Need advice (big post, many questions, screenshots and the .SAV)

[Onipsi]

Hey all, thanks in advance for coming here to read my post. I hope you're patient enough to read through all this.
Here's some history first and some questions. After that, some screenshots with more specific stuff and the .SAV file.

This is my first attempt at Regent (actually it's the first attempt at a real game, so far I was playing on Chieftain and getting bored in 2 hours - never got to complete the medieval age -, but then I found this site, read a lot of the tutorials and now it's like I'm playing a whole different game).

World properties: large, continents, 60% water, roaming barbarians, normal aggression.
Civilizations: France, England, Mongols, Spain, India, Scandinavia, Rome, Egypt, China, Greece, Byzantines, Inca.
Government: Republic
So far, I know that India, Mongols, England and Scandinavia are in my continent.
It's still the Ancient Age. 21 cities founded so far, more settlers coming. Researching for Currency, then Construction, then this age is over - should I research for Monarchy even though I don't plan on using it? I need a lot more training on diplomacy, so I don't know about that yet.

I don't really have any specific goal, it's hard to choose one (although only Domination, Cultural and Conquest are set for victory, so it must be one of these). Back on Chieftain I could do pretty much anything I'd like, no need to get focused on specific goals. I guess I tend to go for domination, since I like the idea of a big empire, but I don't know how to conduct wars properly yet... I think I'm a builder.

Being a builder, I used to build all improvements in all my cities. Now I'm learning to stop doing that (no excess granaries/temples/libraries/barracks, no wonders at all, etc). I stress the "no wonders at all" part because I'm addicted to them (The Pyramids, Sun-Tzu, The Great Lighthouse, The Oracle, etc). No wonder I was bored on Chieftain...

However, I don't really know when/where should I build temples/libraries, and when should I stop. In this game, I'm using them to get culture in my most important borders (opposite to other civs), and temples in 1 or 2 core cities to get a content face and avoid riots. Is that right? I don't know, I guess I should be using the luxury slider instead, or shouldn't I? I'm worried about the $$$ income.

Granaries were built only in cities meant to produce settlers and workers. Barracks in the core and in the border cities mentioned above.

About city spacing, I'm choosing for CxxC or CxxxC in the core, and CxxC anywhere else. I don't know when should I start using CxC, or shouldn't I use it at all? More on that later.

I'm trying to have 2 workers per city, but recently I've founded a lot of cities for expansion, then I focused on building more military units to defend these (more importantly the border ones), and now I have very small worker ratio (19 workers and 21 cities). I'm finding it hard to keep up, don't know if I'm going slow with all this.

About military units, is it OK to leave some cities completely undefended? I know that in the first turns it's not OK, since I've done that and the Mongols took Orleans, my 2nd city, probably for that reason. I didn't think they'd do that, since they were settled pretty far from me, being polite and all... I guess Orleans has resources I'm yet to discover or something like that (I've read somewhere that the AI knows the resource locations since the beginning of the game, is that right?).
Anyway, now there are military units disponible and accessible through roads, then I wonder if the core cities and the others that are going to be far from the borders really need anyone there. In this case, how many units per city should we talk about? 1? 2?... Should I build catapults too (thinking about defensive bombards)?...

Also, I don't plan on invading anyone else right now (should I?). As I said, I'm a builder, a somewhat peaceful one, but I guess that's because I don't know how to manage a war. That being said, I don't really have many military units (17 swordsmen, 4 horsemen, 3 archers, 2 spearmen). Most of them were built because of the early war against the Mongols (I took their capital, more on that later). Should I prioritize the military over the expansion? I ask this because the most productive cities are just the ones that are meant to build workers and settlers. Some others are OK, but they produce less. And building more military units also means I would have to slow down the research. What should I do?

I'm also having some doubts about city placement, corruption, and the city I took from the Mongols, but let's see the screenshots first.

