1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Not a rant thread...

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by lepruk86, Jun 7, 2012.

  1. lepruk86

    lepruk86 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2011
    Messages:
    38
    Location:
    England
    I promise :D

    But I think I am missing something. Do you always have to have a military victory in order to have any other kind? I know in Civ IV you needed a military but it didn't always mean it was possible to wipe the world out. You could stay ahead in tech and fight the odd war.

    Before anyone responds with try mods, I am trying a couple at the moment and it seems to make Science an easier pursuit.

    But I find that I have to actually hold off from just wiping everyone out to win a Science victory for example. As in, the game has already been won through war, But I am purposefully not ending it that way.

    In most of my games I usually get declared on pretty early (which is fine) even with a good military score, I then have to at least take some retribution I.E a city or something for the bother. This allows another Civ to start getting a wonder lead or science lead. Which means in order to win I either:

    Go full economy and bribe city states to win that way or go full War to delay the teching and allow myself to get back to being ahead; by this point I have such a strong military there is literally no advantage to holding back.

    So yeah, This really isn't a complaint, just wondering if I am doing something wrong? I tend to play on King and avoid island-based maps (due to A.I's poor Sea choices often).

    TLDR: (though kind of hard to do) - How do you win a Science victory without essentially being able to out-right win a War victory? King difficulty and continent style maps generally.#

    EDIT: No, not a new player, got the game at release but obviously the expansion news has rekindled my interest.
     
  2. Carl5872

    Carl5872 Prince

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2008
    Messages:
    786
    Location:
    Mentor, Ohio
    It could be your play style. I thought this too until I started looking at the way others play. Basically my play style was that I should ALWAYS be expanding. If theres space and happiness build settlers. This pisses off neighbors which leads to war which pisses off friends, and requires building/buying units.

    The increased number of cities from both settling and conquest drives up Social Policy costs, ruling it out as a victory type. The production and maintenance of soldiers has an opportunity cost of buildings and research agreements, which again steers you away from the nonconquest victory conditions.

    What I've tinkered with in a culture game was to be a minimalist. First building all culture buildings/wonders. If I was caught up on them, THEN I would expand, but this was more an ancillary build order.

    Also keeping the quality of cities high and quantity low. This means I would leave 6 spaces between cities so each could expand to its full 3 ring radius potential, allowing for minimal social policy cost increases, and highly developed cities for building wonders.

    Now you can't neglect defense, so I found that building catapults/trebuchets and their upgraded counterparts for each city really helps. Keeping 1 Military city state will keep you stocked with a small enough army to just defend. It also helps if they are strategically located to block potential attackers. I've never actually used citadels, but imagine they could be very handy with an artillery stationed there as a bulwark against invaders.

    Hope that helped.
     
  3. Lyoncet

    Lyoncet Emperor

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2009
    Messages:
    1,676
    Location:
    Minnesota
    No, it's certainly doable at least up to Immortal (no Deity experience) without any conquest whatsoever. I'd say the majority of my non-domination victories I don't take a single other city. You'll often do better with some puppets, but they're by no means necessary. But without it, you really need to have strong core play – figure out a tech path, how to leverage great people and research agreements, how to do resource trades to generate gold, how you can get a little bit of mileage out of diplomacy even if the system is pretty shoddy, etc.
     
  4. The Pilgrim

    The Pilgrim Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2009
    Messages:
    3,007
    Location:
    Virtual reality
    Yep. Playing the wrong difficulty. ;)

    When you play for science/diplo the tech advantage allows you to have superior army that can wipe out most of the map. In order to be rolled by by AI and fight for your life desperately trying to add last SS parts you should play deity. And even then, if you max out the use of RA's, AI will lag behind in Industrial era when you launch.
     
  5. smallfish

    smallfish Immortal

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2011
    Messages:
    2,968
    I'm going to have to agree about this. AI even at said higher level becomes easily beatable once you get the ball rolling far down the runaway slope.
     
  6. lepruk86

    lepruk86 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2011
    Messages:
    38
    Location:
    England
    Thanks for the feedback so far :)...

    I don't tend to play ICS-type games. I am much more of a tall-empire player and try to section of a bit of the map that is out of the way or tucked where nobody will really need.

    Also I don't feel good enough to try deity. I clearly want a challenge but I unno, I think i'd lose outright on deity.

