Improving my war machine

[Askthepizzaguy]

Greetings.

So upon re-read before posting it, I've noted this is kinda long and rambly.
I'd like to highlight the stuff I'm looking for specific responses to, in bold and blue.

ABOUT ME:

Spoiler :

I regularly play and win at Prince level, so I'm moving up to Monarch.

I typically attempt to win via peaceful means or diplomatic ones, and have been tinkering with my cottage economies and specialist economies. Moving away from cottages has gotten me a bit better and allowed the move up to Monarch for me.

I noticed that under caste system or when utilizing specialists in general I was able to break free of the crippling weight of routine maintenance and research, and could move my gold slider up more, giving me the funds to actually wage war and expand, something I'd been having trouble with. I have also been getting better at the whole binary research concept.

Also helpful is tying up the AI with constant warfare, among each other, and against me. This seems to slow down their research.

And of course, I've been playing more on Epic and Marathon, which I've noted people say drops the difficulty a bit. And now my units are actually worth building as they might be useful for capturing more than 3 cities before being useless.

So that's where I'm at with regard to my skill development. Hardly a world-class player by any means.

That being said, I've been getting more experience at warfare and lately have been trying to base my entire game around the following strategy:

Spoiler :

1) Build Great Wall.

2) Early war to get a great general, use that to promote one attacking unit many times and become very powerful. Use that early war to remove the nearest AI which is an actual threat to expansion and would later become even more dangerous.

3) Expand and develop a specialist or hybrid economy, generate wealth and research up to roughly the middle ages. Get Catapults, Swords, Axes, Horse Archers, Chariots, Spears, etc.

4) Using my deep pockets, fund wars against the biggest powers with the most units nearest to me.

5) Goad them into attacking me, then weaken their stacks with catapults and flanking, finish them off to spread the experience around.

6) Settle great generals in one city, where the Heroic Epic is.

7) Eventually the Heroic Epic city is capable of churning out level 3 or better units. City Raider III Swords and Catapults, Combat 2 anti-mounted Spears, Drill 3 Longbows, Flanking Horse Archers, Combat III Horse Archers, Medic Chariots, Woodsman III Axes, Guerrilla III Archers, etc.

That's the general idea, pardon the pun.

Most of my empire has libraries, markets, is building either wealth or research, and my outer cities are building theaters. I'm setting up Longbows and Spears and Axes on hilly forests on the borders of my empire (and specifically settling cities behind these fortifications). I'm building Forts on these forest hills and clearing the land tiles around it, connecting these forts to each other via road, and manning the forts with sentry chariots, and moving my defensive stack wherever it is needed.

I've been playing with Imperialistic, Charismatic, Industrious, and Philosophical, trying to see which traits mesh the best with this strategy.

If I want to play more peaceful and building-oriented, I pick industrious or philosophical, and if I want to practice my hand at war, I pick Charismatic. I use Imperialistic all the time, specifically for the Great General, and combine that with my use of the Great Wall.


Now, what I'm driving at. Since my strategy here revolves around one city being like a super-military city, I'm trying to figure out what's the best way to set that up.

Obviously Food and Production are the most important considerations for the city. I usually put it on a riverside plains hill near at least one decent food resource and several floodplains or grassland riversides. I mine whatever hills are nearby.

National wonders....

Should I go Heroic Epic, or just emphasize mines and workshops and farms? I'm trying to churn out a unit per turn, or at worst, 1 unit per two turns. If my production is decent enough should I skip Heroic Epic here?

I can always settle a General and make a Military Academy here, for the +50% unit production bonus, but Heroic Epic is +100%. If the goal is 1 turn per unit generated, I probably need Heroic Epic, don't I?

I also probably want West Point, for the +4 experience per unit generated. That way I don't have to burn two generals to get those +4 exp per unit. But that comes kinda late. The game could be won or lost by then.

Should I build Ironworks instead of Heroic Epic? The extra production boosts unit production as well....

What about the Red Cross? The free medic promotion could be handy. I've been using Spain for the Citadel bonuses for siege units, and routinely attach medic promotions to things like chariots. So... I don't think I necessarily need the Medic I promotion. I usually have a few healers in every stack and they aren't powerful units so they don't tend to be the first ones to die. Plus several chariots around means I never worry about axes ever. They just become a chance to promote my medics.

