Questions & Answers

[blizzrd]

Can someone please download this save and point out what is missing...it's probably something really simple, but for the life of me, I just cannot figure out what it is!

Oh, and any tips for better play/strategy would be greatly appreciated, too...

As Wessel said, you need another city in Mesopotamia. I assume Jerusalem was razed before the Turkish spawn, because usually that is one of the three cities in Mesopotamia.

As a general tip, you should try to maintain just 10 cities (you actually have 15). Cities after the 10th increase your research and maintenance costs while not quite making up for this with the extra commerce that they bring in. They only really add production value, so unless they are a really good production city they probably aren't worth it.

In your empire, Baku is certainly not worth having for example. Multan is probably questionable also.

You should trade resources a lot more. From the current situation, I got the following deals:

Wine to China for 6gpt
Marble to Ethiopia for 2gpt
Cancel deals with Arabia (vassal) and then demand Sheep and Incense (Arabia has 2) from them.
Iron to Arabia for 2gpt
Wheat to Khmer for 4gpt
Cancel deals with Germany and then demand just their surplus resources (2x Cow, 2x Fish, Pig, Sheep)
Sheep to Germany for 5gpt
Demand Whale from Portugal
Open Borders with France
10 turns of peace with England for their World Map, 60g and 4gpt

Those changes net you an extra 23gpt, almost enough on their own to raise your science from 60% to 70%.

Also maps trades:
World Map to France for 10g
World Map to China for 160g
World Map to Germany for their World Map and 110g
World Map to Netherlands for 10g
World Map to Spain for 80g
World Map to Portugal for their World Map and 50g
World Map to Arabia for their World Map and 80g
World Map to Russia for their World Map and 30g
World Map to Khmer for 60g
World Map to Mongolia for 60g
World Map to Inca for 20g (they change from Annoyed to become Pleased), then Open Borders and ask them for their World Map

Now that you have a bigger World Map, you can do a second round of map trades with some of the wealthier civs:

World Map to France for 35g
World Map to Netherlands for 30g

That's a net inflow of 775 gold, which was basically just there for the taking.

 

[sercer88]

3 cities!! Yeah, Jerusalem was already razed before I spawned... Ok, so a third city... should I build Jerusalem again, or somewhere else?

I got 5 Persian cities from the flip, Bogaskoy, Baku, Rasht, um...can't remember the rest, but, Baku was one of them (and it's not even a Black Sea city!!), so I didn't found it...

As for World Maps, is it really worth it to sell your world map for WAY less than it's worth to civs who don't have much gold?

As for >10 cities, I knew that little tidbit, but I think I needed all of them, and it seems I need one MORE now...

@ blizzrd: also, is trading resources for WAY less than they're worth really worth it, too? I mean, in all actuality, and AI that says they're only willing to give 5 gpt is actually getting probably +30 gpt, so trading that wouldn't even dent their influx of gpt. I guess what I'm trying to say is, the main reason (not the only reason...) I trade resources for gpt is so I can limit an AI's income, and that only happens if the AI bumps his/her slider down to get some extra cash, and I swoop in and take a 10gpt resource trade...not much, but much better than 2 or 3 gpt...

Ok, here's another question, as an almost strict rule, I force myself to build a unit in-between every building I produce in a city... I find it has really increased my play, made a bunch of things easier... what about you?

 

[blizzrd]

As for World Maps, is it really worth it to sell your world map for WAY less than it's worth to civs who don't have much gold?

If you wait too long to sell the map for the most that you can get, you may miss your chance to get any cash at all - particularly if the civ is at war with someone else. They may be broke next time you check in to trade with them.

When you sell the map, you are actually just selling the bits that the buyer doesn't already have. So in your save game, selling your WM to France initially for 10g was all they were prepared to pay - i.e. that's all it was worth to them, because they already knew most of it. After getting a few other civs' WMs during trading, your slightly expanded view of the WM was then worth another 35g - again, that's all it was worth to France (you didn't get ripped off).

Some civs are never going to be that wealthy either, such as Khmer and Mongolia. Getting 60g is about the best you are likely to ever get from them.

If you regularly check in to trade maps with all of the other civs, you won't usually find yourself selling a map for less than it is worth. You will get an offer which is often less than the total tradeable gold that the civ has showing, which means that your new map information is getting full value ont he trade table.

@ blizzrd: also, is trading resources for WAY less than they're worth really worth it, too?

In a word, yes. I recommend that you only trade one resource for gpt for each civ. After 10 turns, I often find that you can renegotiate the gpt deal and increase it by 1gpt or 2gpt. If the AI civ has 1gpt available for trade (after the 10 turns) simply cancel the old deal for say 2gpt and and they will then have 3gpt available. Offer them the same resource again for the higher price. I can usually get all the way up to 9gpt or 10gpt by the mid-late game in this fashion. Occasionally it is even possible to get to the maximum "worth" of the resource (usually around 16gpt unless it is coal or oil or uranium) using this approach, which then means that you need to offer up a second commodity to get all of the available gpt from the AI civ.

I mean, in all actuality, and AI that says they're only willing to give 5 gpt is actually getting probably +30 gpt, so trading that wouldn't even dent their influx of gpt.

