late-game civs vs early-game civs

[Jaif]

I'm still a newb, but I'm already seeing a rich-man/poor-man split in civs, and I'm curious what some of you do if you get the poor-man civs.

Creative/Mining (mining is most important) - you use this pair to rush settlers, put cities into blocking positions, and grow a nation quickly. You can then back-fill isolated areas later. This gives you a big jump on other people in terms of tactical position, and it doesn't cause a lot of bad faith (the AI doesn't realize it has been "cut-off").

mysticism: getting a religion early is a big advantage, of course. Again, you can build a strong opening position, especially if you can spread your religion wide and make lots of friends.

aggressive/strong UUs: I haven't done as much here, but it looks to me that a good early UU can allow you to go to a wartime footing early and grab what you need from a weaker neighber.


But some powers don't have any of these advantages. No mining, no mysticism, no strong UUs early enough to make a difference. What do people do with these powers? Just hope one of the strong guys decides to ignore you?

-jeff

 

[Galileo44]

That is where diplomacy becomes very important on high levels where the AI can just crush you early. But yeah, warmongering traits like Charismatic, Aggressive, plus Creative and Philosophical are better early while Financial and Organized are better later. Spiritual is good the entire game, although skipping 2 or 3 turns of anarchy later is very good.

 

[Giaur]

Galileo44: Financial is very useful early

Jaif: If you do not have Mining, you have f.e. The Weel and you can connect resources and cities very early. If you do not have mysticism, you have Agriculture, which is not so bad at all.

 

[lilnev]

For starting techs, my least favorites are Fishing (uneven, sometimes good but often not), Mysticism, and Hunting. They're the ones that don't allow your worker (built first, of course) to do anything. So if you start with 2 of those 3, your initial research is pretty constrained. This also means you'll get to BW a bit later, and in rare cases it might even make sense to build a non-worker first because a worker wouldn't have enough to do. But other than that, you end up filling out the early part of the tech tree pretty quickly, so it all evens out. (Hunting has the advantage of a starting scout, but also the disadvantage that you lose the ability to build warriors (for cheap happiness under HR) as soon as you hook up Copper).

Some of the early UUs are really strong (Quechua, Immortals, War Chariots, Praets), but some of them aren't very impressive (Phalanxes, Impis, Jags, Gallics). So I don't think there's a very strong correlation.

If you get a civ without particular early-game advantages, you work with what you've got. The relative advantage is much smaller than the difference between efficient and inefficient play, anyway, so I don't think it makes that much difference.

peace,
lilnev

 

[Sisiutil]

But some powers don't have any of these advantages. No mining, no mysticism, no strong UUs early enough to make a difference. What do people do with these powers? Just hope one of the strong guys decides to ignore you?

-jeff

If you start with any of the prerequisites for Animal Husbandry, you may want to bee-line to it, snag horses with your 2nd city, and build Chariots for defense; early on, you're more worried about barbarians than about the AI civs, who are pretty peaceful, I find, for most of the BC period. If not, select from Mining -> Bronze Working or Agriculture -> AH.

After that, Axemen, Swordsmen, and Catapults make for a potent combination; you don't need an early UU, you just need units, period.

 

[Morgrad]

I usually go with a random leader, and I think part of the challenge is using what Civ you appear as to it's potential.

If I start with mysticism, I shoot for an early religion - I've found even on harder levels you can usually get to Judaism. If I start with mining, of course I go for Bronze Working so I can chop out what I need quickly.

If I start with neither, what I research is often determined by what resources I have for my starting city, though the push to Bronze Working is, more often than not, usually more worth it than messing with something else.

 

[30+]

For starting techs, my least favorites are Fishing (uneven, sometimes good but often not), Mysticism, and Hunting. They're the ones that don't allow your worker (built first, of course) to do anything.

I agree with fishing and mysticism, but hunting is one of my favorites to begin with because it actually allows your worker MORE to do (worker first build). Germans and Russians are my favorite leaders for beginning technologies but not my favorite leaders overall. Hunting allows you to directly research agriculture or AH while your working is being built. Without hunting as an available early tech you have to research 2 techs to reach AH. And of course both the above leaders start with mining as well which means you get the three most important early techs at your disposal (AGR/AH/BW). Just one turn to get to any of em'. That's pretty sexy. Too bad cathy aint financial anymore ^^ =/. She was my favorite leader in vanilla. Now i'm stuck with Ghandi and Huya(sp!?).

 

[HiroHito]

...For starting techs, my least favorites are Fishing (uneven, sometimes good but often not), Mysticism, and Hunting. They're the ones that don't allow your worker (built first, of course) to do anything...

It is not "built first of course", there are many other efficient ways to start a game, not the least of them stealing an enemy worker and time its return to coincide with a building tech.

Dont assume everyone plays the the way you do, sorry if I sound rude, I dont mean to.

 

[gettingfat]

At higher levels, mysticism is likely the least useful starting tech. I'll take the mining/agriculture (worker will have something to improve, AH and BW both available), or mining/hunting (for the scout for quick map exploration and popping goodie without negative outcomes; quick research of archery), or agriculture/wheel in any game.

 

[Polycrates]

For starting techs, my least favorites are Fishing (uneven, sometimes good but often not), Mysticism, and Hunting. They're the ones that don't allow your worker (built first, of course) to do anything. So if you start with 2 of those 3, your initial research is pretty constrained. This also means you'll get to BW a bit later, and in rare cases it might even make sense to build a non-worker first because a worker wouldn't have enough to do. But other than that, you end up filling out the early part of the tech tree pretty quickly, so it all evens out. (Hunting has the advantage of a starting scout, but also the disadvantage that you lose the ability to build warriors (for cheap happiness under HR) as soon as you hook up Copper).

I've come to really like Hunting as a starting tech. For starters, the scout is a big advantage as it lets you see more of the lie of the land earlier and plan better, as well as giving you lots more goody huts. Also seems to survive a bit better than a warrior, since you can more often evade animals with it. That on its own is worth it for me. It also makes Archery a viable option, which is a very good thing if you're recklessly expanding rather than rushing, running raging barbs, or playing BetterAI with Aggressive AI and you're next door to Shaka (who will otherwise GUARANTEED attack you before 2000BC).
And who knows, you might even start with ivory in your city radius too!

Some of the early UUs are really strong (Quechua, Immortals, War Chariots, Praets), but some of them aren't very impressive (Phalanxes, Impis, Jags, Gallics). So I don't think there's a very strong correlation.

lilnev

Impis weak??? Those little guys are unstoppable machines of unholy terror!
The Gallic and Phalanx can be pretty damn nifty too, I reckon.

To respond to the OP: it's an adage from the real world, but it also holds true in Civ that troop experience/equipment make a massive difference on the attack, but that even the greenest conscripts can often do a very serviceable job on defense. Even a civ with no early military bonuses can quite credibly defend against superior forces if you put sufficient investment into military.

But even without a good early UU or trait, the ancient/early classical age can be a good time for (limited) offensive war if you pick your target right, it's just that you need to pick your opportunities, devote more resources into it and perhaps have to limit your appetite more. And when you can't take, you can PILLAGE! Seriously, pillaging is much more powerful than it tends to get credit for, can often be done with lacklustre troops, and you can severely cripple your neighbours to negate their threat and make them easy pickings later. Plus it helps your economy a whole bunch!

 

[cabert]

impis are weak, that 's a sure thing.
But they're also damn fast = rushing!!!