What about the Globe Theater to draft indefinitely? Is that really necessary if my unit production is high enough as it is?

In fact, since I can only put 2 in any one city, should I do like a combination of these wonders in 2 different cities?

_____________________________________


What about this....

In one city, I focus on experience first, production second.

• Barracks, Stables, Walls, Citadel. (+exp)
• I build an Academy (+50% unit production, costs one Great General)\
• Settle Great Generals.
• Globe Theater (National Wonder) (For drafting without unhappiness)
• I put West Point (National Wonder) (+4 exp)
  

In the other city, I focus on production first, experience second.

• Barracks, Stables, Walls, Citadel. (+exp)
• Heroic Epic (National Wonder) (+100% unit production)
• Settle Great Generals.
• Ironworks (Hammer boost)
  

I settle the remaining Generals such that the first city will generate level 3 units without needing both vassalage and theocracy, and then the goal is for the same with the second city, and then the goal is to generate level 4 units in the first city by whatever means available (likely with vassalage and theocracy).

Either city should be able to generate one unit per every one or two turns, and eventually both should be generating level 3 units. I should be able to draft my most experienced units in a crisis, and I should be generating lots of my second most experienced units near-constantly.

First city should have excellent Food first, and decent hammers. The food is to replace pop from slavery or drafting. Goal is for each unit generated to be superior.

Second city should have hammers galore and enough food to work it. Will never use drafting or slavery that much, goal is to just work the tiles.

_________________________


How to generate Great General points faster?

I note withdrawing units such as Warlord led units with 30% withdrawal, Flanking units, and siege units, get experience and credit for defeating an opposing unit without destroying it.

So, ideally, I should be softening every stack of enemies with flanking or siege or both, whichever is most appropriate. Then I should be promoting my Combat forces and my City Raiders. Then I should finish up with my Medics to get at least Medic II or the moving medic promotion for all my chariots.

This way I lose the least amount of units and gain the most experience.


========================


So those are the ideas I've read about or blindly blundered into on my own.

But, what do you do?

Do you employ any tactics like this? Do you have a better idea?

I know some folks prefer to attach their warlord to a unit and generate winning battles that way. A heavily promoted combat/city raider with high strength should win as long as the walls are weakened. Thus, it should be winning a battle almost every turn, provided enough medics, plus travel time to the nearest city.

What unit should I use for my First Warlord attached unit?

• Axeman or Swordsman? ---> Macemen, etc? [Aiming for Combat and City Raider?)
• Horse Archer -----> Knight, etc? (Aiming for Combat and Flanking?)
• Catapult or Trebuchet? (City Raider + Barrage?)
• Chariot for the super medic? (Medic III?)

Many thanks in advance to any useful advice you might offer. Especially if you regularly play at higher levels. I want to be able to beat the AI at harder levels but they usually seem to be much more spammy with their units and likely to attack me before I can get properly set up. I figure having better experienced units and a game-long strategy for generating them would give me a fighting chance.

 

[elitetroops]

Just some general advice... I think you are way too obsessed with great generals and the extra experience they give. To improve your game, focus on how to improve your economy and tech rate. Attacking with more advanced units is way better than attacking with more experienced units in most cases. If you have cannons against longbows, it doesn't matter at all how well promoted your clean-up troops are.

Why are you setting up forts on the border of your empire? That's a waste of worker turns. Learn to handle diplo better and you do not need to fear surprise attacks as much. Even if you are attacked by surprise, you want to be on the offense, which means the forts don't help you. Also, the combat AI is very predictable and you don't need to have every corner of your empire set up to withstand a surprise attack.

Use first GG for super medic. Using them for offensive units is mostly a waste, because as mentioned, with siege you don't need any super strong offensive units. Without siege, bring enough units and you don't need to worry that much about if some unit survives the attack or not.

I'm guessing you want to take out the enemy stack in your lands because of the GG point bonus. Not a good reason imo. There are some situations where it can be good to let your enemy enter your lands first, but most of the time you want to surprise attack and take as many cities as possible as fast as possible.

If your no.1 rule for your games is to build GW, you're doing it wrong. GW is highly situational and often there are way better things to do with your hammers. Once again, building it for the GG point boost is not worth it.

