shield waste

[Zachriel]

Originally posted by Lt. 'Killer' M.
as for Sparhwaks idea: I use that one extensively on Monarch level, I intentionally over-extend, then rush Temples. The AI builds Tundra cities in the same time. Then, their better cities start flipping to me

This means I have to pay quite some tribute, but it has never failed me yet.

Very well thought out strategy. Temple is one of the few buildings I will pop-rush.

 

[Lt. 'Killer' M.]

Originally posted by Zachriel


Very well thought out strategy. Temple is one of the few buildings I will pop-rush.

Thanx, Zach! But never try that when your neighbour is Persia.... I hate Immortals, if I can't build them

 

[bobgote]

Hmmm, I never really tried it on the higher levels, I always get irritated when they build in area that I believe is 'my space'. I always try to build cities with an aim of establishing a firm border with opposing civs, then filling in the blank areas. I really don't like it when they go through my borders and build them on the other side. I find that they build temples (or some culture growing improvement) quickly, move enough military in, or increase the size of their city with settlers/workers. Do you ever get this? I just get impatient and kill them anyway

And I always play as the persians anyway So I don't have to worry about them as nasty neighbours. I am that nasty neighbour

 

[Sparhawk]

Have tried Monarch level a few times but what with the agrression and high waste, just didn't make any headway. Urgh!!

 

[JFL_Dragon]

70-95% Waste & Corruption in a democratic city

The manual say's "minimal"
I think this must be their private joke !!!!!

If they want to slow down players, there are more logical ways
than this crazy corruption and waste.

Eg Increasing science beckers to advances would be a good way
This would really promote democracy eg "minimal corruption"

And increasing production cost per unit, so that player arent pumping out so many troops if waste was reduced.

At this current stage, if only corruption & waste were adjusted the game would become less competitive, so they need to make quite a few adjustments for it to become more realistic

 

[Trinity]

So what I'm reading here is that under a democracy or republic you still get 95% corruption in cities on another continent?

And is there any benefit between 70% and 80% science outlay? I'm at 80% and still tend to fall behind. I really could use the extra gold for pop rushing. (yay for Wall Street!)

I still have a Monarchy and have been considering switching to republic until I got embroiled in a stupid war. I don't want to deal with war weariness -- not when I've got 20 turns for Theory of Evolution and am the only one building it.

BTW, if you have the Forbidden City wonder, and have a substantial number of cities that would be very good producers on another continent, you might want to move your palace.

 

[bobgote]

I don't have a problem with corruption. it reduces the advantage a huge civ has over a small one (slightly). You might not like it when you're the big guy, but when you're the small guy, you might appreciate it more.

Also, I have never had any problems with war weariness, cos I don't start the wars. Sure you might lose a bit of cash when you have to have entertainers, but it's well worth it. Probably still get more cash in that state than in a monarchy

 

[Trinity]

Okay, I'll switch AFTER I get Theory of Evolution built, and after I get out of this stupid war. I don't start wars, I get dragged into them. MPPs are supposed to be for defense, but it doesn't stop your MPP partner from allying with someone in a war and dragging you into it.