Here is a "panoramic view" screenshot, in case it helps to see the big picture: http://forums.civfanatics.com/uploads/119531/_005_France_290BC_panoramic.png

In the ones below, the cyan-circled tiles and arrows are spots where I plan on building my next cities. Red-circled tiles just point out some resources.

Core

Spoiler :

Question: is that spot OK for a new city? I'm thinking about having more unit support. The adjacent land is mostly abandoned by Paris and Rheims (hence the lack of terrain improvement), since both cities can't have more than 6-7 citizens due to unhappiness (and lack of an aqueduct for Rheims) -- again, should I use the lux slider and change the whole situation? Any tips?

Southeast (+ India)

Spoiler :

Following my CxxC structure, the new city should be founded in the SE tile. However, I don't really know anything about the flipping chances. That's near Kolhapur, which is near Delhi. Would place the city in the NE tile make any difference at all? Anyway, is there a better spot than those? Maybe in the coast?
Should Grenoble build a temple/library, so it could get shields not only from the SE hills but also from the NE ones? Or should I forget about that and mine the irrigated plains?
Also, should I place cities in the desert near Grenoble? I don't think they'll produce anything or grow, but there's the unit support issue...

Northwest (+ England and Mongols)

Spoiler :

I'm not really thinking about invading Canterbury (*sigh*, fear of war or something, I hated being invaded by the Mongols). Any tips?
Should I place a city in the "???"-marked tile? Again, same issue as in the desert in the south. Also, I plan on going into the tundra at the north, for the same reason. Poor indian warrior, by the way...

How's the city placement so far?

Southwest and mini-map

Spoiler :

Here's the weird part of the empire. I took Kakakorum from the Mongols, I did that because I didn't want them to expand and get the horses. I don't know what to do with that city, it's too corrupted. For now, it's simply building a settler, getting ready to be abandoned, with a specialist giving me money. That colony is there for a long time... I didn't want to place a city anywhere near, mainly because of the corruption issue. Now I think it was a waste of worker actions to build that big road and get lost in a colony, but that's because at that time the lands with horses in the north weren't explored yet, and I thought the war with the Mongols wouldn't finish so quickly, so I'd need the horses and wasn't making settlers at that time.

Should I keep that city? Should I occupy all that area too?
What about corruption?
How should I manage it? Should I start building the Forbidden Palace already (people are asking)? If so, where? And how come the courthouses I've built so far (some in corrupted cities relatively near to the capital, others in the southeast borders) have made no difference at all? Am I going to deal with more and more corrupted cities? After all, this empire isn't big, and the FP would do the trick for a little time in a small area, just like the Palace and the core, isn't that right?
I've read some topics about corruption, CxC city placement and specialists ("scientist farms"), but it seems people only start doing that in the Industrious age (with railroads or something).
So, what should I do here? Any tips?




*Phew* I guess that's it. Sorry for the big post. English isn't my first language, and I tend to write a lot, so I can't summarize ideas easily here. I hope you can help me.

Thanks again!

Here's the saved file.

 

[Kumquat]

I think you need a training day SG The biggest thing you need to do is ask yourself if you are a peaceful builder or bloodthirsty warmonger. If you are happy with just sitting in your kingdom managing your economy keeping your people happy and defending them from warmongers then your a builder. If you not happy with that then you are a warmonger

 

[Jokeslayer]

should I research for Monarchy even though I don't plan on using it?

Generally - no. There are cases when you might (you're running four turn research, nobody else has it but they do have the techs leading up to it and they all have large amounts of gold) but generally, don't research optional techs you have no interest in. It's a waste of time and resources that could be better spent expanding your lead.

I don't really have any specific goal, it's hard to choose one (although only Domination, Cultural and Conquest are set for victory, so it must be one of these).

High level players will tell you that you need one. Having a goal will help, but you can get through at this level without it. One city cultural will almost certainly be out if you aren't already working for it (although you could do it). 100K cultural might be out too. You could always wait out the year 2050 and try to take it on score

(no excess granaries/temples/libraries/barracks, no wonders at all, etc). I stress the "no wonders at all" part because I'm addicted to them (The Pyramids, Sun-Tzu, The Great Lighthouse, The Oracle, etc).

