Quick Answers / 'Newbie' Questions

[Roland Johansen]

I just downloaded the total reality mod. is there a faq or anything that says what all those extra buttons do?

We don't know the details of every mod out there. But this is a pretty popular mod, I'm still planning to try it some day (when I have a bit more time). Some good changes as far as I've read and some fun additions.

The mod has its own subforum in the project and mod development forum:
Total Realism forum.
Here is a bit of info about the mod:
Total Realism mod description.
And the mod also has its own homepage with also a lot of info:
Homepage of the total realism mod.

If you can't find the information that you're looking for (do a search in their subforum first), then just ask about it in their subforum. There are plenty of people playing that mod, so there's got to be someone who knows and is willing to share the knowledge.

 

[feldmarshall]

some question on permanent alliance
1. can you made a permanent alliance with three members?
2. how to make a permanent alliance with alex? we shared a common war for a long time (I even deliberately not attacking our enemy's capital to keep the war going) , he is friendly towards me but he "just don't like me enough".

 

[ori]

1. can you made a permanent alliance with three members?

No it is a very exclusive club

2. how to make a permanent alliance with alex?

You can't - Alex, Napoleon and Toku have a PARefuseThreshold of "Friendly", i.e. you would have to gain a better attitude than friendly with them, which is impossible...

 

[a4phantom]

Does anyone else have a list of priorities for which civs, all else being relatively equal, they'll attack first? I always go for the extreme warmongers (Alex, Monty, Genghis, Napoleon) first, because I know they're likely to attack me sooner or later, so I like to get that war out of the way early and on my terms. Next comes Isabella if she's around, because I don't like intolerant people or Spaniards, and because Madrid is usually a double holy city. Then Mansu if possible, because I know he'll spread tech around, although sometimes I wait until I have macemen because attacking cities full of skirmishers can be expensive unless you're Rome. I try to knock the English out before the rifleman age and the Russians out before cavalry because Redcoats and Cossacks were so overly powerful the last time I faced either in Vanilla. Finally, I take the first convenient opportunity to attack Qin Shi Huang because he attacked me once at a very inconvenient time, and even razed a city! Also he tends to build nice wonders in my games.

I know that's too much planning to start a game with, but I'm flexible with it, that's just the order I prioritize certain civs to either preempt or rob. Also, I get bored with every Victory Condition but Domination, so by the end of th game I will probably have fought all but one or two civs.

 

[cabert]

Does anyone else have a list of priorities for which civs, all else being relatively equal, they'll attack first? I always go for the extreme warmongers (Alex, Monty, Genghis, Napoleon) first, because I know they're likely to attack me sooner or later, so I like to get that war out of the way early and on my terms. Next comes Isabella if she's around, because I don't like intolerant people or Spaniards, and because Madrid is usually a double holy city. Then Mansu if possible, because I know he'll spread tech around, although sometimes I wait until I have macemen because attacking cities full of skirmishers can be expensive unless you're Rome. I try to knock the English out before the rifleman age and the Russians out before cavalry because Redcoats and Cossacks were so overly powerful the last time I faced either in Vanilla. Finally, I take the first convenient opportunity to attack Qin Shi Huang because he attacked me once at a very inconvenient time, and even razed a city! Also he tends to build nice wonders in my games.

I know that's too much planning to start a game with, but I'm flexible with it, that's just the order I prioritize certain civs to either preempt or rob. Also, I get bored with every Victory Condition but Domination, so by the end of th game I will probably have fought all but one or two civs.

I don't have really a list of priorities, I adapt to the game.
But very often I do it the other way round :
killing the peacelovers first ensures that no one will be super fast teching.

 

[a4phantom]

I see your point and that's why I go after Mansu, but don't you worry about getting dog piled by the warmongers while you're elbow deep in peacenik?

 

[cabert]

I see your point and that's why I go after Mansu, but don't you worry about getting dog piled by the warmongers while you're elbow deep in peacenik?

triangle diplomacy is your friend

 

[bardolph]

What is the research bonus of the AI in Prince, Monarch, and Emperor levels? What conditions make it favorable to chase Buddhism or Hinduism with the first tech?

Obviously, any civ which starts with Mysticism, but how many coins do you need (beyond the initial 8 for the Palace) to overcome the AI advantage?

I was thinking that Isabella (Fishing and Mysticism) starting on a coast would have good chances (due to the +2C coast square), or maybe The Incas (Mysticism + Financial trait), but only if the capital has a coin resource sitting next to a river (for +3C). But that's a pretty rare condition.

 

[cabert]

What is the research bonus of the AI in Prince, Monarch, and Emperor levels? What conditions make it favorable to chase Buddhism or Hinduism with the first tech?

Obviously, any civ which starts with Mysticism, but how many coins do you need (beyond the initial 8 for the Palace) to overcome the AI advantage?

