[BNW] Switching from Tall to Wide in Midgame?

Bughunter

Chieftain
Joined
Oct 14, 2006
Messages
15
Location
Location: Location:
Long time player (from Civ I thru Civ V G&K) but new to BNW so I started a game on Warlord just to learn the mechanics.

Playing Japan on Continents, mainly because I hate playing against Nobunaga. Large map with only 8 Civs. I was hoping for more room to expand, as I usually try to play wide. But I was forced to make a Tall start and wait until researching Astronomy and Navigation.

Now have room to expand.

However, the starting area I got was a peninsula on the largest continent with only room for three decent cities and one that wouldn't suck if Washington hadn't sniped Petra from me with only four turns to go. (My fault, I started it too late...)

Other neighbors on the home continent are Aztecs, China, Greeks (and formerly Austria - Alex took them out early). America and Greece are the powerhouses here, and I'm on good diplomatic terms with both.

Anyway, I made sure to get oceangoing ships first, and now have explored the rest of the map. There is one small continent that was unexplored and, probably, intended to be a starting area. Now it's open to colonization.

Another large continent has only Rome and Egypt, and neither of them have grown very large. I suspect I got lucky and they've been wearing each other down, rather than running away. Neither of them has fully colonized or even explored it.

So now I have plans for expansion. I have a good economy with six trade route slots and three-digit gpt income, a four digit bank account, and surplus happiness just above +20. I have enough units to field three, three unit exploration squads (scout, xb, and pikeman or samurai) and rotate experienced units home for defense. Science output isn't great, but I have enough gold to enter RAs with Washington and Alex (with the side benefit of tying up their gold.) Not really competitive religioulsy but am holding my own.

My strategy going forward is:
- Expand into the closer, smaller continent and scoop up the unclaimed territory in anticipation of oil reserves.
- Place foothold cities on the larger continents and scout out any likely resource terrain.
- Build a strong expeditionary force.
- Goad Ramesses into DoW on me so I go take him down.

I have the nagging feeling I'm overlooking something, though...

Any thoughts?
 

mbbcam

Prince
Joined
Apr 7, 2012
Messages
580
Location
Cambridge
I don't think I've ever played Warlord, but I would think it ought to be fairly forgiving. From what I have read on these forums and seen in videos, a fairly reliable strategy on higher levels is to found three or four cities, taking Tradition, and beeline the major Science techs. Open Rationalism as soon as possible. Bribe aggressive Civs to fight each other. The easiest kind of victory seems to be Science. Personally, I've learned a lot from watching videos by players like Acken, peddroelm, and a few others. But emulating what they do is not so easy! Acken's Liberty domination game with China is quite something. Easy to find on YouTube.
 

Bughunter

Chieftain
Joined
Oct 14, 2006
Messages
15
Location
Location: Location:
Ok. Yeah, warlord is rather forgiving. I wanted to play thru all eras and learn the mechanics of the new trade system, tourism, archaeology, etc., without getting wiped out early and having to restart... also partly why I played one of my least favorite AI opponents. [Somehow I always get placed next to Odo and it requires me to put more resources than I may care to into military just to keep him from bullying me. I have the same personal relationship with Napoleon, the little bastage.]

Seeing as how I already completed Tradition, and all of Honor except Professional Army, and am working on Exploration [cuz it's new, and I have a whole globe to explore], I should indeed at least adopt rationalism because both George and Alex are great RA partners.

Ramesses is playing rather tall. I think he and Auggie are perpetually scrapping. I may befriend him and team up on Rome instead... Caesar is the only leader ahead of me on the scoreboard. And he has too many units; I am beginning to feel the need to mitigate his upkeep burden.
 

mbbcam

Prince
Joined
Apr 7, 2012
Messages
580
Location
Cambridge
If you have taken Tradition, you might want to experiment with internal food trade routes. You can develop weak cities much faster that way, or build a monster capital if you prefer. It can help with keeping specialist slots manned, for Science or Culture. Someone on these forums once described Cargo Ships as the most powerful thing in the game, though I imagine many people would challenge that! Certainly, if you have a city that is short of food, a trade route to it can help it a lot. Some players say they only use trade routes internally. Depends on what you need, I guess.
 

Bughunter

Chieftain
Joined
Oct 14, 2006
Messages
15
Location
Location: Location:
Interesting. I tried internal trade routes to help the production of new cities while they focus on growth and it was effective. I'll try that the other way around.

Since the OP I've gone from four cities to twelve and have settled most of the unclaimed continental territories, and now am setting up outposts on small islands that I suspect will show oil soon.

Still no problems with happiness, which was my main concern. Unit maintenance to defend all that land is expensive but manageable; Merchant Navy (with East India Company) helps.