A super military city is nice, but it's not that hard to set up either. HE in a hammer heavy city and settle GGs there. Add WP and military academy later. Drafted units only get half the XP, so GT in a city with settled generals is a waste imo.

What is a lot more useful though, is a super research city (=bureau cap in most cases). Learn to set that up properly and it will give you a much bigger edge than the military city.

And btw. Imperialistic is mainly good because of the cheap settler. Leveraging that part of the trait is way more powerful than trying to leverage the GG boost.

 

[Gumbolt]

Agree with Elite. You are playing these wars wrong.

GG for super medics yes. I am really not bothered by how many I get.

Slavery and war are the key for me. Set up 3-4 cities. Build barracks in 1-2 cities. Make sure I have a horse/copper resource. Tech BW. Switch to slavery. Start whipping /chopping units. Maybe 10-11 HA or 10-11 axes or chariots to attack the closest AI's capital. On immortal level this is normally enough to take out the first AI with a few follow up units.

No great wall needed. No great general needed. Simply whipping units to get a big stack quickly with a lot of promoted units. Char trait is great for war games. Cheaper promotions.

IW vs HE. HE comes about 100 turns sooner?? +100% production on units?? Why would you wait for IW?

With HE city you are looking for a strong production city. Ideally 1-2 strong food tiles with 5-6+ mines or workshops. So you want a size 10 city that can churn out 50-60+ base hammers. Workshops come a bit late for me.

Red cross?? Why do you need this?? Are you playing to 1800ad+?

Globe theatre is useful if you draft rifles in a food strong city that can regrow quickly.

First warlord should be super medic.

I think you are struggling war wise as you set up your games to ignore the economy at the start or you are too focused on great generals to just whip out an army. Sure set up a bureau capital with cottages but develop 3-4 other cities with barracks if you don't go for an early war. Only plan the barracks when you are ready to prepare for a war.

 

[kossin]

Take some time to understand what the above poster says... some of your concerns are not founded. Making forts on the edge of your territory is pointless as the AI will just go around it. Don't play like the AI, use your brain, which they can't
GG points really are not crucial.

Are you familiar with WHEOOHRN? (We Have Enough On Our Hands Right Now)

What I seem to understand, feel free to correct me if I'm reading this wrong, is that you're making units all game long. If so, stop! Only make units when
1) preparing to make a war (as defender)
2) preparing to make a war (as aggressor)
3) preparing to make a war (in general )

Should I go Heroic Epic, or just emphasize mines and workshops and farms? I'm trying to churn out a unit per turn, or at worst, 1 unit per two turns. If my production is decent enough should I skip Heroic Epic here?

I can always settle a General and make a Military Academy here, for the +50% unit production bonus, but Heroic Epic is +100%. If the goal is 1 turn per unit generated, I probably need Heroic Epic, don't I?

Ultimately yes, you'll want the HE. Forget about Military Academies, they come in so late in the game that by then they're usually not really worth it. Don't save up GGs waiting for them.

I also probably want West Point, for the +4 experience per unit generated. That way I don't have to burn two generals to get those +4 exp per unit. But that comes kinda late. The game could be won or lost by then.

As you said... it comes really late. Plus, how much does it even cost?
Experience on units is overvalued... you want to beat the AI with numbers... quality of units will develop itself as you gain momentum.

Should I build Ironworks instead of Heroic Epic? The extra production boosts unit production as well....

Not in the same city. Ironworks is a late-game national wonder that typically helps you hammer down the late Wonders or space parts... or build wealth to keep your research slider high.

What about the Red Cross?

See West Point. The best place for it might just be OCC (One City Challenge).

What about the Globe Theater to draft indefinitely? Is that really necessary if my unit production is high enough as it is?

GT comes quite early... most of the time it's the first National Wonder to help production.

However, don't wait for drafting, use the

You do use the whip, right? If not, learn to... it's the most powerful civic for production.

For the second question: by the time GT is available, you will NOT have enough production. If you're in the Industrial Age and just now concerned about GT... yea, it's a bit late.

In fact, since I can only put 2 in any one city, should I do like a combination of these wonders in 2 different cities?

HE, GT, IW should all be individual. RC and WP don't matter.

