Multiplayer Deity Strategies (co-op vs AI, BtS)

aramoug

Chieftain
Joined
Apr 17, 2010
Messages
4
A friend and I have been playing some co-op multiplayer games recently.
We are playing with the two of us on the same team vs. a handful of AI teams of 2.
We breezed through the difficulties pretty quickly and worked our way up to deity. We have lost a couple close deity games, but it seems like we should be able to do this without this much trouble, so what are some strategies or tips others use?

Some random background info and some basic strategies we are using:
Both playing Beyond the Sword.

Economy:
We have tried numerous setups of CE, SE, hybrid, etc. and have basically come to the conclusion that a financial leader with one scientist producing city (for GS lightbulbs), a couple specialized production cities (and maybe a GE if lucky), and the rest mass cottages for insane commerce/research/gold has much higher output of tech, gold, and production than any form of a SE or non-financial leader. Basically the financial trait is insanely good and we don't even bother to play non-financial leaders at this point as it would only make things harder on ourselves. I am sure it is doable with non-financial leaders, but at this point we are trying to make this easier not harder. Once we master the financial leaders, we will continue on to the non-financial leaders.

Leaders/Civs:
This being said we have restricted ourselves to only 10 possible leaders.
Huayna Capac:
UU - If you start with 2 cities and 4 quechuas, you can sometimes take out a nearby enemy without much trouble. This gives you a big step up, but beware his partner could seek revenge in the future and unless you manage to grab a huge portion of land he will likely be ahead of you in tech and power.
UB - Terrace +2 culture is great since AIs get insane culture bonuses on deity and destroy your borders.
Industrious - Allows you to grab some wonders you normally wouldn't be able to get on deity, plus half speed forge in production cities is nice.

Victoria:
UU - Redcoat +25% bonus vs gunpowder is nice but on an ancient start game the outcome will likely be determined long before this UU comes around.
UB - +15% gold is nice, but not that big of a deal and comes pretty late.
Imperialistic - The faster settlers is really good because you need to grab every inch of land you can. If the AI gets a land advantage you are in trouble.

Elizabeth:
See above for UU/UB.
Philosophical - helps for getting the GS or GE earlier and half build university is nice in your commerce cities. Probably inferior to Victoria in reality, unless you plan on playing a SE.

Pacal:
UU - nice if you don't have copper but basically useless.
UB - +2 happy col is nice, but you should have hereditary rule by then so it won't matter.
Expansive - very good since the health penalty (or lack of bonus) on deity is brutal. Also faster workers and granary are amazing for the early early game.

Hannibal:
UU - sounds good, but by the time you can get HBR and pump these out the AI will almost have longbowmen or crossbowmen. And you still lose to spearmen.
UB - +2 happy aqueduct is pretty good, but again this can be replaced by hereditary rule.
Charismatic - I love the +1 happy before you can have hereditary rule and it is even better if you go for stonehenge (which is really good in team games btw). The -25% upgrade costs come in really handy if you are warring a lot, too.

Mansa Musa:
UU - Skirmisher is good on paper, it is a +33% strength bonus over the archer. But you still can't really do anything with it. If you are having to defend a city at this point in the game you are probably screwed and already lost anyways and they aren't strong enough to attack or take cities.
UB - useless because you should only have forges in production cities, not commerce cities.
Spiritual - great for improving diplomatic relations by accepting all the civic and religion requests from the AI. Also lets you most civics and religions around whenever you want which is nice.

Willem van Oranje:
UU - some crappy boat no one cares about
UB - comes way too late to matter, game will already be determined by this point
Creative - double speed theater colosseum and library are great and +2 culture is a big help for early expansion and for combatting deity ridiculous culture spread.

Wang Kon:
UU - the +50% vs melee catapult sounds pretty good, but realistically its not that useful.
UB - +10% research university is nice but not that great
Protective - nice if you are on the defensive, but if you are on the defensive you have probably already lost.

Ragnar:
UU - macemen are an awkward time and place in terms of tech and I have never been able to utilize them for an attack so both of their bonuses just go to waste.
UB - boats, useless
Aggressive - free combat 1 is nice, but not really that great. only the production cities should have barracks.

Darius:
UU - Immortals are awesome and amazing if you start with horses. Without horse you cant do anything. This makes things difficult because you don't know where horses are when you start, so they are a bit unreliable.
UB - +2 health grocer? awesome
Organized - this sounds better than it is. It only reduces civic upkeep costs, not city maint or unit upkeep. Unless you run some crazy high upkeep civics the benefit of this seems very low.

So basically it seems like:
Ragnar and Wang Kon are out of the picture.
Darius, Elizabeth, and Willem are last resorts.
Hannibal and Mansa Musa are good/acceptable choices.
Huayna Capac, Victoria, Pacal are really good/best choices.

