Runaway Commerce-Conquest-Order

[lindsay40k]

So I've been playing a few fairly friendly games in MP and every time so far victory has easily, clearly gone to the player who conquers an AI every era from Medieval onwards. The AI are easy targets, almost every step in Commerce magnifies the advantages or mitigates the disadvantages of a large empire, and when Mercantilism kicks in to stabilise the happiness it's usually not long before Socialist Realism arrives and makes happiness galore. Full Commerce means the empire generates a mountain of gold, and as Rationalism fills out the tech lead approaches a whole era. Most cities are built near a luxury, so from here on out every new conquest usually adds enough happiness that it doesn't dent things overall. It can even reach the tipping point where Liberty makes more happiness than Tradition.

It seems that conquest is consistently the way to go. It gets to Space quicker, it gets the money to win Diplo, it gets the nukes to nerf a culture ploy. Are there strategies that are competitive with this? I'm thinking about sending SoLs over to liberate the AIs a human has trampled in my current game where I'm going for Tradition and Freedom, but it seems like there'll be no real diplo benefit and they'll need constant babysitting to not get retrampled.

 

[HorseshoeHermit]

Having cities is really powerful, and a game element that creates wholly developed cities with all the infrastructure and fixins without your having to pay the cost for them upfront is a real boon. I am speaking of course, of other, weak players, and the cities they build to be plundered.

Conquest is good.

Mercantilism doesn't give happiness?

 

[EEE_BOY]

He meant Protectionism.

 

[lindsay40k]

Whoops, ta for correction. I don't play Commerce very often

Hmm. I guess there's not much point in waging wars of liberation with a view to diplo and undermining the gains of conquest? In single player the AI is an ingrate who'll denounce you for going to war to liberate them, and in multiplayer it just sort of stands there and lays the table for conquerors.

In Civ IV multiplayer, there were interesting culture and diplo gambits that, assuming human opponents aren't completely cutthroat, made for some nice variety. I can see that the Piety culture game might work... but then, it might also be really obvious and get bulldozed by a carpet of Impi before it comes to fruition.

 

[Silverfuturist]

"It seems that conquest is consistently the way to go. It gets to Space quicker"

Tell us how many turns things are happening at - it gives us something to measure.

Here is something I measured - I played Spain the other day, found barrier reefs right away and another wonder, won space race in 141 turns. Buying 3 settlers and 2 workers before classical era is just so OP.

 

[CraigMak]

If you're playing against weaker players then conquest is the way to go. It adds much to your empire and can even award free wonders when you take cities. If the game has a lot of highly skilled players then war is almost always going to set you back even if you win eventually.

It's very situational. A 30 turn war vs a good player while everyone else is going straight for science and growth will leave you in the dust even if you take cities. But a quick victory over a noob will award you cities, workers and possibly wonders with little cost.

FYI: Most people don't touch commerce. It's usually optimal to fill out tradition, put a point or two in patronage and then fill out rationalism until ideologies. OR Liberty/Tradition mix followed by filling out rationalism until ideologies. These are considered the optimal policy paths 95% of the time.

 

[Tabarnak]

I very often pick commerce after first tree. If i can get at least 3 coastal cities i will put 2 policies into Exploration. The hammer bonus is huge. I once got over 130 hammers per turn by the turn 85.

 

[CraigMak]

I very often pick commerce after first tree. If i can get at least 3 coastal cities i will put 2 policies into Exploration. The hammer bonus is huge. I once got over 130 hammers per turn by the turn 85.

I 100% agree with exploration if you have coastal cities. That +3 hammers bonus is amazing. If your culture is rocking you can even get that bonus +4 hammer bonus from the East India Trading company as well. It's very nice.

I never found commerce that great because its policies seem lack luster to me. +25% gold in the cap usually gives me maybe 5 gold per turn, wagon trails is an OK bonus but I never have external trade routes so meh. The +2 happiness per luxury would be amazing but I don't think I would ever get to it. Rationalism is just so good it can't be ignored which is what would be required to get to that policy.

When would you choose commerce? When entrenched in war and going negative in gold?

 

[Tabarnak]

When would you choose commerce? When entrenched in war and going negative in gold?

Landsneckts can be appealing if you face a stalled war with Xbows on both side. If they go Chivalry you can still laugh

Road maintenance reduction can be good if you have a large empire. I think it's also enhanced by Machu Picchu.

But i will go Patronnage if i have many cs with influence around. But its rare that i have more than 2 cs to care early on.

 

[lindsay40k]

She didn't even need to open Patronage. She had so much income from conquered cities she could out-buy me.

The only time she stalled was whilst waiting for Protectionism to take her happiness from pushing -10 to over +20.