Should there be a level between Noble and Prince ?

GT_OKEZ

Warlord
Joined
Oct 19, 2007
Messages
294
As it stands with me right now , Noble is too easy , Prince is too hard .

I attempted Prince a couple of times and got my behiend handed to me . I first went in with Pericles , the leader/civ I'm most familiar with and got torn up by Boudica and Shaka double attack .

Then I tried a first time Monk economy with Rameses and got beat .

Then I went back to the Greeks but picked Alex this time . Agg is a huge relief and made my Phalanxs stronger in the early game . So with Alex I'm at a stalemate . I was able to make my mark on the land and actually start up pretty good . I can defend well enough but I'm having problems mounting an invasion . I have Churchil , Sitting Bull , Kublai , Tokogawa , Monty , Saladin , and Mao as opponents . Yes you read that right , most of them have the protective trait . Everyone is well garrisoned too and due to my wars with Kublai and Mao I have been unable to mount an offense but can only stick to a stalemate defense .

I have the SE economy up and running pretty good . Any suggestions on how to mount a quick offense ? I HAVE to take someone out and it looks like Mao is the most logical target being the closest to me but he's got Kublai on his side and I'm afraid that even if I were able to take down Mao , he would vassal to Kublai right away .
 
Need more details. Post save, please.
 
Ahum, NO! To be honest I found the transition perfectly doable and I've only played Civ (ANY civ game) for a month.
Noble became too easy, I struggled with Prince for about a week and now I'm starting to win my first games on it. Granted, I can't pull of warmonger victories yet but I'm sure I'll master that eventually too.
The difference between prince and noble really isn't that big to be honest. If you're having trouble with it, just keep trying, you'll get there eventually.

Also judging from your post, you seem to be playing a warmonger strategy mostly...this is the hardest way to win on higher difficulty levels unless you're playing Huayna Capac or Julius Caesar. I'd suggest experimenting more with diplomacy, it helps a LOT.
 
i vote yes. it seems you go from 50-50 percent chance to win to 10-90
where it should be like 30-70. (With self imposed rules/goals)
 
I don't think that the jump from noble to prince is much harder than any other. Just stay at noble and try some new strategies. Once you can win with any leader and any victory condition, move up to prince. Pick your favorite leader and strategy, make some game options in you favor (unrestricted leaders, disabling some victories you don't like, smaller/bigger maps or anything you like) and you will find prince quite easy. Once you get some experience with prince, you can start playing in less favorable environment.
 
As it stands with me right now , Noble is too easy , Prince is too hard .

The transistion from Noble to Prince is one of the most easy transitions in the game. The AI still doesn't get any free starting units on Prince, nor does it get any free techs, and all the bonuses it gets are only 5-10% higher than on Noble.

Compare that to the transition from Prince to Monarch, where the AI gets archery for free *and* a free defender at the start of the game, making warrior blitzes (a working strategy on lower levels) next to impossible. Or compare it to the transition from Emperor to Immortal, where the AI gets an additional defender, a free worker, and free Agriculture tech from the start (meaning it can start to farm food resources on turn one!).

Between Noble and Prince, there simply aren't any radical changes that could result in the effect youre experiencing. My guess is that you either had a streak of bad luck (starting between Boudica and Shaka sounds like bad luck indeed), or you relied on some specific strategy which worked on Noble, but doesn't at Prince (although I wonder what strategy that might be because as I said, the differences between these two levels are very small)
 
This depends on what Map and how many Civ's are chosen also....Hard to win on Prince with a Terra Map and Huge (12?) Civs for example.

What is a highly fair and competitive Map and Size setting for Prince.?...I get owned on Prince all the time and always play Huge but sometimes choose different maps like Fractal.
 
Prince is very easy to beat once you get the hang of it. Just keep playing on Prince, I promise you that it will get easier.



The thing is , the only victories I consider REAL victories are domination and conquest , for me , the other conditions are kind of a cheap cop-out . I haven't started back up the Alex game but just won with Saladin , AP-diplo victory but that doesn't satisfy me . I am only truly satisfied with a conquest or domination .

