If I'm trying a new difficulty level I haven't played yet and I get a tundra island for a start I will restart it. The game will be challenging enough due to the raised difficulty level without having a terrible starting location. For instance I haven't played or beaten emperor yet. If I rolled up my first emperor game in the sahara desert I would restart it. I'd be crazy not to. It's not worth spending 4 hours playing only to lose and not know if it was because of the starting location or because of the difficulty level.
Restarting for a better map
- Thread starter Soryn Arkayn
- Start date
To me, playing Civ isn't just about winning the game's own conditions - it's about setting a goal for myself and trying to achieve it. And believe me, it is the journey to a goal you remember more than achieving the goal itself.
One of my most memorable games was when I decided to do exactly the OPPOSITE of what you're supposed to do in a civ game - I thought it would be cool to try to survive as long as I could as a backward, primitive civilization.
I chose the Aztecs, and upon entering the game, turned my research down to zero. My goal was to keep my people as happy as possible and just survive, so I cranked luxuries up to about 40%, expanded rapidly, built temples and granaries in my cities, and then built up a large military of archers and jaguar warriors to defend my borders. I had a about 11 cities, half of which were in prime locations. My northern borders were heavy with hills and mountains, so I had a few fortress cities there to maintain my borders, with roving patrols to keep an eye on my neighbors to the north and south (Rome and America respectively).
In Civ III you couldn't stop research completely, so I was still researching, just at a ridiculously slow rate (something like 40 turns per tech). I was the envy of the world in culture and my treasury was overflowing (I was so backward in tech that I had built all cultural improvements I could, then just built wealth). My population was massive, but while my enemies were fielding knights, pikemen and medieval infantry, I still had archers and jaguar warriors valiantly defending my ancestral lands. Then the trouble began.
The Romans started wandering into my lands, first a few units, then a deluge of legions. They were still in the northern mountains, where my hopelessly outclassed warriors might be able to survive a guerilla war. I had a hard decision to make - do I preempt their strike to slow their advance to my core cities so I can field more units and wear them down with attrition, or do I simply wait it out and see what they're doing? Erring on the side of caution, I waited, and watched. The Romans marched through my lands, and though I was affronted at their brazen inconsiderate trekking through my people's lands, I wanted to see what they were up to - perhaps, I thought, they were making a move on the Americans.
I turned out to be right. Breathing a sigh of relief that I had dodged the bullet of a near hopeless war, I watched as the Roman legions bore down on the American lands in the south. The war was vicious, and more than half the battles were fought in MY lands as the Romans marched troops south and the Americans marched troops north to meet them. Neither side could gain an advantage, and eventually a peace was signed, while I sat back marveling at my luck and intuition. I never got a chance to finish that game, as my harddrive died a few days later, but I will always remember it for the fun factor and the unique situation I was presented with.
One of my most memorable games was when I decided to do exactly the OPPOSITE of what you're supposed to do in a civ game - I thought it would be cool to try to survive as long as I could as a backward, primitive civilization.
I chose the Aztecs, and upon entering the game, turned my research down to zero. My goal was to keep my people as happy as possible and just survive, so I cranked luxuries up to about 40%, expanded rapidly, built temples and granaries in my cities, and then built up a large military of archers and jaguar warriors to defend my borders. I had a about 11 cities, half of which were in prime locations. My northern borders were heavy with hills and mountains, so I had a few fortress cities there to maintain my borders, with roving patrols to keep an eye on my neighbors to the north and south (Rome and America respectively).
In Civ III you couldn't stop research completely, so I was still researching, just at a ridiculously slow rate (something like 40 turns per tech). I was the envy of the world in culture and my treasury was overflowing (I was so backward in tech that I had built all cultural improvements I could, then just built wealth). My population was massive, but while my enemies were fielding knights, pikemen and medieval infantry, I still had archers and jaguar warriors valiantly defending my ancestral lands. Then the trouble began.
The Romans started wandering into my lands, first a few units, then a deluge of legions. They were still in the northern mountains, where my hopelessly outclassed warriors might be able to survive a guerilla war. I had a hard decision to make - do I preempt their strike to slow their advance to my core cities so I can field more units and wear them down with attrition, or do I simply wait it out and see what they're doing? Erring on the side of caution, I waited, and watched. The Romans marched through my lands, and though I was affronted at their brazen inconsiderate trekking through my people's lands, I wanted to see what they were up to - perhaps, I thought, they were making a move on the Americans.