Make sure you're not going off the other way with this. Any city putting more than 4gpt into science can make use of a library.

Not building any wonders is nearly as bad as building too many. Some are fantastically useful (statue of zeus, knights templar, sun tzu, leonardo, hoover dam, UN, theory of evolution, copernicus & newton spring to my mind. Others will have different idea)

In this game, I'm using them to get culture in my most important borders (opposite to other civs), and temples in 1 or 2 core cities to get a content face and avoid riots.

ONe temple won't necessarily keep enough people happy in big cities. Sooner or later, you will need to use the lux slider. I prefer to start to use it early and then forget about it.

Barracks in the core and in the border cities mentioned above.

Don't build too many border barracks. You only need one or two on each front for upgrades, since those are probably your least productive cities.

I don't know when should I start using CxC, or shouldn't I use it at all?

Use it when the cities are too far from your capital to be productive. Then you want to grow the city to size 5-6 and support 3-4 specialists.

I'm trying to have 2 workers per city, but recently I've founded a lot of cities for expansion, then I focused on building more military units to defend these (more importantly the border ones), and now I have very small worker ratio (19 workers and 21 cities).

If you don't have enough workers, build more. Simple.

I think a 1:1 ratio is just about ok, especially with an industrious civ.

About military units, is it OK to leave some cities completely undefended?

Yes. In fact, it's a good idea. Cities that are far from the borders don't need troops. They're just a waste of resources if they can't even make anyone happy.

What should I do?

This depends on where you want to end up. Obviously it doesn't apply to this game, but if you want a diplomatic win, don't make too many wars. And if there's good unclaimed land left, don't go to war when you could expand peacefully instead.

And don't start a war you can't win. Wars will be much tougher than you are used to.

 

[MadScotsMan]

You said you like the idea of big empires. Corruption shouldnt be too big of a deal then, because domination brings corruption. I tend not to worry about border cities producing too much because they are usually there just to hold off the enemy until the calvary/strong infantry come up. Also, building more spearmen/defensive folks would be a good idea, if you want to peacefully build anyway. Just do not use swordsmen for defence, because there is bad juju when they defend. Always attack with them. Hell, always attacking your next door neighbor is a good idea, a just in case. Make them so tiny they are backasswords, like a vassal state of sorts. Then kill them later for signing that embargo against you *went off to conquer something now*

 

[vmxa]

Just from the screenies:

Core:

It is fine to put a town there, because it will be close to the capitol and have low corruption. Just use mostly coastal tiles and leave the land for Paris.

You should be able to get to size 12. If you have 2 lux and use the slider. A temple in the capitol is fine.

Southeast:

Do be aware that if you drop a town next to India, it will be unhappy and could lead to war.

That is consider provocative by the AI to over lap their tiles with a new town.

I would do it, but then I would be wanting a war anyway. You could go with the close circle and then one on the coast to get the fish in it.

You can expect India to have good culture, but no flips if you take the cities soon. Else get up a temple or a lib quickly.

You can raze the town near Grenoble and found on the river instead. Flood plains feed lots of pop.

Northeast:
No wall in that town, it is too far away to sweat it. Not sure I would crank out a CH in a size one town right away. If you have a lib or a temple in those town cantebury could flip.

If not, capture it when you are ready. How many towns does England have left?

Again if you place a town in ??? you will upset Khan, so it is your call. I see no rush to do it now. When you are ready or instead capture those cities. Close the borders with culture. Temple or lib, which ever is cheapest for your civ.

Placement is ok.

Southwest:

You can abandon without building a settler, in fact it will never be built as you are not growing and need to be size 3. Abandon, if you do not want to sit on it, until you get around to filling the land. I would not have made a colony, unless it was the only source of horses.

The AI will probably not cut the road, but may attack the colony. So if you drop a couple of defenders on it, it will last until some builds a town.

If this is Conquest, then corruption is not really a problem, just use specialist to get gold or beakers.

