Quick Answers / 'Newbie' Questions

The only full game I ever explicitly timed was Game Of The Month 38, where I spend 30 hours spread over 10 calendar days. But I'm not a very good player, and spreading out that much probably slowed me down even further. On the other hand the GOTM rules meant that there's no restart-to-fix-that-stupid-mistake time in that number.

I do have the impression that it's a very long game.
 
I find it varies. I'm playing Civ III more nowadays (less depth as I have less time - Civ III is a bit like Space Invaders compared to IV!) but when I was playing Civ IV ad nauseam I would play one game more or less a week - although sometimes it just seemed I was playing the same game over and over again. I do enjoy playing on Marathon speeds to get the full feel of the game, and in playing Civ III I will play beyond victory just because it's so enjoyable.
 
All of your games should be timed if you complete them. When the game history screen comes up, at the end it will tell you your playtime (this does not include reloading old saves) - no need to get out the clock.

My games under normal speed on a normal map started at around 25 hours and have gone down to 15 as my confidence with the interface grows, and the addition of the BUG mod
 
If you capture (or raze) the rival's capital city while the spaceship is in flight, the spaceship will be destroyed and they'll have to start again on building it. (A bit unrealistic, but I guess it's for game balance. ;) )

I thought that by razing the capital any link to the spaceship was lost, and so there would be no way to know if the ship reached it's destination - nor would there be any way to give advice/technical support. - But then again that sounds almost as far-fetched.
 
And it's not necessarily the same as sitting down one day to play a whole game and playing the same game staggered over a week or so. And also the time taken includes the time the computer sits idle waiting for you to have dinner or do other things - I like Civ because you can walk away for dinner and come back to find nothing has changed in several hours, unlike RTS games. Unrealistic (when my Golden Horde sweeps across another civ, it is unlikely that the Mayan Holkans are going to be standing around picking their noses waiting for my Mechanised Infantry to take them out one at a time, but never mind that, that's what I like about the game even more...) but there you go.
 
Alright, So I have two questions:

#1. Does the score calculation at the end of a game calculate in the number of saved games you reloaded to reach victory?/ Is there any way to tell (Like from the hall of fame) how many reloads were taken throughout the game? Does the game keep a record of that anywhere?

and #2. Is it true that Units take more XP to upgrade to the next level the stronger they get? For example, I just recently upgraded some praetorians to riflemen and I swear the level-up threshold for them has increased...
 
And it's not necessarily the same as sitting down one day to play a whole game and playing the same game staggered over a week or so. And also the time taken includes the time the computer sits idle waiting for you to have dinner or do other things - I like Civ because you can walk away for dinner and come back to find nothing has changed in several hours, unlike RTS games. Unrealistic (when my Golden Horde sweeps across another civ, it is unlikely that the Mayan Holkans are going to be standing around picking their noses waiting for my Mechanised Infantry to take them out one at a time, but never mind that, that's what I like about the game even more...) but there you go.
If you tap your Pause key it will pause the game timer. Assuming you're interested in getting a more accurate idea how long you actually spent playing the game, of course.

Alright, So I have two questions:

#1. Does the score calculation at the end of a game calculate in the number of saved games you reloaded to reach victory?/ Is there any way to tell (Like from the hall of fame) how many reloads were taken throughout the game? Does the game keep a record of that anywhere?

and #2. Is it true that Units take more XP to upgrade to the next level the stronger they get? For example, I just recently upgraded some praetorians to riflemen and I swear the level-up threshold for them has increased...
  1. No. This is up to your own personal honour.
  2. Yep. The promotion thresholds for non-Charismatic leaders are 2, 5, 10, 17, 26 (I think) and so on. Also, when you upgrade any unit, its XPs automatically drop back to 10, though they retain their promotions.
 