The other thing to consider is starting techs.
HC has no overlap with Victoria, Hannibal, or Mansa Musa.
Victoria overlaps with Pacal, MM, Hannibal leaving only HC.
Pacal overlaps with all the other good candidates.

So basically it leaves the preferred team as HC + Victoria, but HC + MM or Hannibal are both great teams too.

It is doable to play a game with overlapping techs, just puts you a little behind in the early game, but that is when a "little behind" hurts you the most, so we avoid it when possible.

Maps:
We have played a handful of combinations but found that more coast + islands + water = less opportunity for you to catch up on research. Basically the commerce bonus from cottages is the best opportunity for evening the odds and you need as much land as possible (not crappy coastal squares) to make this happen. Also you need fresh water which only comes inland most of the time. So we have played a few continents, pangea, etc. Most recently we are trying inland sea and it seems pretty fun. Lots of fresh water plus the opportunity to cut off the AIs expansion without much trouble. We always play balanced resources.
We have mostly been playing standard size map with 5-6 teams of 2, so it is a little bit more crowded than normal settings. We played smaller sized maps with less teams and found it to be less fun. We enjoy more teams, more wars, more diplomacy problems, more conflicting religions, etc.
We tried a large map with 9 teams once but it was too much for our comps to handle and was too annoying with the slow load times. Was fun though.


Starting out:
We use advanced start and typically start with 2-3 cities/settlers. Shoot for 1-1.5 workers per city at all times, but this isn't always feasible. Always try for fresh water since health is such a problem mid game on deity. Food resources/flood plains and some production is important. Grab huts if you can, but it sure seems like most of them are just hostile and end up taking one of your cities, ha ha.
Early expansion is really important because if you give the AI a higher land percentage than you it will be nearly impossible to ever come back and close that gap.
Workers build improvements on all resources and build cottages on all 2+ food non resource squares (grassland, flood plain). Work the cottages and as soon as they go to hamlets you will have a 2 food, 3 commerce square. If you build a cottage on a river tile, it will start with 3 commerce! (thanks financial) In production cities build mines and a couple farms, later add some workshops. The GS city might need a couple farms if it doesn't have food resources. Also it will need a mine or a little production to get a library. Connect cities for trade routes and resource sharing, also connect to your ally.

Techs:
Pottery and bronze working are priorities for cottages, granaries, and slavery.
Alternate path, if we have marble you can go for priesthood and rush Oracle.
Also get the techs that allow you to work your resources (AH if you have pig/cow, agg if you have corn/wheat, etc. )
Monarchy is really good for hereditary rule. The happiness bonus is awesome and lets your cities grow and work more tiles, thus giving you more research, gold, production.
The AI never seems to research aesthetics until later and you can trade it to everyone to backfill all other techs. You will be way behind in techs on deity if you don't do a lot of trading. The problem comes later when all the AIs say "We fear you are becoming too advanced." Apparently this is caused by some counter that increases every time you trade for a tech. So more tech trading early means less later. But you will need to trade just to stay in the game.

Then there are a couple options. Do you tech for a early/mid war? Or go liberalism? I like rushing trebuchets since they are awesome at taking out cities. Nothing in that era can defend against them. Just make sure you have some HA or axemen or something to finish off the cities since trebs can only knock down to 25%.

Diplomatic Relations:
It seems like most of the time it is beneficial to give in to AI demands. You do NOT want them declaring war on you when you aren't ready. You aren't giving them that much anyways, they have like 50% research bonus on deity. Or one turn of anarchy is much better than getting wardecd. Also building relations and having allies when you do decide to go to war is invaluable.

Religion:
Typically it seems like religion is a bad idea since it just leads to negative relations and more people hating you and declaring war. Sometimes it is good though, like if all your neighbors are the same religion. Or if you use Mansa Musa (spiritual) then you can just change it around for trading or relations whenever you want.


So anyways, these are just a bunch of random observations from our games. Will add more as they come up. Looking for more input or strategies or tricks other people use. I am sure there are a lot of other ways to play the game and beat team deity, too, so post yours here.

I have not seen any other posts with deity level strategy for team/multiplayer games vs. the AI so thought it would be good to start a topic on it.
 
Teams of 2 to me speeds up the game alot (do you play normal marathon?), having advanced start also severely reduces the fast AI settling issue.

The GS city might need a couple farms if it doesn't have food resources.
It really shouldn't be a GS city then. Also, weren't GPP bounds different for each empire, so it'd be still worth for both generating GPP? Running 2 scientists is quite easy, 4 isn't hard, and 4 GSs instead of 2 is alot of difference.

