Intermediate player questions..

[xxsyrusvb]

I have a quick question for all of you pro's out there, and I greatly appreciate your time in reading and replying...with that said..

When I start a new Civ (most times its with the spiritual trait which also usually includes myst as a starting tech) Anyway i usually go for polythe first to found hindu, then go for Code of laws and Civil service. Also I usually grab agriculture and priesthood too.

My question is, should i be more focused on getting "need now" techs such as (if i dont have) minning, the wheel, pottery..etc instead of going for more advanced stuff as my first religion and wonder? (also the CoL slingshot)

I play on noble right now and am still getting used to the CE and SE systems...usually a hybrid (thats what i was doing basically before knowledge of either "systems"). Iam note to experienced just yet so my understandings might be convaluted (sp?) Also should note, i dont warmonger much. I like diplomatic solutions.

Also a quick off topic question. My understanding of a "super science city" would be a big cottage factory with plenty of food and multiply science specialist, also a great engineer academy or super spec added once in awhile. Is this the basic idea cause i am awfully confused. Ive searched and searched for a more definet answer but havent found one. Also i tend to cottage up my capital and add just a few mines there, would this potencially be a good science city or should i look to place that super science city elsewhere?

Thank you all for your time reading this, and for answers/comments you might supply.

 

[flamingzaroc121]

well, im not the best player, but you need techs which will benifet you now. if you have flood plains, grab pottery if you have deer grab hunting if you can survive with farms and mines(if you have mining) then do what you want

as for specialization, i think your right commerce which turns into research and enough food to have some science specialists,

but you might want to wait for some experienced player to help you more than me

 

[xxsyrusvb]

Great thanks for your input. Ill wait to see what others say too. Although I think your pretty much right about getting the techs i need now. It seemed i did that when i first played (which i always lost lol) so i think i might have changed my strategy to a more long term plan.

Now that I think about it, I should start finding that that middle ground between gettings short term to long term techs. Now i just need a pro to tell me im on the right path and maybe a suggestion on super sci city.

Thanks again flamingz

 

[Mutineer]

You will found a big deffirence in opinions.
In my opinion something like supper sci city is only usefull on very small maps.

Generally I would say that you allways need to concentrate on NEED NOW.
That does not mean allways researching tech you need now.
Often it could be abtain by othe rmeans, like trade, demand, peace agreement. So, allways go for need NOW, but think about the way got get there.

 

[Pogel]

I tend to play random leaders, which means buddhism/hinduism is often out of the question. I often don't adopt a religion initially, for diplomatic reasons, so racing for religion when I could be getting other stuff done is not an option. My normal start is to bee-line for Bronze Working. I sometimes bee-line for Animal Husbandry instead (if I have animal resource in fat cross and any of its pre-reqs). My main focus is to grab copper or horses with my second city if I don't get it with my first. After that, my tech path will depend on the lie of the land, but I'll usually pick up worker techs and go for either an early war or a slingshot (Oracle or GW->Mids), sometimes both. If I can't get horses or copper, I'll pick up archery, get the worker techs & start researching ironworking.

 

[Thomas G.]

Research path...
Play to have fun.
If your goal is to improve gameplay to be able to play higher difficulty levels, try the following:
Start a monarch game, pangea/normal. Save the game on starting
Play it like you described in opening post.
Note what happens.

Then play it like this:
Research bronze working(mining first if needed), build worker in capital.
Hook up copper (build 2nd city with a chopper settler to grab it). Build a total of 3 cities.
Meanwhile research a worker tech you need (agri/hunting then animalH), then wheel and pottery writing to reach Code of Laws (need it after your war is won) and Alphabeth
Build axemen when you can, and when you have 8 declare war on closest rival. Fight the war while producing axemen. Win the war (take capital - then you might sue for peace)

Note differences from game #1

Well I'll not be so bombastic, with right circumstances you might survive and thrive doing the peaceful approach. But on higher difficulty founding religion gets increasingly lower priority over survival. In fact, one is tempted to conclude that the founding is a luxury which is not affordable on higher levels. If you found one on the way doing something you needed to do anyway (like CoL) well sure. But converting to it will often piss off neighbours with conflicting religious views, which then gives them a reason to wipe you out.

Super science:
A super science city I'd call the place where you built the Oxford University.
It should normally be cottaged all over, with spare food (resource or from floodplains)

Running a SE it should of course always have max science specialists, but sometimes in a CE when you science-percent is low (due to war weariness, high upkeep) then you should definately hire specialists there, if only temporarily. The power of this city comes from the oxford.

Many use the term "super" science city for all the above, but also that this place gets all great scientists settled in it. Under representation they give good returns as well. These cities can get truly offensive amounts of science per turn, doing substansial amounts of a civilization's research

 

[xxsyrusvb]

Great thanks for the advice.

Its kinda unfortunet that in the end (higher diff levels) that warmongering is your only hope. I wish they implimented such features that even a diplomat could win often enough to be worth it.

Although im still playin on Noble so i have a few games left to enjoy the diplomatic approach hehe.

I think you might be right about not setting a religion as a priority at first. My weakness seems to be better educating and setting up economic infrastructure in my cities in stead of setting up a survial army of sorts.


All in all, thanks for all of your comments guys. And if you have anything more to add, feel free.

Thanks again

PS- I guess ill slowly be switching to a more militaristic warmonger style of play....hmmm makes me think..."Gandhi the Destroyer" haha...

 

[eric_]

CE and SE systems

Can someone spell those out for me?

Thanks

[EDIT]Oh, nevermind. CE = Cottage Economy and SE = Specialist Economy, right?

 

[Thomas G.]

CE - cottage economy. Gets research and money from cottages primarily.

SE - specialist economy. Gets resreach from scientist specialists primarily. Tend to use farms rather than cottages except in some money-cities. Generates more great persons. And is nicer with representation.

In late game, its easy to point out that a cottage grown into a town, with printing press and under free speech will generate at least 7 coins, and not require food support if its on grassland. While a science specialist under rep. will give 6 science, but actually need 2 farmed grasslands to support, equal to 2 towns. SE is stronger in the early game.

 

[acidsatyr]

BUT with rep + biology SE beats CE. So SE is actually better early and late game. To convert all 7 coins to beakers you need to run at 100% which is imposible while scientist is always 6.

 

[Mutineer]

Great thanks for the advice.

Its kinda unfortunet that in the end (higher diff levels) that warmongering is your only hope. I wish they implimented such features that even a diplomat could win often enough to be worth it.

It is quet posible on higher levels.
An Example:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=166814

 

[Thomas G.]

It is quet posible on higher levels.

I agree. I just played an emperor game now. And in the whole game I only lost 1 unit (axeman against barb city). I also founded 2 religions.

Cultural win.

Still, one could argue that early aggression is easier, but it depends a bit on starting position. If you get crowded and boxed in you might be a second-rate power the rest of the game unless you break out...

 

[clinton]

The only thing I go for very early almost all the time is pottery. Unless you've got a lot of gold, cottages are the only way to get decent amounts of commerce. I find that going for pottery early means I get pottery and the other techs quicker than if I skipped pottery.

 

[sylvanllewelyn]

With universal sufferage, you get the extra hammer on the towns, plus the ability to rush-build units by sliding the gold slider 100% for just one turn should the need arise (7 base, +100% with grocer, bank and market makes 14 gold, translates to about 4-5 hammers). You can't multiply food or specialists. But before the industrial era, yes, SE's are definitely more efficient.

 

[acidsatyr]

thats again if you'r at 0 science, can't be both, you loose on fractions
with very solid SE you keep your slider at 0% science

 

[MrCynical]

BUT with rep + biology SE beats CE. So SE is actually better early and late game. To convert all 7 coins to beakers you need to run at 100% which is imposible while scientist is always 6.

You're making the mistake of only looking at beaker output. Firstly, it is quite possible to run at 90-100% science in the late game and I often do it even at high difficulty level. Second, even if the slider is lowered, you're getting gold as well as beakers.

Consider:
My civ needs 40 gold per turn to maintain it. Say I'm getting 200 commerce from cottages; I need to run at 80% to pay the maintenance, giving me a research output of 160. Call that approximately 30 towns at 7 commerce each (OK it's actually 28.57... towns but I'll use round numbers and go on the safe side).

Now if the SE runs 30 specialists that's 180 research. So are you ahead on economics? No. You've forgotten your maintenance costs. You need 40 gold from somewhere, so you have to swap over some scientists to merchants to give you a final research output of 140 per turn, weaker than the CE.

You can make a few arguments for economising on gold/research boosting buildings, but even on rep/bio SE is weaker on plain research/gold output, and is actually at it's weakest in the late game.

 

[acidsatyr]

First, I am only looking at the beaker output. Second, 90-100% late game is rather imposible. What difficulty your playing??
Finally, infrastructure of CE and SE is almost always different. Very important.

 

[MrCynical]

First, I am only looking at the beaker output. Second, 90-100% late game is rather imposible. What difficulty your playing??

No, you're only looking at beaker output for the SE, and comparing that to beaker output minus maintenance costs for the CE (since you're insisting the CE pay for maintenance costs and yet not insisting the SE does so). Hence you're arriving at a false conclusion.

What difficulty your playing??

Immortal and Deity, since you ask.

Finally, infrastructure of CE and SE is almost always different. Very important.

I'm well aware of that, but it doesn't change the fact that you are not keeping conditions consistent in your comparison, and are hence arriving at a mathematically invalid conclusion.

 

[acidsatyr]

I don't believe you are running 100% often on immortal and deity that’s totally impossible, your either lying or threes something else going on.
Running CE and SE is not independent from their infrastructure, thus comparing them “:mathematically” without infrastructure is useless in reality.

 

[MrCynical]

This is a simple concept, which I have already demonstrated with an example. Whether you run an SE or a CE you have to pay your civ's maintenance costs. You're allowing for this in the CE, by insisting that you have to run at below 100% research. This isn't always true, but it's reasonable. However you then claim that since the SE's total output (completely ignoring maintenance) is greater than the CE's (WITH maintenance), which is a false comparison. The +1 commerce per tile that the CE gets (6 vs 7) has not vanished into thin air. It is performing a vital function in paying maintenance, which the SE has to as well.

Your comparison would only be valid if you compare the CE at 100% research with the SE, thus ignoring maintenance in both cases.

Running CE and SE is not independent from their infrastructure, thus comparing them “:mathematically” without infrastructure is useless in reality.

In the mid game there is some argument that the CE won't be converting to gold as efficiently as the SE, though it's unlikely to shift the balance. However you're talking late game, when there is no excuse for not having all infrastructure, both gold and research boosting, in place.

Oh, and don't call me a liar. I very much doubt you've tried an Immortal+ game in the late stages, and I know you haven't seen any of my games. You are not in a good position to judge what is and isn't possible at that level, and your inability to see the glaring mathematical flaw in your earlier argument doesn't make me think you are capable of working it out from theory.