I was thinking that Isabella (Fishing and Mysticism) starting on a coast would have good chances (due to the +2C coast square), or maybe The Incas (Mysticism + Financial trait), but only if the capital has a coin resource sitting next to a river (for +3C). But that's a pretty rare condition.

there is a thorough analysis of the odds to get a religion at immortal level in Aelf's IMC (on page 4 mostly).
In the end this is all meh. It's a gamble.
With Isabella on a lake or coast, I go for Buddhism or hinduism with a near certainty to get it.
With other leaders, you need to check how many turns you have with a
1 c tile
2 c tile
3 c tile (huyna capac!).
I'm not able to get it straight for any level and any leader, but I know for sure that if an AI chases the same religion you chase and starts with an oasis, you lose, even if you're financial.
That's why it's always a gamble.
The good part is it's often a winning gamble

 

[Lord Parkin]

As a general rule of thumb I use, when playing against AI with a civ that starts with Mysticism, you'll have a reasonable shot at an early religion up to about Monarch level. At Emperor level and above, I don't bother gambling on the early religions unless it's exceptional circumstances.

 

[cabert]

As a general rule of thumb I use, when playing against AI with a civ that starts with Mysticism, you'll have a reasonable shot at an early religion up to about Monarch level. At Emperor level and above, I don't bother gambling on the early religions unless it's exceptional circumstances.

on emperor with Isabella, it's quite doable

 

[cameoz]

I saw CIV IV in the store when I was buying other software. I almost bought it, because I haven't played Civilization in ages and ages. What stopped me though was a lingering bad memory of a game under the Civilization series called "Call To Power." After immensely enjoying both Civ I and Civ II multiplayer, I bought Call to Power and boy what a dog that was. In my opinion, it was unplayable. So my question to all the civ fans is this. Is Civ IV more like Civ I & II or is it more like Call To Power? Please enlighten me before the store lightens my wallet by $50. Be honest. And don't reply unless you've actually tried to play Call to Power.

 

[cabert]

I saw CIV IV in the store when I was buying other software. I almost bought it, because I haven't played Civilization in ages and ages. What stopped me though was a lingering bad memory of a game under the Civilization series called "Call To Power." After immensely enjoying both Civ I and Civ II multiplayer, I bought Call to Power and boy what a dog that was. In my opinion, it was unplayable. So my question to all the civ fans is this. Is Civ IV more like Civ I & II or is it more like Call To Power? Please enlighten me before the store lightens my wallet by $50. Be honest. And don't reply unless you've actually tried to play Call to Power.

I played (hum not a lot ) call to power, and cIV has nothing to do with that one.
It's the real civ serie, don't be afraid.

 

[a4phantom]

triangle diplomacy is your friend

Diplomacy shiplomacy. I'm a man of few words. "Give me all your money and I won't invade for 2 more turns" and "Give me all your tech and convert to my religion / capitulate and I won't go searching for your last city on whatever Island you found".

 

[KMadCandy]

Diplomacy shiplomacy. I'm a man of few words. "Give me all your money and I won't invade for 2 more turns" and "Give me all your tech and convert to my religion / capitulate and I won't go searching for your last city on whatever Island you found".

well, to each his own of course, playstyles differ, and we start out completely opposite since i am a woman of many words. but when i'm in the mood for warmongering, i often prefer to cripple my teching competition, and the geography/etc allows, using diplomacy to try to get the warmongers to bicker among themselves. it can take finessing since they start out with an invisible +modifier between them from the start but can be awfully fun to watch. if i work it out right, it can end up crippling everybody (except me) for quite some time.

my own question: how do i do the fancy green "lurker comment" thing when i'm interrupting an SG? and i think i figured another on my own, going to test it here... strike one yay i did!

 

[ori]

my own question: how do i do the fancy green "lurker comment" thing when i'm interrupting an SG?

lurker's comment: you can find all tags here, e.g.
[delurk] just lurking ;) [/delurk]

 

[bardolph]

there is a thorough analysis of the odds to get a religion at immortal level in ...

OK. But that's immortal, which is 125% for techs. Can you point me to the tech +% for Prince - Emperor?

 

[bardolph]

What are good "rules of thumb" for judging how much force is needed to take a city? I usually end up overbuilding before I attack, mostly because I don't know how much force is needed to take a city.

 

[a4phantom]

What are good "rules of thumb" for judging how much force is needed to take a city? I usually end up overbuilding before I attack, mostly because I don't know how much force is needed to take a city.

2 attackers / defender should be sufficient, plus support troops and city garrison and your artillery. Add a few more attackers if the city is on a hill or the defensive units are especially good (Protective Leader or Civ with a good defensive UU). Overdoing it is usually a smart thing, because coming up short is a disaster and having excess forces means you can move on the next city sooner. Basically you want to be sure you'll win even with bad luck. Obviously far overdoing it will cause you problems.

 

[ori]

OK. But that's immortal, which is 125% for techs. Can you point me to the tech +% for Prince - Emperor?

Have a look at CIV4HandicapInfo.xml in ...\Firaxis Games\Sid Meier's Civilization 4\Assets\XML\GameInfo the AI bonusses for each Handicap are listed there.