Rampid Expansion still worth it

[Darkgreen]

So, I've noticed that Civ 4 tries to stop rapid expansion in the early game by cripling your economy, and thus your science as well. It works fairly well, or at least it is a decent counter to the rapid expansion strategy that was available in Civ 3.
However, I just played a game on noble where I tried expanding fast in the begining (by using the great worker chop method) and yes I was crippled in the early part of the game. However, I think by having that large number of city base actualy helped me out in the long run. Sure it took me a little longer to get the techs for banks and courthouses and whatnot, but by the time I got there I had a huge city and population base that the other civs did not. I may have missed out on a couple of the early wonders, but I quickly became a money and science machine and sped past the other civs on the tech tree.
So, the moral of the story is this: if you want to play rapid expansion, you still can in Civ 4. You just have to take a little hit in the begining.

 

[adidas]

I think in CIV they pushed to the concept of balancing resources/war/science/religion/whateverelse a bit too far. It's not really fun to be under attack by 2 civs early game, having to build a defensive force while the messages 'this great person' or 'this wonder has been built here and there' keep on flowing on the screen. You end up behind in tech etc and having to reload all the bloody time. Boring.

It's not that big a deal if you disable the 'time' and 'space race' victory conditions though, because everyone ends up catching up and participate in big brawl

 

[Tremo]

I guess it's all up to personal preference, but in the end you'll have the same result. You either grow in strength graually, or you grow fast, then slow down a lot and then speed up a lot.

Sure, it's possible to rapidly expand, but i think it's nowhere near as usefull as in CivIII. And to be quite honest, I prefer to grow steadily rather then having to jump through 5 different kinds of flaming hoops to become strong when the endresult isn't even that noticable. not to mention that if a rival nation decides to declare war when you're in your depression, you couldn't fire up the warmachine even if thats all you try to do.

Ow, and on Noble difficulty, almost everything is easy i wouldn't want to try that on higher difficulty settings if i were you.

 

[stoicfaux]

So, I've noticed that Civ 4 tries to stop rapid expansion in the early game by cripling your economy, and thus your science as well. It works fairly well, or at least it is a decent counter to the rapid expansion strategy that was available in Civ 3.

It helps to have the financial trait and to build cottages on river tiles. You get 2-3 food, plus 3 commerce. (1 for the river, 1 for the cottage, 1 for the financial trait.)

One or two fast growing cities with cottages can support a rapidly growing empire's maintenance costs until your cities are big enough to support themselves.

 

[Tremo]

I think in CIV they pushed to the concept of balancing resources/war/science/religion/whateverelse a bit too far. It's not really fun to be under attack by 2 civs early game, having to build a defensive force while the 'this great person' or 'this wonder has been built here and there'. You end up behind in tech etc and having to reload all the bloody time. Boring.

You reload because another nation gets the better of you for a while? that's actually pretty sad. The point of this game is not to WTFPWNBBQ everyone. No, it's to develop a nations through the good times and the bad.

I find the balancing of this game pretty awesome compared to almost any other game that just hit the market.

 

[Darkgreen]

I guess I prefer the rapid expansion because then I get much more of a choice about my positioning. If I wait and grow slowly then I have to either take cities from other civs that have a greater potential of not being positioned well or I have to plant cities in the few open spots left to me which also have greater potential to not be positioned well.
I just enjoy good positioning. Making sure my cities occupy the good resources and minimizing the amount of desert spaces my cites draw off of. Also, I position for defense, peeks and coastline to create bottlenecks and hills in positions to put forts and troops on to defend my boarders.
Positioning makes a big difference, so I want as much freedom as possible when choosing where my cities go, which is why I prefer the rapid expansion strategy.

 

[kingpenguin]

Rapid expansion killed me. Played as Rome, praetorians gave me a whole continent to myself, and my economy wasn't even normal until about 1975. Of course, this conquest of the continent didn't even allow me the positioning you're talking about.

 

[Harv72b]

I guess it's all up to personal preference, but in the end you'll have the same result. You either grow in strength graually, or you grow fast, then slow down a lot and then speed up a lot.

If you're playing on a huge map vs. few opponents, this is true. But if your game setup makes for a more crowded world, grabbing as much land as you can as quickly as you can is a must for the early game--otherwise you will run out of land to grab. And having to fight multiple, protacted wars in the middle ages will hurt your economy/development much worse than a quick expansion will.

Of course, the key to this (or any other strategy) is that you do it well, and with a clear focus. A Civ3-style settling bonanza just won't work in Civ4--even with a rapid expansion strategy, you still have to pace yourself to find the right balance.

 

[adidas]

You reload because another nation gets the better of you for a while? that's actually pretty sad. The point of this game is not to WTFPWNBBQ everyone.

"WTFPWNBBQ"? I guess that's the acronym for what the *bleep* own barbecue?

Anyway I actually agree with you, I'd rather not reload, but I seem only to have the 'bad times' you mentionned. I mean, 25 turns for a settler, plus 13 or so for the archer escort, and both get whacked by the barbs swordmen? Enough to make you scream at your computer

 

[mutax2003]

Use the worker chop method to build settler and escorting archer fast, and if you see barb, let archer go on high defense tile, and let the settler stay back. If the archer loses, you can still run your settler back to safety.

Mutax2003

 

[knupp715]

I guess it's all up to personal preference, but in the end you'll have the same result. You either grow in strength graually, or you grow fast, then slow down a lot and then speed up a lot.

