Transitioning Warlord to Noble

[I<3PWG]

Well I'm playing vanilla Civ 4. Bought it about a month ago. I struggled mightily at first and personally think the game suggesting you play at Noble out of the gate is a bit nuts. That all said, I lowered the difficulty level to Warlord, read the many great strategy guides on these forums and somewhat slowly got better at the game.

i've now won 3 different ways, two of them twice. i've won domination twice, conquest once and cultural twice. i felt fairly adept at Warlord and now want to move up to the challenge of Noble. However I'm somewhat concerned that I've relied on certain crutches in Warlord that have made the game very winnable for me which in Noble are not working out.

i have a million questions to ask but i'm trying to limit myself here so as to not irritate people right out of the gate. i think to start i have 3 main questions.

1. i've always used financial leaders. i didn't really intend this at first. i picked Mansa Musa at random in my first win on Warlord and when i won cultural i chose Saladin & Elizabeth as i'd read certain others liked them for cultural victories. my first game on noble i let the computer pick my leader and i got Isabella. my economy was in shambles so quickly it was stunning. so my first question would be "is financial considered a crutch of sorts?". it seems so much more useful to me than any other single trait that i wonder how it's viewed by the civ 4 community. would my next step be to try noble with a financial leader or go back to Warlord and try and win without it.

2. my 2nd noble attempt was a lot more successful but ultimately more frustrating. i played as frederick and did really well ( first place in score by over 1000 ) for much of the game. however i think i didn't press my advantage enough. i had knocked off france and at that point had about 9 cities. i was at 80% science and still pulling in cash. i had academies in virtually all my cities was the most advanced civ and thought at this point that a space race victory was my best option. this turned out to be a bad call as my cities while great for cash / science were not very good production cities and i fell well short of the number of turns needed to produce everything. is space race perhaps not the best way to try and win first ?

is it correct to press a science advantage and knock out another civ at that point?

3. my last question is what do folks think is the best way to get better? Should i take my Frederick game go back to just after defeating the French and replay the last 300 years a more aggressive way? Or would it be better to start another Noble game at random and see how I do?

 

[PJyang]

To 2nd: Did you cottage every tile in all your cities? Cottages are great for commerce, but poor for production. You need some production cities:
most likely on a river, build forge/factory/plant/levee in the city,
for improvement:
build farms only enough to support the population to work all workable tiles, build watermills where ever you can, workshop/mines/lumbermills else and running state property.

 

[Cam_H]

I<3PWG,

Welcome to CivFanatics!

On (1.) ... Many consider Financial to be the best trait - and while it got nerfed a little early on (one of the early vanilla patches took the fast-build Bank bonus away), many players think that it's still the best. There are a vocal few who disagree. Personally I think that it's one of the better traits, but I wouldn't go so far as to label it as a "crutch".

I would suggest that you press on with Noble level rather than withdraw back to Warlord given that you've won a few by different victory types on that level now.

On (2.) - cross post with PJyang - ... "i had academies in virtually all my cities" ... try to specialise your cities better. You'll probably be better served by concentrating your haul in three or four cities (at most) and keep a proportion at the other end of the spectrum with a real focus - great for unit production and later Spaceship parts. Also, what at first might appear like a good commerce city or Great Person Farm can later be converted into a dynamo hub with Workshops and Watermills.

"is space race perhaps not the best way to try and win first?" ... I actually think that it's a good way to go, as you'll get through the bulk of the technology tree and usually require at least a moderate sized empire, so usually there will be at least a bit of warmongering. Indeed to secure a wide range of resources and improve your chances of getting Oil, Aluminium, etc. in the late game, it's good to have a large empire. In short, a 'normal' Space win usually requires a good blend of development and warmongering.

On (3.) ... I'd suggest that you spend a bit of time reading through some of the games in the succession games forum and other similar forums (Game of the Month, the Realms Beyond site, etc.) as well as some of the 'challenge' games in this Forum (e.g. Sisiutil's 'All Leaders Challenge' games) for practical ideas and insights, as well as playing your own games. Be prepared to experiment, even if you lose a few.

Best of luck - and again, welcome!

 

[TRJS]

I>3pwg,

Cam's points above are great. Was struck by the acadamy point myself. I probably have at most 2 cities with acadamies, I like to settle the scientists in my capital mostly. Making it a monstor science city.

Also, recommend a shift in focus from score/science to production. Production is you advantage over the AI. You can always win if you can outproduce.

Finally, feel free to post a save of a game at some point and have other critique it. I did this early on and Cam_H gave me some excellent pointers that I still use.

