Tradition guide from beginner to intermediate

My thoughts on Tradition:

1. Tradition is mainly about Great Persons and so linked to growth/food to feed those specialists
2. Tradition is highly depending on your surroundings. What are your neighbours? What is the landscape like? Where are your monopoly ressources? Can you defend your territory easily?
3. How many cities do you want/can you found? How much land do you can crap with as few cities as possible?
4. What are your Pantheon choices?

Opinion:
1. As Tradition, your capital is your crown jewel, more than for other policy branches. Most likely all your National wonders will be built in it. Even the Heroic Epic, because after the last change, it is increasing your production depending on population and in the most cases, you will build your wonders in the capital. Further, your first units will be built in the capital so giving them the honor promotion will add further. Those first units are very precious to you. You cant afford to lose them even less than for the other branches, because your other cities will lack free production, they will be behind the general infrastructure compared to the other branches.

Your land infrastructure wont come up as quickly as with other branches. You dont get a free worker and if you want to stay friendly most of the game with your neighbours, you wont steal as often their workers as with other branches. And you dont need to, because you will start to build those juicy farm triangels later on as much as possible and your ressources will be improved by GPI. GPI are really your friends, you will have more than others and the additional food makes it easier to plant on plains so the tile will feed itself, later even pushed by the WC resolution which gives GPI as Tradition +2 food so even GPIs on hills will feed themselves.
After playing a couple of tradition games, forest are not your friends, unlike they help you defend easily or your cities have no mines to work.

In general you can say, you will work high food farms, maybe one to two mines, all your GPI and specialists, specialists, specialists. And yeah, you should priotize rivers, because the windmill is better in the long run and has better synergy with Tradition's growth modifier.

2. Surrounds, I think that might be even the most important part of tradition. What are your neighbours? Aggressive AIs with early advantages? Or peacefull culture and/or science bloomers? What is the landscape like? Do you have a lot of choke points like mountain ranges, peninsulae or river crossings combined with rough terrain? How many rivers are nearby, how many possible farm clusters. For your second cities and further, you want to have them placed on hills for that extra hammer and defensive bonus and on your side of a river. Your army will be in the most cases smaller than others, so make it easy to defend, the better you can do it, the more production you have to put in something else.

3. How many cities do you want to have? That question is not easy to answer. The less you have, the lower your tech and social policy costs are. Because your Capital will have most of your %-modifier, you will have placed all your guilds in there. But where to put the other six guilds? That is depending if one of your secondary cities can feed more than one guild, in most cases you build one guild in your other cities and maybe an additional one in one or two cities with high growth. That part is really difficult to answer, because if you place your cities on choke point, it is very likely you wont have that many possibilties to have big farm clusters.

I would say the number of directly controlled cities for tradition is somewhere between 4-7 cities. For placing your cities, I recommend to just forward cities so far away, that you can place on between it and your capital. The advantage of higher border growth gives you the advantage that you dont have to settle that densily, but in general I recommend that you have some overlap so your cities can share those juicy farm clusters and GPI over ressources. The further advantage as tradition is that you can spend gold on border expansion more frequently than authority because you dont lose potential yields, but you need less than Progress, because your border expansion is faster. In VP I learned that ressources in the third ring are not guaranteed, because the AI will often take those themselves. But you can gamle a little bit, just buying a tile in the second ring and hoping that your next border expansion will grab it just in time.

4. Pantheons are often depending on your surrounds, but not everyone. As tradition, it is better to take one, which doesnt need to improve sth if it is not in abundance or build buildings, which will just take longer in your other cities. With Sovereignity you have an early faith advantage above the other branches and if you aim for a religion, you will build shrines first anyway, those for the first building in your secondary cities the hammer advantage of Progress and Authority is not that big, Progress needs at least 3 SP to have better cities and authority will have it earlier anyways, but both need at least 2 cities more with built shrines before they get the advantage. So in my opinion, Pantheons without active improvement tend to better for a tradition game. In general, you will have less faith in the long run than a big empire, but to get a religion the early faith is important.

Further comments:

How to spend your gold and hammers? Your capital will have those early buildings like shrine/monument/counsil first, it will build your settlers and your first units and first worker. As tradition, most likely you will try to squeeze in at least one early wonder, from my experience the Pyramids and Hanging Gardens are the best in general, because for first, you can save bulding a settler the hard way and loosing the growth during that time and second, the hanging gardens just make it easier to work those specialists early on.
Gold you should spend on rushing those maintances free buildings in every city, buying a worker or more in your secondary cities and if needed because of an aggressive neighbour buying a unit in your capital or the city which will have the Heroic Epic.

My personal tradition playstyle is not to wage aggressive wars, because those need units which can be quite hard to squeeze in early on. Building something like 4 horsemen early on is a BIG investement and if then no AI declares war on you, you wasted hammers.
I have to say that I dont play on deity, so I cant say if it feasable. As tradition, diplomacy is even more important I think, because you dont want to have a crosshair on your back and you want to trade as much as possible, because you tend to have less luxuries and those WLTKD have a bigger synergy with tradition's growth bonus.

