Realpolitik CIV - An Interactive AAR

[arya126]

I blame it on ADHD



My main goal in Civilization is to build every wonder in my first 2 cities. (my capital and first coastal city). thats all I care about. I have done this on 3 occasions in regular civilization, and once in multi player (You don't know how pissed I was when my friend DOW me and razed the city, bypassing about 10 cities on the way)


I start researching them right after the religion is founded.



Call me crazy but yes. I play civilization to have fun, not to win, besides I find corporations to be quite useful. I like corporations to much to adopt state property.



I know. It does cost me and its almost impossible to do. I also have to skip some key buildings like libraries to do it.



That was one game. Which proves my point, war destroys the economy. I would DOW a country, and as soon as I was done I attack the next, It was 1600 that I won the game, Immortal huge map.



Nope, I spread them to civs, got them to help me. Also once you force them to convert the religion spreads relatively quickly. Especailly if the civ is spiritual, they love to mass missionaries. I don't cheat, I make sure the map is playble and then start playing.


True, but I am suggesting that we don't mass units so when we don't have a dead economy from converting


He wont intentionally get our civilization destroyed


Does, unlike my brother I play through the war. I have only once lost a war to an ai (not counting diety) in a war and yet I don't build units before the war begins and don't enter world builder unless I loose with 90%. I quit the game, because normally I had to get off 100% tech to have the economy to win the war, and aren't doing as well as I had hoped. However I wont quit the game if the war benefited me more then hurt me.

Great. So all you care about is building wonders? That doesnt apply much in our current situation.

But you purposly avoid them just so that you dont found the religion? That makes no sense. I dont prioritize them either, for MANY reasons, but to avoid them just for the religion, well you need to think about that for a bit. And you dont want the religion because of the BUILDING STYLE. Yup, thats a perfectly reasoable explanation.

Winning is fun. But *sigh* corporations are BTS so i have no idea abou them. You can take that comment Cull.

Well skipping key buildings like libraries would be even more crippling to our economy. I dont know why you would skip them, but that might be why you dont seem to win often.

No, war DOES NOT destroy the economy. It CAN, but normally does not if you know how to handle these things. We are DEFINITLY not planning to go on a DOW spree like you claim to have done. War is good, but peace is very important as well.

Cheating.

We are not massing units. I dont know where you got this idea from, so please stop using it to explain your actions.

He can make it alot harder, or alot easier though. We never said he would intentionally destroy england. We only said his evets are very important. It is essential to fear the man.

How did your brother get dragged into this? Leave him out of it. Anyway, you missed the point. Cull said that quiting the game does not apply to this game AT ALL. We cant quit, and i usually wouldnt anyway. Also, quiting because you were at 90% science, is just wrong. Just plain wrong. So what? Keep playing. You dont always need the science slider so high.

 

[MathNerd]

I think he meant when he lost a battle that had a 90% or > chance of winning. But that's plain wrong too. Approximately equal to a free Combat I per unit, which is basically getting three traits instead of 2.

 

[arya126]

I think he meant when he lost a battle that had a 90% or > chance of winning. But that's plain wrong too. Approximately equal to a free Combat I per unit, which is basically getting three traits instead of 2.

But he was talking about his science slider at the time. I think he was talking about science, but you may be right.

 

[Ravus_Sol]

Discussion

Okay guys, end of discussion it's getting pointless.

I have a lot less free time now that my work has started again so i'll be on here less often but i'll continue to try and take stock of everything when i do.

There is a maxim that states we learn more from defeat then victory. One of the best things you can do in civ is play to loose. Yes loose. Start a game as a tech savy leader and build no military units and see how long you can last through political trickery and maybe the great wall. Go for a agressive leader and build insane amounts of troops and see how long you can rush the enemy before their tech advantages become to much. You learn a lot from playing these self destructive games.

The point i'm trying badly to highlight is that we can fall into patterns. Those who find it easier to win by war will be warlike and those who find it easier to win by tech will be flying to the moon or using lasers againt spearmen. It sometimes takes us awhile to realise we could attempt to do things differently, and then even longer to actually try because the other way is so easy to us. Ilduce the other guys are trying to point that out. They don't want to lock the english empire into one potential victory condition. Guys, Ilduce is pointing out that maybe thats so, but he enjoys playing things his way and he'd like to continue to do so as it DOES technically work. Ok? Can you agree to disagree?