In one city, I focus on experience first, production second.

In the other city, I focus on production first, experience second.

City specialization is good... however military specialization doesn't exist... or is not worth your time.

How to generate Great General points faster?

Kill more units.

Do you employ any tactics like this? Do you have a better idea?

I know some folks prefer to attach their warlord to a unit and generate winning battles that way. A heavily promoted combat/city raider with high strength should win as long as the walls are weakened. Thus, it should be winning a battle almost every turn, provided enough medics, plus travel time to the nearest city.

What wins you war is siege units. Not GG. If you're relying on 1 unit to kill 10 of the enemy... well Civ is a numbers game.

Use collateral damage from siege units to soften up the enemy... after that, all your units will have 90+% winning odds.

What unit should I use for my First Warlord attached unit?

Depends. GG medic is a board favorite due to the acceleration of the war.
The true GG supermedic however is not a chariot... because you need the woodsman III promotion.

A good use of GG is to upgrade an obsolete unit, free of charge... like that 4000BC warrior into a Maceman for free. It all depends.

 

[elitetroops]

Btw. I used to think more like you back when I was struggling to even beat prince. I mostly played leaders with traits that either give free promotions (agg/pro) or imp/cha for more generals and faster promotions. In fact, I picked this screen name because when I joined I had just played a game with Cyrus where I focused very much on great generals and experience and I thought it was such an awesome strategy. Now a couple of months later, when I have learned how to play the game and moved up several difficulty levels, I wish I hadn't picked such a stupid SN.

 

[Askthepizzaguy]

Thanks very much for the feedback everyone.

I do want to say I am aware that this strategy isn't optimal in terms of economy and whatnot. I know you more elite players wouldn't choose such a strategy.

Here's what I've been up to:

Spoiler :

The last game I played I leveraged the heck out of the strategy I describe, at Monarch level which is outside of my comfort zone.

I ended up near Shaka (yay! I actually want to be near an AI which has high unit prob for this strategy) and declared war early, got two early generals, and settled them both in my capital. I built heroic epic and went for bureaucracy to boost the hammers even further. I specifically didn't expand deep into Shaka's territory because I wanted him to be my punching bag for most of the game, to build troop experience and not have to go far across the map to get it. Went theocracy and built citadel in capital.

Shaka expanded and quickly became more powerful than me, strictly speaking, and vassalized some weaker AI. I was at about half his strength military wise.

I kept declaring war when convenient for me, sieging his cities and attacking with trebs and flanking units, finishing with my swords/axes or maces. From this I spit out several more great generals.

By the middle ages I was generating Drill 4 longbows and crossbows fresh from my capital at a rate of 1 per turn.

I was generating City Raider III, Combat I Macemen at a rate of 1.5 per turn.

I was generating City Raider III, Barrage II Trebuchets at a rate of nearly 1 per turn.

I had Guerrilla III, +Combat Longbows and Crossbows, and I had Woodsmen III Pikes, and could generate Medic II, March, Combat I chariots for medics.

What that did was eliminate the need to waste a general on a Super Medic. The chariots perform the same function and I could spit them out at less than 1 per turn, meaning for every chariot I spat I could then do a more expensive unit at 1 per turn with overflow.

So, I was generating elite veteran units at 1 per turn from my capital.

At this point, Shaka was getting pretty aggresssive and invading my territory a lot, and I made his stacks of troops disappear into thin air. I was friendly with the other two top warmongers and got them to declare on each other, and I was out-teching everyone because of the constant wars.

I was leveraging Wealth in my minor noncapital cities so that I could use the slider any way I wished and never had to worry about troops being expensive to maintain, and I got Liberalism, used that to get Military Tradition and now I was generating the Conquistadors. They were absolutely stupid in terms of sheer strength, made them Combat IV out of the gate.

All in all, I set out to accomplish what I wanted, which set up a veteran troop production factory in my capital. I was winning the science races and had half the number of cities as Shaka did.

Because of this, I would be the first one to reach Steel, and Military Science so I could go Commando and Blitz.

After this I plan on rolling up the map with Blitz and Commando veterans.

I feel the strategy is not your optimal veteran player strategy but I feel I was also able to leverage it exactly how I wanted. So I feel pretty happy about that.