It seems that I can get pretty much good start I get on noble but I notice Prince is much stronger militarly . I am much more limited on initiating conflict and seem unable to wipe out a civ early . Maybe its because I keep on drawing well garissoned protective leaders .
 
It seems that I can get pretty much good start I get on noble but I notice Prince is much stronger militarly . I am much more limited on initiating conflict and seem unable to wipe out a civ early.

Still, there is nothing in the differences between Prince and Noble that could explain such an effect. Compared to Noble, the AI gets a 5% bonus to unit production - meaning that in the time you can build 20 units, the AI can build 21 (if all other factors are equal). This is not at all game-changing.

Question: Are you sure that all your previous games were played under the same conditions than your current ones? For example, patch 3.13 changed the AI a little so that it focuses a bit more on building units in the early game. If you played your Noble games mostly with 3.02/3.02, and your Prince games with 3.13, then this would perfectly explain the effects you're experiencing. The cause of these effects would then not be a to steep increase in difficulty between Noble and Prince, but the fact that patch 3.13 made your favourite early game strategy substantially harder at about the same time when you decided to try a higher difficulty level.
 
hmmm...i never played anything below monarch so i dunno. i usually play emperor or monarch and although i get my ass kicked on emperor a lot, it makes me a much stronger monarch player. so keep practicing on a higher level and get your ass kicked you will do well in the lower difficulty.
 
The transistion from Noble to Prince is one of the most easy transitions in the game. The AI still doesn't get any free starting units on Prince, nor does it get any free techs, and all the bonuses it gets are only 5-10% higher than on Noble.

Compare that to the transition from Prince to Monarch, where the AI gets archery for free *and* a free defender at the start of the game, making warrior blitzes (a working strategy on lower levels) next to impossible. Or compare it to the transition from Emperor to Immortal, where the AI gets an additional defender, a free worker, and free Agriculture tech from the start (meaning it can start to farm food resources on turn one!).

Between Noble and Prince, there simply aren't any radical changes that could result in the effect youre experiencing. My guess is that you either had a streak of bad luck (starting between Boudica and Shaka sounds like bad luck indeed), or you relied on some specific strategy which worked on Noble, but doesn't at Prince (although I wonder what strategy that might be because as I said, the differences between these two levels are very small)

The Emperor ---> Immortal jump is clearly the toughest (mainly because of the additional worker methinks).
 
This is going to sound bad, but Prince really isn't that hard. It's almost the same as Noble.

I notice you're using leaders with builder traits. Maybe you should focus on more militaristic leaders, instead of Pericles. Alex is better for war, but, still, I'm not sure that he's a good choice for you. I think Rome or Persia would be better than Greece. Both Rome and Persia get overwhelmingly powerful, early UUs, and both get quite good UBs. Rome and Persia are extremely noob-friendly, warmonger-friendly, and most of the Roman and Persian leaders are Organized, letting you easily manage that large empire that you conquered so easily.

Greece is not really as noob-friendly, and you might want to hold off on playing Greece until you've got a good handle on the game. A specialist economy requires lots of micromanagement and experience. You need to know when to force merchants, when to force priests, etc.

Here's some quick tips that will help you survive Noble/Prince:
  • Build more workers. Keep building them until you've got so many, you are tempted to automate them.
  • Don't bother making defenders. Defenders are pointless. Make offensive units. You can leave unpromoted warriors in your cities, generally. Border towns need a decent garrison, of course, but that's about it.
  • Protective is a joke. Target the Protective leaders first. It's like they only have one trait. Treat them that way.
  • Never trust ANY Russians or Frenchmen. They will backstab you, guaranteed. Kill them before they do so.
  • Choose one civilization to be the "rogue state". Bribe everyone into war with that civilization. If anyone holds out, then choose that civilization to be the next rogue state. This is the safest way to engage in war, because you end up minimizing the "You declared war on our friend!" modifiers, and your war allies are too busy being useful to backstab you.
  • Build more cottages. Really. Cottage spam, as a strategy, almost never fails. You don't need the pyramids, you don't need to be philosophical, and you certainly don't need to be Financial. In fact, Financial only helps minimally -- about a 10-15% increase in commerce, at the end of the game. Financial's real benefit is when you're working coastal tiles, where you get a constant 50% increase in commerce.
  • Learn how to use diplomacy to your benefit. Once you can get a permanent alliance with Tokugawa, you're probably all set. If you don't know how to get Tokugawa to open his borders, you need to read the War Academy ASAP.
  • Don't build so many wonders. Take the wonders by force.
  • Don't go after religious technologies. Take the shrine by force.
 
