Quick Answers / 'Newbie' Questions

[Ryan84]

Hello

i have a couple questions, im playing the original civ4 game which i bought last week (it came with the expansions but id like to know the original first) and some things are really puzzling me.

1) A friend told me u could win the game by being the most cultured civilization, i got a message in the game saying my culture was at legendary status - should that not have won the game for me? or to win the game do u always have to be literally the biggest city and have more control over the map that anyone else?

2) is there always a set length per game? sometimes the game ends when things are just starting to get really interesting anyway to disable the timer? I also dont see how its realistically possible to research all the technologies etc to launch into space..

any help?

 

[Roland Johansen]

Hello

i have a couple questions, im playing the original civ4 game which i bought last week (it came with the expansions but id like to know the original first) and some things are really puzzling me.

1) A friend told me u could win the game by being the most cultured civilization, i got a message in the game saying my culture was at legendary status - should that not have won the game for me? or to win the game do u always have to be literally the biggest city and have more control over the map that anyone else?

2) is there always a set length per game? sometimes the game ends when things are just starting to get really interesting anyway to disable the timer? I also dont see how its realistically possible to research all the technologies etc to launch into space..

any help?

1) You need 3 cities with legendary culture for a cultural victory. In vanilla civ4, the AI controlled civilisations don't try to achieve this victory condition, in the BTS expansion pack, they do.
You can find the various victory conditions in the victory screen.

2) There is a set length to the game (2050AD) if you set the game settings at the start of the game as to have a limited game length. In the custom game setup options, the time victory condition controls whether the game has a set game length. You can't have a time victory without a limited game length and without a time victory condition, there is no limited game length.

You're a relatively new player and thus you're unlikely to play the game near optimal efficiency. It really takes a while to play this game really well. It has a fairly long learning curve. You'll still learn new things after you've been playing the game for a year. When you get better and better at the game, then you'll see ways to reach the end of the research tree way before 2050 AD.

 

[RulerOfDaPeople]

Does having a bunch of vassalls under your control with you forcing them to be peaceful help speed up the modern era AI turns any?

 

[obliterate]

They are a luxury resource. They will be providing +1 in your cities and you can trade away the surplus ones to other civs for more resources or money. You might also be getting more than 1 if you have a building which benefits from hit musicals (I can't remember if there are any).

You get +1 from hit singles with a broadcast tower. And there are two more buildings that provide +1 with hit musicals and hit movies. Can't remember them off the top of my head though.

 

[Sisiutil]

Does having a bunch of vassalls under your control with you forcing them to be peaceful help speed up the modern era AI turns any?

Not that I've noticed, and why would it? There are only a handful of decisions you're making for the AI (research, war/peace, and not much else); most of the others (city builds, worker tasks, unit movement, foreign trade deals, citizen tile assignments, espionage, specialists, etc., etc.) are out of your control.

 

[CIV4WL]

Hi. I am new to CIV IV. DH and I have been playing with the Tutorial all day (Yikes - this is addicting - thank goodness for take out pizza!), and I can't get my ICBMs to launch. Are there any restrictions on launching ICBMs in tutorial mode?

TIA.

 

[PieceOfMind]

I seem to recall that for each mapsize there is an "ideal" number of cities. Can anyone remind me what those numbers are?

 

[Roland Johansen]

I seem to recall that for each mapsize there is an "ideal" number of cities. Can anyone remind me what those numbers are?

Huh, as far as I know that is nonsense. There are some people who like to use rules of thumb, but I couldn't even develop a reasonable rule of thumb for this. The ideal number of cities is too dependent on other factors.

The number of cities upkeep for a single city is linearly related to the number of cities that you own and the size of the particular city and this upkeep has a maximum level. Even that maximum level (dependent on difficulty level) is not a problem once you have decently sized cities and some important economical technologies.

The city distance upkeep for a single city is linearly related to the distance to the capital (or pseudo capital) and linearly related to the size of the particular city. It won't be high for the cities that you'll found early and once you build cities far from the capital, your cities will be able to reach levels of economical development so that this upkeep won't be a problem.

The civic upkeep has a component that is linearly related to the total size of your population in your cities and a component that is linearly related to the number of cities that you have. So this component of your costs can't result in an optimal number of cities at all.

The element that stop limitless expansion at the start of the game is mainly the fact that the number of cities upkeep behaves quadratically for a while (linearly to both the size of the city and the number of cities in your whole civilization for each of your cities) and you will have difficulty paying for that with small cities with few cottages and no way to halve the cost (courthouse). At the same time, the cottages haven't developed at all and are not very efficient yet and you have few trade routes per city. It's just a temporary block in your expansion.