In teams of 2, it really is like single player, but diplo is harder, and you get two caps (bureau), double national wonders and maintenance doesn't matter as much (12 cities vs 2 x 6 cities). Wars also need to go very quickly as well for the same reasons, faster techrate, less time to abuse. At the moment looks like aside from start techs, you guys try to play in sync, so strengths are doubled, weaknesses... somewhat same. Can try alternative.

Often you can have ecos where 100% res, cap is cottage bureau ox acad, 1 GP farm, rest is all production, building gold and/or units. Basically maximising.. bonuses. Similary for players...

Often you hear players for single about how eco crashes after wiping out opponent in war, not the same issue here, since you could have one player just being warmonger, while other keeps him up to date. Gift cities taken (I think can, if not, let researcher take with last unit). Great people the warmonger gets gift to ally to either settle (if bulb you give to whoever higher pop).

If you have one designated as warmonger, then he only needs to stay in warmonger civics, Vassal, caste workshop, theo (if religion), or bureau HE while other stays in bureau, slavery, org religion. Other can gift GGs he gets so uber XP HE city for warmonger.

Or one is wonder builder (slows down AI alot), wonder builder can also fill role of army builder, normaly 1 city is for wonders (cap) and can squeeze out 2 more pump army, other REXes, depending on map, sometimes the land a player doesn't settle, can be filled up by partner instead due to blocks. Wonder builder normally generates enough early game res to let Rexer get back into game (settle great people + rep).

How effective do you find your treb rush to work? How many opponents do you wipe out?

If it isn't wiping out people, then beelining rifling might work better. In which case well... cottage spam.

O just remembered some other players posted some co-op game reports, might be worth looking up.
 
It appears that each time a person gets a GP, it increases their own GPP cap by 100 and their allies caps by 50. Each person would still benefit from running a GS city, though.

Research costs 50% more in team games I think. So if you get 100 research per turn it takes 5 turns for a 500 research tech. In team, you would both have 100 research per turn, 200 total, but the tech would take 750 so it would take 4 turns. This is an interesting point, maybe we should play on a slower setting. Yes we play normal speed.

Also good point about why would a no food resource city be a GPP city. It would likley be better as economy or production then.

The double bonus from bureaucracy is also really good.

I am not sure how you can rate effectiveness of each rush strategy, it all depends on how quick you do it and how many you have. The big benefits of treb rushes are that the main unit can bombard defenses AND do collateral damage. With CR1 it has +120% city attack, which actually gets applied as -120% defense to the defending unit. So it is actually more beneficial when used vs a stronger unit. (i.e. -100% of 6 str = -6str. +100% of 4 str is only +4 str)
Trebs are more than capable of taking out a city up through longbowmen/crossbowmen. They struggle a little vs macemen or mustekmen. After that, don't bother. You do need a couple spearmen and axemen to defend the stacks and finish off the enemy stacks though. But when they are at 25% health that should be easy. I haven't really tried a full treb rush on deity yet, but the couple times I have tried it, I just quit playing the game because it was over at that point.

Basically I think it is really important to always be on the offensive. If you are getting attacked or the enemy stack is in your borders you are probably screwed. Thats why I like trebs and their +100% city attack.

Beelining rifling works really well too, that's how we won our last immortal game.

We do also examine the starting spots and sometimes switch if one is better for a certain trait or UU/UB somehow. Gifting cities works fine and we distribute them in a way that makes sense and try to create the least culture problems.
 
my 2 cents:

-human players should look for civs that grants 2 sets of different initial techs. You start w/ 4 techs instead of 2 or 3.
-maximize each other's trait: for examples, aggressive trait should build more troops and gift to the partner to lower unit maintenance. Imperalistic leader should build most settlers and gift to the other partner.
 
Well that is a huge wall of text. I won't scrutinize every detail, but here are some things that popped into mind...

My biggest tip to you:

- Don't stack the odds against the AI by choosing the absolute best leaders, map conditions, advanced start etc in order to play a higher difficulty. Cramming 5-6 teams into a Standard map makes the games a lot of easier for the humans (at least if you insta-reroll the times where you get stuck with 3 cities and a Cathy/Joao in your face). Ditto for most of the other non-standard settings. You would probably get less frustration and more joy (less ego though ;) ) by playing closer to normal settings (that the AI manages better) and a lower difficulty level.

Other facts:

- All the FIN Civs are very, very good for team. That being said, picking two of those makes you much less adaptable, even though the raw power (if you get to sandbox) is higher. I would not advise always picking two FIN, even when going "all-out".

- Rushes that eliminate a Civ are much more powerful than in solo, since that leaves another Civ for easy pickings later - optimally in a corner somewhere so another team won't come to swoop the prize. Another reason not to rely on cheesey early UUs like the Quechua.

