city/puppet total varied from 8 to 11, in which I quickly attacked a strong civ with Egyptian chariots or Indian elephants, then moved on to the next civ, eventually upgrading to knights for the third, never allowing any civ on my continent to build a head of steam. In both games victory was never in doubt, and I launched in the early 1800s.
I split the four games where I had 5-6 cities (including two puppets once) but did not launch any pre-emptive strikes. I only achieved the two wonders in the first game, so that wasnt a critical factor.
In the two losses I felt I was doing fine, then realized by the Renaissance that I was way behind in tech to the local big boy. This foe ramped up for the usual late-stage expansion, and I was powerless to stop him (much modern armor vs a few MI) in either game, losing in the late 1800s.
The two wins had me last in everything except literacy (4th and 2d in that). The last one had my pop at 20% of the biggest power. What they had in common was good defensive geography. I was able to establish choke points in conjunction with CS, and then hold off the inevitable, endless attacks with steady efforts at DOW bribing. Interestingly, I found that by the end of each game an expected attack from the ravenous local bully never came, and the only explanation seems to be that I had a sufficient contemporary force (all I had!) right on the chokepoint border. I launched in the early 1900s in both.
The two chokepoint wins were by far the most fun, since I was often under attack, and on the verge of being swamped once or twice each game. This is what I play for, and my pre-set limits deliver it. In my next games Ill be trying to find a way to win consistently without pre-emptive strikes or chokepoints.
I'd be curious as to what ideas others would have to improve under the same basic ground rules.