My worst problems are:
- Ceasar had a continent to expand into unchecked and is the global powerhouse. Trying to catch up and the trends are good.
- Tech progress. I'm fourth after America, Rome, and Greece. But I had uncontested control of the high seas for ~100 turns.
- Relative lack of CS allies. Alex is a CS whore (but you knew that).

It started as a sandbox game just to learn the new mechanics but now I'm kinda peeved I'm getting pwned on Warlord by the AI
 

mbbcam

Prince
Joined
Apr 7, 2012
Messages
580
Location
Cambridge
You haven't said what level you usually play, or whether you have looked at any guides in the past. There are several that I have found useful or interesting, though some of them are old by now. I've linked some of them in case you don't know them and want to look at them.

https://forums.civfanatics.com/resources/tradition-three-cities-approaches-bnw.25617/

https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/liberty-domination-walkthrough.503931/

https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/liberty-wide-game-guide-ackens-version.559009/

https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/the-getting-tributes-from-deity-ai-strategy-part-1.655650/

https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/domination-on-immortal-deity-a-noobs-guide.547630/

https://forums.civfanatics.com/thre...-city-industrial-era-domination-guide.529482/

One thing I tend to find on Deity is that if you allow certain Civs time to get going, there is no way to catch up. Culture is particularly insidious, as they can sit there and build wonders, and if they are on the other side of the world there is not much you can do about it except bribe others to attack them, which in some cases just leads to them becoming stronger.

Good luck with the game!
 

Bughunter

Chieftain
Joined
Oct 14, 2006
Messages
15
Location
Location: Location:
Well honestly, it has since become the cakewalk I expected a Warlord game to be. It just surprised me not to already be running away with the game by the end of the Medieval era. It gave me a real nagging feeling I was overlooking something important, but expansion from 4 to 18 cities is helping Japan become dominant on every aspect except CS allies... and therefore the world congress. (Friggin' Alexander. At least he's an decent neighbor.)

I usually play at Emperor if I want a challenge, or King if I am more motivated to play for domination and just go kick some *ss. I generally get my butt kicked at Deity. Haven't even tried Immortal. I don't enjoy playing against a stacked deck. Deity and Immortal make up for a weak AI by simply tilting the playing field too far for my taste; I'd rather have a good AI. (Not into the PvP scene - I'm too casual to be competitive.)

Thanks for the correspondence :)
 

vorlon_mi

Emperor
Joined
Oct 21, 2004
Messages
1,167
Location
Chelsea, MI
In my last two games (Assyria and now America), I start with a 4 city Tradition start and then look to see if there are easy targets. My instincts are honed from Civ3, Civ4, and BERT, where more cities are usually better. So I bring my army and conquer a city or two...

BAM! If I annex the city, my happiness drops like a stone. Especially if it is larger than size 10. Research slows, rebels appear, until I can digest the new one.

In both of these games, I started the game planning for a Science Victory but have ended up with lots of great works, great artists and writers, and will probably move to a Culture Victory instead. Ending the game with 4 or 5 self-founded cities, but another 5-6 conquered cities. Tall to wide.

Is my mistake in annexing the cities? Should I leave them as puppets? Should I do less warmongering? I'm worried that I won't have the Aluminum or Uranium I need to build spaceship parts if I don't grab more land. Prince difficulty.
 

aafritz17

Escaping
Moderator
Hall of Fame Staff
GOTM Staff
Supporter
Joined
Oct 13, 2015
Messages
707
Location
The Boonies of Central Michigan
In my last two games (Assyria and now America), I start with a 4 city Tradition start and then look to see if there are easy targets. My instincts are honed from Civ3, Civ4, and BERT, where more cities are usually better. So I bring my army and conquer a city or two...

BAM! If I annex the city, my happiness drops like a stone. Especially if it is larger than size 10. Research slows, rebels appear, until I can digest the new one.

In both of these games, I started the game planning for a Science Victory but have ended up with lots of great works, great artists and writers, and will probably move to a Culture Victory instead. Ending the game with 4 or 5 self-founded cities, but another 5-6 conquered cities. Tall to wide.

Is my mistake in annexing the cities? Should I leave them as puppets? Should I do less warmongering? I'm worried that I won't have the Aluminum or Uranium I need to build spaceship parts if I don't grab more land. Prince difficulty.
A conquered city is in "resistance" for the number of turns equal to the number of citizens you captured. If there were 8 citizens left when you took the city, there will be 8 turns of resistance. During that time, the city does not do anything - except give you unhappy! No production, no faith, no tourism, no nuthin'! Also, you will not be able to purchase units or buildings in it. So, in general, don't "annex" it right away. Puppet it at first, and wait at least until the resistance is over before you annex.