I have to agree with Powerslave, the difference between prince and noble is actually pretty minor.
 
Build more cottages. Really. Cottage spam, as a strategy, almost never fails. You don't need the pyramids, you don't need to be philosophical, and you certainly don't need to be Financial. In fact, Financial only helps minimally -- about a 10-15% increase in commerce, at the end of the game. Financial's real benefit is when you're working coastal tiles, where you get a constant 50% increase in commerce.

I agree with most of your suggestions, but this one not so much. I agree that spamming cottages is a strong tactic, but the Financial trait is a huge benefit in the early game. Not only do the coastal tiles produce 50% more commerce, but the early cottages on river tiles do as well as the level 2 cottages on all other tiles. While it is true that by the late game, this benefit is somewhat watered down by the ammount of commerce that your fully developed towns generate, the early game is where the Financial trait is important. Having 50% more commerce in the early game means that you are getting the early techs 50% faster. You have a better chance of reaching the late game if you develop a tech lead early on.
 
I agree with most of your suggestions, but this one not so much. I agree that spamming cottages is a strong tactic, but the Financial trait is a huge benefit in the early game.

I totally agree with you, and much of Civ IV seems to be about getting an early advantage, but even if you're not Financial, you can gain a huge advantage from cottage spam. Many people seem to associate cottages (and cottage spam, in general) with Financial, exclusively. I think this is shortsighted of them. Cottage spam definitely helps the Financial civilizations the most (and early in the game, most of all), but there's no reason that Mehmed II or Shaka should avoid cottage spam.

Some of my recent posts have been a bit too short on details, especially considering their rather firmly stated generalizations, as I've been trying to cut back on writing excessively long posts. I think maybe I've been mercilessly editing my posts down past the point which is reasonable, leaving rather contentious statements without enough details.

I'll consider this experiment to mainly be a failure and go back to writing dissertations on whatever comes to mind. I just hope that people don't skip my posts when they see how long they are!
 
What People find hard or easy varies a lot. If you find a level too hard, give the Computer some disadvantages or vice versa. Playing certain combos of leaders and civs can give you huge advantages. Playing the Sumerians with Zara Yaqob for instance - is really powerful on a larger map.
 
The thing is , the only victories I consider REAL victories are domination and conquest , for me , the other conditions are kind of a cheap cop-out . I haven't started back up the Alex game but just won with Saladin , AP-diplo victory but that doesn't satisfy me . I am only truly satisfied with a conquest or domination .

Agree


I consider a game won just only when I can control/erase everyone with my military power.

When I " feel " I have won the game I end it up without waiting to delete every opponent city. Of course often I take some time razing cities just for fun.

I still have anyway to try harder levels
 
This is going to sound bad, but Prince really isn't that hard. It's almost the same as Noble.

I notice you're using leaders with builder traits. Maybe you should focus on more militaristic leaders, instead of Pericles. Alex is better for war, but, still, I'm not sure that he's a good choice for you. I think Rome or Persia would be better than Greece. Both Rome and Persia get overwhelmingly powerful, early UUs, and both get quite good UBs. Rome and Persia are extremely noob-friendly, warmonger-friendly, and most of the Roman and Persian leaders are Organized, letting you easily manage that large empire that you conquered so easily.

Greece is not really as noob-friendly, and you might want to hold off on playing Greece until you've got a good handle on the game. A specialist economy requires lots of micromanagement and experience. You need to know when to force merchants, when to force priests, etc.