I turned out to be right. Breathing a sigh of relief that I had dodged the bullet of a near hopeless war, I watched as the Roman legions bore down on the American lands in the south. The war was vicious, and more than half the battles were fought in MY lands as the Romans marched troops south and the Americans marched troops north to meet them. Neither side could gain an advantage, and eventually a peace was signed, while I sat back marveling at my luck and intuition. I never got a chance to finish that game, as my harddrive died a few days later, but I will always remember it for the fun factor and the unique situation I was presented with.
I never restart in the early game. I will admit to restarting a couple of times in the last week, but they are the exception. Both times I restarted in the mid game, because the set of other Civs was too much like the previous game. I like some variety, and groan when I see the same familiar characters so soon -- even if they do look great. 
I need to confess! I downloaded the real world map and found teh builder on my own and I Cheated
Cheat number 1. I erased Montazuma because he was cramping my style.
THEN, I figured out how to plop settlers down so now I have 6 cities to everyone elses 2.
THEN, I put gems in and put a elephant on cuba! I'm a cheater!!!!
I do have 1 other game saved its a custom. 12 civs huge map comquest only for victory. I'm in 2196AD and I havent cheated! but the other civs wont start a war and I got bored because if another civ stops by to pay me a visit he has 52 stealhbombers and 25 jets, 19 gunships to deal with plus a horde of marines. next time I need to make it harder and put agressive AI.. they need to go to war so I can declare war and bum rush the WORLD!
Cheat number 1. I erased Montazuma because he was cramping my style.
THEN, I figured out how to plop settlers down so now I have 6 cities to everyone elses 2.
THEN, I put gems in and put a elephant on cuba! I'm a cheater!!!!
I do have 1 other game saved its a custom. 12 civs huge map comquest only for victory. I'm in 2196AD and I havent cheated! but the other civs wont start a war and I got bored because if another civ stops by to pay me a visit he has 52 stealhbombers and 25 jets, 19 gunships to deal with plus a horde of marines. next time I need to make it harder and put agressive AI.. they need to go to war so I can declare war and bum rush the WORLD!
When I play CIV I randomize everything except difficulty level. Unfortunately, CIV IV doesn't allow me to randomize the map script (Archipelago, Continents, Terra, etc.) because I would randomize that if I could as well. Thus far, I've only played on Continents.
Either way, though, I'm sticking with my tradition of not restarting because of the map, although I will restart if I am given a Civ I played with recently. If the map dictates I lose, then so be it, but most of the time I feel like you should be able to compete regardless of starting position.
Of course, I've never really played on the high difficulty levels. In fact, in CIV IV my games have all been Noble so far. I'm looking to move up to Prince sometime soon.
Either way, though, I'm sticking with my tradition of not restarting because of the map, although I will restart if I am given a Civ I played with recently. If the map dictates I lose, then so be it, but most of the time I feel like you should be able to compete regardless of starting position.
Of course, I've never really played on the high difficulty levels. In fact, in CIV IV my games have all been Noble so far. I'm looking to move up to Prince sometime soon.
The only game that I have restarted so far had my computer name pop up instead my chosen name. I didnt care what kind of start it was. After attempting load from each of the auto saves (I didnt have a manual save) I gave up.
I have played one game with what seemed like a poor starting location. I had a lot of tundra and mountains. I continued to play and was able to grow into better territory. I later found out that most of the map was poor in land type. But I did have a lot of resources and an easily defended location. It worked out ok with some careful play.
So far Civ 4 seems to created playable maps better than Civ 3 did. If it is bad, I seems to be bad all over.
I have played one game with what seemed like a poor starting location. I had a lot of tundra and mountains. I continued to play and was able to grow into better territory. I later found out that most of the map was poor in land type. But I did have a lot of resources and an easily defended location. It worked out ok with some careful play.
So far Civ 4 seems to created playable maps better than Civ 3 did. If it is bad, I seems to be bad all over.
