Japan strategy?

zxcvbob

Emperor
Joined
May 18, 2015
Messages
1,810
Location
SE Minnesota
Japan has military bonuses for coastal tiles, but I have never started near the coast on any of my attempts with Hojo (I haven't finished one yet) I end up starting on tundra, or someplace with no production at all. Are you supposed to play peacefully (get your districts up quickly and tech towards Samurai) while scouting out a coastal civ to attack?
 
They can be played basically any way you want, they're very versatile, but the fact that they have an easy time getting religion and pagodas, which are buddhist along with hojo, offer housing combined with the fact that they are highly incentivized to settle as close together as possible to pack their districts together has me thinking they should be settling every 4 tiles of coast and using Holy Sites for housing. Particularly with long strip of land, where others might settle along the spine of it, Japan aught to settle along the coast and fill the spine with districts.

If someone gets in your way attack them, but their coast bonus serves more consistently on defense when settling coasts, so you don't have to be warmonger to get the most out of Japan.

As far as starting locations, probably you're just unlucky. there is often tundra nearby but it's rare I am landlocked with them, usually the coast is within distance for my second city
 
Last edited:
I started a new game. No tundra this time, just a whole continent to myself -- with a bunch of horse-barbarians and no city states. And they seem to target my most experienced units. I'm going to have to fill the whole continent with cities to crowd out the barbs, but I'm too busy building units to replace the ones getting killed (yes, I'm clearing the encampments) Think I'm going to start over.

I did get the first religion; even beat whomever built Stonehenge. Divine Spark, Feed the World, and Pagodas. And I like the idea of packing the cities close together so the districts from one city can give adjacency bonuses to another city and vice versa.
 
Yeah, best strategy with Japan is to pack districts as close as possible to each other. Given their bonuses, they can easily get +4 or higher adjacencies for any of the districts, so pile them in as much as you can.

I honestly don't worry too much about the coast bonus. Just treat that as a bonus if you happen to be in that situation.
 
I think Japan is one of the most versatile (and underrated) civs, but for different reasons than mentioned above. They get five bonuses - two of which are garbage, one of which is very good but comes a little late, and two bonuses that are very good and early. The two bonuses that are good and early are what I base my strategy on:

garbage bonus #1: combat bonus on coastal tiles or on the coast: just disregard this bonus. You'll drive yourself crazy trying to snare opponents (especially humans, but the AI as well) into fighting in specific tiles so that you get a very minor bonus, and probably sacrifice more successful tactics in order to get this minor bonus. If you try to take advantage of it, you'll probably be worse off than if you had just ignored the bonus.

garbage bonus #2: samurai: these units were lackluster before the last patch which buffed swordsman, and are now a complete joke with the swordsman buff. Their major flaw before the patch was that they don't upgrade from anything, and still don't - they're not like Roman legions, for example, when you can upgrade 4 warriors to legions on the very turn that you get them because nothing upgrades into them. Now that swordsmen have been buffed, they're a complete joke: they're only 12% stronger but nearly 100% more expensive and cost 50% more in maintenance. They also have a pretty short lifespan as the technologies leading to muskets are often higher priority than military tactics. I guess their bonus of fighting at full strength makes a nice nod of the hat to civ5's Japan, but is nowhere near enough of a bonus to compensate for the high production and maintenance cost. Seriously, if you have iron, just make twice as many swordsmen instead.

good but late bonus: electronics factory: it comes a little late to factor in to your game strategy, and (along with Germany) is one of the biggest losers from the first patch where area of effect districts no longer stacked. However, it is still a significant bonus. The common, every-game, default strategy is to ensure that all of your cities are covered by one factory's AoE production bonus, and in the case of Japan that means one extra hammer per city. A larger part of their bonus, though, is the +4 culture that you get when discovering electricity, a tech that is not that much further than industrialization. While the culture does not extend to all cities like the production does, it's the equivalent of adding two more monuments to each city that has the building, and this can really help in a number of ways. I wouldn't modify your strategy to emphasize this bonus, but rather just let it be a nice, passive boost in production and culture to your normal strategy.

great, early bonus #1: extra adjacency: You could go with the above mentioned strategy of cramming cities as close as you can, and that may pay off. I prefer to have a little more space between cities (well, just one more tile), and that works pretty good as well. The basic adjacency strategy (aside from district specific bonuses like commercial hubs near rivers and industrial zones near mines) is to have them form a triangle like farms with civil service. In doing so, each of the three districts is adjacent to two other districts and gets a +1 bonus for doing so. In the case of Japan, however, this is a +2 bonus per district. Furthermore, to build on the triangle another civilization would have to add two districts to either side of one of the districts in the triangle's "corner," which would result in the two new districts getting a +1 bonus, the district in that corner getting an additional +1 bonus (+2 total) and the other two districts being unaffected (total of +3.) In the case of Japan, though, adding on to the triangle in the same way would add +2 to each of the new districts, +2 to the "corner: district, and +1 to each of the original, "non-corner" districts (total of +8.) This is particularly beneficial with culture from theater squares as they have difficult adjacency bonuses, and the bonus is nice way for Japan to get a little bit extra in many categories (beakers, faith, culture, gold, and hammers) which is one of the reasons why I consider Japan a versatile civilization.

great, early bonus #2: 1/2 priced districts: Japan gets encampments, holy sites, and theater squares at 1/2 price. Most people seem to react to this advantage by saying, "grr... wish that was commercial hubs or industrial zones." But there is a good reason why these three districts were chosen: they are three out of the four "victory condition districts." If you're going for a religious victory, you'll want a lot of holy sites, probably one per city. If you're going for domination, you'll want a lot of (commercial hubs, I mean...) encampment districts. If you're going for a culture victory, you'll want a lot of theater squares, probably one per city. If you're going for a science victory, you'll want a lot of campuses (which Japan doesn't get a bonus to, but...) That means that 3 out of the four victory condition districts are 1/2 priced, which is a big bonus if you're going for any of those 3 victory conditions. The way that I use this bonus is to start by NOT making a lot of these three types of bonuses. Build campuses and commercial hubs early, while they are cheap. Get your infrastructure in place and a decent tech progression (getting you to electronics factories sooner.) See how the game plays out. And when you decide which is the best victory to pursue, the associated district is 1/2 cost.
 
garbage bonus #1: combat bonus on coastal tiles or on the coast: just disregard this bonus
Garbage assessment: the land combat should be disregarded apart from the very large fact that all your coastal cities are that much tougher. However you are the only civ that gets a sea combat bonus is the waters most sea battles are fought in and this includes attacking cities. Do not underestimate this ability . In a first strike situation even against a larger foe it can be the telling blow.
...minor bonus.... in a game where +10 is a hell of a lot stronger than +5 it is not a minor bonus.

Now considering in MP Japan is one of only 2 civs considered to be able to rush GG and in mp stacked GG means Good Game.... why are they not used in SP? Because people do not see the benefit of encampments which are huge and I may add a severe game speed upper in SP. cheap encampments getting to dual GG is enough to make Japan high tier... just SP people do not appreciate this

Start position is wrong and Japan should be coastal IMO and it's this that gets me annoyed

It's one of the reasons I love Gorgo, a start position of hills makes a big diff
 
Last edited:
I was gonna say, when you're attacking a coastal city that +5 would be awesome, even if that's the only thing you use it for. But Vicky beat me to it. ;)
 
Japan is very strong getting early great generals, to the chagrin of multiplayers everywhere.
 
I just looked up and Japan has no start Bias in the below list... I would have liked them to be coastal.... such a shame

<!-- Start Bias Lower is First -->

StartBiasResources
SCYTHIA RESOURCE_HORSES" Tier=2

StartBiasFeatures
BRAZIL" FeatureType="FEATURE_JUNGLE" Tier="2"
EGYPT" FeatureType="FEATURE_FLOODPLAINS" Tier="2"
KONGO" FeatureType="FEATURE_JUNGLE" Tier="2"
KONGO" FeatureType="FEATURE_FOREST" Tier="2"
NORWAY" FeatureType="FEATURE_FOREST" Tier="5"

StartBiasTerrains
ENGLAND" "TERRAIN_COAST" Tier="3"
GREECE" "TERRAIN_DESERT_HILLS" Tier="3"
GREECE" "TERRAIN_GRASS_HILLS" Tier="3"
GREECE" "TERRAIN_PLAINS_HILLS" Tier="3"
GREECE" "TERRAIN_TUNDRA_HILLS" Tier="3"
NORWAY" "TERRAIN_COAST" Tier="3"
RUSSIA" "TERRAIN_TUNDRA" Tier="3"
RUSSIA" "TERRAIN_TUNDRA_HILLS" Tier="3"
SCYTHIA" "TERRAIN_GRASS" Tier="5"
SCYTHIA" "TERRAIN_PLAINS" Tier="5"
SPAIN" "TERRAIN_COAST" Tier="3"
LISBON" "TERRAIN_COAST" Tier="1"
NAN_MADOL" "TERRAIN_COAST" Tier="1"
StartBiasRivers
EGYPT" Tier="5"
FRANCE" Tier="3"
SUMERIA" Tier="3"
 