Now then, some excellent advice was given, and what I think I want to do is perhaps pull one of the early saves and try the same map using one of the strategies you folks suggested, to see if I can perform it more effectively than the current strategy.

 

[Askthepizzaguy]

I greatly appreciate your feedback, elitetroops.

Regarding this:

Attacking with more advanced units is way better than attacking with more experienced units in most cases. If you have cannons against longbows, it doesn't matter at all how well promoted your clean-up troops are.

Well yes, I agree about that much, but at no point in my game was I ever behind in military tech. I was first to Machinery and Engineering, and was first to Curiassers and was first to Steel. So, I was able to have the tech lead and also have experienced units being generated from one city, freeing up the rest of my empire to be an economic powerhouse. Keep in mind, I was beating empires twice my size in terms of science and gold production, and their ability to generate units wasn't able to keep up with mine.

I don't feel it's a trade off, I think you can be ahead in tech and also have experienced unit generation.

What I think is the key weakness to what I've been doing is that I haven't been focusing on expanding my empire as well, in this one trial at least. If I had made more of an effort to expand to 20 cities I think I would have done better.

Why are you setting up forts on the border of your empire? That's a waste of worker turns. Learn to handle diplo better and you do not need to fear surprise attacks as much. Even if you are attacked by surprise, you want to be on the offense, which means the forts don't help you. Also, the combat AI is very predictable and you don't need to have every corner of your empire set up to withstand a surprise attack.

I only needed to build a few of them on forest hills. Even on Marathon five workers can spit those out pretty quick.

Being on offense is precisely what those forts were for. I cleared the terrain and roaded between the forts. From those forts I could sally forth with my units, taking advantage of the roads between them which my opponents couldn't use, damaged and killed the enemy units, and returned to the fort where my healers did their job.

Because those forts were on my border or near it, I was not at all worried about pillaging or my cities being under siege. For a small time investment it's slightly better than parking my stacks in my cities. I can also spot the enemy approaching sooner and can wheel my forces where they're needed faster.

I'm aware that it's not necessary to be too overprotective. I wanted the enemy to engage me within my cultural borders (for the Great Wall bonus) and also not have to worry about things getting pillaged.

Because we're talking about double the GG points, I feel the 15 or so turn investment in three forts is worth the time.

Use first GG for super medic.

I have used super medics before. I feel that medic II, march chariots that I can generate myself at 1 per turn are superior to burning a Great General on a medic.

I actually want to burn a Great General on Combat 4 City Raider Maceman, I feel that would be more useful to me than the medic, which if you have those medic chariots is largely a shiny trinket that is no more effective than a couple chariots.

I think you can leverage either strategy. I am not saying this idea is strictly better or worse than the super medic, but I never, ever have to worry about losing my super medic, because I can generate another one in one turn. They're a dime a dozen.

Using them for offensive units is mostly a waste, because as mentioned, with siege you don't need any super strong offensive units. Without siege, bring enough units and you don't need to worry that much about if some unit survives the attack or not.

That I have noticed. With the insane trebuchets popping out of my capital, I can win most engagements with freaking basic archers. If I were to redo my game, I'd ignore the Macemen and so forth and just pop a bunch more archers out, turn them into longbows and crossbows when necessary.

I can use catapults for non-siege battles until cannons, and can generate enough of them to not worry about losing any.

I'm guessing you want to take out the enemy stack in your lands because of the GG point bonus. Not a good reason imo. There are some situations where it can be good to let your enemy enter your lands first, but most of the time you want to surprise attack and take as many cities as possible as fast as possible.

This is probably better in terms of my long term economy. In the sort term, lots of cities that aren't generating anything for my empire because they're in unrest and don't have much in terms of buildings slow my research.

My plan was for later, more rapid expansion, after my core empire has banks, grocers, markets, and is generating Wealth, and I also have Commando and Blitz.

With that, I am not at all concerned about the maintenance costs and I feel I could blow out the enemy empire in one quick sweep. That way I can focus on one AI opponent at a time, demolish them quickly, and then settle in for a few turns until the disorder is over and the new cities can generate wealth to cover the mainenance costs, while they grow, until I can whip some buildings.

And yes, I am very heavy on the whip. My cities were in unhappiness due to whipping more than warfare, so I'm definitely using the whip.

