Strategy vs Improvisation

[elgat0]

I've been playing Civ since the original came out in the early 90's. Until now, I've never invested a lot of thought into predetermined strategies.

I've read some of the suggestions on this site to improve that part of my game, for which I'm appreciative.

However, for those of you who play and dominate at the higher difficulty levels, do you feel like you're playing from a script for success or is there still plenty of room for improvisation to your game play.

 

[DaveMcW]

The map generator improvises. The higher-difficulty-dominator reads the map and plays the correct strategy.

 

[cabert]

improvisation?
it's a strategy game, you should think a bit.
However, there always is a bit of adaptation to the overall strategy you put in place.

For instance in a recent immortal game, I was planning for a time victory (HoF style = selecting the right map, the right civ, the right opponents, the right settings).
I had built a nice assault stack but somehow underestimated the number of boats the AI would throw at me.
Having suprise attacked I managed to take 1 city (all the troops had landed) before the AI could play. Next turn, I didn't have a navy anymore .
Adaptation consisted here in airlifting paratroopers to hop from 1 city to the other. This semi improvised tactic gave me 3 more cities, and I could sue for peace after having brought this AI down.

 

[tycoonist]

i never go into a game with a strategy. however, as soon as i scout the map, i have a plan in my mind. i know where i want my cities, what i want each one to do, what i'm gonna do diplomatically, who i'm gonna declare war on, who is gonna be my friend. i know my techpath, i know what GP i want, what wonders i want to build and where i want my national wonders. after playing so many games, this is instinct.

not everything goes to plan. but i know that if it does, i have the best possible chance of winning.

 

[Shafi]

I've been playing Civ since the original came out in the early 90's. Until now, I've never invested a lot of thought into predetermined strategies.

I've read some of the suggestions on this site to improve that part of my game, for which I'm appreciative.

However, for those of you who play and dominate at the higher difficulty levels, do you feel like you're playing from a script for success or is there still plenty of room for improvisation to your game play.

What level do you play at? I think that would definitely be a factor on hw much of pre planning you need to put in?

@ lower difficulty levels can make a mistake or two and overcme - though it will delay your victory & hence lower score.

Anyways i always put some thought into the leaders charcteristics / UU & UB before i start the game and jot down a few key techs i want to get to + what would be my preferred victory type for the game etc.

Then when i get to the game and see the map some additional priorities cme up based on the map ( a lot of calendar resources may tempt me to go for calendar earlier than planned, lack of bronze may mean you need to go after iron earlier) & based on the situation (if hapiness is an issue drama & construction may need to be fast tracked)

In fact i am currently playing a game as pericles of greece - since he is creative & philosophical i was thinking along the lines of a largely peaceful (maybe a war or two at times might be required) space race win with lots of specialists, what actually happened was -

I popped 3 workers after finding around 7 goody huts (it has never happened before for me) and i had to only build settlers no workers - before you knew it i had around 4 cities (AI only 1), i had a source of horse - hooked it up and went for a chariot rush and took out isabella & churchill early i now have around 80% of the continent i am on and thinking along the lines of domination which i have not ever achieved

 

[r_rolo1]

Therefore a victorious army first wins and then seeks battle; a defeated army first battles and then seeks victory

Nothing to add...

 

[andreasb]

I think there is a vast difference between mastering concepts of the game and specific strategies. Most of the stuff in the war academy and the strategy forum are just bits and pieces of the game play. I think what differs mediocre players from the top-notch players is the ability to apply these concepts in a succesful manner in any given situation. Using one, single, predefined strategy in this game is probably why many players are stuck at Noble and below...so I would argue that the opposite to what this post claims/questions is true

(Btw, I'm in no way saying that I'm that good of a player, but I can still analyze the game mechanics, right? )

 

[elgat0]

Thanks for the feedback.
BTW I play at Noble level.

One of the things that inspired my question, was that I normally chose random for all game settings. Lately, I've selected more specific settings to take advantage of the advice available on this site.

 

[Deckhand]

Therefore a victorious army first wins and then seeks battle; a defeated army first battles and then seeks victory

Nothing to add...

Nothing to add???

This Sun Tzu BS quote doesn't provide ANY practical advice about how to achieve a victorious army. It's like in sports: in order to win, you need to believe you are going to win; but the truth is only one team will win. Believing isn't enough. Perhaps Sun Tzu's point is don't go to war unless you can expect to win because or your superior army/position/whatever. Knowing this isn't enough. How do you build the victorious army and How do you know before hand that your army is the victorious one.

There is more to The Art of War than this one quote. So, definitely more to add.

 

[r_rolo1]

It has a very specific point, that is to have a plan before you dive in the issue and that unguided improvisation is dangerous. To the discussed issue it was more than enough, and it definitely does not require a more lenghty quotation of Sun Tzu or anyone else... I can quote the Art of War chapter about the use of espionage if you want, that is pretty interesting, but it has small interest for this issue

 

[Decius]

I like to improvise. I don't want to know what I'm going to do before I start. That's why I often choose random game settings. I enjoy not knowing which leader I will get, who my opponents will be, what the map will look like or which events will pop up. Those are key reasons why Civ is the most replayable computer game I know about.

That said, Civ is a strategy game. Squeezing synergy out of the leader attributes, units, buildings, tech paths, map resources etc. etc. is what I find most rewarding about playing Civ. Early on, if I don't know what I want to achieve in the next, say, 50 turns and how I will go about it, my gameplay suffers. As the game goes on I try to plan further and further ahead until I can see a clear path to a victory condition (assuming I don't see a clear path to my civilization's certain doom).

 

[KaytieKat]

Hi

What's that saying go like? "no plan survives first contact with the enemy" or something. Kind of like have a plan but be willing to be flexible and adapt in case things you didnt expect when the plan was first made happen or even if plan just doesnt seem to be going as intended. But still have a plan.

There is a VERY fun and VERY cool article on warring in civ titled "Fire!". I kind of think of it as sun tzu for civ just cuz since it is written for civ2 (the title is reference to sound effects for cannons in that game--just some guy yelling "FIRE!!!!") when it gets SPECIFIC about units and game mechanics and examples from games played it is kind of outdated. But in the more general stuff about warring in civ is STILL very good advice. And some of that advice is to always have a plan but also just be alert to how things are changing and adjust plan accordingly.

But I think key is ALWAYS have a plan. If I had one thing to be be my advice for new players kind of thing that would be it. ALWAYS have a plan. Even if its a BAD plan MOST of the time a "bad" plan by human is better than anything the AI can do. And moving up trough difficulities is more about mastering all the little stuff that will help you more effectively execute your plans and thus overcome all the xtra ai bonuses (and eventaully all the human penalties) that happen as you move up in diff.

As far as I know the AI plans as best it can on settler as it does on diety and those bonuses/penalties really the only difference not the level of intelligence the ai is bringing to its game.

Kaytie

 

[Red Dwarf Devil]

I am a Monarch level player and another who likes to play random settings for most of the settings, apart from game speed and not random personalities (tried once "War monger Ghandi of the Mongols" & "mild and meek Shaka of the Mayan" just did not do it for me

I use the Legends of Revolution mod so I normally also select planet generator.


As for a pre-defined A-Z that rarely even enters my thoughts, once I have been given a leader I will try to make the most of his / her talents, UU & UB.. And in fact I will re-use the same leader again and again until I win on a map before I go for another leader.

I find this really helps to get to know each civ and how to make them work the best,
Currently on my 7th game as Ho Chi Minh but have it in the bag at last