What leaders are good for playing on standard or large maps?

[Divaythsarmour]

I really struggle on standard and large maps. I want to work on getting better at playing them. I've tried a couple of things, like focusing solely on expansion and avoiding wonder building. I thought the Incas would be good for an expansive Civ. But I find that by the time my borders are bumping into the other civ's, I still only have a skeleton of infrastructure, barely enough army to defend myself let alone going and conquering. And If I haven't landed on the right strategic resources, I'm in no shape to go and take them.

I would imagine that for some players, the above scenario is just "par for the course" and the fun of the game is in overcoming it. What do others think?

Level of play = Monarch

 

[Hellfiredoom]

I mostly play Monarch too. For standard or smaller size maps I don't worry about specific traits, I just play my "tribe of the month", which right now is the Celts (Agri and Religious). But for large or huge maps I play a tribe with the Commercial trait to reduce corruption and waste, usually India (Commercial and Religious). I've played France (Commercial and Industrious) on large/huge maps and they worked great.

I'm a war-monger (VC = Conquest), I recommend you pick a tribe that fits your VC.

 

[Hellfiredoom]

One more thought , if you're looking to expand on large maps, I recommend not using the Expansionist trait, but rather the agricultural trait and getting your settler factory set up asap. Expansionist is an oxymoron, they should have named it the "scout around and pop huts" trait.

 

[del62]

The expansionist trait works best on Pangea maps in lower levels with goody huts on.

One trick I have found is if you only have 1 city and no settlers and you are building a settler, temporarily switch it to something else before popping a hut.

 

[Lanzelot]

On large/huge maps, seafaring is good in my opinion: they start with a 3-movement curragh, which will get you contacts faster than any 2-movement scout (with a bit of luck even on a different continent), and then you should be able to keep up with the AI through intensive trading!

If you are falling behind on Monarch (with a reasonable start location), it means you are missing out on the important early (tech) trade opportunities.

 

[Fiddlin Nero]

I play mostly large and huge maps, avoiding war is a main part of my early strategy until I've expanded to the limit and built a good core. My preference is to put off going to war until railroads. Strictly defensive wars I can't avoid by paying off the AI with whatever they want, usually not expensive.

 

[Snarkhunter]

I play mostly large and huge maps, avoiding war is a main part of my early strategy until I've expanded to the limit and built a good core. My preference is to put off going to war until railroads. Strictly defensive wars I can't avoid by paying off the AI with whatever they want, usually not expensive.

Sounds like an ag industrial kinda guy to me. . . .

kk

 

[Fiddlin Nero]

Not sure what to make of that, my only VC is conquest.

 

[Hellfiredoom]

Not sure what to make of that, my only VC is conquest.

Interesting. I'm surprised you wait for railroads before attacking. I play Conquest too, but I attack in waves as soon as I get each military unit upgrade. Meaning as soon as I get swords I target the nearest weakest neighbor. I get MDIs I'm looking at the next guy. Cavalry and I give my neighbors the stink eye. I imagine if you wait for raidroads by the time you start rolling out the troops you must smash through them fairly quickly. Sounds like an interesting variant.

God I love those cool icons

 

[Snarkhunter]

Not sure what to make of that, my only VC is conquest.

It was a reflection on the original thread title. Ag-Ind are a pretty good pair of traits for conquest/domination, I think. You can expand/improve rapidly with that.

kk

 

[Nergal]

I'd agree expansionist is a waste of time, but I think Industrious is as well. The worker bonus is easily duplicated by building more workers and the bonus production in cities is lost tocorruption anyway. Seafaring does tend to give good commerce.

 

[Snarkhunter]

I'd agree expansionist is a waste of time, but I think Industrious is as well. The worker bonus is easily duplicated by building more workers and the bonus production in cities is lost tocorruption anyway.

That takes away from producing other units & also eats up unit support. And in the early game, it forces you to spend time on units you'd rather not have to build, especially if your start is not conducive to a settler/worker factory. Not only that, the constant draw-down of population hurts your overall shield production for some time. You definitely need workers, but you'd prefer to build as few of them as you can get away with to get the job done on time.

kk

 

[Opies]

I'd agree expansionist is a waste of time, but I think Industrious is as well. The worker bonus is easily duplicated by building more workers and the bonus production in cities is lost tocorruption anyway. Seafaring does tend to give good commerce.

I also have to disagree. I think industrious is one of the best traits, especially for conquest. You can build your infrastructure very fast, and have tiles improved before cities even grow to use them. It gives the best early game advantage, letting you set up farm cities very rapidly while only having a few workers, and then rapidly building the infrastructure to support the rapid expansion. ind/mil ind/agr are my favs for sure being a very aggressive conquest player myself

 

[Nergal]

I'm not convinced, I normally find, playing the Persians for example, that my workers end up standing around with everything roaded and worked. The one situation where I do find Industrious workers useful is clearing huge Jungle areas. If you are careful with workers then just a few can manage to work the required normaltiles in the early game. Its only later than large number of workers are really useful.

 

[CommandoBob]

I really struggle on standard and large maps. I want to work on getting better at playing them. I've tried a couple of things, like focusing solely on expansion and avoiding wonder building. I thought the Incas would be good for an expansive Civ. But I find that by the time my borders are bumping into the other civ's, I still only have a skeleton of infrastructure, barely enough army to defend myself let alone going and conquering. And If I haven't landed on the right strategic resources, I'm in no shape to go and take them.

I would imagine that for some players, the above scenario is just "par for the course" and the fun of the game is in overcoming it. What do others think?

Level of play = Monarch

Could you post a save of game where you think you think you've hit this spot?