As this is a multiperson game we should try to NOT lock ourselves into one victory condition. That means a healthy army (just in case). A sizeable tech lead. (more options) and some political allies (they have their uses even if we don't NEED them)

On Military City (Birmingham, thanks Arya)
Yes technically we could just pay to upgrade them but it's actually cheaper to build a new unit in a heroic epic city then it is to upgrade an old one. It would SAVE us money.

On Miscilanious points raised
Okay, One point that could be highlighted again is the wonder question. Wonders can be good for the economy. Do we try to build one?

On getting a tech lead
As i pointed out previously Russia or Vikingland is just about to get liberalism... thats how far behind the tech race we are. Russia allready has philosophy and from the looks of it russia and the vikings have become happy trade partners while we have squandered with no tech allies. We need allies for trade so perhaps a phony war with shaka in the future. Just send some troops to the egyptian cities to make sure they survive. Then convert Egypt to Chritianity. Germany could also be nurtured.

On War
War can actually gain you money if you burn the cities to the ground instead of keeping them. Unfortunatly if we did that Lighthearter would probably slap us with a "butcher of the innocent" label in game and we'd get dogpiled by haters.

But it can collapse us we kept trying to keep cities. I'm actually quite happy that the germans are here and love us because we can use them as a buffer in the future. They also claim some useless cities that we wouldn't need.

 

[ilduce349]

Your comments are USELESS unless you play games without WB!!!!!

WB is cheating, that simple. Mods: Watch out for this guy in the Gauntlets, Epics, Adventures, etc.

The way I use WB is exactly like playing a scenario. I just want to know what my starting situation looks like. If you play a scenario and know what the map looks like before hand, you know more about the map then I do by entering world builder. In this map, we know exactly what the world looks like before hand. DOES THAT MAKE US CHEATING?

But you purposly avoid them just so that you dont found the religion? That makes no sense. I dont prioritize them either, for MANY reasons, but to avoid them just for the religion, well you need to think about that for a bit. And you dont want the religion because of the BUILDING STYLE. Yup, thats a perfectly reasoable explanation.

I play civilization to create a cool looking empire (with 38 wonders in its capital). I don't want the ugly buildings.

Winning is fun. But *sigh* corporations are BTS so i have no idea abou them. You can take that comment Cull.

Why don't you get BTS???

Well skipping key buildings like libraries would be even more crippling to our economy. I dont know why you would skip them, but that might be why you dont seem to win often.

I skip them so I can build more wonders. I only skip it in my capital.

No, war DOES NOT destroy the economy. It CAN, but normally does not if you know how to handle these things. We are DEFINITLY not planning to go on a DOW spree like you claim to have done. War is good, but peace is very important as well.

When you have the civic pacifism, war cripples the economy

Cheating

Its cheating as much as playing a scenario

We are not massing units. I dont know where you got this idea from, so please stop using it to explain your actions.

Whosit said he would be building nothing but cats in London until the war was over. I would call that massing units.

Also, quiting because you were at 90% science, is just wrong. Just plain wrong. So what? Keep playing. You dont always need the science slider so high.

It means I can't finish the tech tree by the 1600's

@Ravus, I don't have the time to read/respond to your post yet, I will do it when I get back home. in 5 hours.

 

[Cull]

I blame it on ADHD



My main goal in Civilization is to build every wonder in my first 2 cities. (my capital and first coastal city). thats all I care about. I have done this on 3 occasions in regular civilization, and once in multi player (You don't know how pissed I was when my friend DOW me and razed the city, bypassing about 10 cities on the way)

1.That is a way to play, but some wonders like the Hagia Sophia, Chiza Itza, and the like are not at are useful compared to their worth in far more simpler or BETTER things, such as 2-4 settlers, or 5 workers, or a couple military units, or something that helps more, like a library.

I start researching them right after the religion is founded.