 

[Lazonby]

I play vanilla Civ4 at no less than Noble (I think Noble is the most well balanced), so I'll toss out my ideas. Financial can be a nice trait, but it's a trait best used for a specific goal. IMO, the best trait is Industrial. It's handy for a very broad spectrum of the game. I'll say it now, unless going for pure military, Ghandi is the best of the best. Couple the wonder building speed with fast workers that can set a city right in a hurry, and you've got extreme potential. Fast workers that can build and reap the potential of cottaging faster than unknown potentials of city payoff's = BLING ALL GAME LONG. Creative Civs are really nice to spread culture and boundaries--if you choose to deny yourself the weak benefits of open borders in Noble level. You can essentially define your own areas of land like this.

The key to Noble is learning to manage your city. I rarely specialize a city like many say I must, but I do adjust slightly my production given cities with more hills/mines than another with grasslands/cottages. In my veiw, cash & the speed at which you get it is the ultimate balancing act. You cut back on your military some, but you keep it technologically ahead of everyone else with the money that buys high research levels (80%+ the entire game). Ideally, when you get Infantry, you can roll everyone else on the board.

Building wonders takes care of your culture, along with founding at least 2 religions is crucial. If you can do this, you've got your culture & happiness taken care of. The problem you will see is that the AI will tend to go after the same...high culture. Industrious civs can counter easily, but if you're faced with Monte or Alex (I hate Alex with a passion), you MUST have a military. In this regard, focus on iresearch and military. What gives you a strong military and infrastructure? Production and Research. Hammers and money make the Civ world go 'round. The game thinks culture is all that, but when you can whip anyone's butt, culture doesn't mean chit.

Stay ahead of the research curve with $$$, build a technologically advanced military (it reduces the number of mil units you need to keep on hand), keep one civ as a friend to distract other civs that hate you, never trade your techs to anyone (yes, the whole world can hate you for it, F'em), and roll another civ when you get macemen, infantry, or mech armors. The larger you get, the more money, research, and production you can get. MONEY makes the world go round...but financial is not the long term answer. The financial trait is only a quick fix.

 

[Lanstro]

Stick at it at noble. The game's more fun up near monarch, and you'll move up faster if you challenge yourself.

 

[twocan7]

I'm glad to kow I'm not the only one having trouble makeing the jump to noble!! I can win on warlord but usually get my but kicked on Noble. I have been on warlord practicing my specialization of cities. Someone said there is a thread with a walk through of a noble win. Anyone know where it is at?

 

[I<3PWG]

I<3PWG,

Welcome to CivFanatics!

On (2.) - cross post with PJyang - ... "i had academies in virtually all my cities" ... try to specialise your cities better. You'll probably be better served by concentrating your haul in three or four cities (at most) and keep a proportion at the other end of the spectrum with a real focus - great for unit production and later Spaceship parts. Also, what at first might appear like a good commerce city or Great Person Farm can later be converted into a dynamo hub with Workshops and Watermills.

few thoughts and a reaction here. i typically do specialize my cities in Warlord and was doing so in my Frederick game as well. I was putting out a lot of Great Scientists as a result of having Frederick (philosophical), having founded no religions and having a high research rate. at first i created academies in my two big science cities. after that i each time i got a scientist i hit F1 and sorted by science. if 50% of the next best science city was more than the additional science i'd get in my main science city, i decided to build another academy.

is this not good logic?

as for converting a city from science to something else, one concern here. cottages unlike other improvements require time to reach effectiveness. that always make me really really reluctant to destroy them. i think maybe i needed to push more production cities early on but it feels like my hand was somewhat forced by the terrain.

i also though i might post save game around the time i think i blew it and went all science when i should have pressed my tech advantage and warmongered more.

maybe someone would be willing to look at it and provide critiques. i also intend to read that forum with walkthrough games that several have mentioned.

thanks so much for the helpful responses.

 

[eewallace]

Look for the threads labelled "Orion's Home School" here in the strategy and tips section from a few weeks back--there are a couple of these, where he walks through several games to several different victory conditions. Very useful stuff!

 

[DMOC]

few thoughts and a reaction here. i typically do specialize my cities in Warlord and was doing so in my Frederick game as well. I was putting out a lot of Great Scientists as a result of having Frederick (philosophical), having founded no religions and having a high research rate. at first i created academies in my two big science cities. after that i each time i got a scientist i hit F1 and sorted by science. if 50% of the next best science city was more than the additional science i'd get in my main science city, i decided to build another academy.

is this not good logic?

