Some (possibly silly) questions from a newbie

[Golem of Prague]

Hello all,

I'm new to Civ V, and almost entirely new to the series, and I have some difficulty figuring the game out. So I thought I'd drop in and ask some questions.

1) Which civilization would you recommend as a beginner's choice? I'm not asking which one is "best" overall, but rather which one best fits an inexperienced player.

2) Are there downsides to transitioning too fast to a new era? Do any features, wonders, social policies, technologies etc. become unavailable upon transitioning from Ancient to Classical era etc?

3) What exactly is the point of "puppeting" a state?

4) What effect do declarations of denoucing someone/being denounced by someone have on the actual game?

5) When planning the placement of a settler, what is the optimal city-spacing? It's a bit confusing on this hexagonal map...

Thanks in advance to all

 

[guczy]

1. I don't think there really is any civ that's better for a beginner than any other, but if i had to pick one i'd say Egypt, can't go wrong with the wonder production bonus, the unique building is solid and the war chariot is....well it's sort of useless, but no biggie.

2. Nope. You want to transition as fast as you can.

3. If you puppet a city then it doesnt count toward the social policy threshold (if you have a lot of cities that are your own or are annexed you get SP-s waaaaaay slower).

4. TBH i have no idea what the exact effects are, my only tip regarding them is to never use this feature yourself.

5. There is no such thing as optimal city spacing, depends on lot of variables. They have to be at least 4 hexes apart, (so there must be at least 3 hexes between 2 cities), terrain, resources are important factors for city placement.

 

[FeiLing]

1) Which civilization would you recommend as a beginner's choice? I'm not asking which one is "best" overall, but rather which one best fits an inexperienced player.
2) Are there downsides to transitioning too fast to a new era? Do any features, wonders, social policies, technologies etc. become unavailable upon transitioning from Ancient to Classical era etc?
3) What exactly is the point of "puppeting" a state?
4) What effect do declarations of denoucing someone/being denounced by someone have on the actual game?
5) When planning the placement of a settler, what is the optimal city-spacing? It's a bit confusing on this hexagonal map...

1) Any but India (unless one actually reads about their trait and doesn't spam cities like a madman; then really any).
2) The only downside is: RAs (Research Agreements) become more expensive. However you also get more culture from friendly/allied city-states. So generally it's a good idea to advance to a new era (also due to unlocking new social policy trees) and it's a common tactic to try to time the signing of a RA-wave to just before you hit a new era.
3) A Puppet does not increase the cost of future social policies and the cost of national wonders and it most importantly gives less unhappiness than annexing a city.
4) Declare friends --> Others that like that leader might like you too. Though those that hate him will also hate you now. And denouncing is really the same thing, just the other way round. It's very important to chose carefully who you become friends with and who you denounce. If you want to stay friendly with everyone you probably shouldn't become friends with anyone and not denounce anyone either.
5) Depends. Usually it doesn't matter (apart from trade route efficiency). Just make sure you got enough resources and as many luxuries as possible within range (preferably range 2 (middle ring) as the outer ring can take quite a while to become your land (through cultural border expansion). A river is always nice (...or somewhat imbalanced actually - more gold and more food early in the game plus ability to build a water mill... yes. imba!)

 

[Golem of Prague]

1. I don't think there really is any civ that's better for a beginner than any other, but if i had to pick one i'd say Egypt, can't go wrong with the wonder production bonus, the unique building is solid and the war chariot is....well it's sort of useless, but no biggie.

Interesting idea. So the strategy would then boil down to maximizing wonder construction speed and capitalizing on their benefits?

5. There is no such thing as optimal city spacing, depends on lot of variables. They have to be at least 4 hexes apart, (so there must be at least 3 hexes between 2 cities), terrain, resources are important factors for city placement.

I know that, but I was wondering if distance per se matters.

 

[Golem of Prague]

If you want to stay friendly with everyone you probably shouldn't become friends with anyone

That is very Buddhist of you to say

 

[Heerlo]

I read in the Civilpedia that if you denounce someone before going to war with them that it might draw others civs into the war on your side.

I'm no expert, though.

 

[guczy]

Interesting idea. So the strategy would then boil down to maximizing wonder construction speed and capitalizing on their benefits?