If your no.1 rule for your games is to build GW, you're doing it wrong. GW is highly situational and often there are way better things to do with your hammers. Once again, building it for the GG point boost is not worth it.

True. But I'm also using the Great Spy for an early science and espionage lead, and I want to begin generating Great People points as early as possible.

After that I also don't worry about barbs so instead of building all sorts of fogbuster units I'm building my next set of cities and also the Mids or Stonehenge before the AI can. I leverage the heck out of the Great Wall.

I bet you any money it doesn't work on higher levels. So for that much, point conceded.... but I'm nowhere near good enough to play on the higher levels yet. I'm surprised I'm doing well on Monarch in this game, using an idea that is generally panned by better players.

The strategies that work on Immortal or Deity I'm not quite good enough to grasp or leverage effectively yet. I'm still working on the step from Prince to Monarch.

A super military city is nice, but it's not that hard to set up either. HE in a hammer heavy city and settle GGs there. Add WP and military academy later. Drafted units only get half the XP, so GT in a city with settled generals is a waste imo.

THAT I did not know.

Thank you very much for that heads up. Ugh, it's completely pointless to use in my capital then. I can generate plenty of units as is, if they're not even heavily experienced then I don't see the point. I don't think I'll be drafting much.

Globe theater/drafting just isn't optimal to me. I can already generate oodles of units, more than I can support without crashing my economy.

I think what I need to do is leverage those units into building my economy through expansion more. That's the X factor that was missing in my most recent game. I doubt if I will even build the Globe Theater except in a city where I will be whipping a lot.

What is a lot more useful though, is a super research city (=bureau cap in most cases). Learn to set that up properly and it will give you a much bigger edge than the military city.

My capital served as both. It was my GP farm due to all the food and production, and in peacetime I built some wonders and settled several scientists.

And btw. Imperialistic is mainly good because of the cheap settler. Leveraging that part of the trait is way more powerful than trying to leverage the GG boost.

Except for my most recent game, I tend to over-expand and crash my economy. The cheaper settler was useful when popping out my first few cities, after that it wasn't all that useful.

Different strokes for different folks I suppose.

I think I'd have to watch someone play differently to see how they're leveraging their strategies. See, if I spammed settlers, I'd just doom myself. I always do. I overexpand and I'm not prepared to defend myself or tech very well.

I tried not to overexpand in my most recent game to get away from that, and I may have gone too far in the other direction. I was stagnating around 12 cities and most of the AI had twice that. They couldn't beat me militarily but it was still a slog to try to capture all their cities. One of the reasons I was racing to get Blitz and Commando was so that I could stunt my enemies' ability to wage war by sweeping through their territory, obliterating their strategic and happiness resources, and cutting off all roads to the Capital so they would suffer from higher maintenance, unhappiness, and the inability to replenish their units.

But I could be waiting until too late into the game for that. Maybe I should try pillaging sooner.

There's definitely room for improvement in what I'm doing, but I'm not at all convinced it's a losing strategy or ineffective, if properly leveraged.

I'll stipulate that it's probably technically weaker than the more mainstream strategies folks use for beating Immortal or racking up the score for Hall of Fame games. I don't believe I could come up with any ideas that are better than those players can.

I guess what I'm saying is that I'm trying to find the best way to improve or leverage this particular strategy for success. Sort of like how cottage economy or espionage economy or specialist economy, there's a view that one is better than the others, but it's possible to play any of them, and some will work better than others in certain situations.

When I get a chance I'll post some screenshots and save files so I can demonstrate whatever I'm saying, and that will give folks a chance to respond with their own saves which show how much better their tactics are. And I will sit in awe, I am sure.

 

[Askthepizzaguy]

Agree with Elite. You are playing these wars wrong.

GG for super medics yes. I am really not bothered by how many I get.

Slavery and war are the key for me. Set up 3-4 cities. Build barracks in 1-2 cities. Make sure I have a horse/copper resource. Tech BW. Switch to slavery. Start whipping /chopping units. Maybe 10-11 HA or 10-11 axes or chariots to attack the closest AI's capital. On immortal level this is normally enough to take out the first AI with a few follow up units.

This.

It makes a whole lot of sense to target their capital right off the bat. I've been sort of nibbling at the edges.