- Bulbing is relatively worse in team. Tech beaker costs are 1.5x higher, but bulbing beakers are not scaled. Mass GP-based strategies (like WE/SSE) can work wonders if you exploit the fact you get two National Epics and that the ally's GP threshold only rises 50% of normal when you pop a GP, but they need some special attention to get running. So as you noticed cottages are the easier way, usually. Often getting more than a handful of GPs (key Academy or two, key mass-civic-switch GA or two) in the whole game is a waste.

- Getting in a rut where you are in a mindset to always build cities for certain uses (like this "GS city") sounds very bad to me. Play the map, not a checklist :) Of course if you always pick the same Civs and play advanced start it might be more viable...

- You didn't mention what speed you play, or I didn't notice at least. A "treb rush" working best sounds like Marathon to me though :p With the doubled concerted production capability, war in any era and very various unit compositions is very possible though. Cheeserush (Quechua, Immortal, Vulture, etc, or even a combination of thereof for super-cheese), Elepult, Medieval (Knight/Mace/Treb), Cav, Rifle/Treb, Musket/Cannon, Rifle/Cannon can all be optimal for some circumstances. All in all warfare is much easier in team since AIs cannot actively defend their teammate's cities, only retaliate.

- Diplomacy is averaged over the attitudes of both AI team members towards both of you, so the real attitude is the average of four attitudes (integer math, Friendly + Pleased + Cautious + Cautious = Cautious). Keep this in mind when deciding what to do with demands that possibly alter attitudes. Learn who you can piss off all you want (Gandhi), who will surprisingly declare for refused demands very often considering their whole personality (Washington), and other such stuff familiar in solo play, it's often even more important in team.

- Agreeing to stop trading with a team is more powerful in team than solo. In solo you get a huge period where the offended party refuses to talk to you; in team they will still talk to your teammate and can trade techs.

- Fair trade diplo bonus is personal in team, but WE hate is blanket. If you're going to do lopsided trades, do them with the Civ in your team that most needs the diplo.

- Map-wise, naturally maps that don't split up teams (like global pre-Astro contact; Pangaea, Inland Sea, Lakes) make for more balanced games.

- You might want to check out the series kossin linked, we've tried to highlight team play specific points in addition to just narrating the events.

- Popping huts with non-Scouts & non-Borders on Deity is 40% barbs, so not great odds there. However if you do pop them with Scouts or borders, the probability to get a tech is very high (~17%), higher than any other difficulty other than Settler. Hunting is a great starting tech.
 
we play normal speed. I didn't say a treb rush works "best", just that it is pretty effective. Swordsmen/Elephants + Catapults works too, as do Knights or Riflemen or Cannons.

Very interesting notes about huts though, I did not know that. Darius and Ragnar are the only FIN civs that start with hunting :(

Another thing we found out the other day - If a civ demands or asks for you to give them a tech, your partner can open up the trade window and trade to them and get whatever you can for it, might just be a lower crappy tech or some gold or whatever. And then you accept their demand/plea. So you get +1 for helping them AND your partner generally gets +1-2 for fair trade relations since he most likely got ripped off. Way better than just giving in to a demand or denying it for -1!
 
Another thing we found out the other day - If a civ demands or asks for you to give them a tech, your partner can open up the trade window and trade to them and get whatever you can for it, might just be a lower crappy tech or some gold or whatever. And then you accept their demand/plea. So you get +1 for helping them AND your partner generally gets +1-2 for fair trade relations since he most likely got ripped off. Way better than just giving in to a demand or denying it for -1!

If you want to go that route, you can also trade techs with anyone you're making peace at even at Furious. Go to the trade screen and put their techs on the table (they're not redded out because of the war), then have your ally make peace - tada, now you can offer your techs for their techs since they're already on the table even though they wouldn't normally trade them.

I would call stuff like this blatant cheating though, much worse than for example mass reloading and double move :p
 
Playing the AI in teams of 2 will really screw with the diplomacy since they don't mind having different religions. It's almost impossible to get both of them to like you unless you use some heavy espionage. For this reason, I prefer to play single AIs even though it sounds easier, it's just way more balanced in terms of diplomacy.
 
^ Well... The same means AIs will like other AIs less, so it mostly balances out. It's often a net benefit for the human since you can just stick with NSR while the AIs are forced to adopt whatever crapligion spreads their way. Religion is not the only way to make AIs like you anyway, and neither is espionage the only way to influence the religion of other Civs.

If anything, team diplomacy is more interesting and complicated because of the extra factors involved. It can be a rather fascinating endeavor for those who want a challenge - I've always liked the more convoluted diplomacy. Worst enemy -related stuff can be obnoxious though with double the whine frequency and whatnot.
 
Back
Top Bottom