I know that, but I was wondering if distance per se matters.

Well i guess you are playing on a lower level, where you can easily build every wonder you want anyway (which BTW is not a viable strategy on higher levels), and Egypts UA helps speed that up. But as Feiling said, you can take any Civ,there are no bad choices.

Distance matters somewhat, but is not the most important thing. You should build cities to maximise resources, apart from that build cities in locations that make for a good specialised city (eg. in a hilly terrain you could build a production monster, or in a nice riverbed a GP farm)

I read in the Civilpedia that if you denounce someone before going to war with them that it might draw others civs into the war on your side.

I'm no expert, though.

This is the only Civ game where i would advise you never to trust the Civilopedia

 

[Heerlo]

This is the only Civ game where i would advise you never to trust the Civilopedia

Oh.Is it that inaccurate?

 

[Brichals]

Friendship and denouncing effect trade primarily.

Friends will give you top dollar on deals, sometimes they are gracious and will give you favourable deals. They might stop or start wars if you ask them. They will also ask you for favours, which you should probably do, it's give and take. Denouncing is the opposite. They will not trade with you very easily at all, and if a popular figure denounces you, others will follow. This can be used to set up trade embargoes and strangle a civ if they are being an idiot. Being an idiot = doing unfair trades, going back on your word, declaring wars and killing city states. Also over agressive expansion, building too many wonders etc, making friends with too many groups. Other civs object to these different things in different measures. You just have to get a feel for it.

Also sometimes a civ might say they are friendly but they are lying. Their likeliness to trade with you is a better judge.

New eras give extra bonuses, especially from city states (they give you more stuff). It's not a bad thing to do, and your cities look better, and you open social policy trees. It shouldn't influence your tech choice that much, still go for the best ones first that you need for your playstyle.

 

[FeiLing]

it's give and take

Actually it's 'give' only. And I didn't notice getting better trades if friends with someone. You can't get more than max (50/borders, 240/lux) and if you get less and then get more after becoming friends it's very likely a false friendship anyway - if you didn't dof they'd show the same false friedlyness also paying full price suddenly before backstabbing some turns later.
If i become friends with someone they want free luxuries or me go to war with 1-2 enemies... oh yeah - that's just what I wanted. Not sure if I said it here or in another thread these days: If you want to stay friendly with everyone (or at least the most) you must not become friends with anyone. Otherwise you'll end up with first being at war or gain less value in trades with ~50% of the civs instead of only 1 or maybe 2 foes and it might even become worse over time.

 

[Brichals]

I don't know, if you have a flawless record with a civ (including giving into their demands) they do seem to give you that max trade much more easily. It's disappointing when they drop down a bit and now you're only getting 200 for your lux or 180 or whatever. I think it actually is a good idea to give that spare lux to somebody when they come begging if you trust them. No maths on that but it can work out favourable in the long run.

It's very hard to keep a friend with so many other interactions between other civs but it's highly possible to get a clique with 2-3 civs going on.

Also I think remember getting 500 gold for a lux for 45 turns on epic. I think my trade partner was gracious. This was old patch where lux = 5 happiness, but still its more than normal max. if you scale it.

 

[chazzycat]

1) Personally I like Rome, China, and Persia for beginners. They have well-rounded UAs/units that can go towards either war or peace, so they are pretty flexible.

2) The only downside is RAs (research agreements) get more expensive if your trading partner is still in the previous age, by 100 gold. So it's best to sign RAs before entering a new age.

3) Puppeting cities is a way to expand your empire geographically and financially without affecting policy cost or cost of national wonders. They do hurt happiness though.

4) Denouncing is a simple mechansim whereby you are announcing to the world that you hate that civ. If you have other friends that also hate that guy, there is the possibility they will also denounce them, which has the effect of banding you closer together with your friends. This also ostracizes the chosen opponent from international relations, and can lead to a military dogpile on that civ if you play your cards right.

5) depends on the map. Generally you want to expand to every new luxury you can find, and secondarily try to get as many river tiles in your land as possible. If your cities are futher apart that's ok, but you'll want to build a couple more military units since it'll be more difficult to transfer troops for defense on demand.