I haven't posted in a while, so I want to catch up on a few posts where I would like to add something to the answers already given by others. Since I typically use a lot of words, this post is still very long. Just scroll down to the part where I answer something that is of interest to you and skip the rest.
a4phantom said:
Just curious, where's the numbering system for patches come from? 1.52, 1.61 for Vanilla, 2.00, 2.08 for Warlords? I assume the 2 is because it's an expansion, but where do they get the other number? Starcraft patches were 1.01, 1.02, 1.03 . . .
I believe this is the internal numbering system used by Firaxis. They start fixing some bugs and go from 2.00 to 2.01. Then they notice some other bugs created by solving the previous ones. So then they create version 2.02. In version 2.03, they change some balance issues. Finally they reach version 2.08 and think it's ready for release and do so. Then we discover new bugs and they can start with patch 2 for Warlords.
a4phantom said:
1. My strategy for the past several Nobel games has been to minimalize settler-expansion and concentrate on conquest. Usually I'll build three or four cities, pump out a host of swords and catapults, and conquer my neighbors one by one. If I'm Persian I only build two cities (one if the capital has horses), and if I'm Inca only one before going on the warpath (all of this subject to the map of course). The benefits of this are obvious: I let my opponents do all the heavy lifting of building settlers, connecting cities and improving terrain, founding religions, and building city improvements some of which will survive my conquest. I also get assorted Wonders out of it. Also, by having a massive army from early on I deter attack from the AI civs, who are all bullies and vultures and only attack the weak. Often by the end of the game, there are only 5 or 6 cities whose names match my Civ, and some of those are built to occupy territory where several other cities were razed so they benefit from others' terrain improvements. I don't care to think about what this says about me as a person, but what I do want to ask is: will this strategy be less suited when I make the jump from Prince to Monarch?
This is a very decent tactic used by many aggressive players. I agree with Lord Parkin that you should always adapt to the circumstances, so the numbers in your post are not always perfect.
If you would like to try other tactics, then try an archipellago map. Attacking directly won't work as there are no enemies to attack. It might give you a new perspective on your opening moves.
Note also that an aggressive opening is not so easy on the biggest map sizes (large and huge) because the other players cities (AI or human) are not closeby. So if you have to walk that distance, then you risk the situation where the other player has time to get a better defence. Even if you succeed, you'll end up with two disjunct parts of your empire.
a4phantom said:
3. Sometimes I have very urgent Civ questions and RJ and Lord Parkin aren't on to answer them. What are their phone numbers?
There are cheap horror-movies that start like this.
a4phantom said:
I think the point of first strikes come in when you already dwarf your enemy, like a tank against a rifleman. +10% more is no longer a huge deal, whereas the ability to cripple your enemy before he even gets the chance to attack you will greatly reduce the damage your tank takes, especially if fighting a swarm of weaker units. The problem is that the Drill promotions add so little. 50% chance at a first strike?
I agree with the use of the drill promotions. In equal strength situations and in situations where you're weaker a combat promotion (or vs. unit A type promotion) is better to improve your chances of victory. But when you're in a situation where you have a 95%+ chance of victory, then I'm more interested in the percentage of time that I can use the unit. If it is wounded half the time, then it's not that interesting. The drill promotion can drastically reduce the number of hps the unit loses in combat and thus increase the time that you can use it.
Note that the first levels of the drill promotion are not that useful because they only allow a chance of first strike or one single first strike. But the last one is great as it offers 2 extra first strikes. If you have a modern armor with 4-7 first strikes, then the enemy unit will have virtually no hps left after all of those first strikes and can do very little damage before it dies.
Note that the drill promotions also give reduced collateral damage since the Warlords expansion which makes them better in city defence as city defenders often are subject to collateral damage.
The typical cases where I use the drill promotions is in cities that are (going to be) under heavy attack. City defenders often have a good chance to win (as long as the city defence is present) and the drill promotion will thus allow less damage and more successive defence actions before the unit dies. Also the drill promotion reduces any collateral damage. I make more use of the city defence promotion, but a few drill promoted units in cities that are going to be attacked can help a lot.
