...Golden age durations are Q/N/E/M: 6/8/10/16 turns (This progression does not follow the time ratio) If Golden ages scaled to game speed they would last for Q/N/E/M 5.5/8/11.5/21 turns This means that Golden ages are less powerful on slower game speeds...
I'd say yes, but not everywhere. A barracks in the capital can be nice, at least for axes or HAs.1: Is a barracks ever worth building for an early rush (chariot/axes)?
Think it varies a lot. It can be one turn, so practically instantly, or they can plot for ages and ages, and then suddenly stop (fist goes away).2: Approximately how long (on standard speed) does an ai plot before declaring war?
Definitely yes. Culture is the most dangerous one I'd say. Not sure if diplo/AP is possible, but maybe? Space is possible too, but should be easy to control as you are probably much bigger and can direct their research to other things. Culture however is hard to control. If they go into culture mode you can't really do anything about it, except spy shenanigans I suppose.3: Can a vassal ever win a victory while still being a vassal?
Free market is pretty good on bigger maps with many AIs, because you then get more trade routes to AI cities (and fewer internal ones), and even more so after astro on continents types maps. Corporate maintenance is only a factor if you get corporations, obviously, but if you do, then FM is a good move. You can postpone a bit and stay in Mercantilism for a while, but not SP. Corps don't work at all then, and you can't even found them if you have the great person and techs for it. Hard to quantify what it is worth, but SP and FM have different strengths. FM is about commerce and corporations, while SP is for food, hammers and gold (less maintenance). Unless going with corporations, however, I'd say that state property is a safe and very strong option, and probably better than a "naked" free market empire. All that extra food AND hammers from boosted workshops and watermills is very, very strong. On top of that, you get 0 costs in distance from the Palace (including for overseas colonies) and even more hammers from the 10% bonus, which also affect whips. Free market comes earlier, though, so it can be nice to go into it even if you plan a communism game.4: How do you use the economic civics?
Thank you! I'd say that answers my questions.I'd say yes, but not everywhere. A barracks in the capital can be nice, at least for axes or HAs.
Think it varies a lot. It can be one turn, so practically instantly, or they can plot for ages and ages, and then suddenly stop (fist goes away).
Definitely yes. Culture is the most dangerous one I'd say. Not sure if diplo/AP is possible, but maybe? Space is possible too, but should be easy to control as you are probably much bigger and can direct their research to other things. Culture however is hard to control. If they go into culture mode you can't really do anything about it, except spy shenanigans I suppose.
Free market is pretty good on bigger maps with many AIs, because you then get more trade routes to AI cities (and fewer internal ones), and even more so after astro on continents types maps. Corporate maintenance is only a factor if you get corporations, obviously, but if you do, then FM is a good move. You can postpone a bit and stay in Mercantilism for a while, but not SP. Corps don't work at all then, and you can't even found them if you have the great person and techs for it. Hard to quantify what it is worth, but SP and FM have different strengths. FM is about commerce and corporations, while SP is for food, hammers and gold (less maintenance). Unless going with corporations, however, I'd say that state property is a safe and very strong option, and probably better than a "naked" free market empire. All that extra food AND hammers from boosted workshops and watermills is very, very strong. On top of that, you get 0 costs in distance from the Palace (including for overseas colonies) and even more hammers from the 10% bonus, which also affect whips. Free market comes earlier, though, so it can be nice to go into it even if you plan a communism game.
Vassal can possibly win AP if a) in the AP religion or b) own the wonder. Otherwise they will vote for you, if you were eligible. They can win culture and space, but that would be silly. You’ve technically already nerfed them.Thank you! I'd say that answers my questions.
Approximately how long (on standard speed) does an ai plot before declaring war? I
Thanks for your input as well, @lymond. I learned most of what I know about civ 4 from everybody on civfanatics, especially @Sisiutil. His old ALC challenge threads are still a joy to read in my opinion.Vassal can possibly win AP if a) in the AP religion or b) own the wonder. Otherwise they will vote for you, if you were eligible. They can win culture and space, but that would be silly. You’ve technically already nerfed them.
Note: You can direct a vassal”s tech
A relatively strong vassal can be a good thing. They can research some tech for you, and at minimum prove a distraction to your enemies at war. Still, if you are anywhere close to letting them win in some manner, then something is wrong..ha
If a barracks is taking you a long time then you do not know how to use whipping and/or you don’t chop forests. But yeah, barracks are not needed. Sometimes simply speed of attack > the promo.
Free Market is a good civic. Key thing though is use of corporations, which are simply not always that powerful on certain maps. State Prop disables corps. State Prop also rocks late game.