Then, if you annex it, the "unhappy" will again go up, but you can build or purchase a courthouse to make it act like one of your own cities.

If you take the city and decide to "raze" it, that is the same as annexing it. So you're going to experience that same spike in unhappiness until it's burned down.

The rebels appear when you hit 10 (or more) unhappy. So that is a sort of goal, to keep it under 10.
 

mbbcam

Prince
Joined
Apr 7, 2012
Messages
580
Location
Cambridge
My instincts are honed from Civ3, Civ4, and BERT, where more cities are usually better.
Civ5 is different. Four or five cities are enough to win a Science Victory on Deity (I have done it myself), and not having Aluminium is not a problem if you can buy it from someone else, or get allied with a City State that has some (they are not going to be building space ships).

That is not to say that you should not use warfare, of course. But this is a *strategy* game, and it is sensible to think strategically, which means that if you know you are going to conquer a city, it is advisable to plan for that, and make sure that you have excess happiness before you capture it. That means having built happiness buildings, made alliances with City States, or made trades with other Civs, so you have a buffer before you march into a city. Capturing a city and then trying to fix the happiness hit afterwards is not optimal, though it is sometimes what one needs to do.
 

Diktaattori

Chieftain
Joined
Oct 10, 2021
Messages
78
In my last two games (Assyria and now America), I start with a 4 city Tradition start and then look to see if there are easy targets. My instincts are honed from Civ3, Civ4, and BERT, where more cities are usually better. So I bring my army and conquer a city or two...

BAM! If I annex the city, my happiness drops like a stone. Especially if it is larger than size 10. Research slows, rebels appear, until I can digest the new one.

In both of these games, I started the game planning for a Science Victory but have ended up with lots of great works, great artists and writers, and will probably move to a Culture Victory instead. Ending the game with 4 or 5 self-founded cities, but another 5-6 conquered cities. Tall to wide.

Is my mistake in annexing the cities? Should I leave them as puppets? Should I do less warmongering? I'm worried that I won't have the Aluminum or Uranium I need to build spaceship parts if I don't grab more land. Prince difficulty.
You need to play as Attila and burn all cities down with double speed. There is also ideology policies with courthouses that you should consider very very very very strongly
 

vorlon_mi

Emperor
Joined
Oct 21, 2004
Messages
1,167
Location
Chelsea, MI
You need to play as Attila and burn all cities down with double speed. There is also ideology policies with courthouses that you should consider very very very very strongly
I've played as Attila before, which was fun. I'm trying all the leaders to see what their individual traits are.

I will look for the ideology you mention, but my happiness crash happens earlier, before I get to open any ideologies.
 

Diktaattori

Chieftain
Joined
Oct 10, 2021
Messages
78
I've played as Attila before, which was fun. I'm trying all the leaders to see what their individual traits are.

I will look for the ideology you mention, but my happiness crash happens earlier, before I get to open any ideologies.
You should only conquer one city before ideologies
 

mbbcam

Prince
Joined
Apr 7, 2012
Messages
580
Location
Cambridge
You should only conquer one city before ideologies
I'm puzzled as to why you would make that recommendation. These forums are replete with guides to strategies for Domination games which involve conquering the entire map, often *before* reaching Ideologies. And there are videos by very good players showing how it can be done. Here are a couple of examples:



As for guides, look at these:

https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/domination-on-immortal-deity-a-noobs-guide.547630/

 

Diktaattori

Chieftain
Joined
Oct 10, 2021
Messages
78
I'm puzzled as to why you would make that recommendation. These forums are replete with guides to strategies for Domination games which involve conquering the entire map, often *before* reaching Ideologies. And there are videos by very good players showing how it can be done. Here are a couple of examples:



As for guides, look at these:

https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/domination-on-immortal-deity-a-noobs-guide.547630/

Following those guides require too much micromanagement related to happiness and other stuff which is really boring.When you are first to ideologies you have all the happiness you need and there is no need to handle tedious micromanagement. You can just concentrate on the essential which is conquest by force

Edit: Also tanks are more beatiful than any other units
 

mbbcam

Prince
Joined
Apr 7, 2012
Messages
580
Location
Cambridge
Are you kidding? I think they are super fun and I hope you change your opinion to same after playing some games with them
I'm puzzled again. I'm not really disagreeing with you. Perhaps we are from different cultures, and just express things differently.
 

Diktaattori

Chieftain
Joined
Oct 10, 2021
Messages
78
I'm puzzled again. I'm not really disagreeing with you. Perhaps we are from different cultures, and just express things differently.

Reading and replying civfanatics on a bus with less than good phone can give interesting errors
 
Top Bottom