ur difficulty level
- Thread starter CivPWn3r
- Start date
Favourite? King.
Why? Because it's as fair as you are going to get with the computer. Chiefan, Warlord and Prince (while I couldn't have enjoyed civ as much as I have without these levels) kill some of the fun by giving you an advantage.
And I'm just scared of the big E.
Why? Because it's as fair as you are going to get with the computer. Chiefan, Warlord and Prince (while I couldn't have enjoyed civ as much as I have without these levels) kill some of the fun by giving you an advantage.
And I'm just scared of the big E.
I go with Prince. I find that it challenges me yet I [usually] win every time. Chieftain, Warlord, and Prince all give the player the advantage, but King and Emporer give the AI a huge advantage. Combine that with rampant AI cheating and I have to say "no thanks."
King means that you are dead even with the AI.. no?
http://www.civfanatics.com/civ1/difficultychart/
It's tipped in favor by the AI. It may not mean much on paper, but makes a big difference in the game.
For example: you pop 4 citizens and your cities and then they go into civil disorder (while the AI faces none)
It's tipped in favor by the AI. It may not mean much on paper, but makes a big difference in the game.
For example: you pop 4 citizens and your cities and then they go into civil disorder (while the AI faces none)
Irish Caesar
Yellow Jacket
King is the closest to a fair game, I think.
conquer_dude
Imperial Slave
Ditto. King was (actually) believe it or not my first game to play and I won! 
No way! Nice mate!
Some time you should give us the story (if you can remember it) of that game. I won my first game in Chefian and I thought that was pretty good.. but winning in King! Very nice.
Some time you should give us the story (if you can remember it) of that game. I won my first game in Chefian and I thought that was pretty good.. but winning in King! Very nice.
Swiss Bezerker
Emperor
the few times i play, its on the second difficulty.
conquer_dude
Imperial Slave
Well, the story...trada said:
This will be kinda quick, no big story to tell.
I started, good starting position, science all the way, built one unit in my city, built a settler, some techs came in, like 4 or five, cant remember but alot. Built legios I think, settler settler settler settler. I lost some cities to barbarians every know and then.
I finally started to look around for people, found someone, demanded tribute, they declare war, I laughed. I brought some units over and took two or three of their cities til my units were exsuated or stuck in between (I hate when that hapens).
I then sent over some more units cats and caravans. Took one city, destroyed a humungous stack of like 10 units all with one cat, that thing I do remember
! I took all their cities.Found someone else, brought some musketmen over (I was far behind in tech), demanded tribute, declared war. Conquerede in a couple of turns. The last civ was remaining. (I only played with three other civs)
It took me a while, but I found that the other civ was on a two city island
! I took some muskets and conquered! Alas, king conquer_dude! 
conquer_dude
Imperial Slave
Oh yeah, I went from despotism, to monarchy, to republic, then democracy, then back to republic. Don't ask why I can remeber that, maybe cause its so crazy
Oh, and why did you put ur instead of your difficulty level.
This isn't a chat room...
Oh, and why did you put ur instead of your difficulty level.
This isn't a chat room...
Hah! That's why! You only had two civs to combat... tricky conquer_dude 
conquer_dude
Imperial Slave
Three.
10 char
10 char
redsittter
Chieftain
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2007
- Messages
- 18
Emperor honestly. It's a great challenge. You need to be super aggressive and strong military. Having a good start and a bit of luck, with barbarians and whatnot helps, but it's not impossible. I can win maybe 40% ish of the time on emperor on an earth game if I get a good start. There's alot of variables, you might be the greeks and have just nicely defeated the french and now own all of europe, and then the mongols declare war on you, or the russians have amassed a huge empire and you need to engage them. once you do, the huge Zulu ampire is breaking into the middle east and you've a whole new challenge.
Civ 1 is amazing...
Civ 1 is amazing...
Emperor! It's a boring game if there is no challange. Even if I often get bad starts and I'm conquered really early in the game, I prefere Emperor level since you get more "game joy" in 5 hours if you play 3 shorter games with big challange, than only one game where not so much happens. That's my point of view.
