The UNREAL Walkthrough

[frob2900]

This is less true when you aren't as worried about expanding.

No its not. Unless your industrious (or have very,very good hammer tiles in your capital)

Egypt starts with Mysticism and Agricultural, right? That's one essential worker tech, and one wonder tech right off the bat.

Yes, I agree. This is why Ramesses is a prime choice for the "C'Mon, nab everything, even the Chichen Itza!" strategy

 

[futurehermit]

Yeah, but also remember, obsolete doesn't advocate chopping, either

Yes, I know that, which is fine, but depending on how much production your capital has, you may need to chop to ensure getting BOTH pyramids AND oracle or risk losing one of them.

p.s., Egypt starts with Ag and THE WHEEL. Not mysticism. It is HC that starts with ag + myst.

 

[frob2900]

p.s., Egypt starts with Ag and THE WHEEL. Not mysticism. It is HC that starts with ag + myst.

Ha, you're right! I stand corrected

Then it would be Huyana Capac that's well suited for the strat, but what a crying shame to waste all those financial cottaging possibilities

 

[futurehermit]

Yeah, I would say with the financial trait that HC is not ideally suited. Mysticism is a very cheap technology.

 

[aelf]

I think people are being a bit overly critical tbh (probably a reaction to obsolete's language use e.g., "for noobs" "non-experts" etc., but tbh that is probably a reaction to people who were calling HIM a noob, or inferior player, for NOT lightbulbing, building cottages, etc.!!!).

I don't know about the others, but I wasn't overly critical, and actually I don't think anyone was. And I don't recall anybody calling obsolete a noob or inferior player either.

However, one thing I would like to point out was his aggressive repudiation of lightbulbing and cottaging. He seemed out to prove that these were unnecessary, but that has yet to be seen. Am I correct, therefore, to say that they might not be necessary for one to win given certain conditions? Also, I still don't see why lightbulbing and cottaging are crutches. Ironically, wonder spamming was considered an unfashionable crutch a while ago, a testament to the fact that 'crutch' is a double-edged word that really makes little sense.

I also find it silly to say that this method is only for experts. So, conversely, people who lightbulb and cottage spam are noobs, then? And non-experts can't duplicate this strat? I do all of these things, including wonder-heavy strategies, so I must either be an expert player or an 'amateur' (you mean some of you are professional?? ). Which? And I find it silly and meaningless to dismiss a certain way of playing, since it's right there for you and it's not an exploit. I'm all for variants, and have publicly done some myself, but the objective of the variant must be made clear and sensible. You must have a disclaimer, of sorts, without some a kind of implicit condemnation of others.

Believe me, I know. I used to be quite militant towards warmongering as I saw that percisely as a crutch and was really against using it as a basis to judge how easy the game was. But after playing challenge after challenge, I have come to the conclusion that one way isn't necessarily more superior than another. The first Immortal Challenge was won without much warmongering, while the second was lost despite and probably because of much warmongering. I have come to the conclusion that there is no sin in using what works. However, I still am against any game changes that favour warmongers

 

[futurehermit]

What I meant by overly critical is people (not necessarily you aelf) harping on obsolete along the lines of the strat being situational. All I wanted to point out is that EVERY strat is situational. And, certainly, you should always use what works in a given situation. There are some games where warfare is not the best way to go (early at least) and there are some games where you will lose if you don't.

I think there probably would've been less criticism (as I mentioned) if Obsolete had just been more calm about the whole thing, but (as I mentioned) he was probably cheesed at people harassing him when he was (more peacefully) defending no cottages and no lightbulbing in an earlier thread

 

[frob2900]

However, I still am against any game changes that favour warmongers

Hear, hear!

Warmongering is a pretty darn solid (I'm not going to use the words "broken" ) strategy. If anything they should nerf it, but that's a whole other discussion...

All I wanted to point out is that EVERY strat is situational.

Yeah, but warmongering is situational as in "works in about 95% of situations", I'd say

[EDIT]
One can only really talk about the "goodness" of a strategy in terms of how versatile it is (the percentage of randomly chosen situations it actually does work in). That's why I was critical in some earlier posts.. to dispel the notion that this strategy is in some way superior, when statistically I'm pretty sure it is not.

I'm willing to bet money on the fact that this strategy will work for less random starts/random leaders than cottaging or lightbulbing will.

Now all we need is a huge scoreboard and a thousand monkeys playing Civ (no, I'm not talking about the Hall of Fame! )

 

[futurehermit]

Well, I just see warmongering as part of the game really and not a "strat" per se. This is for high levels only though. On levels at and especially below prince you can peacefully expand to a large enough empire.