So, just my 2 cents ... ;)
 
Building something like 4 horsemen early on is a BIG investement and if then no AI declares war on you, you wasted hammers.

In my opinion, playing deity, 4 horsemen are one of the best early investments available, regardless of the policy tree. Of course I wouldn't twiddle my thumbs with them waiting for an AI to attack - I'll attack myself.

Also, if no AI attacks, it's quite possible that it was thanks to the 4 horsemen. Either way it won't be a waste of hammers unless you're literally alone on your landmass.
 
In my opinion, playing deity, 4 horsemen are one of the best early investments available, regardless of the policy tree. Of course I wouldn't twiddle my thumbs with them waiting for an AI to attack - I'll attack myself.

Also, if no AI attacks, it's quite possible that it was thanks to the 4 horsemen. Either way it won't be a waste of hammers unless you're literally alone on your landmass.

Like I said, I am not playing Deity, so I cant say if there is an alternative. Do you really cant defend yourself with just a couple of spearmen, archers and maybe one/two horsemen/charriots?

Because four horsemen need a lot of hammers or gold early on, you have to tech for it. And if you build them, you should use them. But like I said, I try most of the times when I am playing tradition to be friendly to my neighbours. But war will happen in VP anyways, especially on higher difficulties. But in most cases, I just defend myself, sign a white peace. The most annoying part is, that you have to rebuild some or all of your caravans or cargoships. The reason I dont be aggressive in wars is, that I wont to avoid negative diplo modifiers as much as possible, when I play a peacefull tradition game for science or culture victory...
 
Like I said, I am not playing Deity, so I cant say if there is an alternative. Do you really cant defend yourself with just a couple of spearmen, archers and maybe one/two horsemen/charriots?
You should be able to defend yourself with either spearmen, horsemen, or a scout you get via ruins. In my experience you really want at least one high CS unit to tank hits. You can get by with archers for a while, but I really only do it if I'm in a situation where I don't unlock a better unit (such as rushing trade and lighthouses early on). Spears or horsemen are generally a much better use of hammers than archers or warriors, in my opinion.
 
Seems there's two lines of thought about the challenge of Tradition. One is that it requires more finesse. There's more ways to screw it up. The ease of messing it up isn't related to its strength when played properly, though. The second seems to be a bit of a risk vs reward thing. Aka, if it can be messed it more easily than the other two, there doesn't seem to be an appreciable reward.

Personally, I'm fine with finesse, though I've certainly played a number of games where the need for finesse felt overly restrictive. Part of the 'reward,' I'd say, is the unique style that it brings to the table. Even if it's riskier, just being straight stronger if you don't mess up/get unlucky wouldn't be a great goal, given that usually greater risk (that's worth taking) is associated with a greater reward. Some people may not be interested in experiencing a different style like that just for the sake of it, but that's not hugely different than some people not caring about cosmetic skins in games that they play.

As for people talking about all the "don'ts," I think that's partially just more to do with how some people analyze things. Some focus on the positives that can be gained. Others focus on what obstacles to avoid/remove so that the goal can be reached (and as one person alluded to, some find it more engaging).

--

I found the guide useful, having been away from VP for a few months + not playing dozens of games before that, too. Some of it is a refresher and some of it stuff I hadn't come across/learned previously.

I've also wondered about the city damage boost thing, in regards to defensive measures. Cities can hit for a respectable amount early on, but by the time the midgame rolls around they seem to be doing minimum (10) damage a shot to most units. I can understand when a unit has stuff like Cover (or a Survivalism Pathfinder), but it feels strange for them to feel so impotent in the later stages (sometimes as early as Renaissance). I don't know if the promotions that increase unit combat strength play a part or not.

I could see an argument for it only intended as a defense in the early game, with army expected to play a greater role later (and VP has techs to improve city attack range, too - figured that was partially to deal with range 3+ siege units), but I figured the smaller size of Tradition empires (and oft mentioned lower unit cap) may've been partially offset by certain defender advantages.

Do people find the city attacks useful as more than "free damage, I guess" past the early game?
 
Last edited:
Do people find the city attacks useful as more than "free damage, I guess" past the early game?

That depends on the city strength. Some cities with 40 strength are useless, but you'll find other cities with 120 strength that can crush your armies them alone. Using a high strength garrison is useful. And tradition already does +50% to city ranged damage with garrison.
My only problem with this ability is that I rarely use it. Normally I stop foreing armies in the borders, not in the city, as I dislike their units pillaging my territory.
 
That depends on the city strength. Some cities with 40 strength are useless, but you'll find other cities with 120 strength that can crush your armies them alone. Using a high strength garrison is useful. And tradition already does +50% to city ranged damage with garrison.
Yeah, I expected increased strength (Walls, Castle, etc) to boost the damage (and thus keep up with units getting stronger), but they seem to fall behind instead. I almost feel like taking the pantheon that boosts it with Babylon + Fealty + Orders just to see something on the upper end.

I know that the (combat) strength of the garrison plays into it, which is why it's sometimes recommended to put melee rather than ranged inside the city. Wondering if that adds to the base damage (before Tradition/Pantheon boost) that the defensive strength is adding to, or what's going on.