Yeah, prince is not challenging enough. If you keep with a particular strategy and follow the rules, the
probability you would win is 100%. Emperor - to biased in favour of AI and barbs.King is the best possible challenge with a high probability you win. Emperor is a good challenge too but the probability of your victory is much lower. I would say 50% at most. Or even lower if you make some mistakes (not blunders as those would ruin your civ, so leave them for prince level or lower). Another reason I do not play Emperor too often is that I play on my PDA (via DOS emulator) and compared to PC it has less convenient interface so micro-management and close monitoring of my cities becames very tedeous if you know what I mean.
so, King is both challenging and rewarding.
probability you would win is 100%. Emperor - to biased in favour of AI and barbs.King is the best possible challenge with a high probability you win. Emperor is a good challenge too but the probability of your victory is much lower. I would say 50% at most. Or even lower if you make some mistakes (not blunders as those would ruin your civ, so leave them for prince level or lower). Another reason I do not play Emperor too often is that I play on my PDA (via DOS emulator) and compared to PC it has less convenient interface so micro-management and close monitoring of my cities becames very tedeous if you know what I mean.
so, King is both challenging and rewarding.
King is my kind of thing because it's the level where you are most equal with the AIs. That gives me a more satisfactory game.
Cheifian is great. Really great for the newbie. I wouldn't be alone in saying without this level I would never have got into civ.
Warlord.. Hm.. Meh. It's lifespan is not nearly as much as the easiest difficulty. I always saw it as the Chiefian-but-the-AI-is-a-threat.
Prince, I'm playing this one right now because I haven't played civ in a while. It's the level for old timers who want to get back into civ1 (maybe not *old* old timers. If you haven't fired up this game in 10 years I suggest Chiefian). This is also the level I can win most consistantly at.
King, as I said before, great plateau level. Most likely, I could be playing this level for the next five years or so and still only win 50/50 percent of the time.
Emperor. I rilly rilly want to win this. Haven't yet. It looks pretty much impossible. But I like a final wall to climb. If this, being the hardest difficulty level, was passible then it would utterly stunt the replay value of this game.
Then there is Emperor +1 AKA level 5. Only one person has won at this level and it's you-know-who.
PS: Note that I do not play ancient virus like most others do in order to win at the harder levels. By ancient virus I mean conquering the world <0AD with 20 chariots. IMHO, that is just breaking the game. Sure, it's a valid stradegy but I doubt Sid and the team meant it to be *that* easy. I usually go for High Tech Conquest or SS victory. Yay for me being different and special!
Cheifian is great. Really great for the newbie. I wouldn't be alone in saying without this level I would never have got into civ.
Warlord.. Hm.. Meh. It's lifespan is not nearly as much as the easiest difficulty. I always saw it as the Chiefian-but-the-AI-is-a-threat.
Prince, I'm playing this one right now because I haven't played civ in a while. It's the level for old timers who want to get back into civ1 (maybe not *old* old timers. If you haven't fired up this game in 10 years I suggest Chiefian
). This is also the level I can win most consistantly at.King, as I said before, great plateau level. Most likely, I could be playing this level for the next five years or so and still only win 50/50 percent of the time.
Emperor. I rilly rilly want to win this. Haven't yet. It looks pretty much impossible. But I like a final wall to climb. If this, being the hardest difficulty level, was passible then it would utterly stunt the replay value of this game.
Then there is Emperor +1 AKA level 5. Only one person has won at this level and it's you-know-who.
PS: Note that I do not play ancient virus like most others do in order to win at the harder levels. By ancient virus I mean conquering the world <0AD with 20 chariots. IMHO, that is just breaking the game. Sure, it's a valid stradegy but I doubt Sid and the team meant it to be *that* easy. I usually go for High Tech Conquest or SS victory. Yay for me being different and special!
redsittter
Chieftain
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2007
- Messages
- 18
My advice is...you have to (assuming your playing earth) pick a civ that is surrounded by others, and expand your civ through conquest, ie anyone from rome/france to russian/mongol is ok because of where they are. I hardly ever win playing semi isolated on the americas, or actually playing start a new game because youve no idea where the threat is coming from. The replay value of this game is obscene, Ive had it for over a decade and it's still a new and fresh challenge.
redsittter
Chieftain
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2007
- Messages
- 18
Also playing russian might be worth a try on emperor, because it means the AI doesnt have them, and they are super aggressive. + bonus is if the mongols are in the game, you can (hopefully) take them out straight away, or very soon.
Similar threads