See that's a problem. You delay OR, temples, as well as courthouses, Caste System, and, assuming you want it, Chitza Itza.

Call me crazy but yes. I play civilization to have fun, not to win, besides I find corporations to be quite useful. I like corporations to much to adopt state property.

Aside from Mining Inc/the weaker version of it, as well as Sid Sushi/the other version of it, the others are mostly case by case. Culture goes well with Creative Constructions, but is really bad in a military-oriented victory. And corporations versus State Property for me depends really. Sometime State Property is good, in space races(Caste System and State Property late-game workshops), and for uber large civs covering more than one land mass. Sometime corporations are better. Civ 4 is a game that depends per game.

I know. It does cost me and its almost impossible to do. I also have to skip some key buildings like libraries to do it.

Which is why we shouldn't do your CHASE EVERY WONDER GRRR strategy.

That was one game. Which proves my point, war destroys the economy. I would DOW a country, and as soon as I was done I attack the next, It was 1600 that I won the game, Immortal huge map.

If you war for too long, or overextend, then yes. However, we are trying not too. War doesn't destroy your economy, you pushing for more war does.

Nope, I spread them to civs, got them to help me. Also once you force them to convert the religion spreads relatively quickly. Especailly if the civ is spiritual, they love to mass missionaries. I don't cheat, I make sure the map is playble and then start playing.

Every civ map is playable.

True, but I am suggesting that we don't mass units so when we don't have a dead economy from converting

WHY WOULD WE CONVERT TO PACIFISM? We don't need the extra GP points. We're not running a Specialist Econ, we don't have many wonders, or settled GPs, so whats the point? You are going by the assumption we will convert. Somebody's wrong again.

He wont intentionally get our civilization destroyed

I need more .

Does, unlike my brother I play through the war. I have only once lost a war to an ai (not counting diety) in a war and yet I don't build units before the war begins and don't enter world builder unless I loose with 90%. I quit the game, because normally I had to get off 100% tech to have the economy to win the war, and aren't doing as well as I had hoped. However I wont quit the game if the war benefited me more then hurt me.

But then you quit right after the game. You don't experience the rebuilding of conquered lands, and becoming strong out of it. You just say, 90% research after war, quit. DOES NOT APPLY TO US.

The way I use WB is exactly like playing a scenario. I just want to know what my starting situation looks like. If you play a scenario and know what the map looks like before hand, you know more about the map then I do by entering world builder. In this map, we know exactlhttp://forums.civfanatics.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=9424042y what the world looks like before hand. DOES THAT MAKE US CHEATING?

No, because we know the map will look like that before playing and we accept it. But when you roll a Wheel map, or a Pangaea, or a Terra, do you have any idea how it looks like. No. Everybody else doesn't look at the WB when they go into a random rolled map. In scenarios, everyone already knows it, or the info is free out there. You using the WBed in random maps, and then comparing it to scenarios its like telling a guy telling a fat man to stop eating chips the same time the first man is crunching down on chocolate.

I play civilization to create a cool looking empire (with 38 wonders in its capital). I don't want the ugly buildings.

We're playing to win.

Why don't you get BTS???

Maybe he doesn't have enough money, or maybe he does, but by the time he does, civ 5 is coming out in less than 3 monthes, so why bother?

I skip them so I can build more wonders. I only skip it in my capital.

So instead of making your capital, with Bureaucracy bonus, as well as the palace bonus better by libraries, you just skip them for quite USELESS wonders.

When you have the civic pacifism, war cripples the economy

WE DON'T HAVE PACIFISM, AND WE WON'T ADOPT IT. Addressed above.

Its cheating as much as playing a scenario

Addressed above. Also, you mentioned that you move your capital to make it "more playable", as well as WBed in religions you rightfully lost.

Whosit said he would be building nothing but cats in London until the war was over. I would call that massing units.

When our military is so low, that we have some trouble against a civ ganged up against Russia and Vikingdom, then I think its alright to mass military units to win the war, and not lose the game.

It means I can't finish the tech tree by the 1600's

@Ravus, I don't have the time to read/respond to your post yet, I will do it when I get back home. in 5 hours.