I personally usually build world wonders for their unique benefits (like a free technology from the Oracle or +2 experience from the Pentagon). The great person points are nice and are actually a fair share of the bonus for the earlier wonders. But when you're starting to invest 500+ hammers just for 2 great person points, then I think that's a less efficient investment.
Indeed, I agree. Wonders should really be built with their primary benefits in mind, not the side benefit of the extra GP points. ;)

If you have the luxury that you are so far ahead of any competition that you can choose and pick your location to build the world wonder, then I would (just like Lord Parkin) put all of them in the National Epic city. However, if you regularly are in this luxury situation, then I guess your presently used difficulty level isn't really challlenging you.
Personally, I think it's more when you have the luxury of choosing and picking locations for each world wonder that you tend to spread them out in different cities (to avoid contamination of Great Person points you don't want, for instance). On the other hand, when you're playing in a highly competitive game, you usually won't have a choice of cities to build wonders in. You'll often have just one city that happens to have good enough production to build your wonders, so the same city that builds your first wonder will tend to be used in attempts at building other wonders (at least in the early game).

That's my experience from multiplayer games, anyway. Of course, in single player things are different, and you might be able to afford having multiple cities build different wonders in the early game. (All this is assuming you're building wonders at all, and aren't rushing out an army instead.) :)

Question to anyone here, really. How long do your games usually last in real-time? Regardless of what speed you have it on. Do you play it over days? Even on quick this game seems incredibly slow. I usually can't get as motivated if I re-load the next day having already experienced much of it...
My single player games usually last from a couple of hours to a few dozen hours. (I had one game that I spent close to 100 hours on.) That'll usually be over the course of 1-30 days, depending on how busy I am.

Multiplayer games I'll spend many months on, though. Some take over a year to finish. It's great fun, as long as you have the patience for it! ;)

  1. Yep. The promotion thresholds for non-Charismatic leaders are 2, 5, 10, 17, 26 (I think) and so on.
Indeed - each new level requires 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13... extra XP. :)
 
Indeed, I agree. Wonders should really be built with their primary benefits in mind, not the side benefit of the extra GP points. ;)


Personally, I think it's more when you have the luxury of choosing and picking locations for each world wonder that you tend to spread them out in different cities (to avoid contamination of Great Person points you don't want, for instance). On the other hand, when you're playing in a highly competitive game, you usually won't have a choice of cities to build wonders in. You'll often have just one city that happens to have good enough production to build your wonders, so the same city that builds your first wonder will tend to be used in attempts at building other wonders (at least in the early game).

That's my experience from multiplayer games, anyway. Of course, in single player things are different, and you might be able to afford having multiple cities build different wonders in the early game. (All this is assuming you're building wonders at all, and aren't rushing out an army instead.) :)


My single player games usually last from a couple of hours to a few dozen hours. (I had one game that I spent close to 100 hours on.) That'll usually be over the course of 1-30 days, depending on how busy I am.

Multiplayer games I'll spend many months on, though. Some take over a year to finish. It's great fun, as long as you have the patience for it! ;)


Indeed - each new level requires 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13... extra XP. :)

Im 100% sure RJ was only talking about SP games. I know he plays at least Immortal lvl (or something even more self flagellating);)

Personally, I don't play any higher than Emp, as I like to win every single time ;) If Ive won by 1000AD then so be it, mostly it takes a mite longer (marathon /huge)..I have my own house rules too, to make things fairer, without having to indulge the excrutiating ai diplo lovein that often occurs...

Anyways, back on subject, I almost always run a pure CE, and manage very nicely without GP whatsoever. I used to make a GP farm, now I never bother. It just dilutes the later production of GP (forced by the algorithmic rate of GP emergence). I'd rather have them later, when a Golden Age really matters.. (Academies are really a waste of a GP on a huge map- and yes thats very arguable;))

Just a different method ;)
 
I've been lurking around alot and I've noticed it seems universal to
A) Whip mercilessly for units
B) Build the bare minimum in buildings

So here are my questions:

1) Suppose I want to build an army of 20 war chariots, should I turn all cities onto war chariots and then whip until I can't whip anymore? Secondly, Should I whip as soon as the city begins production on the chariot or wait a few turns so the pop cost isn't so much?