For example. Barbarian Horde spawned in the next door city state of my current game (Progress, though - so no policy bonus). No drill/cover. My city, on a hill, with Walls + Castle = 10 damage, despite having a slightly higher strength.

upload_2018-5-5_20-31-0.png


Move the nearby Lancer into the city and the damage went 14 (hooray?). The barbarian vs terrain modifier ends up with him having the better bonus, but my theoretical strength (as displayed) is higher. At even combat/stalemates, I expect more than a mere 10-15 damage.

upload_2018-5-5_20-30-43.png


A Tercio of my own, with Shock 3 (flanks with the Pikeman), gets a strength totaled to 41.25, and would trade 35-25. Guess I'll see where I can get to with Babylon. XD
 
Last edited:
Yeah, I expected increased strength (Walls, Castle, etc) to boost the damage (and thus keep up with units getting stronger), but they seem to fall behind instead. I almost feel like taking the pantheon that boosts it with Babylon + Fealty + Orders just to see something on the upper end.

I know that the (combat) strength of the garrison plays into it, which is why it's sometimes recommended to put melee rather than ranged inside the city. Wondering if that adds to the base damage (before Tradition/Pantheon boost) that the defensive strength is adding to, or what's going on.

For example. Barbarian Horde spawned in the next door city state of my current game (Progress, though - so no policy bonus). No drill/cover. My city, on a hill, with Walls + Castle = 10 damage, despite having a slightly higher strength.

View attachment 494955

Move the nearby Lancer into the city and the damage went 14 (hooray?). The barbarian vs terrain modifier ends up with him having the better bonus, but my theoretical strength (as displayed) is higher. At even combat/stalemates, I expect more than a mere 10-15 damage.

View attachment 494954

A Tercio of my own, with Shock 3 (flanks with the Pikeman), gets a strength totaled to 41.25, and would trade 35-25. Guess I'll see where I can get to with Babylon. XD

I see what you mean. Ranged damage was severely nerfed in VP for balance reasons. And cities were weakened so they can be captured by just using melee if left alone, forcing the defender to have a defensive army.

But it's true that one expected a city with 43 strength to perform better than a crossbowman.
 
I love it this way. Ranged damage, especially city damage, is ridiculously overpowered in vanilla. I love how all unit classes are viable in VP and that cities actually need to be defended.
 
I love it this way. Ranged damage, especially city damage, is ridiculously overpowered in vanilla. I love how all unit classes are viable in VP and that cities actually need to be defended.
I can agree with that sentiment as well. Just that I mostly remember siege units in vanilla dropping cities with little aid from the actual army, other than to be on standby if actual units showed up to threaten the siege VIPs (and your oftentimes single melee to actually take the city, usually losing a bajillion health in the process). Melee actually mattering is a refreshing change. VP does have Drill, but not every unit type can get city damage reduction like that. Still, Cover is pretty effective by itself, though.

In a recent game, I had Shock + March units hitting the city because they could heal through most of the damage they took (with Medic support, of course). Guess that just points out the damage a city does when counterhitting a melee is greater than what it can actively shoot for. So despite the increased city range, the defense against siege units is melee/mounted taking advantage of the siege's weaker combat strength.

I haven't really focused on going purely for a science victory in VP, as the changes to systems related to the other victories are more appealing. I don't have enough of a city spam mindset, so Tradition will be the more comfortable route to take. I'll just have to figure out the religious beliefs.
 
Last edited:
As a side note, in one of my recent games I managed to get a hold of a few monopolies and noticed that GPI on luxes wasn't getting the monopoly bonuses, sometimes GPI would have no effect at all. I was playing warmonger therefore didn't plan for GPI and didn't have any of the bonuses still the important part is that monopoly bonuses weren't applying to GPI. Which also begs to the question: do GPI over relevant resources gain the bonuses from religion?
 
Yeah, I expected increased strength (Walls, Castle, etc) to boost the damage (and thus keep up with units getting stronger), but they seem to fall behind instead. I almost feel like taking the pantheon that boosts it with Babylon + Fealty + Orders just to see something on the upper end.

I know that the (combat) strength of the garrison plays into it, which is why it's sometimes recommended to put melee rather than ranged inside the city. Wondering if that adds to the base damage (before Tradition/Pantheon boost) that the defensive strength is adding to, or what's going on.

For example. Barbarian Horde spawned in the next door city state of my current game (Progress, though - so no policy bonus). No drill/cover. My city, on a hill, with Walls + Castle = 10 damage, despite having a slightly higher strength.

Move the nearby Lancer into the city and the damage went 14 (hooray?). The barbarian vs terrain modifier ends up with him having the better bonus, but my theoretical strength (as displayed) is higher. At even combat/stalemates, I expect more than a mere 10-15 damage.

A Tercio of my own, with Shock 3 (flanks with the Pikeman), gets a strength totaled to 41.25, and would trade 35-25. Guess I'll see where I can get to with Babylon. XD

City damage is discussed here: https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/low-end-city-attack-damage.632942/
 
Back
Top Bottom