So you war, your tech rate drops to 90%, you quit, and you don't bother rebuilding and having a higher tech rate as a result. I think you are just ASSUMING that you won' reach it. Frankly, I think you could reach it at an earlier date. Addressed above as well.

 

[Sonereal]

The way I use WB is exactly like playing a scenario. I just want to know what my starting situation looks like. If you play a scenario and know what the map looks like before hand, you know more about the map then I do by entering world builder. In this map, we know exactly what the world looks like before hand. DOES THAT MAKE US CHEATING?

The difference is that scenarios aren't randomly generated because they're not suppose to be "something you don't know". It almost doesn't matter for this scenario we're playing because its a Realpolitik. It's not like we know the military strength of everyone.

I play civilization to create a cool looking empire (with 38 wonders in its capital). I don't want the ugly buildings.

lol

Why don't you get BTS???

Civ5 is 'bout to come out but BTS is still a great deal for anyone given that modding is probably to continue as actively as it is for at least another year or two with continual play for....a decade maybe.

I skip them so I can build more wonders. I only skip it in my capital.

You know, I easily acheive getting as many wonders as you probably do through sheer military strength. Not every wonder is worth building.

When you have the civic pacifism, war cripples the economy

Why would you have a war at Pacifism?

Its cheating as much as playing a scenario

No it's not. In scenarios, you're supposed to know that there's oil in the Middle East or something like that. Going into WB anyway in a scenario is equally weird in all regardless. There's a reason why WB is considered cheating. You see all the resources around you and plan accordingly which, while on a Giant Earth Map, you should already know off-hand where they are, is unfair in a randomly generator map.

Whosit said he would be building nothing but cats in London until the war was over. I would call that massing units.

Not really. We need Catapults like crops need water. Cats have high morality rates simply because of the nature of the game (suicidal siege weapons). Since you have to send them suicidally into a stack to do damage, we'll lose a lot of them during a war.

It means I can't finish the tech tree by the 1600's

And?


@ Ravus

Okay, One point that could be highlighted again is the wonder question. Wonders can be good for the economy. Do we try to build one?

Yes, but not right now. It should probably go in Kent.

On getting a tech lead
As i pointed out previously Russia or Vikingland is just about to get liberalism... thats how far behind the tech race we are. Russia allready has philosophy and from the looks of it russia and the vikings have become happy trade partners while we have squandered with no tech allies. We need allies for trade so perhaps a phony war with shaka in the future. Just send some troops to the egyptian cities to make sure they survive. Then convert Egypt to Chritianity. Germany could also be nurtured.

Oh God, we are far behind. We don't need a tech lead but we do need to keep up. What are we going to do if we're 50 turns away from Rifles when the Russians or Vikings have them?

On War
War can actually gain you money if you burn the cities to the ground instead of keeping them. Unfortunatly if we did that Lighthearter would probably slap us with a "butcher of the innocent" label in game and we'd get dogpiled by haters.

Pillaging helps. However, a temporary drain on the economy can be off-set if the city can be made valuable mid-term like Antium. If the Romans had razed RY, we would've raised Antium and look "just" to many.

 

[MathNerd]

Oh, god. Lib already? They're tech rate is like a Prince/Monarch tech rate then! What year is it, like 500 AD?

 

[Whosit]

Actually, it's 1000 AD, and Catapults are brand new, so I can't say that we're doing awfully well.

This reinforces my notion that we should take the German cities, sign peace, and throw down cottages wherever we can. We also need to be making smart tech trades. Ideally with whoever is not already top dog. We also can't let ourselves lag behind militarily, because if someone attacks us, it will not be with units an age behind us! We'll need to keep a large force of Catapults handy because those are the only things that can save us from stacks of equal or advanced units.

 

[MathNerd]

Oh. Yeah, we'd better pick up the pace.

We NEED to start putting down cottages. Lots of cottages. Our previous REXing didn't help our economy either, and neither did this war. The next term will be a mainly "finish the war and begin the rebuilding process" term, probably.

 

[Celticfury]

Hey there! I've been lurking this forum for a while now, and I believe that I have sufficient knowledge as to how this game works. So is it alright if I jump in?

