Smaller maps are harder

[apocalypse105]

Hey forum members,


i wanted to share some experiences i had with civ 5. A lot of people say smaller maps are easier because you have lesser AI to compete with you. But i dont thinx so.

I recently played a few games on small map with 6 civs and 6 city states. And disabling diplomatic victory. i tested the game on king because it was more then 5 months ago when i played the game.

The game was much harder then normal I usually win without problem at king. But now i had trouble. You dont have a lot of trading partners so you cant sell your gold constantly to the AI. You will allways have one hostile civ because he is petty close to you. Diplomacy actually matters because there are so little civs to be friends with.

There is a higher change of a runaway AI because in my first game alexander conquered only one civ and became overpowered. In standard map it isnt a big deal.

You olso have less trade route partners so you should be carefull and plan youre diplomacy verry well.

Standard speed feels actually good. you dont feel like you are rushing to the era's you will have enough time to use youre unique unit because there is lesser space to move.

Domination victory is a little bit easier because you have less opponents and less space to move but the warmonger penalties are higher so you have to carefully plan youre big move or else you will get jumped by allthe AI's. However science and culture are a pain because there usally 2Ai that builts all the wonders and get massive culture or science. And you will allways be atacked so not building military and staying peacefull is not possible.

You olso have less trade route partners so you should be carefull and plan youre diplomacy verry well.

Whats your opinion on small maps?

 

[danaphanous]

If you are good at micromanagement and diplomacy, Small maps are still easier in my opinion. When there is less space and the average civ settles 3 cities, who do you think can manage those 3 cities better? The stupid AI or the human? trust me, AI on deity are mcuh, much scarier with 20 cities then with 5 or 6. I'm playing a huge map right now and America has entered the Atomic era on standard speed before turn 240 with 30 cities. IN a game with limited cities the Ai's advantages matter less because the human is better at managing bigger cities and can use more effective micromanagement and manipulate diplomacy. Also, there is no "runaway" AI on small maps. "Runaway" to me, means they are a large empire and hard to stop. On a small map, no one is hard to stop because everyone is nearby and vulnerable to invasion if they start to do too well and as you said the other AI tend to hate anyone that conquers even one person on a small map and teams them, this includes other AI. Small may be harder then standard, if you are used to standard. Especially on Deity because the AI will often have 3 cities by the time you can expand to your second. In limited space this means you found less cities then on standard, but I still consider it way easier then a huge map where it much harder to stop powerful AI all the way on the other side of the world. With some diplomacy and war you can effectively stop any AI on a small map so they are less threat if you can survive the first 80 turns or so and actually found a couple cities. This is my opinion having played most of the map sizes. Also it depends on your intended victory condition. If you are going domination or culture small maps are definitely easier as you have less opponents to overcome. Diplomatic victory is also a bit easier since less city states and total votes needed means it's easier for one empire to buy all their loyalty. You don't need nearly as much gold or quests to pull it off. Arguably science victory is harder on small vs. standard and I assume this is what you were trying for based on your argument. You still should be able to do it though, just not as fast.

 

[apocalypse105]

If you are good at micromanagement and diplomacy, Small maps are still easier in my opinion. When there is less space and the average civ settles 3 cities, who do you think can manage those 3 cities better? The stupid AI or the human? trust me, AI on deity are mcuh, much scarier with 20 cities then with 5 or 6. I'm playing a huge map right now and America has entered the Atomic era on standard speed before turn 240 with 30 cities. IN a game with limited cities the Ai's advantages matter less because the human is better at managing bigger cities and can use more effective micromanagement and manipulate diplomacy. Also, there is no "runaway" AI on small maps. "Runaway" to me, means they are a large empire and hard to stop. On a small map, no one is hard to stop because everyone is nearby and vulnerable to invasion if they start to do too well and as you said the other AI tend to hate anyone that conquers even one person on a small map and teams them, this includes other AI. Small may be harder then standard, if you are used to standard. Especially on Deity because the AI will often have 3 cities by the time you can expand to your second. In limited space this means you found less cities then on standard, but I still consider it way easier then a huge map where it much harder to stop powerful AI all the way on the other side of the world. With some diplomacy and war you can effectively stop any AI on a small map so they are less threat if you can survive the first 80 turns or so and actually found a couple cities. This is my opinion having played most of the map sizes. Also it depends on your intended victory condition. If you are going domination or culture small maps are definitely easier as you have less opponents to overcome. Diplomatic victory is also a bit easier since less city states and total votes needed means it's easier for one empire to buy all their loyalty. You don't need nearly as much gold or quests to pull it off. Arguably science victory is harder on small vs. standard and I assume this is what you were trying for based on your argument. You still should be able to do it though, just not as fast.