I just looked up and Japan has no start Bias in the below list... I would have liked them to be coastal.... such a shame

<!-- Start Bias Lower is First -->

StartBiasResources
SCYTHIA RESOURCE_HORSES" Tier=2

StartBiasFeatures
BRAZIL" FeatureType="FEATURE_JUNGLE" Tier="2"
EGYPT" FeatureType="FEATURE_FLOODPLAINS" Tier="2"
KONGO" FeatureType="FEATURE_JUNGLE" Tier="2"
KONGO" FeatureType="FEATURE_FOREST" Tier="2"
NORWAY" FeatureType="FEATURE_FOREST" Tier="5"

StartBiasTerrains
ENGLAND" "TERRAIN_COAST" Tier="3"
GREECE" "TERRAIN_DESERT_HILLS" Tier="3"
GREECE" "TERRAIN_GRASS_HILLS" Tier="3"
GREECE" "TERRAIN_PLAINS_HILLS" Tier="3"
GREECE" "TERRAIN_TUNDRA_HILLS" Tier="3"
NORWAY" "TERRAIN_COAST" Tier="3"
RUSSIA" "TERRAIN_TUNDRA" Tier="3"
RUSSIA" "TERRAIN_TUNDRA_HILLS" Tier="3"
SCYTHIA" "TERRAIN_GRASS" Tier="5"
SCYTHIA" "TERRAIN_PLAINS" Tier="5"
SPAIN" "TERRAIN_COAST" Tier="3"
LISBON" "TERRAIN_COAST" Tier="1"
NAN_MADOL" "TERRAIN_COAST" Tier="1"
StartBiasRivers
EGYPT" Tier="5"
FRANCE" Tier="3"
SUMERIA" Tier="3"

Interesting. Are the DLC civs not on that list?
 
I would have to go through those... were you interested in one in particular?

I've been curious about Australia. I feel like I get close to Nat. Wonders more often with them, and it makes me suspect their bias is for Breathtaking Appeal. But since I don't see any of the DLC civs on that list, I was just wondering.
 
<StartBiasResources>
<Row CivilizationType="CIVILIZATION_AUSTRALIA" Tier="5" ResourceType="RESOURCE_CATTLE"/>
<Row CivilizationType="CIVILIZATION_AUSTRALIA" Tier="5" ResourceType="RESOURCE_HORSES"/>
<Row CivilizationType="CIVILIZATION_AUSTRALIA" Tier="5" ResourceType="RESOURCE_SHEEP"/>
<StartBiasTerrains>
<Row CivilizationType="CIVILIZATION_AUSTRALIA" Tier="3" TerrainType="TERRAIN_COAST"/>

Maybe I do them all and post them for peoples pleasure
seems too much like hard work and in the wrong way
 
Garbage assessment: the land combat should be disregarded apart from the very large fact that all your coastal cities are that much tougher. However you are the only civ that gets a sea combat bonus is the waters most sea battles are fought in and this includes attacking cities. Do not underestimate this ability . In a first strike situation even against a larger foe it can be the telling blow.
...minor bonus.... in a game where +10 is a hell of a lot stronger than +5 it is not a minor bonus.

Now considering in MP Japan is one of only 2 civs considered to be able to rush GG and in mp stacked GG means Good Game.... why are they not used in SP? Because people do not see the benefit of encampments which are huge and I may add a severe game speed upper in SP. cheap encampments getting to dual GG is enough to make Japan high tier... just SP people do not appreciate this

Start position is wrong and Japan should be coastal IMO and it's this that gets me annoyed

It's one of the reasons I love Gorgo, a start position of hills makes a big diff
well, if we're going to get personal about it, garbage retort. land combat is, hm..., maybe a little more common than coastal combat, so the weight of that evaluation would be based on the land aspect, which you concurred should be disregarded. As for the coastal combat aspect of it, you yourself pointed out that Japan has no starting bias, so whether or not you get to use it is completely luck-based, it's like saying that Civ5's Spain is unbelievably good because if you find one or two natural wonder tiles in the first 10 turns, you can do amazing things, but that's an incredibly big "if."

As for the multiple great generals thing, I pointed out the exact same observation in another thread dealing with the worthiness of encampments, and many contrarians, including you, stated that at deity it could not be done, that the deity AI takes too many of them and moves the eras along fast enough that you cannot get multiple from the same era, and I must be playing prince level if I achieved that. It's funny how when you and I make the exact same argument, it should be taken as valuable insight when you say it, but something to be dismissed when I said it (first.)
 
Back
Top Bottom