 

[MathNerd]

Of course! A word of warning: You'll be spammed with invitations to enter parties. Chose wisely!

I recommend joining the Cooperative Party of England, the party that I lead. First, they have a cool logo. Second, (and more importantly), they believe that the Administration should be open minded and include everybody's opinions in their decisions. In return, the CPE feels that the Opposition should cooperate with the Administration, hence the party name. This avoids an administration like Arya's, who didn't listen to the opinions of the people until he was forced to by the Opposition.

And welcome to CFC!

 

[Cull]

Anyone can join.

We are in election though, so you might want to PM the neutral GM before doing anything or the party leader of whoever happens to be party leader.

@Whosit: What is Germany? Would you consider just Cumae and Neapolis or into "Poland"? I do agree that spamming cottages everything espically in the almost-certain now ours Germany land of lush wet grasslands.

EDIT: X-post. Should mentioned that the new player has been around since 2009, BEFORE EITHER OF US.

Join the NPP! We do everything to assist England, but are far more bloodthritsy, and aggressive when it helps us than pretty much every party.

And our logo rocks(GO AOUDIS)!

 

[MathNerd]

Also, our workers need a reorganization (I think). How many galleys do we have? Is is possible to stick one in the English Channel and use it as a kind of bridge?

X-EDIT: Yeah, but these were his first few posts. And NPP's logo rocks too, but ours rocks more. Speaking of that, I'll need to remind LH to add it to the first page... Linky

BTW, is it just me, or did the colored text just stop working?

 

[Sonereal]

Also, our workers need a reorganization (I think). How many galleys do we have? Is is possible to stick one in the English Channel and use it as a kind of bridge?

X-EDIT: Yeah, but these were his first few posts. And NPP's logo rocks too, but ours rocks more. Speaking of that, I'll need to remind LH to add it to the first page... Linky

In chat, LH mentioned that there's a part of the channel which is only one water tile so we could put a galley there and transport workers across it pretty easily.

 

[MathNerd]

That's good to know! It's just like a land bridge then, isn't it, Whosit?

 

[Darth Caesar]

Hey there! I've been lurking this forum for a while now, and I believe that I have sufficient knowledge as to how this game works. So is it alright if I jump in?

Join the Joker Party we are highly supportive of England and wishes to see it victorious against its opponents at any cost.

 

[MathNerd]

But most everyone agrees that that leader of the Joker Party, Arya, was more of dictator than a president. There are numerous cases where Arya went against the wishes of basically everybody on the forum during his term reign.

 

[ilduce349]

Okay guys, end of discussion it's getting pointless.

I have a lot less free time now that my work has started again so i'll be on here less often but i'll continue to try and take stock of everything when i do.

There is a maxim that states we learn more from defeat then victory. One of the best things you can do in civ is play to loose. Yes loose. Start a game as a tech savy leader and build no military units and see how long you can last through political trickery and maybe the great wall. Go for a agressive leader and build insane amounts of troops and see how long you can rush the enemy before their tech advantages become to much. You learn a lot from playing these self destructive games.

The point i'm trying badly to highlight is that we can fall into patterns. Those who find it easier to win by war will be warlike and those who find it easier to win by tech will be flying to the moon or using lasers againt spearmen. It sometimes takes us awhile to realise we could attempt to do things differently, and then even longer to actually try because the other way is so easy to us. Ilduce the other guys are trying to point that out. They don't want to lock the english empire into one potential victory condition. Guys, Ilduce is pointing out that maybe thats so, but he enjoys playing things his way and he'd like to continue to do so as it DOES technically work. Ok? Can you agree to disagree?

As this is a multiperson game we should try to NOT lock ourselves into one victory condition. That means a healthy army (just in case). A sizeable tech lead. (more options) and some political allies (they have their uses even if we don't NEED them)

Ravus is right, both strategies work, I have used both, and won a game with both.

On Military City (Birmingham, thanks Arya)
Yes technically we could just pay to upgrade them but it's actually cheaper to build a new unit in a heroic epic city then it is to upgrade an old one. It would SAVE us money.