I don't understand your meaning here. How could trading sheep for 5gpt end up giving the AI civ +30gpt?

I guess what I'm trying to say is, the main reason (not the only reason...) I trade resources for gpt is so I can limit an AI's income, and that only happens if the AI bumps his/her slider down to get some extra cash, and I swoop in and take a 10gpt resource trade...not much, but much better than 2 or 3 gpt...

If you only trade one resource, even if it is a happiness resource, it wont make that much of a difference to the AI civ's economy. Sure if you give them 4 different happiness resources they may be able to change their commerce slider around (assuming they were using some % on culture for happiness, but still not a given by any means either).

Ok, here's another question, as an almost strict rule, I force myself to build a unit in-between every building I produce in a city... I find it has really increased my play, made a bunch of things easier... what about you?

No this isn't something I've ever found myself doing. Some cities never have very much production (without using slavery to get things going) and if I had to build a unit inbetween buildings in these sort of cities they would never get any important buildings constructed. I only usually build military units in certain key cities.

As Turkey, some of the smaller cities in Asia Minor for instance I usually just use to produce military units. These cities simply can't get a large enough commerce base to justify the hammers spent building universities or banks or observatories, but they still get a decent number of hammers which is great for building a regular stream of military units.

 

[AnotherPacifist]

The only civ I find myself building a unit between each building is China (after whip/chop I have carry-over hammers to build a cheap warrior or catapult, needed for happiness).

 

[kravixon]

I don't understand your meaning here. How could trading sheep for 5gpt end up giving the AI civ +30gpt?

He means that the gold that the AI gets back after science and whatnot is different then what they put up for trade. I don't know if it's true, but I know civs often have more gold than they offer in the window.

 

[The Q-Meister]

EDIT: saw the thread on Congresses.

 

[sercer88]

If you wait too long to sell the map for the most that you can get, you may miss your chance to get any cash at all - particularly if the civ is at war with someone else. They may be broke next time you check in to trade with them.

When you sell the map, you are actually just selling the bits that the buyer doesn't already have. So in your save game, selling your WM to France initially for 10g was all they were prepared to pay - i.e. that's all it was worth to them, because they already knew most of it. After getting a few other civs' WMs during trading, your slightly expanded view of the WM was then worth another 35g - again, that's all it was worth to France (you didn't get ripped off).

Some civs are never going to be that wealthy either, such as Khmer and Mongolia. Getting 60g is about the best you are likely to ever get from them.

If you regularly check in to trade maps with all of the other civs, you won't usually find yourself selling a map for less than it is worth. You will get an offer which is often less than the total tradeable gold that the civ has showing, which means that your new map information is getting full value ont he trade table.

Ok, I see your point, but I must not have explained my question clearly enough. Basically, the reason I wait to trade WM is because then it's worth more. Of course, most civs won't be able to pay 100 gold if that's what it's really worth, so usually I do trade WM to those civs. However, there are usually 2 or 3 power civs that accumulate gold (I've seen France with over 1000 gold available for trade once...) So what? What I mean is ever since the new patch of 1.183, I've discovered that the AI values gold more than beakers in a trade negotiation, and a world map is as good as it's value in gold. So, I usually wait to sell maps to power civs that can research techs that I don't want to research, and then use the better bargaining power that my map is compared to the way the AI values the techs that I have to offer...does that make sense any?

In a word, yes. I recommend that you only trade one resource for gpt for each civ. After 10 turns, I often find that you can renegotiate the gpt deal and increase it by 1gpt or 2gpt. If the AI civ has 1gpt available for trade (after the 10 turns) simply cancel the old deal for say 2gpt and and they will then have 3gpt available. Offer them the same resource again for the higher price. I can usually get all the way up to 9gpt or 10gpt by the mid-late game in this fashion. Occasionally it is even possible to get to the maximum "worth" of the resource (usually around 16gpt unless it is coal or oil or uranium) using this approach, which then means that you need to offer up a second commodity to get all of the available gpt from the AI civ.

That's actually exactly what I do, but it seems I wait too long to initiate those trades...

No this isn't something I've ever found myself doing. Some cities never have very much production (without using slavery to get things going) and if I had to build a unit inbetween buildings in these sort of cities they would never get any important buildings constructed. I only usually build military units in certain key cities.

As Turkey, some of the smaller cities in Asia Minor for instance I usually just use to produce military units. These cities simply can't get a large enough commerce base to justify the hammers spent building universities or banks or observatories, but they still get a decent number of hammers which is great for building a regular stream of military units.

Yeah, I guess it's not that much of a strict rule like I said in my previous post...of course if I think a unit will take too long to build in a city, I'll build another building, or build a spy or a missionary...or the like...

Anyway, thanks again.

 

[blizzrd]

However, there are usually 2 or 3 power civs that accumulate gold (I've seen France with over 1000 gold available for trade once...) So what? What I mean is ever since the new patch of 1.183, I've discovered that the AI values gold more than beakers in a trade negotiation, and a world map is as good as it's value in gold. So, I usually wait to sell maps to power civs that can research techs that I don't want to research, and then use the better bargaining power that my map is compared to the way the AI values the techs that I have to offer...does that make sense any?