    I tried a game tonight where I only spawned 2 cities. I was miles ahead in science and thought I had an okay military. Turns out Darius thought otherwise and just stormed in.

    Despite the fact that I was bending over backward to his every request and desire and we were *friendly* the entire way through.

    Oh well, time to lose a city then spend the next 50 or so turns building up an army (though with just 1 city I doubt I can produce enough forces to push back now)...

    Was going well; oh well xD
     
  7. binhthuy71

    binhthuy71 Emperor

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2003
    Messages:
    1,887
    Location:
    Southern California foothills
    Depending on the map type you are likely to get DoW'd sooner or later. Just being in the lead is ample excuse for a DoW and likely a dogpile. I'm a peace loving, builder type and I've learned that the best way to keep the peace is to slap the heck out of the first civ that attacks me. Beat them down to one city, annexing or puppeting their cities as you go and you'll generally be left alone afterwards. The AI is absolutely wretched at war after its initial steamroller rush. If you survive that then you have a better than even chance of success.
     
  8. The Pilgrim

    The Pilgrim Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2009
    Messages:
    3,007
    Location:
    Virtual reality
    I didn't suggest you to play deity. I just pointed out that it's pretty much the only level when you don't need to deliberately avoid domination victory since others can be actually easier.
    As for that game, if you were ahead in science, you didn't need big army, advanced army is even better. Of course, depends on how you leveraged that advantage. If all you did was researching cultural/wonders techs and building cultural stuff/wonders, then everything makes sense. Anyways, looks like 'domination is too easy' problem is solved. ;)
     
  9. lepruk86

    lepruk86 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2011
    Messages:
    38
    Location:
    England
    Haha...

    Actually it's turned out to be a really fun game.

    I forgot as I posted that I was messing about the defence pacts.

    Persia Declared on me, which made Rome, Inca and India all declare on Persia. I managed to win by taking out just one of Persia's cities and stay ahead in tech without over building units...

    Only to find that Rome declared on India during this war. So I then had Rome coming from one side and Persia the other (as well as two CS's right next to me).

    As soon as I managed to get one of Persia's cities they quickly accepted a peace treaty.

    Rome I simply marched to their border and they accepted one too.

    I only had about 3 military units at the start of the war and even now have about 6 total.

    Was a lot more fun having less military... but I still feel like now I could just go into mass military and win... <--- Which is still the problem I have with every Civ 5 game I play... They all feel the same.

    This one was a lot of fun though ^^

    EDIT: two instead of *to*.... <,<
     
  10. Sherlock

    Sherlock Just one more turn...

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2009
    Messages:
    1,227
    Location:
    Eagle, Idaho
    I've had games with LOTS of cites (was fun) and games with only two cities. I found the 'two cities' games are me constantly defending myself from neighbors.
     
  11. gozpel

    gozpel Couch-potato (fortified)

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2002
    Messages:
    4,383
    Location:
    Australia
    The lesson is with a tall empire, only build your next city near another happy-resource. Build 4 or 5 and then go turtling. Works wonderfully!

    IF you want to conquer the neighbourhood/the world, build no more than one more city after the cap, figure out where the iron is and match your research with the settler you're building. If there is a 6-iron near enemy borders, plop him down ontop of it and you have 6 iron and 3 hammers in the new city.
     
  12. PierreBonaparte

    PierreBonaparte Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2012
    Messages:
    18
    In response to the question at top, i'm usually the opposite. I have never gotten a millitary victory, but I usuually have a strong millitary, and I've gone for the occasional war.I've only gotten diplo or culture (I might have gotten science one game, but the diplo and sci victories were on the same turn, and I chose the diplo victory) I suggest choosing a huge map so it takes too long to conquer the world
     
  13. lepruk86

    lepruk86 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2011
    Messages:
    38
    Location:
    England
    This is actually an interesting concept. I usually... actually, ALWAYS play standard size (though I sometimes play marathon over standard).

    I might actually start a huge map game, and see if it feels any different. Any other recommendations for settings to try (to sort of remove *military* as the easiest option)...

    I.E map-type etc?.
     