The problem i have with standard maps is that as you said the tech goes really fast. Atomic era at turn 240 yeah i have seen that happen to but not in small maps. I usally play epic if i go standard just because the speed goes fast

 

[Acken]

The game was much harder then normal I usually win without problem at king. But now i had trouble. You dont have a lot of trading partners so you cant sell your gold constantly to the AI.

That is true.

You will allways have one hostile civ because he is petty close to you. Diplomacy actually matters because there are so little civs to be friends with.

Pretty common in standard to have an agressive neighbour. I'm not sure there is much difference here. While you can be friend with many more on huge maps and is good for RA and trade the impact of a single friend on the overall landscape is also inferior.

There is a higher change of a runaway AI because in my first game alexander conquered only one civ and became overpowered. In standard map it isnt a big deal.

Considering the penalities are similar I don't see why it's different.

Domination victory is a little bit easier because you have less opponents and less space to move but the warmonger penalties are higher so you have to carefully plan youre big move or else you will get jumped by allthe AI's. However science and culture are a pain because there usally 2Ai that builts all the wonders and get massive culture or science. And you will allways be atacked so not building military and staying peacefull is not possible.

That doesn't make much sense. The less AI there are the more likely you are to get a wonder. Also warmonger penalities are the "same" (they depend on how many cities the target has).

Whats your opinion on small maps?

Easier overall. Especially for domination and culture.

 

[miaasma]

i've been playing huge maps recently and they are by far the hardest in my opinion

 

[poxpower]

The only way it would be harder is on deity and if you start next to a warmonger or two. Then they will rush you right away and forward settle you into oblivion.

 

[Ryoga]

The only real disadvantage that I can see in playing a small map is that you have less trade partners, but that's all.

You don't really have less trading route partners in the first phases of the game (which are the most critical) because you can't really establish trade routes to far away civs until late. Besides, this works both ways. Even if you have less trading route partners, they also have less trading route partners.


Building wonders is easier because you have less competition.


Domination is decidedly easier because you have less cities to conquer and your armies have less hexes to move through.


Dealing with a runaway civ that is close by is a lot easier than dealing with a runaway civ that is on the other side of the planet. You can actually prevent them from becoming strong very early before they become a huge empire if they are close. But you can't really do so effectively if they are very far.


Additionally starting from King difficulty the AI has more gold output than the player does. With more civs to interact with, the AI have more options to strike research agreements with. You as player have less money so you can't benefit from that as much as they do. This become increasingly worse the more you increase the difficulty.

Diplomatic victory is easier because there are less city states to ally with (but you still have the same amount of spies). It only becomes harder if you are playing with Venice or Austria (or worse: both).

 

[SYKOJAK]

When discussing the size of the game map and how it correlates with the difficulty of the game. It is my opinion that the larger the map, the more AI civs and city states that as a player you must contend with. With this being said, it increases the difficulty of your game by breeding more votes to buy for Diplomatic Victory. More capitals to capture to achieve the Domination victory. More AI civs to become Influencial over on a Culture victory. The only Victory condition that is not changed by the size of the map is the Science Victory. That Victory condition is only modified by game speed.

 

[danaphanous]

^^^

Not quite, techs cost more on large maps. They cost 100% on small maps, 110% on standard, 120% on large, and 130% on huge. The idea being you'll make up for it by settling more cities. But because of this competitive fast science times with traditional strategies are not nearly as good. On top of this the AI complete science victory faster on Deity on huge maps since they can snowball with the space so even science victory is harder on it in my experience. I mean, it's still totally doable, because the AI is not a human, but it's not as straightforward and the AI will be more competitive.

On a standard map with tradition you can sail out with the ship on like turn 230 with even an average start if you are a good player (sub-200 requires a very good start), and many games before the AI even gets ideologies so you can just ignore tourism completely. In my experience this strategy doesn't work out on huge. The AI can have ideologies by turn 180 or so so and massive tourism after archaeology so if you take freedom you get hit by ideological pressure problems forcing you to play it in a more well-rounded fashion with good culture and some tourism. Or just bank on order and a large empire.

 

[Special Places]

I think it's much harder on larger maps if the difficulty is high enough. What it really comes down to is who will have the build advantage. If you play on Emperor or easier, then you'll have the advantage when you are given the free chance to build large empires. On the other hand, if you are playing deity or immortal AIs, they have a HUGE advantage when they have the ability to spread out on a larger map. Just by definition of the difficulty, the AI can build faster, research faster, grow faster and have less troubles with happiness. They almost always go liberty, and they will expand to no end. On larger maps, I fear the higher difficulties. I typically play large map, 8 players (7 AIs), and it's insane how strong the AIs can get on higher difficulties.