Here's some quick tips that will help you survive Noble/Prince:
  • Build more workers. Keep building them until you've got so many, you are tempted to automate them.
  • Don't bother making defenders. Defenders are pointless. Make offensive units. You can leave unpromoted warriors in your cities, generally. Border towns need a decent garrison, of course, but that's about it.
  • Protective is a joke. Target the Protective leaders first. It's like they only have one trait. Treat them that way.
  • Never trust ANY Russians or Frenchmen. They will backstab you, guaranteed. Kill them before they do so.
  • Choose one civilization to be the "rogue state". Bribe everyone into war with that civilization. If anyone holds out, then choose that civilization to be the next rogue state. This is the safest way to engage in war, because you end up minimizing the "You declared war on our friend!" modifiers, and your war allies are too busy being useful to backstab you.
  • Build more cottages. Really. Cottage spam, as a strategy, almost never fails. You don't need the pyramids, you don't need to be philosophical, and you certainly don't need to be Financial. In fact, Financial only helps minimally -- about a 10-15% increase in commerce, at the end of the game. Financial's real benefit is when you're working coastal tiles, where you get a constant 50% increase in commerce.
  • Learn how to use diplomacy to your benefit. Once you can get a permanent alliance with Tokugawa, you're probably all set. If you don't know how to get Tokugawa to open his borders, you need to read the War Academy ASAP.
  • Don't build so many wonders. Take the wonders by force.
  • Don't go after religious technologies. Take the shrine by force.


Thanx for the advice . Actually your right about most things and because of following some of these tips , I just won my first game on Prince ( with this actually being my 5th try on Prince.) Well , I did win a diplo with Saladin but this time I'm talking a Domination with Alex .

I see what your saying about the Greeks and the SE , however , for me , its rather simple to run a SE and it paid off very nicely for me . In the Medieval Era with my science meter at 0% I was still producing between 300-400 beakers/turn . I actually find the SE more benificial to me .

I picked Alex because he seemed the perfect balance between a builder and warmonger . Alex's two traits make him formidable during both war time and peace time . It paid off once I incorperated some of these older but very wise tactics . Brushed over the war academy again before trying another game .

This time I had the intent of being aggressive since turn 1 . In my other games I would be either non-aggressive or semi-aggressive . This time it was about building troops , troop support ( barracks , etc) , invasion .

The only wonder I gunned for early was Oracle just for the slingshot , I didn't even bother with the others until later in the game . By going Oracle , I already had the option of adopting two religions ( 3 once I slingshoted CoL) but chose to remain a heathen . I didn't discover any of the early religions first aside from Confuscism .

Ok this map was particularly odd . It seems that certain resources were concentrated on one part of the continent ( I was playing Terra standard) . Of 7 of us , only three had access to early iron and 3 had access to early copper . I was fortunate enough to have a relatively close ( not immediatly close) access to copper . Threw up my second city there . So I build mostly Phalanxs . I varried their promotions and shuffled between cover and CR I . My scout was fortunate enough to gain two levels in his exploring so I brought him back to base where he awaited the emergence of a GG to become a super healer . From the getgo , I was focused on taking down Isabella . Naturally she made the Buddha shrien and focused on wonders and religous techs This worked in my favor since I was going mostly militarly . I didn't even bother with any wonders after Oracle until later in the game . I got 4 cities up before I invaded Isabella . By then she had a couple swordsmen and axemen , no big deal , majority of her forces were Archers . My Phalanxs had relatively little trouble taking her five cities and razing one . I made good right away with ZY of the Ethiopians as soon as I captured the Buddha shrine since he was also a Buddhist .
I was rather fortunate because Isabella already spread Buddhism to all four of my cities including her 5 I captured . Naturally I converted to buddhism as soon as I got the shrine and destroyed the Spanish civ .