But there is no way to tell at what number of cities you will encounter this limitation. It is very dependent on the number of happiness and health resources that you have claimed which determine the maximum size of your cities and thus the number of cottages (or specialists) that you can use per city. It is also very dependent on how quickly you discover the technologies which make your cities more profitable (like currency for trade routes and code of laws for courthouses and monarchy for hereditary rule happiness). And it is also dependent on the difficulty level as the cost of cities are higher at higher difficulty levels and the technologies take a longer time to develop because of higher research costs. Another hard to control factor is the contact with other civilisations and their willingness to open their borders with you. As soon as you can get foreign trade routes in your cities, you'll also see the profitability of your empire increase which allows you to expand more freely.

It's good to keep a look at your break even research level while expanding. At the start of the game, you'll have a break even research level of 9-12 (your palace + base tile + 1 other tile). While you expand, your research percentage will become lower, but your break even research speed should slowly increase. Each time that you found a new city, the break even research level will get a temporary set back. If the set backs are getting too big or take too long to recover from, then you should limit your expansion a bit. You don't want to hurt your research level too much as you want to reach those important economical technologies within a reasonable amount of time.

 

[Endure]

Hi, I'm new to civ 4, having only played it now for a week or so. I was a longtime player of civ 2, but that was years ago (skipped civ 3). I just have a couple of questions.

1) How much expansion is too much? Back in civ2 I remember just pumping out settlers like crazy early on and trying to build a large empire. From reading articles in the war academy, I've gathered this is not the best strategy in civ4, because when I try it, I quickly run dry on gold and my science drops to near nil. However, whether I try peaceful expansion in the very early game, or rushing a nearby AI or 2 to steal their cities, I always find myself having to bring my science slider down, frequently below 50%. One game where I didn't expand much early on, I found that in the mid-late game I fell too far behind a couple of the more powerful civs who had much larger empires then I did. I know the articles in the war academy stress not over expanding, but they don't say how much is too much.

2)What is generally speaking the best early build order? I've been experimenting and have kind of settled on warrior --> worker --> settler, but it seems like its always in the 1000-2000 B.C. range by the time I get my 2nd city down. Seems kinda late to me. Should I be doing something different in this regard?

3) After you capture an enemy city...it's culture borders are generally really small because the enemies other cities are close. I try building cultural building to get the cities borders to expand, but I don't think I've ever managed to get them to expand much, short of just taking the next city (but it's a vicious cycle until you wipe out their civ...and sometimes I just want a few border cities, not a long drawn out war). Is there any way to help this?

4) Should you always have your cities "fat cross" available just for them? I know in civ2 I often had cities overlap each other and it was fine. But I can already tell civ4 plays differently so I'm not really sure if it's a good idea to have cities overlap. I try to keep my capitals fat cross intact, but have been kind of slacking on my other cities.

Note: If it matters, most of my games have been played on warlord/noble so far, Generally on large or huge maps, at the standard or epic game speed.

Thanks!

 

[Sisiutil]

Hi, I'm new to civ 4, having only played it now for a week or so. I was a longtime player of civ 2, but that was years ago (skipped civ 3). I just have a couple of questions.

1) How much expansion is too much? Back in civ2 I remember just pumping out settlers like crazy early on and trying to build a large empire. From reading articles in the war academy, I've gathered this is not the best strategy in civ4, because when I try it, I quickly run dry on gold and my science drops to near nil. However, whether I try peaceful expansion in the very early game, or rushing a nearby AI or 2 to steal their cities, I always find myself having to bring my science slider down, frequently below 50%. One game where I didn't expand much early on, I found that in the mid-late game I fell too far behind a couple of the more powerful civs who had much larger empires then I did. I know the articles in the war academy stress not over expanding, but they don't say how much is too much.

2)What is generally speaking the best early build order? I've been experimenting and have kind of settled on warrior --> worker --> settler, but it seems like its always in the 1000-2000 B.C. range by the time I get my 2nd city down. Seems kinda late to me. Should I be doing something different in this regard?

3) After you capture an enemy city...it's culture borders are generally really small because the enemies other cities are close. I try building cultural building to get the cities borders to expand, but I don't think I've ever managed to get them to expand much, short of just taking the next city (but it's a vicious cycle until you wipe out their civ...and sometimes I just want a few border cities, not a long drawn out war). Is there any way to help this?

4) Should you always have your cities "fat cross" available just for them? I know in civ2 I often had cities overlap each other and it was fine. But I can already tell civ4 plays differently so I'm not really sure if it's a good idea to have cities overlap. I try to keep my capitals fat cross intact, but have been kind of slacking on my other cities.