I can beat the higher difficulties on smaller, more cramped maps. It gives the AI less time to take advantage of their huge bonuses. The longer time seems to stretch, and the larger they get, the more momentum they build. It can be extremely challenging to try to stop them when have a dozen or more cities because they are left to grow.

I think I'd have a much better chance of winning when I'm close to a bunch of civs than if I have to build up and try to march across a huge map to reach them.

 

[fau78]

If you are good at micromanagement and diplomacy, Small maps are still easier in my opinion.

Smaller map requires better micromanagement as in higher difficulty you must start war early to strangle the enemies before they spamming cities in all spaces. AIs are actually bad at commanding their troops so you could beat them, or at least burn their improvements with fewer troops. Therefore, the civilizations with early UU, or fast UU such as Greek are pretty effective.

Frankly, I doubt one could win small map without engaging a war. A bigger map at emperor level could still have a peaceful win if one correctly uses diplomacy and settles cities at good places. I never try smaller map with that level.

 

[Sclb]

Smaller map requires better micromanagement as in higher difficulty you must start war early to strangle the enemies before they spamming cities in all spaces.

It really isn't that hard to start a war to capture settlers for more workers and to cripple the AI, while at the same time limiting their expansion. Pretty much a required skill on high difficulty standard size anyway.

 

[Socratatus]

I definitely agree smaller maps are harder.

On large maps there are usually more resources (including space). But it`s really the space that makes the difference. It gives you plenty of time to build and explore and usually avoids getting into a draining war too soon.

 

[danaphanous]

You guys have to be comparing the sizes on a lower difficulty then me. Huge by far the hardest on Deity from my recent experience.

I was pretty much going to say the same thing as Sclb. If you are going to cripple the AI then doing it early is the way to go. All that is required on small maps is that you target an AI and limit their expansion. This also doubles as a source of free workers. Because of proximity tensions are high and you can use diplomacy or a quick military excursion to shut down competitors. You do have less space but so does the AI so they can't really capitalize on their Deity bonuses quite as much in my opinion. Your early punching bag will be weak and an easy distraction.

Now, on a huge map, it's true you have the space to settle your own empire and rushes will come maybe 20-30 turns later then on maps where space runs out, but they still come and a Deity AI is much better equipped at filling in that space then you because they have 50% discounts on production, happiness, maintenance, etc. Once they get off the ground, taking down a 40-city monster on the other side of a huge map may not be possible. He will produce far more units then you can kill off with an army you send and it'll get outdated while trying. When they rush you it is never-ending carpets and sometimes they never even realize they are losing they replace troops so fast. Diplomacy is more finicky too. The other AI will usually fail to stop a big AI and isn't much help, not to mention the sheer amount of AI means ideology trouble. All 3 may be established if you get unlucky like happened to me with, and this means unavoidable unhappiness and pressure problems. Then you have the fact that 11 AI with loads of money will be constantly buying out your city states and will constantly override you in the united nations and pass silly things like arts funding and banning your luxuries. These issues are easy to deal with on small or standard where AI are close enough and small enough to keep under control. So yeah, the beginning of the game is more peaceful but the end is much more stressful.

Add to this the coding changes on huge:
- techs cost 20% more then standard and 30% more then small so staying small is less effective
- penalties to tech and culture cost are about halved per city

So yes you have decent space to settle, but your normal 4-6 city empire will not be very effective on a huge map. You are supposed to settle more space. I won via science on my Deity huge map, but it was all due to management skills and scientist-saving. In shoshone empires I was trying to settle a big empire just like the AI as a side challenge and actually managed to keep up with them in settling rate till about the renaissance. I found the AI had way more of the advantages from huge then me and I was riding the line in happiness and gold all game and tailing them almost till the end. On a small or standard map I would've been a clear tech leader from the industrial onward even on Deity. Granted, some of these problems came from the theme of the challenge (settling a huge empire) but it doesn't change the fact that on Deity the AI have twice the advantage with every new city they found, giving them space is just asking for it. If they hadn't passed arts funding I might have seen one of them launching a spaceship around the same time as me, but they were all warring and trying to dominate culturally so I did have a break there.

If we are talking any difficulty I will give you that on a more even playing field the human gets the advantage from having the extra time and space. On something like emperor or below it might be easier, dunno, I don't play below immortal anymore.

 

[Acken]

And if you expand too quickly on huge the algorithm for "too many cities" is unchanged so the AI will hate you for having 6 cities on huge before them... zzzzzzz.