When you make 300+ gold/turn on 100% science, the money has to go somewhere. (This has happened to me on more then one occasion). Just because we have the epic in that city doesn't mean we just build military units in it. I would still like to see libraries, markets etc in that city. I would still rather only build units during wartime.

On Miscilanious points raised
Okay, One point that could be highlighted again is the wonder question. Wonders can be good for the economy. Do we try to build one?

No, we don't try to build one, WE TRY TO BUILD THEM ALL!!!

On getting a tech lead
As i pointed out previously Russia or Vikingland is just about to get liberalism... thats how far behind the tech race we are. Russia allready has philosophy and from the looks of it russia and the vikings have become happy trade partners while we have squandered with no tech allies. We need allies for trade so perhaps a phony war with shaka in the future. Just send some troops to the egyptian cities to make sure they survive. Then convert Egypt to Chritianity. Germany could also be nurtured.

OH !!! I have almost never been this far behind in the tech race (my immortal conquest victories being the exception) I blame arya for the sabotages. I blame cull and arya for not doing anything productive during there rules, and I blame LH for not pointing this out sooner (and for playing the game and for being the guy who has intentionally given us disaster after disaster).

1.That is a way to play, but some wonders like the Hagia Sophia, Chiza Itza, and the like are not at are useful compared to their worth in far more simpler or BETTER things, such as 2-4 settlers, or 5 workers, or a couple military units, or something that helps more, like a library.

But the Haggai Sophia is the 3rd coolest looking wonder... I cant skip it.
I do normally skip Chicken Itza, or build it in my 3rd highest production city.

See that's a problem. You delay OR, temples, as well as courthouses, Caste System, and, assuming you want it, Chitza Itza.

OR and Caste is useless, I never convert to them anyway. I don't delay them, I just research different techs first.

Aside from Mining Inc/the weaker version of it, as well as Sid Sushi/the other version of it, the others are mostly case by case. Culture goes well with Creative Constructions, but is really bad in a military-oriented victory. And corporations versus State Property for me depends really. Sometime State Property is good, in space races(Caste System and State Property late-game workshops), and for uber large civs covering more than one land mass. Sometime corporations are better. Civ 4 is a game that depends per game.

But having 4 Corp HQs in my capital is fun. I never have Caste enabled, I wait for emancipation before changing from Tribalism. Also I never build Workshops, I prefer the +1 food +8 gold Towns give over them.

Which is why we shouldn't do your CHASE EVERY WONDER GRRR strategy.

But I enjoy erecting (joke from civanon) to the wonder videos

If you war for too long, or overextend, then yes. However, we are trying not too. War doesn't destroy your economy, you pushing for more war does.

The difference between your games and my games: If in the 1800s, on noble victory you haven't completed the tech tree and are getting less then 300+ gpt on 100% science. My family calls that a FAIL.

Every civ map is playable.

Not in my oppinion, I can't build all the wonders if I dont have an overrigged starting city.

WHY WOULD WE CONVERT TO PACIFISM? We don't need the extra GP points. We're not running a Specialist Econ, we don't have many wonders, or settled GPs, so whats the point? You are going by the assumption we will convert. Somebody's wrong again.

We already messed up this game, Pacifism is in my oppinion the most over rigged religion tech. We should convert. I thing MN and WIM will support me on this one.

No, because we know the map will look like that before playing and we accept it. But when you roll a Wheel map, or a Pangaea, or a Terra, do you have any idea how it looks like. No. Everybody else doesn't look at the WB when they go into a random rolled map. In scenarios, everyone already knows it, or the info is free out there. You using the WBed in random maps, and then comparing it to scenarios its like telling a guy telling a fat man to stop eating chips the same time the first man is crunching down on chocolate.

I have seen my mum, tell my sister to loose wait while eating chocolate . I also saw a fat kid say he was going on a diet while buying 4 chocolate bars.
As I have said before, I play to create a certain looking empire, if that doesn't happen I will quit. I generally will forget most of how the map looks after a few turns. My WB is saving me time. I find out wether it is worth playing or not. Can we drop the WB comment, as I don't find it to relevent to the discussion. Everything I do is about saving time, I find the most efficient way to do it so I have more free time.