I also use it in modern times on tanks that are going to attack units that have been bombed to half health. The victory chance is already great and the first strikes will result in almost no health loss for the tanks and thus a rapid war with little healing time.
a4phantom said:
I still don't see the great advantage to Keshik's ignore terrain ability. In real life such an ability was murder, but crammed and pegged to game mechanics it doesn't seem so hot. It won't help much in enemy territory, where the enemy has roads, and keshiks alone don't seem likely to do very much before they're cut down by spears.
I usually use mounted units for counter attacks against units that entered my territory. There high speed allows the unit to attack and retreat back into the city so that it won't be vulnerable to counterattacks in the next turn. If the offending unit has pillaged the road on a hill or in a forest, then the keshik can still attack and retreat.
If I enter hostile territory, then I often take some mounted units so that I can counterattack units that attack my stack and survive (and also for stack defence against some types of units). The mounted units can often attack and retreat back into the protection of the stack. The keshik can do this better as it doesn't suffer any extra loss of movement points on hills and forests.
You could try a sudden surprise strike against a city that is just over the border but not in striking range of units without the ignore terrain ability. You can only do this against cities that are poorly defended.
andybrown65 said:
How do I get the combat log to display (the thing that displays each combat rounds results in a popup)? Will accessing it invalidate GOTM's submissions?
Because I often look in the log, I tend to use the shortcut key for it. It's CTRL-TAB.
Vitez said:
I think I'm encountering the same problem. Using Giant Earth mod now, around 1200 AD the game starts to lock up sometimes. After a couple of minutes witing it unlocks if I don't do anything. If I try to hit some keys or move mouse I get bluescreen about something related to kernel overflow.
Also about savegame - after some turn I saved and now I can't load - at the start of loading the game just goes back to the desktop and I'm unable to continue (tens of turns lost ...).
I'll upload the save to Bug Reports.
It's great that you upload it. Firaxis can only solve the problem if people upload games where the problem occurs. Don't forget to mention that you used the Giant Earth mod.
a4phantom said:
Any guidelines on optimal early expansion? Obviously it DEPENDS ON CIRCUMSTANCES, but assuming a stanard sized world, relatively good locations, and no need to build in specific places to grab resources, how many cities do the hotshots build before CoL, and how many after? If it makes more sense to express it in terms of the science slider, that's fine.
When you say build, I guess that you mean build + capture. I never play on standard sized worlds, only on huge worlds. And the numbers there are quite different because the city upkeep formula is dependant on map size. I often build 10+ cities before COL and that is probably a much higher number than what you would have expected. My science rate can drop as low as 10% or even 0% when I try to grab as much land as possible. That depends on the game.
First of all, even if you mention it yourself, I still have to say that it all depends on the situation.
You can always take a look at how much your gold per turn went down when you build your last city. Don't look at the upkeep of the city as that is only part of its cost. If you build a city, then the number of cities upkeep in the rest of your cities will also go up and the civic upkeep will also go up. So the easiest way is to look at the gold per turn before and after settling. The problem with capturing a city is that it's not directly clear how much it will cost in upkeep as that cost will only start when it comes out of its period of unrest. So there's an unpredictability in the upkeep of these cities. But as long as you are settling cities, then you can look at the gold per turn directly before settling and directly after. If you think that you can improve that city so that it makes more commerce than your increase in upkeep, then it was a good idea to settle it. Of course, you can eventually make more commerce than its upkeep cost in every city that you build but in some cities it just takes too long to make it an interesting city (at the start of the game).
Now you'll say that this only works after you have already settled your city. Ok, that's true, but it helps you estimate the upkeep cost of the next city as it will only be higher than the previous one. Use that estimation to see if the city is worth it.
The exceptions to this 'rule of thumb' are of course the cities that are worth it because of their strategic value. A great position to block off a piece of land, a strategic resource that you really need. There are some things that are worth keeping a city that will take a little longer to become profitable.
5thGodOfChaos said:
Ok, quick question:
how can I attack with multiple units at the same time? If i have more units selected and i attack a city, only the strongest unit will atack?
First of all, welcome to civfanatics!
There is a stack attack option in the options menu. However units will still fight on a one-on-one basis. Only the animation has changed. The AI will then determine what is the optimal order in which your units will combat the enemy. Of course, an experienced player can often find a better order of attack.
(tens of turns lost ...).
Are there cheat codes for Warlords and if so what are they?