 

[Jokeslayer]

Just do not use swordsmen for defence, because there is bad juju when they defend.

What's a juju? Using swordsmen for defence (instead of spearmen) could be a good idea. They're certainly more useful against stacks as they can counterattack properly.

 

[MAS]

Using swordsmen for defence (instead of spearmen) could be a good idea. They're certainly more useful against stacks as they can counterattack properly.

Lets not confuse Defense1 (attacking invaders) with Defense2 (letting invaders bash themselves on your walls)

For the purpose of Defense1, swords are far better than spears, but less good than horseman.
For the purpose of Defense2, swords perform equal to spears, except that they cost 10 shields more.

I don't know if thats what you meant, but I'd like to point it out just to clear up any misunderstandings that may exist to all who follow the discussion.

I agree with MadScotsMan that defending by actively attacking invaders is better than defending by planting spears. For this purpose, horseman, knights, cavalry, are the best defenders. Assuming a good road network, they can move, and thus defend, up to a radius of 6 tiles, (9 for cav) archers/swords/MI/bowman can defend up to a radius of 3 tiles, spear/pike/musket/rifle/infantry can defend only the tile they are standing on.

 

[gmaharriet]

What's a juju?

Saying "there is bad juju" is sort of saying "it's bad luck". Not sure if that's true or not, but that's what it means.

 

[Tribute]

I would keep Karakorum. And let it grow as soon as possible. Wait for it to finish the settler (and send over a couple of horses as MP/defense). You might want to switch to a spearman though it may be unnecessary. I feel it's sort of silly to put a city so near your capital when there's plenty of land SW towards your horse colony. It would be such a waste if you didn't get there in time; the AI could take your colony out with a well placed settler.

You've got good luxuries and have both crucial Ancient Age to middle of Middle Ages resources. There is no point in getting the far iron unless India doesn't have it. (Even then though, they'll still get those pesky war elephants.)

Yeah, so I'd expand SW only. The tundra in the North west does not look so appetizing. There may be oil or rubber up there, but who knows? And if an AI lands a settler there, you'll be able to declare war on them later and seize it. (Since you sound like a builder, maybe you'll have to wait until they declare war on you, but that is okay. But just be prepared to take it when an opportunity comes.) But if you do get to settling that NW area, it seems like a good idea to do a coastal CXC, so that you can maximize your usage of coasts and have some very nice science farms.

 

[Onipsi]

Thanks a lot for the replies, guys. They're very helpful.

Kumquat, in the way you put it, I'm definitely a builder. I don't like the idea of destroying my enemies for a living. However, as I said, that could be because I don't really know how would I start or maintain such a strategy.

Jokeslayer, I'll think more about the wonders. It's just that I tend to want all of them, so I tried to do the opposite in this game. But you have a point there. I should spend more effort in analysing their cost/benefit.

vmxa, I'm not sure what you meant when you said I could raze the town near Grenoble. Did you refer to Avignon or to the idea of founding a town in the NW desert?

I agree I shouldn't be focusing on spearmen for the military.

I think I'll keep Karakorum and expand to the west. Your replies and a couple of SG threads made me think about the corruption handling. I think it will be fine.

I may post more with some screenshots later.

There's a question unanswered, still: should I be thinking about the Forbidden Palace by now? I'd appreciate some tips on this.

Thanks!

 

[Delphi456]

There's a question unanswered, still: should I be thinking about the Forbidden Palace by now? I'd appreciate some tips on this.

Thanks!

Yes, because you don't have all your cities tied up building military, preparing for war.

 

[vmxa]

I was saying that it is not a great location, so why not just found on the river bend and raze that town. Not mandatory.

 

[Jokeslayer]

Saying "there is bad juju" is sort of saying "it's bad luck". Not sure if that's true or not, but that's what it means.

Right.

Thanks, gmharriet.