This is clearly, much superior. Thank you!

No great wall needed. No great general needed. Simply whipping units to get a big stack quickly with a lot of promoted units. Char trait is great for war games. Cheaper promotions.

I've done Charismatic and I agree it's great. But with this strategy I can generate highly experienced troops at one per turn from one city, and whip additional units if necessary from other cities, and promote them the old fashioned way.

At no point in my game was I at a loss for experienced units, and I could get happiness from Hereditary rule and conquering happiness resources.

So, there are two ways to the same destination. Charismatic or GG production.

I'd argue one could be better than the other, but either one can work effectively.

IW vs HE. HE comes about 100 turns sooner?? +100% production on units?? Why would you wait for IW?

Exactly. You're right about that.

I did just fine with the Heroic Epic and didn't need any additional help producing. If necessary, Police State can generate units faster too.

I'll use IronWorks a different way. Never even got around to Ironworks in my most recent game, whatever I wanted to accomplish was done well before that.

With HE city you are looking for a strong production city. Ideally 1-2 strong food tiles with 5-6+ mines or workshops. So you want a size 10 city that can churn out 50-60+ base hammers. Workshops come a bit late for me.

True. With the Heroic Epic my capital was generating 120 hammers for units easily. I don't need to worry about further base production bonuses.

Red cross?? Why do you need this?? Are you playing to 1800ad+?

Just planning ahead I suppose. Since you can only build 2 national wonders and can't relocate them, wanted to see which two synergized the best with this strategy.

Globe theatre is useful if you draft rifles in a food strong city that can regrow quickly.

Never even got as far as rifles in the latest trial. I feel my Globe city will be an afterthought unless I beeline it specifically.

First warlord should be super medic.

I guess I'm just not leveraging it effectively. I don't have problems needing a medic in any of my games. The additional boost to the medic from the General is not enough to justify burning the general when I could just add a chariot or two.

Am I really wrong on this? What is so much better about Medic III that Medic II March chariots can't match easily? I am aware I will need more than one but the effect is the same. It's burning a general on something I can generate myself in two turns with chariots.

I feel like I'm peeing on the Veteran Civ IV players' Bible when I say this, but what's so great about the Medic III Warlord unit? I can replace its function and rather easily with standard units which don't cost much to generate or maintain and I can replace them instantaneously.

Please show me using numbers why I'm wrong about that if I am wrong.

I think you are struggling war wise as you set up your games to ignore the economy at the start or you are too focused on great generals to just whip out an army. Sure set up a bureau capital with cottages but develop 3-4 other cities with barracks if you don't go for an early war. Only plan the barracks when you are ready to prepare for a war.

I get what you're saying here. I needed a couple cottages at least, early on in my most recent game. Would have avoided the first economic crash that way.

I need to avoid those economy crashes. If I can juggle that much, everything else would flow much better.

I may yet replay the game from scratch using what I learned from this thread and from my own experience, play up to the point I did before, and compare my empires.

If I am to make the next step from Monarch up, I'll need to tighten my weak areas. Practice is needed.

I was out of practice for several years, only recently picked up the game again. Doing much better than my first time playing it. Think I could join you guys in the Emperor's club someday.

Being able to beat a warlike aggressive AI to a bloody pulp on a level I usually suck at has given me the confidence to keep trying. I think I got discouraged from massive stacks of Cavalry coming at me from several AI in a game from long ago and decided I wasn't cut out for higher level play...

 

[Askthepizzaguy]

Take some time to understand what the above poster says... some of your concerns are not founded. Making forts on the edge of your territory is pointless as the AI will just go around it. Don't play like the AI, use your brain, which they can't

Yeah, they're not usually stupid enough to attack the forest hill fortress, which is the point. I send my medics and wounded units there and they heal fast in my own territory and I generate GG points and cannot be defeated by the AI.

They're essentially invincible, and for the AI to take them out they'd need Siege units which are countered by my own Catapults.

I can use them.

It can be argued I can do similar things from cities but I don't want any pillaging to occur and I also want to be in striking distance of my Punching Bag AI (tm) cities so I can lay waste to their units and then retreat, allow them to replenish their units, then charge back in again and slaughter more units.