In the aftermath , I had 9 cities with a couple wonders to boot . I was in good shape . I then had an era of peace ( not long but long enough) where I reshaped the cities to fit my economy by appointing specialists ( I had caste already) . I consolidated my gains and turned all of my cities into benificial ones . My beaker rate began to skyrocket which saved me a lot of money in the long run . I made friendly with ZY . ZY isn't as militarly effective as Shaka but he had access to some nice happiness resources before I wanted to take on Representation with Pyramids . I was able to procure those happiness resources from my friendly civ for free and able to send him to war with some future enemies to weaken them up a bit . I only had to trade a couple techs for it . With the SE economy and high GS + other GP birthrate I was already ahead of the tech race in no time . I built the Great Library , National Epic , Heroic Epic ,etc , and adopted Mercantilism . During my era of peace I was on pacifism/beauracracy which generated some very useful GP , mostly GSs and GMs . I lightbulbed mostly with teh scientists until I was far enough ahead that I could integrate them into the cities as SSs .

I had riflemen before the AIs did with a considerable cusion of a lead before they would get them . As soon as I had riflemen , I was building like crazy plus upgrading obsolete units . As soon as I had enough , I took out Hatty and Tokugawa in one sweep . Consolidated my gains again but in much shorter time , I was strictly focused on ending this game as soon as possible before other AIs had a chance to catch up . During the wars with Hatty and Tokugawa , I aquired the ability to make infantry . I upgraded to infantry , used my great generals as both instructers and elite units . I moved to Shaka and took him out with a single sweep , I totally destroyed all but one of his cities , swooped on over to Brennus ( he was one of the lagging AIs , not as powerful as Hatty) and didn't have much trouble there . During the fight with Brennus I declared war on my former friend ZY and did a double front and even killed ZY with mostly calvary reserve I left in my base to pick off potential invaders .

All in all , it was a very smooth game . I generated probably 5x more GP than the AIs combined . I was able to advance even in war or with a 0%-20% beaker investment and was able to focus that extra money on upgrading units or paying my friend ( ZY) appropriate sums to ' soften up' a target .

This went even smoother than some of my noble games and this was prince . I must have been partly lucky . For one , Isabella basically gave me her religion , shrine , and couple wonders with Iron too boot without much of a fight . I was able to aquire an ally relatively easily because of taking her state religion w/ shrine . I had one turn where I produced THREE GREAT ENGINEERS at the sametime in 3 diff cities . A couple of my opponents lacked Iron which made the fight A LOT easier .

I think what made the difference this time is that I focused on my Agg trait as much as my PHI trait . I utilized it to its max advantage by not being afraid to be aggressive in the early game . I used hammers for military instead of wonders and buildings and got a pay back by capturing wonders the AI already built for me :D

THough , I can see , like in other games , how the Org triat can be extremly useful . I gave my cities the basic ' buildings package' with all the standard ' every city ' buildings like granaries , libraries , forges , etc . I had to spend some turns on courthouses but it helped me in the long run . I managed to pop up Forbidden palace and versilles fairly quickly further helping my money situation . I had wall street / shrine in Madrid , the buddhist holy city .

This game is purely strategy . Its about building the right units/building and selecting the correct civics for max synergy .

I think part of this game was luck and I don't want to speak too quickly and say I might be ready for monarch already . But this was a pretty straight foward game and I didn't have too much trouble . Still , I want to try some other strategies with other leaders/civs on prince before I start playing monarch regularly . I want to be able to win with multiple strategies .
 
Wow, that sounds like it was a great game, GT_OKEZ. You've got the ability to put theory into practice, a very useful skill for strategy games. I think that you'll be playing on Monarch very soon, given how well your previous game went. The main challenge of Monarch, I feel, is that you can't always have everything you want, like in Noble (and, to a lesser extent, Prince). Monarch is the first time that you're likely to be beat to Liberalism, your favorite wonders, or founding religions. In prince games, I can still found every one of the seven religions and/or build every wonder, if I want.

I still dominate most of my Monarch games, but it's occasionally frustrating to get news reports that I'm not getting every single trophy. It's a blow to the ego, really. I guess it's the builder in me refusing to die.
 
Back
Top Bottom