 

[Onipsi]

So, I expulsed the Mongols and expanded to SW. Finishing the expansion, I began building up the basic military for the cities bordering India and England. Even though the number of barracks and their locations were being planned, I've ended up building the Sun-Tzu anyway. That's when the Indians RoP-raped me (I guess that's because they've got their war elephants, or a golden age or something like that), but they weren't able to conquer any of my cities, while I ended up taking 5 from them. The Spanish and the Vikings were my allies and also conquered some cities.

I had to deal with war weariness, because Delhi had the Knights Templar and its defense was a little overpowered, so I thought I couldn't end the war without taking it. However, the other 4 cities could wait, but I was so mad that it didn't feel right not to conquer that Indian border!

Maybe if I waited their most powerful attack, letting their units kill themselves in battle, and then I attacked, I could have ended this war a little sooner?

Also I don't really like the mess I have right now. Too many units, too few buildings and culture! *builder rant* No, really, maybe I'm exaggerating, since the core cities have a lot of buildings, it's just that I'm used to having everything everywhere I guess. It's been an easy game so far.

Thanks for the help.

Here's the current minimap and the save file:

 

[TruePurple]

Man alot to read, so I just skimmed and looked at a few pics for now.

What odd city placements, yes rivers are nice but then its worth a few aquaduct builds to take advantage of tiles better. That first pic your not using coast tiles at all. Not a bad placement mind you though. That coast spot you mention near the dye, I'd place the city further out upper left of rhiems. As far out as you can. No reason to share those dye tiles like that.

Second pic, crowding two cities there isn't much use. I'd place a city coastal, get that fishing. Don't underestimate the kind of income coastal squares give, especially latter on.

 

[Onipsi]

Man alot to read, so I just skimmed and looked at a few pics for now.

What odd city placements, yes rivers are nice but then its worth a few aquaduct builds to take advantage of tiles better. That first pic your not using coast tiles at all. Not a bad placement mind you though. That coast spot you mention near the dye, I'd place the city further out upper left of rhiems. As far out as you can. No reason to share those dye tiles like that.

Second pic, crowding two cities there isn't much use. I'd place a city coastal, get that fishing. Don't underestimate the kind of income coastal squares give, especially latter on.

So far the coastal tiles are OK I guess. They don't do much (except the fishy ones), but I guess they will do more later, just like you said.

I regret a lot of city placements by now. I didn't prioritize the rivers really, actually I neglected a lot of riverside tiles, only to strictly obey to a CxxC scheme in my head which I'm not sure that made a big difference.

Also, some non-corrupted SE cities aren't really productive because they're settled mostly in plains, maybe I should have let India take that area so I'd worry with more decent spots.

I wonder if it's too late to rebuild some cities...?

I've built a FP in Chartres (one of the core cities), not sure if it was a good location (or if a good location is really needed anyway).

About the war, maybe I could have avoided the war weariness by switching to monarchy (but I'd have to deal with an anarchy during the war, so I'm not sure). I was thinking I shouldn't go with monarchy because of the commerce disadvantage (therefore, research disadvantage as well), but I wasn't investing in science during the war anyway (relied on specialists), and as such the gpt income would be bigger since I'd have more military support.

I think that once the current mess is dealt with, I'm going to conquer India, they have nice rivered grasslands... I might switch to monarchy this time and see if it's better.

 

[King Hannibal]

just on the defending cities patrt if you are using CxxC your empire is square? i like to have a sqaure empire normaly i try have it so my city has 3 sides against water so i only have to defend the front line early in the game. If you have a square city 3 sides facing water just put a whole line of spear men wich stops any civ walking on your empire. 1 line also means when you can leave all your cities undefended just bulk up that line.

How ever i keep a few soldiers in the rear incase they try to land behind me.Try this and see if it works for you.+

 

[TruePurple]

Aside from fish, every coast tile gives 2 commerce without any improving terrain at all (and enough to feed population with harbor which isnt all that expensive) You can get that with land tiles too of course river + road or special tiles. But still sweet money/science lost if you don't use those coast tiles. Plus its nice to be able to build ships depending on map. Coast tiles in core cities can mean very fast science progress/gold in right governent and with anticorrruption improvements like forbidden palace.