Note: If it matters, most of my games have been played on warlord/noble so far, Generally on large or huge maps, at the standard or epic game speed.

Thanks!

First off, welcome to CFC! Now, on to your questions:

1. A good rule for beginners is to expand until you have to drop the research slider to 60% to break even. When you build up your economy so that you can push the slider higher, it's time to expand again. That being said, dropping the slider to 50% or even lower is not necessarily a bad thing; 12 cities researching at 50% is almost always better than 4 researching at 80%. You'll also find that your research will drop precipitously during a war, but should spring back like gangbusters afterwards as you build courthouses and so on.
2. It depends. I like to build either a Scout or Warrior (depending on whether I start with Hunting or not) for exploration and try to time the build so that the city grows to 2 pop on the very turn the unit appears. Then I usually build a Worker, then a Warrior or two for defense, then a Settler. However, I'll vary this depending upon the map, leader, starting techs, etc. For example, if I start with Fishing, the capital is coastal and has seafood, I'll build a work boat first. If I start next to gems, gold, or silver, I'll research Mining (if needed) and build a Worker first to get that commerce-rich tile on-line ASAP. And so on.
3. You can build culture, but I think building culture-producing and culture-multiplying buildings works better. You can settle Great Artists in that city (which works better in the long run than culture-bombs) as well as running artist specialists. If you have BtS, some of the corporations that produce culture (Sid's Sushi is a favourite) can really help. Remember that some civics like Free Speech and Free Religion can also increase the amount of culture a city produces. Be patient.
4. Some overlap is not a bad thing and sometimes inevitable. Generally you want to give each city as much of its own tiles as you can, but the map may force you to build some overlapping cities so that you can work resources, claim territory, and so on. Sometimes it can even be beneficial; for example, one city can work and grow another's cottages while that city works hammer-heavy tiles to complete a wonder.

 

[RulerOfDaPeople]

Does the Culture Bomb 4000 number go towards that city's cultural total that it needs to become a legendary city for a cultural victory?

And how high should you put the culture slider in comparison to the science slider to keep up with research so you're not destroyed by more advanced civs?

 

[Sisiutil]

Does the Culture Bomb 4000 number go towards that city's cultural total that it needs to become a legendary city for a cultural victory?

And how high should you put the culture slider in comparison to the science slider to keep up with research so you're not destroyed by more advanced civs?

1. Yes.

2. Don't move the culture slider at all. Adopt Caste System, make the tiles around your three cultural cities produce as much food as possible, and run artist specialists out your yin-yang. All the while keeping up in tech and power.

 

[Endure]

Thanks for the reply Sisiutil.

I have another question

I noticed that in the custom game mode, you can place civ's on the same "team".

What does this do? Do you share techs/resources/etc (is it like PA?) Or can you just not go to war with each other? Maybe this is covered in the manual, but my game didn't come with one (Bought the mac version...was just a dvd and a tech tree & specifications charts)

Edit:

Another question.

On the diplo/trade screen, often AI civ's have things they won't trade you because they don't like you enough, or they don't want to trade that tech just yet.

I can understand this and accept it, my question is...

Why can't I have the same thing? When I'm the first to discover a new tech, and immediately civs start demanding it for free... sometimes I don't want to take the -1 ding for rejecting them (trying to build relations)...is there anyway we can have red options to the AI? So rather then demanding things I don't want to give, they don't even have the option to ask?

Just seems like a lack of balance if there isn't.

 

[Sisiutil]

Thanks for the reply Sisiutil.

I have another question

I noticed that in the custom game mode, you can place civ's on the same "team".

What does this do? Do you share techs/resources/etc (is it like PA?) Or can you just not go to war with each other? Maybe this is covered in the manual, but my game didn't come with one (Bought the mac version...was just a dvd and a tech tree & specifications charts)

Edit:

Another question.

On the diplo/trade screen, often AI civ's have things they won't trade you because they don't like you enough, or they don't want to trade that tech just yet.

I can understand this and accept it, my question is...

Why can't I have the same thing? When I'm the first to discover a new tech, and immediately civs start demanding it for free... sometimes I don't want to take the -1 ding for rejecting them (trying to build relations)...is there anyway we can have red options to the AI? So rather then demanding things I don't want to give, they don't even have the option to ask?

Just seems like a lack of balance if there isn't.

You're welcome.

I'm not sure about the first question, I'll let someone else handle it.

