next step?

NFace2003

Chieftain
Joined
Dec 8, 2006
Messages
28
just won my first warlord game on standard map, with the Celts...what a great Civ.
anyway...was curious if you all think the next best step would be to advance a level or to play warlord again but on a bigger map?

thanks...:king:
 
I would switch to small maps, up the difficulty to regent, and rotate through pangea and continent w/ different civs.

Stick w/ the celts first and go for a continent map on regent.

The last few games I have run though on small maps I have gotten Conquest and Domination wins around 300AD and 500AD.

I normally plays these at Monarch but have been playing at Emperor as well.

I also like to stick w/ Agricultural civs because growth is just such a huge advantage.
 
I would jump directly to monarch level. I spent too much time at regent doing almost the same as I did on warlord.
 
i guess my main question is this: is it a cop-out to win on standard map on warlord?
i don't want to advance until i can righly claim that i beat the level you know?
 
There's no cop out. A win is a win.

Unless you reduced the number of AI's to a low level then I would say you beat it. Also, even if you don't think you can rightly say that you beat that level you should still move up to higher difficulty level.

I suggest moving to the smaller maps because you'll be able to get in more games in a shorter period of time. The more games you get through the sooner you'll start to incorporate lessons learned.
 
no, i didnt' reduce the number of AI's...the only thing i chose was my Civ.

(i am correct in assuming that the larger the map, the harder the game, right?)

yeah i think i am going to jump up in level...perhaps reduce the map size b/c yeah the games take awhile sometimes...
 
no, i didnt' reduce the number of AI's...the only thing i chose was my Civ.

(i am correct in assuming that the larger the map, the harder the game, right?)

I'd say the larger the map, the more tedious the game and the longer it lasts. Micromanaging all those cities on a large or huge map is an enormous amount of work on a large or huge map. Also, your computer may slow down more in the end game.

The only thing that actually gets more difficult about playing a map larger than standard is that you can't see all the leaders in the diplo screen...it becomes harder to see who has ROPs or MPPs with whom, since you cannot view more than 8 at one time.
 
I suggest that you move up levels until you feel reasonably challenged. If you think that you're ready to move up, do it!
i don't want to advance until i can righly claim that i beat the level you know?
The trouble is that you can learn techniques that work on the lower levels that then have to be 'unlearnt' as they don't work on the higher ones. Some players never bothered with the lowest levels, particularly if they had experience of earlier civ versions.

BTW don't think that maps larger than standard are significantly more difficult. IMO what makes the difference is the map type. Assuming that you know the importance of contacts, and how to exploit the AIs inability to gain them before Map Making/building the GLHouse/Astronomy/Navigation, I would say that pangea is the most difficult and 'pelago the easiest. This is due to the faster tech rates when the AI has more contacts and the AIs inability to launch an effective invasion from another landmass.
 
well, i upped it to Regent (the level after Warlord i believe?) and used a larger map. i am on my way to conquering my continent with the Celts...and then see what's what after that.

oh...when does the ability to upgrade to pikemen and midevil infantry occur?
 
oh...when does the ability to upgrade to pikemen and midevil infantry occur?
Fuedalism. (I try to stall that when playing with the Celts as I'd rather still build Gallics than medieval infantry.)
 
Fuedalism. (I try to stall that when playing with the Celts as I'd rather still build Gallics than medieval infantry.)

Yep, I'll take the 3.2.2 over 4.2.1 any day.
 
Back
Top Bottom