The thing about settling vs academies, is that the more scientists you settle in your main science city (usually capital), the greater the academy bonus is. Under a non-representation civic, GS settled give 3 beakers, which gives an extra 1.5 to cities with academies so it's really like 4.5 beakers. If you are running Representation, a GS will give nine beakers (3 normal, then 3 from rep for a total of 6, then +50% from academies). That might not sound much but if you have Oxford University in your capital (which happens A LOT) then that 9 from the GS turns into 18!! (Actually, if you already have a library and a university in your capital, that's even more so it's like 25 total beakers. And what if you're running Bureaucracy as well? Raw commerce increases thereby which usually increases beaker output, which is further magnified by buildings such as Oxford, etc.

Usually, I find it best to settle scientists in ONE major city (almost always the capital), rather than spreading them out because only one city can get Oxford University which doubles beaker output. Therefore, I think it's best to keep magnifying ONE city's beakers instead of adding academies to 6 other cities. This also has the advantage of allowing other cities to focus more on production.

 

[TRJS]

This also has the advantage of allowing other cities to focus more on production.

And here in lies the key. If you are trying to only max your science output in all cities, and 6-7 is a lot, then you are not producing enough. Focus on the hammers. They give you the units/wonders/buildings you need.

 

[twocan7]

I just started reading this. It's awesome!! It is Orions school. I am having the same problem you are having and it has helped me so far. It's kinda confusing when the "Experts" keep questioning what and why Orion is doing what he is doing so I skip over those and just read Orion's reponses to them. That helps explain why he does what he does. Great for Newbies like me!!

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=246889

 

[I<3PWG]

that thread is helpful. that said there are a lot of things mentioned which are warlords / bts so they didn't make sense to me but much of the overall strategy was great. based on that thread i started a game on epic speed with a standard sized world, random map and low sea levels. i dont' understand what the was referring to with big / small in terms of the setup; maybe that is a bts /warlords thing.

anyway i'm posting a few save games of the game i started. as expected i'm losing =(. it's 500 ad i'm on a continent with two other folks - persia & the united states.

my strategy so far has been to make persia a trading partner by switcing them over to hinduism. this worked to get them to hinduism but has not really paid off at all because the two reasons i did this don't seem to be working.

1. he refuses to trade any of the techs he has with me.
2. he is still pleased or friendly with washington which irritates me as washington is annoyed with me over the difference in religion. he refuses to trade / open borders anything because of this. this means by persia relations take a hit if/when i invade washington.

i'm wondering what to do next. i've expanded in a controlled manner and used slavery alot early on in my capital to push out the missionary ( used to convert cyrus , library , barracks , etc. i have a few ideas for next:

1. push out a great prophet. i should have done this earlier. cyrus has lots of hindu cities and this could make me an additional 10g a turn or so.
2. crush washington. i figure despite the religion thing not working out as i hoped i need to do something and taking his good cities seems reasonable.
3. find other civs?? i finally have a coastal city. should this be my next priority?



my 4th city turned out to be a barbarian take over in an are i had already sort of hand picked to use. i'm going to post a few saves games, one from 500 AD and a few others from earlier to see if anyone thinks i made some big mistakes to this point. a million thanks to anyone willing to take a look at this stuff.

 

[I<3PWG]

well i wanted to drop by and thank everyone for the immense help. i managed to win my first noble game today: space race victory in 1971 ( or so). the tips i gathered here were really helpful, in particular:

1. having a specific goal to all wars: this was important because i was very much willing to have peace with persia ( shared the main continent with them) as long as

a. they weren't crowding me culturally
b. i had enough cities to mass produce space ships / tech ahead of everyone

in earlier days i would have pushed to wipe them out for no good reason other than to eliminate them as a competitor.

2. focus on production in the later game. i had two many science cities to win at noble. once i started working on improvements that added production and putting forges / factories / etc in every city not just a few i was able to churn out a military to dissuade monty from coming after me and space parts.

3. orion's thread helped me be a lot more efficient in the early game by using granaries / slavery to get my cities up, my religion out.

i think i need to get much better at barbarian management & early teching. orion schooled everyone techwise in that game. this was not the case with me where i trailed a bit until i united most of my continent at which point i surged ahead.

i also don't think i did much with tech trading. i was hoping to do so but for the most part the techs i needed others wouldn't trade at all. i was also impressed that i managed to get a win with monty never declaring war on me. that bastard is impossible to keep pleased and has the most bloodlust of any AI i've run across. i think isabella would be 2nd.

anyway thanks again for the helpful tips, i suppose i have to repeat this now and probably on standard speed which i suspect is more difficult.