If you want to pick up some of the big piles of cash that certain AI civs accumulate (France, Mali in particular) the best method is to use espionage. Enter the espionage screen, weight your espionage spending against just one civ, send a spy (or even a couple of spies) to their closest city to your capital, wait five turns there and then steal from their treasury. I've got as much as 800g in one 'stea' this way from France before.

Anyway, thanks again.

NP.

 

[civhelp121]

is there any map that shows the tiles for each civilization that are under its historical area. I don't mean the spawn cites, I mean areas where if you settle your expansion won' go down.

 

[kravixon]

I've seen them before; they come in a zip file and they're all gray with a bunch of random colors.

At least they exist for sure, I'd like to see them too.

 

[blizzrd]

The settler maps (which is what you are looking for) were posted in this forum for 1.181. I know this because I downloaded them at the time.

However, the settler maps were changed for 1.182 and perhaps were changed again for 1.183 (although I'm not certain about this).

I don't believe anyone has posted the updated settler maps. I'd be interested in viewing them also. I'm not proficient in the python code to know how to create them unfortunately.

Jet posted that it was possible to create the new settler maps in this post:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=7484563&postcount=6

 

[deanej]

Nobody posted an updated RFC Atlas either. Is there work being done on one? I'd like to see a version that includes the changes made in 1.182. At least we can create our own settler maps.

 

[LukeUeda-Sarson]

In a word, yes. I recommend that you only trade one resource for gpt for each civ. After 10 turns, I often find that you can renegotiate the gpt deal and increase it by 1gpt or 2gpt. If the AI civ has 1gpt available for trade (after the 10 turns) simply cancel the old deal for say 2gpt and and they will then have 3gpt available.

The problem with this is sometimes if you cancel a deal going for, say 6 gpt a turn, and you try to renegotiate it, you often get stuck with an untradeable resource, since instead of offering more than 6gpt for it, they mysteriously now have 0 gpt available.

Cheers, Luke

 

[LukeUeda-Sarson]

Nobody posted an updated RFC Atlas either. Is there work being done on one? I'd like to see a version that includes the changes made in 1.182. At least we can create our own settler maps.

I'd also like to see one that doesn't take ages to download. I'm on a 100 MB connection (and have been for 4 years, some things about Japan are good...), so it's not a problem at my end, but the other.

Cheers, Luke

 

[blizzrd]

The problem with this is sometimes if you cancel a deal going for, say 6 gpt a turn, and you try to renegotiate it, you often get stuck with an untradeable resource, since instead of offering more than 6gpt for it, they mysteriously now have 0 gpt available.

Cheers, Luke

That can occasionally happen, but I usually find that the civ will have their 6gpt (or perhaps more) available for trade again one or at most two turns later. Sometimes the reason for them having 0gpt after you cancel the deal is that they are displeased with you for whatever diplomatic reason. If you are borderline unfriendly with a civ, I recommend improving relations before renegotiating any gpt deal.

 

[Walliard]

Playing as Babylon, I noticed that tech costs shoot up on turn 75. What's the reason for this?

 

[Rhye]

Playing as Babylon, I noticed that tech costs shoot up on turn 75. What's the reason for this?

is it very noticeable?

It's a temporary solution, because the longer timeline does not fit the number of techs, so I had to raise the costs to avoid that ancient civs reach medieval or renaissance techs very early (in time with the old timeline). A proper solution would be a complete analysis of the single costs, but I can't do that right now

 

[Walliard]

It added ~100 beakers to the cost of Priesthood, which amounted to an extra four turns. Didn't check the other techs. Not a big deal, I'll just have to adjust my strategy so Priesthood is done earlier.

 

[Agent327]

Playing as the Dutch ('What? Again?!'), I got war declared on me by the HRE (which managed not to collapse this time) and succeeded in loosing my capital to them. Next thing I'm exiled to Mali (as Mali), with the notice that I have a limited no. of tuns to recapture my capital. Also, the Dutch immediately signed peace with Germany. Trying to talk to the Dutch, their leader now is Mansa Musa... (and I have zero chance of recapturing 'my' capital, as Mali is quite ******** techwise.) Is this right?

 

[sk8er AG]

Playing as the Dutch ('What? Again?!'), I got war declared on me by the HRE (which managed not to collapse this time) and succeeded in loosing my capital to them. Next thing I'm exiled to Mali (as Mali), with the notice that I have a limited no. of tuns to recapture my capital. Also, the Dutch immediately signed peace with Germany. Trying to talk to the Dutch, their leader now is Mansa Musa... (and I have zero chance of recapturing 'my' capital, as Mali is quite ******** techwise.) Is this right?

Something like that happened to me as dutch a while back so i just gave up, trying to recapture as mali sounded too hard so i just started over.

Question: Playing as Carthage with new version and keep failing the 5 medditerraian cities req. Tried twice, once had Carthage, Iol, Gadir, Pompei, and Sur. another time had Carthage, Iol, Carthage (in Spain), Barca, and Sur. Any ideas?