I scout waters edge (and elsewhere, expansionist is nice for smart city placement) for the common fish and whale bonuses and always try to place cities to use them. They are just nice tiles that require no improvement like I already said.

Place according to terrain and less to any pattern IMO. Trying to make sure no good tiles are left out of any city radius (hills are good tiles too btw, not so great early on but with a different government and time to improve them plus irrigation on grass shield lands[so GA gives bonus shields for those tiles too] ) And of course try to keep cities spaced right, but city spacing patterns should be your second thought and not your first.

Move cities? Tough to do, even if a city has no improvements to lose, all the cities around it are probably placed in pattern relevent to its location. And mass moving cities would be such a challenge and use of resources as to not be worth it. Now if you regret a single city location or two, dont have improvements in it, its nearer to edge so doesnt effect other city placements can get it to 2 citizen settler move without too much effort (alternative just make workers till the city is gone) And know of a place that you can be sure is better... Then go for it

@hannibal, yes you should try to be contained, though circular works good too. Having border stuff like water or mountains to reduce troop requirement can be great (you dont necessarily need to be "square" for that though)

But don't count on it too much! Especially if your going to ever learn to play against other players. Its a good idea to get into the habit of having at least 1 unit in every town. Even in middle towns since they can go out where needed. Just in case a horseman sneaks paste your defenses or something. Plus it makes your towns happier in many governements.

Place forbidden palace in a town far as you can from cap without having it take too long to produce, and in center of other towns. Since it acts as a second cap for purposes of distance from cap corruption numbers. BUT this effect is minor in comparison to the effect of having a forbidden palace at all so its important to make it quick too.

Another consideration for forbidden palace placement is a city with alot of nice tiles around it but not too crowded. Since forbidden palace helps corruption ALOT in the city its placed in, eventually you can remove corruption altogether with a courthouse and police station. Making that second super city aside from cap.

Which is why MGL can be nice, they can rush in FP in a more optimal spot.

 

[Othniel]

Its a good idea to get into the habit of having at least 1 unit in every town. Even in middle towns since they can go out where needed. Just in case a horseman sneaks paste your defenses or something. Plus it makes your towns happier in many governements.

I must disagree. In single player games against the computer, one mistake a lot of newer players make is to have large, defensive-oriented garrisons (spearmen and such) in all their cities, which is a huge waste of available manpower and resources. Multiplayer games against humans are, of course, a whole different ball of wax...

You only really need some of your border cities to have a permanent garrison, at most. Of course, if you have some obsolete warriors hanging around, don't upgrade them but instead use them for military police if your form of government has MPs.

For a better defense, use some roaming fast units like horseman/knights to clean up an invasions. The usual idea is to attack invanders with your fast offensive units, than retreat those units out of harms way. On occasion, it can be good to have a very strongly defended town and have invaders "crush themselves upon your walls". But generally, attacking your enemies' units first before they can attack you is the best defensive plan.

Place forbidden palace in a town far as you can from cap without having it take too long to produce, and in center of other towns. Since it acts as a second cap for purposes of distance from cap corruption numbers. BUT this effect is minor in comparison to the effect of having a forbidden palace at all so its important to make it quick too.

If you are playing Conquests, it's not the best plan to place the FP far from the core. Simply build the FP close by, even in a city right next to the palace. It's better to get the FP quick than to try to make a second core, which doesn't really work in C3C with the corruption model changes.

 

[TruePurple]

I mentioned its important to make it quickly too. But further out towards nation center/ super city spots are good too. As long as you can make it quick enough. (MGL help alot like I mentioned)

Yeah roaming fast units are good for behind defensive lines. I said units, I didn't specify type. I still say its a good idea to get use to having units behind city lines if you EVER want to play multiplayer. Also regardless units in cities do help happiness with most governments. Which means you can turn down lux slider which means the troop often pay for themselves + some in such locations.