The "problem" is that on the higher levels the AI expands super-fast and the only way to compete (without going cultural at least and even then sometimes you get boxed in) is to go to war. That is why I don't see warfare as a strat per se, but rather as an essential part of the game.

After an initial war to get some land, however, your options really do open up so long as you are able to get at least a dozen cities, which is usually no problem after mopping up one opponent.

 

[frob2900]

Well, I just see warmongering as part of the game really and not a "strat" per se.

Well, then like me you've internalized warmongering to the point were you don't even think about the fact that you're pursuing "the warmongering strat"

Imagine how the game would change if unit support costs were five times higher... (in those cases war would be very much a specific strat)

On levels at and especially below prince you can peacefully expand to a large enough empire.

Well, pretty much anything will work on prince and below.

After an initial war to get some land, however, your options really do open up so long as you are able to get at least a dozen cities, which is usually no problem after mopping up one opponent.

Yeah, sure, I agree fully. But one big, shiny, profitable option that still remains is always something along the lines of "Oh, look at Brennus.. He only has longbows/macemen.. What shall I do with all these shiny grenadiers?"

 

[ABigCivFan]

Wow, it does look like an "Unreal" starting location: Every tile in the BFC has either a tree, a resource or a flood plain. And a nice river(Niles) runs through it.

However, I do not think it is good to demonstrate a "strategy" using a start like this because you can crush the AIs easily and leasurely with ANY strategy under such circumstances.

 

[OTAKUjbski]

Again, I admit there is a time and a place to use a cottage the odd time, but most people get it all wrong.

I would like to see a game in which you play without restriction (preferably on Monarch with BetterAI).

Cottages and lightbulbing both have their places in the CivIV bag'o'tricks. If most people really do "get it all wrong," I would like to see it done properly -- as I am certain I am probably one who does get it wrong.

I’m not going to say this method is BETTER than others.

Sadly, many of the CFC readers are taking your walkthroughs to mean just that.

- Still ds61514 shadowed the game playing the conventional route, 1870 is 22 turns faster so i wouldn't say lightbulbing/cottages is playing with crutches compared to this strat.

Well:

1. Obsolete never claimed lightbulbing/cottages is playing with crutches, soooo ... I'd call that a moot point.
2. One game is hardly a strong enough comparison to bank on ... even using the same strategy on the same map, the RNG can play a major role in the outcome of a game and could certainly account for 22 turns.
   
   Another turn-adjusting benefit is knowledge of the board. Knowing who is where and what is where can also play a strong role in the outcome of a game and could also account for 22 turns.

- I wonder how it all pans out if you're not industrial/don't find Stone and marble, seems to me that you'll have to resort to slightly more convention techniques in that case.

/nod ... I want to see this too.

I think people are being a bit overly critical tbh (probably a reaction to obsolete's language use e.g., "for noobs" "non-experts" etc., but tbh that is probably a reaction to people who were calling HIM a noob, or inferior player, for NOT lightbulbing, building cottages, etc.!!!).

I think people are being overly critical, because they have somehow gotten the impression Obsolete is trying to advocate his way as the right way, which couldn't be further from the truth.

And, I do agree with him that "expert" players tend to be the most close-minded. To move up to and past Monarch, you really have to focus and pay close attention to the game. After a while, you figure out which strategies work more often than not and tend to become tunnel-visioned into utilizing that one strategy.

I am far from an expert player and admit I've fallen into this mindset before.

However, one thing I would like to point out was his aggressive repudiation of lightbulbing and cottaging. He seemed out to prove that these were unnecessary, but that has yet to be seen. Am I correct, therefore, to say that they might not be necessary for one to win given certain conditions? Also, I still don't see why lightbulbing and cottaging are crutches. Ironically, wonder spamming was considered an unfashionable crutch a while ago, a testament to the fact that 'crutch' is a double-edged word that really makes little sense.

I also find it silly to say that this method is only for experts. So, conversely, people who lightbulb and cottage spam are noobs, then? And non-experts can't duplicate this strat? I do all of these things, including wonder-heavy strategies, so I must either be an expert player or an 'amateur' (you mean some of you are professional?? ). Which? And I find it silly and meaningless to dismiss a certain way of playing, since it's right there for you and it's not an exploit. I'm all for variants, and have publicly done some myself, but the objective of the variant must be made clear and sensible. You must have a disclaimer, of sorts, without some a kind of implicit condemnation of others.