2) I've seen several queues for what to build in a city such as,
a. Build culture for 1st border pop
b. Emphasize hammers
c. Queue up granary, forge, courthouse, barracks, stable in that order
d. Loop unit and waypoint them.
My question here is would any other buildings such as libraries, universities, etc. be necessary? Or would their modifiers be moot since the city would probably not be specially placed?

Thanks in advance :D
 
Another question:

Does maintenance go up for units the more advanced they get? For example, will a modern armor cost slightly more than a warrior to maintain? Or is there simply a flat rate of upkeep for all military units, assuming default civics, etc.?
 
Another question:

Does maintenance go up for units the more advanced they get? For example, will a modern armor cost slightly more than a warrior to maintain? Or is there simply a flat rate of upkeep for all military units, assuming default civics, etc.?

All units cost the same.
 
Im 100% sure RJ was only talking about SP games. I know he plays at least Immortal lvl (or something even more self flagellating);)
Oh yes, I'm sure of that too. I was just offering a friendly alternative opinion. :)

1) Suppose I want to build an army of 20 war chariots, should I turn all cities onto war chariots and then whip until I can't whip anymore? Secondly, Should I whip as soon as the city begins production on the chariot or wait a few turns so the pop cost isn't so much?
Depends... you'll want to be careful though, because excessive whipping can cripple your economy and potentially kill your game if you don't know exactly what you're doing. If you're whipping, the general rule is to ALWAYS wait 1 turn so that the penalty for whipping on the first turn goes away (unless it's a very urgent situation - eg an enemy army is on the city's doorstep).

For something as basic as a Chariot rush, in my opinion you'd probably be better off letting your cities grow and work mines (and having your Workers chop forests) rather than whipping the living daylights out of your cities. But it's up to you. :)

2) I've seen several queues for what to build in a city such as,
a. Build culture for 1st border pop
b. Emphasize hammers
c. Queue up granary, forge, courthouse, barracks, stable in that order
d. Loop unit and waypoint them.
My question here is would any other buildings such as libraries, universities, etc. be necessary? Or would their modifiers be moot since the city would probably not be specially placed?
You certainly need economic type buildings (such as Libraries and the like) in at least some cities. It is (almost always) impossible to win the game with practically no research. A colossal ancient empire with a dying economy will not last the distance unless the game is played with very few players on a very small map.

It's all a question of balance. Sure, build your multiple production cities and your large armies - but keep a few cities dedicated to commerce to at least maintain technological par. ;)
 
I feel that no city should go without a Library. (Actually that's kind of like real life. :goodjob: ) They are diverse and they kill two birds with one stone. They increase your research and they're good for a culture border pop.
 
I feel that no city should go without a Library. (Actually that's kind of like real life. :goodjob: ) They are diverse and they kill two birds with one stone. They increase your research and they're good for a culture border pop.

Some cities aren't there to build research or push borders
 
more a quick question than anything else ...

anyone know where the reference guide for leaders (more specificly when they can declare war etc.) is to be found ... haven't been about to find it by a search though the forums (other than an outdated one from Warlords)
 
It seems to me that later in the game, when I take over that the AI has built a lot of workshops? Why??

Is this be a good stratey? Seems to me that they decrease the food available. Maybe after biology and if you are OK with the city being stagnet??

Thoughts??

Thanks!
 
With your military conquests, it sounds like you would benefit greatly by bringing along more siege units such as catapults, trebuchets, cannons, artillery. When you attack cities, you should use these units (or bombers or ships) to reduce the city defenses to 0% by bombarding first. After doing that, you should send in your siege units first, even if you lose several in the process, as they will damage many defenders. After the siege, you use your normal units like city raider units and so on. This works well because combat favours the healthy over the injured. :)

Agreed... Also, planes are very effective in this. I usually try and build bombers (if I get to radio soon enough)... Then after I capture a city, I move my bombers there. While my army recovers, I bomb the heck out of my next target, so they usually have 0% defense - and frequently incapicated a number of their units - by the time my army has recovered... Then it's easy to march over and take them out. This works fairly well - until they get flight or SAM and fight back.
 
Back
Top Bottom