This is how I generate lots of Great Generals without having to expend huge maintenance costs for an empire that has expanded too rapidly. I keep the source of my great general points (enemy AI) right near my core cities and Heroic Epic city. Any units I lose are replaced and put back on the front line very rapidly, and with more experience, and the survivors also gain lots of experience. And the AI's economy is stunted because they're tossing thousands of hammers into units that then die and they're whipping units who die and so they're weak and unhappy.

Hence, even Shaka is just a pathetic punching bag. No actual threat to me even at twice my size.

Now, is it optimal? Is there better? Maybe. But I'm using the tactic I described to advance my empire. I think I need to work on the stuff I'm not doing well, as opposed to replace the stuff I am doing okay on.

 

[elitetroops]

No time for long response now, but a few points:

Medic benefits don't stack. Units in one tile can get max 10HP healing bonus from units with medic 1. No matter how many medic I&II + march chariots you have, units in the same or adjacent tiles still heal only 10HP extra per turn. (Medic II and march does nothing for other units in the same tile). One Medic III unit heals units in the same or adjacent tiles 25HP per turn, which is 2,5 times as effective as your chariots. You can add a woodsman III unit for the extra 15HP for the same tile, which means that on friendly/neutral territory any unit, no matter how badly wounded, will heal to max strength in max 2 turns. This helps you keep your army moving and conquering your enemies fast. You can read more about healing here: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=157954

Commando and Blitz are fun, but they won't help you win the game any sooner, because it takes so long to get there. I recommend you read some sample games threads to see how the more experienced players are stomping even deity AI without any super promoted units and at that level often even facing techonolically superior defenses. It's all about quantity and proper usage of siege, not the strength of the individual units.

You get +100% GG points on home territory even without GW. GW adds +100% to make it +200%. If you are imperialistic, GW boosts it from +200% to +300%, which actually in effect means it only gives +33% to the points you would otherwise get.

For early science lead oracle is the best. A great spy from GW can not give you a lead, it can at most bring you to tech parity (which then of course means you can research a lead). But if you choose your techs wisely, you can often trade for anything you don't have. On higher levels it's often best to avoid researching techs that AI prioritizes highly and instead follow a path that the AI doesn't prioritize (for example the path to liberalism) and trade for engineering and other stuff.

 

[elitetroops]

Oh, and please stop building those forts. It only gives you an illusion that you have a solid strategy, while in fact it keeps you sitting there generating great generals to eventually be able to build highly promoted units, when you could already have vassalized the enemy and two more AI behind him. Not even at the border closest to your biggest threat are they worth it, because your goal is to fight wars at your terms, which means that within 2 turns from the start of the war, your border should already have moved further into enemy territory.

 

[Doshin]

Simple illustration of Medic III vs. Medic II differences:

Spoiler :

Medic III:



Medic II:

Spoiler :

Medic III:



Medic II:

As elitetroops has already stated, medic promotions on multiple units don't stack.

In terms of warring efficiently, try not to worry about producing Great Generals. Shift your focus towards securing better military technologies sooner.

Let's say that you manage to generate a ton of Great Generals to settle in your Heroic Epic city during the Medieval Period. This slows your research down (fewer trade routes, fewer trading partners, greater maintenance costs, lost units need to be replaced) but lets you build one turn units that start with Combat III out the gate. Is it better to fight with...

a) A Musketman, base strength 9, +30% = 11.7 strength (needs 7XP to hit next promo)

or

b) A Rifleman, base strength 14. Can be built in any city. (needs 2XP to hit a promotion)

Great Generals are nice, for sure, but they should be considered a low priority if you are genuinely looking to improve. If you just want to have fun, then Commando/Blitz Gunships upgraded from Cavalry are the way to go.

 

[Doshin]

A follow up:

New, lowly promoted units >>>>> old, highly promoted units

Spoiler :

 

[FlyinJohnnyL]

You are getting these highly promoted units,, but what are you doing with them? It doesn't sound like you are gaining land to win the game. A tech lead doesn't win you the game, you have to use the tech lead to win the game. I routinely win by conquest with conquistadors, so once I get military tradition research doesn't matter anymore. Same with steel if I don't have horses.

I see no mention by you regarding victory condition.

 

[kossin]

Why bother asking advice if you want to stick to your style?

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=248918