Believe me, I know. I used to be quite militant towards warmongering as I saw that percisely as a crutch and was really against using it as a basis to judge how easy the game was. But after playing challenge after challenge, I have come to the conclusion that one way isn't necessarily more superior than another. The first Immortal Challenge was won without much warmongering, while the second was lost despite and probably because of much warmongering. I have come to the conclusion that there is no sin in using what works. However, I still am against any game changes that favour warmongers

Maybe I glazed over that part ... but I don't remember Obsolete ever saying lightbulbing or cottaging is a crutch.

What I do recall him advocating is that having tunnel-vision towards a particular strategy can be a crutch (i.e., believing that any one strategy is the only way or the best way.)

I have taken both of these walkthroughs to mean "don't fool yourself into thinking any one strategy is better or worse than another, and don't let yourself fall into the trap of thinking there is only one formula to winning at high levels. Lightbulbing and cottaging are two strategies experts tout as necessary to win any high-level game, but I'm going to show you that isn't always true. Think outside the box."

I could be wrong though ...


-- my 2

 

[Harbourboy]

Obsolete, thanks for this walkthrough. Very interesting, although I am a little taken back by the heat of the discussion. It's just a game, folks.

 

[aelf]

Maybe I glazed over that part ... but I don't remember Obsolete ever saying lightbulbing or cottaging is a crutch.

What I do recall him advocating is that having tunnel-vision towards a particular strategy can be a crutch (i.e., believing that any one strategy is the only way or the best way.)

I am just going to not build any cottages here to continue shooting down the arguments a lot of the intermediate & amateur players keep making. However, I am not going to go ALL OUT OF MY WAY to kill every single cottage an AI may make in a city that I capture. The AI just makes too freiken many that I don’t even have time to pillage them all (unless we are playing marathon/epic speed).

In any case, it should be pointed out that one should be a top-player before heading out on Emperor, especially if you are used to lightbulbing crutches. It is not that it’s insanely scary (it’s not), but you really should know how to OPTIMIZE your cities/specialists, etc. This is because of the huge edge the AI’s get on this level. And of course, it helps when you KNOW WHAT YOU ARE DOING.

You can twist it any way you want, but that his how the above statements are going to appear to most readers. In fact, ironically, it can hitherto be implied that he thinks his strat is superior because it is for experts. FACT: Many elite players are vouch for cottage spamming and lightbulbing.

I don't know why I'm pointing this out and seeming to take sides (i.e. for or against). Maybe I just don't feel that it's right.

 

[ds61514]

Another turn-adjusting benefit is knowledge of the board. Knowing who is where and what is where can also play a strong role in the outcome of a game and could also account for 22 turns.

I never said on this particular map, but in general .

The good thing about this map is the sheer amount of good land the human player has. Contrary to a lot of games, it's TOKU who has to bust out of a fairly bad start (desert north and jungle south). Playing peacefully with wonders is definitely a viable strat here.

 

[MickeyD]

Obsolete- Thanks for the fresh point of view! I've neglected settling specialists in thinking that they were inferior that way. Now, I'm thinking that late game prophets aren't really so bad, since they seem to settle really well. However, Artist specialists have their place. Cities on the fringe w/cultural pressure from AIs or for the 3 cities for a cultural win can really use that settled, but unwanted Artist.

On a side note, I think leaders with the financial trait would be neutered with the no cottages strat, since only so many cities will have forge (gold, silver, gems) or calendar resources to boost the commerce up.

 

[OTAKUjbski]

You can twist it any way you want, but that his how the above statements are going to appear to most readers. In fact, ironically, it can hitherto be implied that he thinks his strat is superior because it is for experts. FACT: Many elite players are vouch for cottage spamming and lightbulbing.

I don't know why I'm pointing this out and seeming to take sides (i.e. for or against). Maybe I just don't feel that it's right.

I glazed over it after all. Given the Unreal statement you quoted, it seems Obsolete changed tunes somewhere between Impossible and Unreal, because this was his original Impossible statement (bold added for emphasis):

Case in point, most players when leaving Prince levels behind and trying to tackle the higher levels, fall into a case of basing everything around lightbulbing. While that is a strategy that works, and has its use, a lot of players get so entrenched into it, they think it’s the only way. In fact, they feel certain it’s impossible to win Monarch+ without lightbulbing. And believe the sole purpose of a GP farm is only to lightbulb.

I have been asked to do a walk-through which shows how winning without lightbulbing can be done. And I’m going to take some time off now (I really shouldn’t) to run through a game and do that. Another thing I’m going to show you, is that you DON’T need to spam cottages! This is another thing many newbs plaster all over the place when first starting out in civ IV. But even intermediate players are doing this, and not only doing it, but there seems to be a misconception that you MUST use cottages, or you can’t win. Not just do you need cottages to win, but to even keep up in tech.

