Teaching game 2 noobs and a teacher vs. Monarch

[Shusaku]

Hi everyone, I'm looking for good partners to take on a monarch level game. It would be a teaching game where another noob (warlord lvl max), a teacher (Emperor or Immortal) and me (I'm stuck at Warlord lvl).

We would be play this game together, being teached my our "master".

Players
- Noobiest noob ever: Shusaku
- Poor player: Fellow
- Teacher, master, god, wathever: Neilmeister
- Chuck Norris: babybluepants

For the leader, I would propose Zara Yaqob. I think he's a pretty good leader. I also like Louis XIV. If, however, you prefer another leader, just tell it, I will have no problem no take it.

I will create and post the game when we'll get enough people and when everything will be decided.

I propose that we are two noobs to teach faster than just one game per noob. Also, if we are like 10 on the same game, too many questions will pop out and it will take 10 years to make one turn...

Just make sure you have BtS version 3.19 before applying.

 

[neilmeister]

I'm happy to join in. There are lots better players than me, but I am probably good enough for your purposes. I can beat Emperor 9/10, and Immortal about 5/10. I am a builder, so I tend to go for Space/Diplo/Culture victories.

I don't really care what leader we choose. If you specifically have a VC in mind, then this will be the biggest factor.

 

[Shusaku]

Allright, you're in! Thank you very much. Btw, if during the game you don't understand something I wrote, don't worry... Just ask me to explain it (sometimes it may happen since I talk french).

 

[neilmeister]

No worries, I work for a french company so I am used to lots of french-english expressions

 

[Shusaku]

If there's still no one else who joins the game in three days, we will begin and another one will be able to join during the game.

 

[Fellow]

If there's still no one else who joins the game in three days, we will begin and another one will be able to join during the game.

I'm in fair enough you can always learn something and I never had anything else than diplomatic victory... *sadly*

 

[babybluepants]

I'll be lurking.

 

[neilmeister]

Now bbp, you are an Immortal/Deity player, so feel free to make suggestions!

 

[babybluepants]

Too busy to really participate. Yeah, I'll comment when I have some time and/or feel compelled to.

I'd vote you play Gandhi, btw. Might as well go with the top dog if you're jumping all the way from Warlord to Monarch.

 

[neilmeister]

Gandhi works for me. What do you think Shusaku?

 

[Shusaku]

I have no problem with that. Gandhi's pretty good, even though he's not offensive at all. But that works for me since I also prefer passive victories (culture, diplomatic, etc...)

Fellow, I didn't quite understood your message (sorry, I'm french...). Does that mean you'll be the other noob?

bbp, you can always look at the game, laugh a little bit than give us tips if you have time. Your help will be more than welcomed

 

[babybluepants]

OH, NO.

Gandhi will 'em all.

Edit:

Spoiler :

Just start the game and see how it goes. It's way premature to think about victory conditions or even general strategy.

 

[Liquidated]

Gandhi is an amazing leader to play as warmonger. Phil and fast workers are two great excuses to overextend and go for an early land grab, while spiritual and happytime jails are a great reason to start bashing heads in once you have run out of room to expand.

Nothing chops forests and clears jungle tiles faster than India's UU worker; you can start chopping the same turn you enter said tile, speeding settlers and jungle belt reclamation. Phil makes crashing your economy and relying on great scientists for beakers so much more palatable; if you can nail the mids, doubly so!

When it comes to war, India's mid game +happiness jail comes in at a perfect time to help abuse drafting and warweariness, while spiritual allows one to civics peacetime and wartime civics with near impunity.

Just because the computer Gandhi is normally a wimp doesn't mean you have to play him that way. That would make a fun "noob" game; try and run an SE and aim for domination/conquest.

Cheers!
-Liq

 

[babybluepants]

Gandhi is an amazing leader to play as warmonger... Just because the computer Gandhi is normally a wimp doesn't mean you have to play him that way. That would make a fun "noob" game; try and run an SE and aim for domination/conquest.

 

[Dem Taqat]

Ghandi's a very strong leader. Other Good choices include Mansa (spi/fin), Darius (fin/org/immortals), Hatesphut (spi/cre/war chariots) and JC (imp/org/Preatorians). Zara is a good leader, but Ethiopia Is a little lacking IMHO, as their UB is useless for a creative leader, and the oromeo is a replacement for muskets, which I don't use often.

DT
Watching Attentively

 

[Liquidated]

Financial is both a boon and a bane.

It's a boon because it really jump starts your early game if around rivers and keeps paying off all game long. Arguably the single strongest trait out there.

The bane is that every financial game roughly plays the same; Cottage Cheese. Any and almost every grass tile is marked for cottages, riverside first, non riverside later when happy caps rise. On low land maps, financial is even more runaway as it super charges water tiles, small wonder 3 of the financial civs have UU's/UB's based on coastal cities.

Dem, you seem to like the early rush units. Do you normally start wars in the BC's?

Cheers!
-Liq

 

[Fellow]

Oui je serrais le deuxième noob

I quit much like Zara , as I do not need to *care* about culture early on and later libraries and courthouse get cheaper both of which i always build in every city...


I do normally start by taking out the nearest oponnent with warriors, however, I found that increasingly difficult as I entered monarch or above...

But yea Why don't you start the game and we'll see how it turns out

 

[Liquidated]

One of the major hurdles involved in moving from prince to monarch is that you suddenly cannot bum rush the closest Civ with impunity.

Yeah it's doable, but archers are much better default defenders (protective archers in a town on a hill, oh my!), not to mention there's serious economic considerations. How are you going to pay for the new town(s) and while you were building up the troops, what were the other civ's doing?

As you advance up though Emp to immortal, early rushes (and wonders) become less and less advantageous because of these growing concerns. Say you did magically take out the Civ 15 tiles away at no cost though, what will the remaining civs do with the land left over since you cannot possible settle 2x civs worth of open land?

One of the major problems with Civ4 is that certain Leaders (Gandhi!) will not expand to their share of the land, instead chasing wonders and whatnot. On the higher difficulties, this just means some other AI leader(s) is going to eat up that extra land and become that much stronger.

One of the main lessons one needs to learn in order to advance in play is how diplomacy really works. Sitting bull might not declare war at pleased, but good luck getting that cranky bastard there without alienating the rest of the land mass

Oh and that Cathy, what a marvelous backstabber she is

Cheers!
-Liq

 

[Fellow]

Does it , considering your post , make sense to "steal" at least a worker?

 

[neilmeister]

worker steal is nearly always a good idea.