What kind of victory should I have sought?

[MikeEdward]

I've been playing much better lately.

But I've not been able to position myself for victory.

In this game, I went for a space race victory, but it's clear I'm not going to get there. I was playing Fredrick on Prince in Warlords.

So, once again, I ask you experts for help: what would you have done differnently, and specifically, what kind of victory would you have sought?

 

[mbye]

Since it is a pangaea, I would almost always look for a domination. You are spending way too much on upkeep for your troops and a war/disbanding will solve that problem. Most inner empire cities only need one unit defending the whole game, even on emporer. You have 10 or so in many cities for no reason. You have too few workers (6) for the size of your empire and some of them are sitting idle. Your reasearch path is very unique considering you got rocketry before liberalism. If you had gotten to liberalism first, you would have saved a few thousand beakers of research. You also should try and work on specialization of cities and not build every possible improvement in every city (i.e. a university in a city with few beakers).

 

[BlackJAC]

Yeah, what mbye said about playing on a Pangaea. I tend to use Pangaea's for warring games only as you're within reach of any given civ, and vice versa. Your military strength has been poorly utilised and it's probably cost you gold that would have been better spent elsewhere if you've had no intention in using it.

Next time you decide to play, I'd either a) opt for a different type of map ie continents et al or b) staying with Pangaea, war whenever you have the upper hand on your neighbour. Oh aye, get more workers and use them to improve, and not to just sit there gathering cobwebs

 

[MikeEdward]

This is helpful.

Can someone direct me to an article or thread that describes how to specialize cities for us that are new to the concept?

I will cut down the number of troops in the inner cities, and I often overlook liberalism.

With regard to workers, what improvements would you deploy that I did not? I had pretty much packed my territory with mines, villages, farms and roads. Were there others, like railroads and watermills, that I should have deployed?

 

[Dr Elmer Jiggle]

or b) staying with Pangaea, war whenever you have the upper hand on your neighbour.

As a recovering builder, I would say that the first rule of war for builders should be, "When you don't think you have the upper hand, you do. See recommendation (b)." Most people have a tendency to wait for that "one more technology" or "one more unit." Don't. Just get to fighting. That one more technology and one more unit will come in good time while you're taking over your 3rd city and laughing at how badly you're slaughtering the AI. The AI is really awful at war. Use that to your advantage.

 

[MikeEdward]

It's interesting you mention that. I am a big believer in going in with overwhelming force. You're right, it takes a lot more time to get the invasion going, but the worst case scenario I run into is that I attack too soon, and my invasion runs out of steam after destroying 3 or 4 cities, thus giving the AI time to recover, while my stack(s) wait for reinforcements.

 

[Dr Elmer Jiggle]

The thread below is what really started to change my approach to war. I still prefer the more peaceful victory conditions, but I've come to appreciate the extent to which a few good wars can facilitate the peaceful aspects of the game. I think I've become better at fighting those wars too.

Warmongering for Builders (at higher levels)

It says "for higher levels" but everything it mentions will work just as well in a Prince level game (that's where I play) as it will on Emperor.

 

[BlackJAC]

If done properly all you need are about 6-8 axes to bring an AI to its knees early on, then another 4 axes, maybe 2 chariots and a spear in reinforcements to take the capital and you won't hear from that particular civ anytime soon.

That's the thing though, I can win on the higher levels more often than not by warring, but I'd toil on prince if I were to play as a builder. Each to their own

 

[MikeEdward]

I have heard a couple people on this thread use the word 'builders.' What does this refer to? Does it contrast to a style of play with less unit production?

 

[Dr Elmer Jiggle]

I have heard a couple people on this thread use the word 'builders.' What does this refer to? Does it contrast to a style of play with less unit production?

Yes. It's people who prefer a more peaceful, sit back and build style of play as opposed to the warmonger. The extreme example of a builder is someone where every city has every available building in it.

 

[MikeEdward]

Yes. It's people who prefer a more peaceful, sit back and build style of play as opposed to the warmonger. The extreme example of a builder is someone where every city has every available building in it.

As I learn more about best practices with regard to city specialization, I realize that building every building in every city is a bad idea. I never really thought of myself as a builder. But I guess, unintentionally, I am. I guess I really don't understand some of the fundamentals of this game still.

 

[cabert]

war is the best key to moving up in levels

I can still remember my "buildaholic" days, but now that I know the value of a well run war, i won't go back.

There was a thread a few months ago, with just a few hints on the theme "are you builaholic".

Can't remember exactly, but it was a real eye opener. That is why i often suggest to experiment a "no wonder/ no religion" game. After you won a game without any wonder nor founding a religion, you see that you don't NEED those. In further games, you may find an interest in racing for a few wonders or for a religion, but you won't forget how valuable that crippling strat was or how much beakers the captured capital gave you later.

Just one more thing, it's really fun to fight in a not overwhelming position!
You need to think harder.
About diplomacy.
About keeping or not a city.
About promotions.
About healing or not.
About sueing for peace or not.
When you're in that overwhelming position, you can go any way, you're gonna win. When you're the underdog, you really need to push your advantage on the enemy's weakness.

Vassalizing Mansa Musa who was some 5 to 10 techs ahead of me was really a pleasurable achievement. Killing of the backward Alexander after that was just tedious. No way he could push me back, no way he could even come close to my cities (well he did, because i did a few moves, but whipping and drafting did take care of his few units).

 

[Dr Elmer Jiggle]

Vassalizing Mansa Musa who was some 5 to 10 techs ahead of me was really a pleasurable achievement. Killing of the backward Alexander after that was just tedious. No way he could push me back, no way he could even come close to my cities (well he did, because i did a few moves, but whipping and drafting did take care of his few units).

I know exactly what you mean. And, of course, I'm sure Alexander was even more reluctant than Mansa to offer capitulation. "We're doing fine on our own." Umm, no you aren't, honey. Here, let me show you ...

 

[BlackJAC]

The simplest way to catch the AI out early is to head straight for BW, AH & IW (if you didn't get any bronze).

My build order for my capital goes something like this: Barracks (stop when the city reaches 2 pop) > worker > finish barracks > build 1 or 2 archers (or axes if I get bronze) for those pesky barbs > settler > Granary (use a chop to help it along), then axes or swords & chariots all the way until the closest civ is destroyed.

My second city starts off with an archer, so I start building a barrack until it reaches size two and start on my second worker and so on...

 

[Bleser]

The simplest way to catch the AI out early is to head straight for BW, AH & IW (if you didn't get any bronze).

My build order for my capital goes something like this: Barracks (stop when the city reaches 2 pop) > worker > finish barracks > build 1 or 2 archers (or axes if I get bronze) for those pesky barbs > settler > Granary (use a chop to help it along), then axes or swords & chariots all the way until the closest civ is destroyed.

My second city starts off with an archer, so I start building a barrack until it reaches size two and start on my second worker and so on...

So you never build more than one settler in any one city? I guess this makes sense if most people only play the game with four-eight cities.

 

[BlackJAC]

I only ever play on standard sized Pangaea maps (tried continents but they suck) and tend to get boxed in after my second city, so I just pick out the civ with decent locations and get my 3rd, 4th... cities that way. I'm usually hard pressed finding a decent 3rd spot anyway and prefer to let the AI build them for me.

 

[cabert]

i usually build 1 or 2 settlers only in the early game (exception is being alone on an island ). I tend to build more later, to grab the land for domination