  14. warlordtheft

    warlordtheft Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2006
    Messages:
    47
    +1

    I pretty much have the opinion that the continent I start on is mine, and that if anyone opposes me tough! After taking the continent (I've been playing continents so far) I've done the victory that makes for the shortest game. Even though I could easily curbstomp the other continent or take a diplomatic victory.
     
  15. The Pilgrim

    The Pilgrim Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2009
    Messages:
    3,007
    Location:
    Virtual reality
    Oh, so I guess you did try deity already and found it too easy as well. :D
    Seriously, if this really isn't a rant, just play on higher difficulty. Try emperor. Still feels too easy - go immortal. I assure you, it'll provide a cure to your pain in no time. ;)
     
  16. lepruk86

    lepruk86 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2011
    Messages:
    38
    Location:
    England
    I think you have misinterpreted me a little bit. I lose on King now and again so it isn't the difficulty that I find confusing.

    It's that whilst going for another victory type (particularly, Science) I pretty much have to have an army capable of wiping out the world. Thus the science victory is merely a thing I am choosing to do; and not the only option.

    Though I agree I can try harder settings and as you said, that may create more *nail biting* moments.

    As a reply I tried a huge map recently and found that mixed the game up a fair bit. I certainly would struggle to wipe the world out too efficiently on that map setting.
     
  17. The Pilgrim

    The Pilgrim Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2009
    Messages:
    3,007
    Location:
    Virtual reality
    Well, I guess I don't really know how to interpret 'I can't hold myself from winning domination when I have such big army that no other victory makes sense' along with 'I lose on king now and again' in a no-rant like way. ;)

    Everything has been said already. For defense purposes alone you don't need a military that can wipe the world out. And on king there is no danger to be outrun by AI to any 'peaceful' victory. You can easily turtle, spam wonders or whatever till the very end. But science is still the key for every victory. If you have a science lead, you potentially can wipe out the whole world, only deity can put up some decent fight (sometimes). I honestly can't see what is the problem. :)
     
  18. lepruk86

    lepruk86 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2011
    Messages:
    38
    Location:
    England
    Hence why I said thanks to someone before... :D

    It was my map settings I think more than anything and perhaps a lack of complete understanding on my behalf of how to build Science quickly etc... :).

    I suppose just for clarities sake, I was really asking;

    what's the minimal amount of military needed to complete a science/culture victory, because in my experience (which are only representative of my play-style), I need a pretty large one, which at that point domination makes more sense?

    ^^^^ Which has been answered in the thread with essentially *bigger maps* and *harder difficulty*.

    So thanks :)... And I love Civ 5 a lot more than Civ 4 - but as a pretty crappy player, there's a lot of things I don't really get I guess xD.
     
  19. joncnunn

    joncnunn Senior Java Wizard Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2008
    Messages:
    8,621
    Location:
    Missouri
    You actually don't need to conquer cities at all to win via culture or science.

    Now your neighbors will at some point DOW you and at that point a lot of people can't resist capturing a lot of cities from someone else that DOWs them. They often end up either conquering the neighbor (or leaving them a useless city to avoid war mongling penalty) but that still resulted in them having a new neighbor which now goes from best friend to worst enemy, and so the cycle continues until before you know it you've conquered the whole landmass.
    You can however choose instead to just drive off the enemy attacks and otherwise ignore the wars.

    (Science victories are often more RA & GS driven than science per turn; diplomatic victories are more trading surplus resources to get the AI's cash than cash per turn.)

    Also, if you find yourself the only player on your starting landmass it's a lot easier to stay at peace. It might not prevent the war, but will delay it.
     
  20. The Pilgrim

    The Pilgrim Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2009
    Messages:
    3,007
    Location:
    Virtual reality
    That's much more clear. :D
    No, you don't need a big military. Defending is easy. One range (or siege later, early on they require iron, which has usually better uses than sitting in defense) unit per city plus couple of melee and a horse or two for fast movement and killing off wounded guys that can be instahealed. Road network is very important, though, it allows units to be shifted around. Thus try not to settle cities too far away from each other.
    To accelerate researching pace, beeline National College and Education. Build universities and fill the slots with specialists. Then use great scientists to bulb late game techs. Also you might want to check out War Academy article about research agreements. Although it might be a waste, since hopefully some changes will be applied in upcoming expansion (ok, so a bit of wishful thinking here :rolleyes:). Hope it helps. ;)
     

Share This Page