As Pangaea note, there is really no way to say for certain when an AI is going to attack. Ha..unless you see a nice size stack parked on your borders. But the fact that they are plotting says something. Ofc, they may not be plotting on you, but if you fear that they may be plotting on you then you should be preparing in some way for that eventuality, like dealing with them yourself or letting someone else do that for you.
This guide from the Strategy & Tips subforum is excellent tool to understand how each leader thinks:
https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/civ-illustrated-1-know-your-enemy.478563/
You can always reference this guide. One line of note is "Can plot war at pleased:". Some AIs simply will not plot war on you at "Pleased" or higher - unless, they started plotting on you before they became "Pleased".
Yeah I mostly agree with that point. He had a lot of trouble playing isolated starts from what I remember, he really struggled with managing specialists, and really loved the early rush which gets a little bit old and ineffective pretty fast. I more enjoyed the camaraderie, input from other players, and how he explained everything.Sisituils stuff is ok starting out, but a lot of his stuff is outdated and sometimes wrong. You can learn a lot over in S&T. You’ve just touched the tip of the iceberg.
Civ Illustrated project is going pretty well (my favorite part was how in the first one, the organizers promised to do a summary of some of the more problematic or strange leaders, but there was only one and it was just a rant on Sitting Bull and his well poisoning )
I concur of its usefulness. To venture further from the main topic a bit, isn't it a bit strange that Sitting Bull loves to poison your wells so much? Were they the master perpetrators behind the largest bioterrorist attack on American soil, the smallpox blankets? In all seriousness though, I would really like to see analysis on more of the leaders. Some of them would be pretty easy, like Monty's insane and will try to Zerg rush you with his hopelessly outdated units, Tokugawa is impossible to trade techs with unless you have pretty high relations, and Mansa will tech ridiculously and loves to trade techs. A lot of the others would probably be impossible because they're less infamous or well-defined. Could you really say anything about Roosevelt except he's high peaceweight, tries pretty hard to convert you to Mercantilism, and can plot at pleased ?
We had planned to do proper analysis of all leaders and there was some work in that direction (the whole project was a gigantic undertaking). Then things kinda died out a bit, and @Kaitzilla to his great honour put it all together and posted the guide, with a million links and stuff. Fantastic work, and I love that guide. Use it all the time, hence why it's in my sig When playing serious games, I tend to have it in a tab in Firefox, and then tab out of the game to check something, like if leader X can plot or be bribed at current relations. Lain seems to remember all this off-hand, but I don't
In most situations, a non biased analysis like what they already have is just objectively better for this sort of stuff. I remember that there is a game tip in the loading screen that occasionally, even a normally peaceful leader such as Gandhi can sometimes be very aggressive, even pre-nukes! I guess I just can't shake how hilarious the Sitting Bull rant was.Suppose you could say that all AIs play badly (some less than others), and you should therefore try to treat their malaise by placing their head on a pike
On a more serious note, there is a lot of randomness involved, so leaders can play kinda differently based on random rolls or the map. What I like about that guide is that it's objective and the information is easily accessible. Analysis of leader behaviour like SB or Monty or whatever, would have a certain deal of subjective analysis which may not be as valuable for the user in the given game they're in. Also, the "wage war on neighbours" factor kinda includes lots of stuff, so guys like Monty will be high there, while Gandhi is not.
Some leaders have pretty clear trends though, like that Isabella loves to go for an early Oracle due to her religious fanaticism. People like Elizabeth and Willem can be Liberalism threats because of their favourite civics.
And crucially: The human plots at Friendly!
1) Can researching Alphabet make it more likely that an AI attacks you? That is, could the AI become more likely to attack you if they can, now, see that you have a tech that they want, in the hope of forcing you to hand it over during eventual peace negotiations?
2) How does the "automatic" espionage work? That is, handbooks and guides are full of information on how to train and deploy spies, but what about the way you can, sometimes, see not only what a civ is researching, but even what's going on in some of their cities, without having anyone there?
3) I've noticed that sometimes, some AI-led civs are painfully slow to expand. I've played games where one of the AI civs took forever to even found their second city, never mind additional ones. Also, I've kind of got the impressions that this is more likely to happen with the Egyptians than others. What's up with that?
4) This one is pretty obscure: when the game decides which AI civs and leaders you play against, does it first decide on civs, and then on leaders, or on leaders from the start? That is, are civs with two or three leaders more likely to be chosen, or are individual leaders from civs with two or three leaders less likely to be chosen?
Never. They usually spam wonders based on their access to stone and marble.Thank you! I usually play on Noble - not very impressive, I know, but for now I'm having enough difficulties on that level.
Another question: Are AI leaders more interested in trying to built Wonders that were associated with their Civ in real life history?
Thank you! I usually play on Noble - not very impressive, I know, but for now I'm having enough difficulties on that level.
Another question: Are AI leaders more interested in trying to built Wonders that were associated with their Civ in real life history?