But then you quit right after the game. You don't experience the rebuilding of conquered lands, and becoming strong out of it. You just say, 90% research after war, quit. DOES NOT APPLY TO US.

My point was I know how to win the war. I have won 5+ conquest victories, I think I know how to win a war and rebuild afterwards.

We're playing to win.

No way in hell is that going to happen. I am playing to:
1. have fun
2. become president
3. Make the people of England happy
4. Make the english economy strong

So instead of making your capital, with Bureaucracy bonus, as well as the palace bonus better by libraries, you just skip them for quite USELESS wonders.

I don't necessarily have Bureaucracy. but yes I SKIP LIBRARIES TO BUILD USELESS WONDERS BECAUSE THE WONDERS LOOK COOL. I also skip:
Barracks, Stables, Walls, granaries, markets and grocers and if applicable, harbors.

WE DON'T HAVE PACIFISM, AND WE WON'T ADOPT IT. Addressed above.

Pacifism is more useful the theocracy. But at this stage I would rather adopt free religion to catch up with the Russians.

When our military is so low, that we have some trouble against a civ ganged up against Russia and Vikingdom, then I think its alright to mass military units to win the war, and not lose the game.

Weve won the war, we dont need more units.

Addressed above. Also, you mentioned that you move your capital to make it "more playable", as well as WBed in religions you rightfully lost.

Not rightfully, I was 2 turns ahead of Shaka and then his scientist had a major breakthrough rapidly advancing to current research. It was the computer telling me you have found this religion 3 times in a row, its somebody else's turn. Also I waited one turn to settle my capital, had I settled instantly the religion would have been mine.

You know, I easily acheive getting as many wonders as you probably do through sheer military strength. Not every wonder is worth building.

True, but the wonders aren't in your capital.

Why would you have a war at Pacifism?

Pacifism is my favorite religious tech, when someone suddenly declares war on me I don't have the time to suffer 2 turns of anarchy just so a large army doesn't cripple my econ

No it's not. In scenarios, you're supposed to know that there's oil in the Middle East or something like that. Going into WB anyway in a scenario is equally weird in all regardless. There's a reason why WB is considered cheating. You see all the resources around you and plan accordingly which, while on a Giant Earth Map, you should already know off-hand where they are, is unfair in a randomly generator map.

I (normally) only look at the resources in my capital city.

Not really. We need Catapults like crops need water. Cats have high morality rates simply because of the nature of the game (suicidal siege weapons). Since you have to send them suicidally into a stack to do damage, we'll lose a lot of them during a war.

I agree, during on offensive war its pretty much the only thing I build. But now that we have enough cats, I would rather focus on econ.

Oh God, we are far behind. We don't need a tech lead but we do need to keep up. What are we going to do if we're 50 turns away from Rifles when the Russians or Vikings have them?

LH gives us another great person for free (he has done it 10ish times already)

Actually, it's 1000 AD, and Catapults are brand new, so I can't say that we're doing awfully well.

This reinforces my notion that we should take the German cities, sign peace, and throw down cottages wherever we can. We also need to be making smart tech trades. Ideally with whoever is not already top dog. We also can't let ourselves lag behind militarily, because if someone attacks us, it will not be with units an age behind us! We'll need to keep a large force of Catapults handy because those are the only things that can save us from stacks of equal or advanced units.

Oh. Yeah, we'd better pick up the pace.

We NEED to start putting down cottages. Lots of cottages. Our previous REXing didn't help our economy either, and neither did this war. The next term will be a mainly "finish the war and begin the rebuilding process" term, probably.

i say we elect one of the two financial geniuses I know when it comes to c4 (me and my brother, who doesn't want to create a civfanatics account)

Hey there! I've been lurking this forum for a while now, and I believe that I have sufficient knowledge as to how this game works. So is it alright if I jump in?

Welcome, are you considering joining the PCE, the social conservatives need you.

 

[ilduce349]

Arya went against the wishes of basically everybody on the forum during his term reign

Hey thats my line