Sure, it's possible to rapidly expand, but i think it's nowhere near as usefull as in CivIII. And to be quite honest, I prefer to grow steadily rather then having to jump through 5 different kinds of flaming hoops to become strong when the endresult isn't even that noticable. not to mention that if a rival nation decides to declare war when you're in your depression, you couldn't fire up the warmachine even if thats all you try to do.

Ow, and on Noble difficulty, almost everything is easy i wouldn't want to try that on higher difficulty settings if i were you.

I definitely agree with you here.

I mean, 25 turns for a settler, plus 13 or so for the archer escort, and both get whacked by the barbs swordmen? Enough to make you scream at your computer

I have had an occasion where a city takes 25 turns for a settler and 13 turns for an archer. This happened to me just a few hours ago actually. But it happened becuase I didn't have the best city placement, my city was small (I didn't let it grow big enough yet), and much of the land was unworked. I suggest you look for the best places to build your cities, make sure the city has some good worked land, and have it at least size 3 before building a settler/escort. You will find that your production is much higher.

 

[adidas]

I definitely agree with you here.
I have had an occasion where a city takes 25 turns for a settler and 13 turns for an archer. (...) But it happened becuase I didn't have the best city placement,

I'm playing epic, seems standard regardless of the location at that speed.

 

[RogueNine]

"WTFPWNBBQ"

I'm seeing this everywhere, would love to know what it actually means. (You can PM me if its vulgar and not post-worthy.)

Thanks! I hate it when new gaming jargon comes out, I'm always the last to know everything. Just found out about O RLY/YA RLY today.

 

[DaveMcW]

http://www.encyclopediadramatica.com/index.php/Omgwtfbbq

 

[Mujadaddy]

"WTFPWNBBQ"

I'm seeing this everywhere, would love to know what it actually means. (You can PM me if its vulgar and not post-worthy.)

Thanks! I hate it when new gaming jargon comes out, I'm always the last to know everything. Just found out about O RLY/YA RLY today.

CERTAINLY not post-worthy

 

[dh_epic]

I managed to make it all the way to Monarch with a Civ 3 strategy.

But in Monarch, I full on bankrupted myself once, and found myself literally stuck in the early classical age. The AI pounced on my weakness, but I managed to hold back their horse archers with my spearmen. I managed to negotiate peace. But then when the knights came, I was in deep doodoo.

Difficulty level changes a lot.

 

[Darkgreen]

Use the worker chop method to build settler and escorting archer fast, and if you see barb, let archer go on high defense tile, and let the settler stay back. If the archer loses, you can still run your settler back to safety.

Mutax2003

This is exactly what I've been doing and it works great. It realy helps you get the early jump in the game and is the key to rapid expansion. Or if you don't want to rapidly expand (though I don't know why you wouldn't since it has been a sure fire win for me every time) it can still help you pick out those first couple choice city spots to help position yourself strategicaly at the start.

 

[-Sturmgewehr-]

I'm currently in a game where I expanded rather quickly, and yes it has definately hurt me pretty bad. My economy is poor which means my science is lacking and most importantly my army is rather weak. The AI views me as a prime target and I'm struggling to keep my cities with no look of going on the offensive. Civ 4 did a pretty good job on stopping the fast expac
Note: This game is on noble

 

[Darkgreen]

I'm currently in a game where I expanded rather quickly, and yes it has definately hurt me pretty bad. My economy is poor which means my science is lacking and most importantly my army is rather weak. The AI views me as a prime target and I'm struggling to keep my cities with no look of going on the offensive. Civ 4 did a pretty good job on stopping the fast expac
Note: This game is on noble

Don't worry about your science. If you went out and grabed a bunch of land then you will be up near the top if not on the top of population. Having that population base is the key. Once you get the buildings that boost you out of that economic slump is when you will come back and pass the other civs in science.
As far as being a prime target, I suggest building lots of missionaries to help make friends. Try to get some strong civ friends and if someone attacks you then get your friends to attack your enemies. This is doubly benificial since the civs you drag into the war with you will also be slowed down. Just play defensive, maybe destroy some improvements of your enemies while at war but don't overextend yourself. If you rapidly expanded correctly then you have all the cities you need, and well positioned ones at that, just keep those building improvements coming and build only enough troops to defend yourself while letting your buddies do most of the fighting.
Out of the many times I've used this strategy the nearest civ to me on the tech tree has been 6 techs behind me by the time I won the space race and each time I've been at least 1000 points ahead.

 

[teoks]

im a big fan of the land grab thing myself. in my game i gave up buddhism and hinduism and spent the early parts of the game getting the initial 3 cities up and working all the good nearby tiles. once that was set up i went straight for the other 5 religions and i got a holy city shrine set up with each new religion, as the first 2-3 great prophets came fast with stonehenge+oracle+chichen in same city after that i just spammed settlers and missionaries everywhere and by the time the city maintainence overtook the 5gold i was getting per city from religions, i already had 25 cities and covering half the continent. it really started to pay off after those cities were developed - i was at 100% science for the entire game and i still got 200+ gold per turn. not to mention my overwhelming population gave me lots of votes during the UN election lol

but i gotta admit that i was playing on Warlord at that time and spending that time churning settlers and missionaries will probably get me killed by barbarians on higher difficulty settings. but it was fun