Maybe Obsolete should clear up those statements. Based on his Impossible statement, I took his Unreal statement to mean his approach is for expert players playing on Emperor.

If he does mean to say this strategy is all-around expert, then it's a laughable statement at best.

Either way, I still feel like I've learned something from this approach and look forward to the next installment (if there is one).

 

[Dirk1302]

^aelf i was just going to check this but i see you've already done so.

@OTAKubjski, i agree that RNG can be responsible for 22 turns difference,as for knowledge beforehand though i presume that ds61514 hasn't studied this game in depth beforehand, looking up all the resource positions . I haven't asked him but probably he just got the save and went to work like most of us would do. Still more games are needed to be more conclusive.

At the moment my feeling is it's a viable strat (given the right circumstances) but not the best. I will be more happy to settle the occassional great prophet though after reading all this.

@Harbourboy, the heat of the discussion follows in my case from the tone of Obsolete's posts which i find somewhat annoying. Probably this annoyance is reflected in my own posts as well. Let's not exaggerate though, there hasn't been any name calling and i have to give full credits to Obsolete for immediately assembling this emperor thread after some doubts were raised in the monarch thread.

 

[ds61514]

@OTAKubjski, i agree that RNG can be responsible for 22 turns difference,as for knowledge beforehand though i presume that ds61514 hasn't studied this game in depth beforehand, looking up all the resource positions . I haven't asked him but probably he just got the save and went to work like most of us would do. Still more games are needed to be more conclusive.

Like I said, not this particular game but in general .

I have played the game a bit (not too much, tests and all). Kyoto is easy to get if you push fast enough; the problem is the rest of Toku's land is pretty crappy. On the other hand, our land is pretty good; tons of food, happiness and stone. In this scenario, going for wonders (although maybe not as many as obsolete) and building up for Cav is a viable choice IMO; Elephants would also just rock Toku's world.

 

[obsolete]

Alright, I will recap some things…

The reason for the disclaimer, is because at least one person pointed out this is not something to recommend to general players ‘in not so many words’ because the skill level required is much higher.

I admitted that after thinking about it, there is some truth to that. So…. To prevent 1001 prince/monarch players from beating themselves over the head trying to get it to work but not having solid understanding of many concepts, I have the disclaimer in. I thought I was doing a favour by saving some players aggrevation until they advanced their game to the next level.

I mentioned I am not the best player in the world, and I do make my own mistakes when playing. Now, since I’m not a deity god, at least that means there SHOULD be other players who can do it to. So there is hope.


There is a few misconceptions I see even still going on. Let me clear some up.

#1 You do NOT need stone or marble to make this work!

In the monarch game I did NOT find any stone, yet I went on the wonder grabbing route regardless. I also did NOT get any marble early either. True, I did finally manage to find some and get it hooked up after a while, but by that point, the marble requiring wonders were already built. The only exception was the Taj Mahal, and since I was already so far ahead of the AI by then, and our production was very high, that was icing on the cake. For almost all intense and purposes that marble was useless to me.

So again, you do NOT need marble or stone.


And this brings us to the other misconception..

#2 You do NOT need industrious. It just happens that Ramesses was industrious. I like Ramesses because he is so well rounded. You do NOT need to go on any wonder building mode. I just went with the situation at hand. At the beginning I did a rough check of all info to me, and took the best course of action I calculated. Because of terrain, traits, situation, etc I went along with the path that you see now.

Also you do NOT need pyramids! Again, this was just an effect of my choosing to go builder mode. Pyramids was just a choice for what to go by at hand, it is not a requirement by any means.

 

[OTAKUjbski]

#1 You do NOT need stone or marble to make this work!

#2 You do NOT need industrious.

Also you do NOT need pyramids! Again, this was just an effect of my choosing to go builder mode. Pyramids was just a choice for what to go by at hand, it is not a requirement by any means.

At Emperor, I seriously doubt even you can reproduce the Wonderlust without being Industrious or having Stone/Marble. But, seeing you've already done what I dared not fathom myself, I am very likely wrong.

At Monarch, I'll give you all 3 of those points.

If you do a 3rd installment of the "Total #*$&ing Bananas Walkthrough," I'd like to see you pull off such a strong Wonderlust-SE without Industrious or Stone/Marble and intentionally without building the Pyramids (something I still find myself believing is necessary to deliver an early tech lead without lightbulbing when running specialists.)

However, if you never do one of these "unlikely" walkthroughs again, thank you for the two you've presented here for us ... I've definitely underestimated Great Prophets and overestimated lightbulbing.