Your second topic is one I've seen here before and delves into game design. Frankly, by refusing a request, you're indicating the same thing as red-lining something. Whether the AI assigns you a -1 diplomatic demerit for refusing the request or for having something red-lined before it even asks is a moot point. Either way you're indicating an unwillingness to cooperate with the AI, and it needs to and should use that information in its on-going numerically-based assessment of you. At least by refusing one request with a single civ you're only earning a demerit with that leader; if you could selectively red-line items, I think the game would be designed so that such an act would earn demerits with several leaders. (Doesn't any AI refusing to trade something to you earn a "demerit" of sorts with you? Or worse? Come on, be honest...)

In my opinion this is balanced. Consider the fact that a human is far more unpredictable than any AI. Everyone around here talks about how Catherine is a "back-stabber" because she's willing to declare war on you even when her attitude is "Friendly"--in other words, she's disliked in this regard because she'll behave like a human. Our unpredictability gives us a big advantage over the AI, so the game designers gave the computer players a few benefits to try to balance that out.

 

[JujuLautre]

What does this do? Do you share techs/resources/etc (is it like PA?)

You share the research, you share the effets of wonders, perhaps the line of sight (not sure)... I think one of the difference is that in team games, you get a penalty on research based on the number of civ in your team, so that you don't tech too fast.

As for diplomacy, you can't ask for balance in this case, because a human is fundamentaly different of a computer. Think as this being an explanation of the ciplomacy of an AI fr you.
With the current system, an AI comes to you, ask you for things that you refuse, so you know next time the declare war on you *why* the did it.
If everything was redded on your side, they would come to you, go back to their home with some negative modifiers against you (because you don't want to give them what they ask), and next time the DoW on you, you wouldn't know why.

i don't say the diplo system is perfect, but I like it the way it is, because at least you know what's happening and why.

 

[Endure]

Thank you for the replies Sisiutil and Juju.

I guess the diplo thing makese sense..however in my opinion it would make far more sense if the AI was more flexible in it's history. Often times rejecting them a tech say around 500 AD will still be there a hundred or two hundred turns later.

I'll admit that it does annoy me when an AI won't give me the option to trade for something I'd like to trade for, but often I'm willing to forgive and forget in the future..

AI doesn't seem to ever forgive and forget

E.g. I once had a -2 "Our closed borders spark tension" with a civ (didn't really understand closed borders at the time). Later in the game, I agreed to an open borders agreement with them...but even later on, I had a +1 for our open borders yadayada, but I still have the -2 "our closed borders spark tension" even though the borders hadn't been closed for a long time.

If it was me I'd have forgiven and forgotten about the earlier closed borders. AI doesn't

 

[Sisiutil]

E.g. I once had a -2 "Our closed borders spark tension" with a civ (didn't really understand closed borders at the time). Later in the game, I agreed to an open borders agreement with them...but even later on, I had a +1 for our open borders yadayada, but I still have the -2 "our closed borders spark tension" even though the borders hadn't been closed for a long time.

If it was me I'd have forgiven and forgotten about the earlier closed borders. AI doesn't

Actually, that demerit is for close borders, not closed borders. Somewhere your cultural borders are butting up against those of the AI. That contention over tiles results in that demerit. Gaining an Open Borders agreement with the AI won't change that. (Though if you leave the OB in place long enough, it should result in a +2 diplomatic credit which at least offsets the -2 close borders demerit, which is almost impossible to avoid.)

The AI does forget some things, but not in diplomacy. If you get the dreaded WFYABTA ("We fear you are becoming too advanced") which results in the AI refusing to trade any techs to you, there's a chance each turn that the AI will "forget" a small number of your previous tech trades which prompted the WFYABTA.

But you're right, I've never seen the AI forgive/forget any diplomatic mis-step.

 

[JujuLautre]

the AI is indeed programmed to not forget easily.

However, the "close borders spark tensions" is another thing. This modifier appear each time you have cultural wars with another civ, depending on their intensity. Nothing can solve it, unfortunately...

-- eich, once more owned by Sisiutil... damn him >.<

 

[Endure]

Ah I totally missed that it was close borders and not closed borders.

Thanks for clearing that up

But my point is still valid for other things such as "-1 you've traded with our worst enemies" back in 0 AD and now its 1850 and that civ doesn't even exist anymore and/or I haven't traded with them in 100+ turns.

 

[Johno Hughes]

Hey, just a quick one.

When you go to the Victory Conditions screen, you can see the diagram of the spaceship. So far so good. And then when you roll over a part, a blueprint (unreadable) of that part appears on the right. But I have noticed that when you click on the various parts of the ship, it moves as though it were a clickable button.

And then nothing happens.

Is this a bug, or should it show me something? Or am I doing something wrong?

Thanks in advance.