What is your preferred style of play please?

[Polonius]

What are your favourite combinations of number of civs, map sizes and types, style of play etc. please?

I seem to have got into a bit of a rut, playing a fairly peaceful style on large maps so would like to hear how others like to play.

I did just try a tiny map with only 2 civs, but it turned out pretty dull – perhaps because the opportunities for trade, diplomacy etc were virtually non-existent! Maybe it only works if you have 2 aggressive civs doing it death-match style.

Big maps with 8 civs seem pretty well suited for the peaceful style, and I recently had a couple of “triple victories” (one as Egypt, the other as Greece). I.e. I won a Diplomatic victory, then reloaded and declined the UN vote; then finished building a Space ship a few turns later, followed by another reload and a few more turns for a 100,000 point Culture victory. So it seems that the successful styles for all three of those victories are pretty similar – but then I’m only playing on Warlord, so it’s not that amazing a feat!

Picking the right combination of map size and type, the civ you play (and the ones you oppose) seems to be a bit of an art form (which I haven’t mastered yet). So would any of you please like to post some combinations that you have found gave a satisfyingly interesting (or winnable!) combination that suits a particular style of play? For instance, if you want to win militarily what victory would you go for – Domination, Conquest or Histographic – and what settings would you find gave the best game, for the way you like to play?

Thanks.

 

[No.Dice]

The majority of my games are on Huge pangaea maps, 16 civs.
Winning my first game on Emperor, so probably moving up to Deity the next time around. I Usually play as Egypt. With culturally linked starting positions, I usually start off near some of the more aggressive civs, making for plenty of action and some pretty interesting diplomacy.

I am looking forward to trying out what Magnus suggested, playing 16 civs on a standard or medium map.

Would probably cut down on the long wait in between turns experienced on bigger maps. Mid-industrial age, early 1300s, upwards to a 5 minute wait. Almost can't wait to finish my current game.

 

[Greadius]

I like Marla Singer's real world map with the full civilization. I'd like it a ton more if not for the long waits between turns. Its getting very tedious... up until the point that I'm considering game-side reading material.

I also tried the smaller maps/players... it was a fun, violent, 4 way game (everyone was very, very aggressive). My problem is that generic maps don't do it for me... I want to be playing 'somewhere'. Invading enemy territory is much more fun if it has a real world relevance... like invading Russia after taking over the rest of Europe (I hear it always works out... damn these long turn waits).

 

[Psychlone]

I used to play huge map with all 16 civs, but found the huge travel times tedious in late game (I never noticed a major problem with computer turn length). My current favorite is 8 civs on standard size, although I'm thinking of boosting it to 16 because I find the technological advance rate a bit slow with only 8.

I always disable space race and diplomatic victory conditions, I don't like them. I have culturally linked starting locations disabled, and always set all civs to random.

 

[A E Butterfield]

I tend to play huge maps with a total of eight civilizations, I found that if you have sixteen civilizations they are soon winowed down to about eight.

I disable the space race but leave all other conditions on default.

I tend to fight huge wars.

I am still trying to learn the ins ans outs of the game. I never return to a saved game when disaster strikes as recovering from disaster is part of the fun.

I still miss the slaves from CTP.


Andrew Butterfield

 

[Kefka]

I usually play a medium map with 8 civs Continents with about 60% water and try and try and be peacefull but there is only so much of the AI I can take

My most common wars come from AI's entering my land with there units over and over again with there anoying worker and settler combo!

 

[maracle]

Does the AI try to "win"? Meaning, if you disable a method of winning like by conquest, is the AI less likely to attack, etc?

I would really be nice if there was some way to group AI actions into a few different categories, and set bonus and penalty modifiers in order to get a peaceful world, warlike world, or make everyone dedicated to the space race, etc.

 

[Kefka]

Im not sure but I kinda hope it works like that!

 

[Anglophile]

I always play as England for basically cultural reasons (I have always lived in the FBE (Former British Empire) - Canada (my home and native land), Australia (G'day Polonius), New Zealand (Go All Blacks) and now the USA; plus my love for British beer & pubs; plus the school indoctrination on British history; plus my respect for the British military record over the past 500 years). However, I can almost justify my preference rationally. I play on huge or fully expanded maps, continents or, currently, panagea; 60% water; 10-12 civs - 8 isn't enough/16 is too easy; monarch level but considering moving up next time as, although I don't think I'm getting a lot better, I seem to be doing a lot better than I used to. My rationale - on the style of map I play and my style of play - peaceful but aggressively expansionist - expansionist & commercial is a good combination (but I have been thinking of modding all civs to three traits and adding industrious to mine - I'd love the faster workers). Expansionist provides the scout (modded to 1mp, treat all as roads) and many goody hut opportunities and commercial removes the chance of barbarians in that hut (I also play raging barbarians but don't see much difference from restless - does anyone know whether this difference is mainly from goody huts?). Expansionist allows a very speedy technology development until the Middle Ages when techs are no longer to be found in goody huts and I can normally hang on to this tech lead to get the key Middle Ages Wonders. Expansionist also lets one find other civs and key city sites early. Commercial lightens the corruption hit that outlying cities would otherwise face in the large empires required on this map size. So expansionist/commercial which would appear to be among the weaker traits can be valuable with the right style and map size (they would truly suck on tiny/small maps).

 

[Zant]

I normally play on a standard size earth map with 8 civs. I'm still experimenting with the variety of civs but japan seems to be my favourite for the time being.

My previous game was regent level, marla's map with accurate starting locations. It was challenging and fun since I started as the germans in a very much overpopulated europe. I quit the game when I got to about 1580 AD though due to the even increasing wait times between turns... during my war with the chinese it would get upto 10-15 mins between turns... which is a bit much *I got a slow comp so that might be part of the problem*

My current game is playing as the babylonians on a standard size earth map. I forgot who's map it was but it's pretty good. I've had to go to war to get to iron, horses and rubber so far so it's had it's challenges.

Regent level is getting a bit easy for me now though so next game will be on another standard size earth map with 8 civs monarch level. Not sure what civ I'll take yet but it'd be a save bet to say the civ has either religious or militaristic properties

Oh almost forgot to add... I play with all possible victories turned on and am still hunting for the conquest victory which is currently the only one I'm still lacking. I play relatively agressive but normally don't attack untill I get knights or cavalry.