Hellfire said:
Ditto. I play to win, not to see how long I can last against the other Civs. What's the point of that?
I have enough experience from Civ3 to know that if you don't get a decent starting position, particularly on the higher levels, you are screwed. You are uncompetitive from turn one and there's no point wasting 500 turns to your inevitable defeat. So the answer is yes, I will restart again and again if necessary until I get a reasonable starting position. Not a great one, mind you - just one that I think is good enough to make me competitive.
MeteorPunch
#WINNING
I'm tired of getting coastal starts in Civ 4. Anyone else have this problem? It was a personal pet peeve of mine to play as a Seafaring in Civ 3 because of the distance from palace corruption.
On restarting, I like to start with a food bonus, a river, and hopefully someplace inland. Today I went with my seaside start, and so far it's going good.
On restarting, I like to start with a food bonus, a river, and hopefully someplace inland. Today I went with my seaside start, and so far it's going good.
MeteorPunch said:
I don't have a problem with coastal starts, in fact I quite like them. I like to have a city with early access to the sea. You can not only crank out galleys quicker, but you also get more Wonders options.
MeteorPunch said:
Rivers aren't so vital as they were in Civ3 but yeah, it's still nice to have one for the health bonus. I definitely like to start with a food bonus or two, hopefully a hill or two for hammers as well. But I can forgo any of these extras providing I don't have bad terrain.
If I start in any kind of barren location - desert, mountain, tundra, jungle, or plains without fresh water, I will restart. And when I say barren location, I mean not just one or two of this type of tile, but a whole bunch of them. I might do a little searching around first, but if there are no good city sites near my start position, that's it. No point continuing when the outcome is inevitable.
I find games in which I succeed despite a rough starting location to be the most fun. There are limits -- if I were started with snow all around and no resources, or a one-tile island, I'd probably restart. But I like the different maps. I prefer difficult starting locations to higher difficulty levels; I've found that a difficult starting location on Warlord is more challenging than good ones on Regent in past Civ games.
My latest game (Noble) has me started on a river with a couple flood plains, tundra, forest and desert. Nearly the whole world is cold and dry, making the small patch of grassland far to the east I was able to grab all the more valuable. My highest food producing cities are coastal. This is a random map, you can get them if you choose Tilted Axis.
My latest game (Noble) has me started on a river with a couple flood plains, tundra, forest and desert. Nearly the whole world is cold and dry, making the small patch of grassland far to the east I was able to grab all the more valuable. My highest food producing cities are coastal. This is a random map, you can get them if you choose Tilted Axis.
IntruderAlert said:
Agreed. Civilizations did make do with what they had, restarting 50 times til you get a corner with abundant resources proves what? You couldn't handle the first plot you were dealt? I see it personally as more of a challenge dealing with the spot you have and making the best of it, makes the game more of a challenge and in the end, I feel proud of what I have done with what I had to work with, win or lose
.GreenMonkey
Chieftain
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2005
- Messages
- 54
I kill games if I have a ridiculously bad start, like almost all tundra or jungle. I'm not good enough yet to have any hope of winning. It's just like I give up games that I'm losing, no use dragging it out.
Kan' Sharuminar
Fluffy
Sometimes I restart if I seem to be a horrible starting position (surrounded by desert, mountains etc). But I've always learned that if the first city is in a bad position, plant your second in the better one.
Marcus_Aurelius
The True Emporer
If I am trying for a certain victory type I will restart if the conditions don't look favorable for what I want. Lately I have been trying to achieve cultural victories, and if I am certain that I will boxed in and fighting wars before long, then I will bail out. However, I always feel guilty about it.
neriana said:
Okay, fair enough. But for me the challenge is beating the AI when it has an advantage, and that means a difficulty level from Prince on up. You've got next to no chance of winning at Prince or higher with a poor start location.
neriana said:
Where did they hide the Tilted Axis option? It sounds interesting, but I've never seen it.
Under Custom Game, Settings, Map. Pick Tilted Axis, and you can make everything else random, except game speed. There are lots of options under Custom Game; I always check "permanent alliances", for example. You can randomize your climate and sealevel under some other map options as well. Actually, looking at it I've just found you can randomize landmass type in Archipelago too. So much to play with, so little time...screwtype said:
