What's ur timeline like?

OTAKUjbski

TK421
Joined
Mar 4, 2007
Messages
1,511
Location
not at my post
I realize one of the biggest (and best) changes to CivIV over CivIII is "rinse and repeat" no longer applies and "recipes" usually don't work.

However, there are always milestones to shoot for and indicators as to just how far ahead or behind you really are.

I'm trying to optimize my game so I can make a permanent move to Monarch, but I sometimes find myself 'lost' on Monarch games -- like the AI is constantly one or two steps ahead of me in some way or another.

Most of my games are played at Prince difficulty on Normal-sized maps running Normal speed.

I could list my milestones and goals, but since the very nature of this post is seeded in the fact I don't take much stock in them, it's kinda pointless.

So on to the questions:
  1. What kind of milestones do you guys go after (like n cities by X date or whatever)?
  2. What (if any) indicators do you use to let you know how far ahead / behind you are?
  3. How many beakers do you shoot for as an Empire and per Science city at the various +:science:% tech milestones?
  4. How many beakers do you shoot for as an Empire and per Science city at the various +:science:% tech milestones?
  5. See 3 & 4.
 
I realize one of the biggest (and best) changes to CivIV over CivIII is "rinse and repeat" no longer applies and "recipes" usually don't work.

However, there are always milestones to shoot for and indicators as to just how far ahead or behind you really are.

I'm trying to optimize my game so I can make a permanent move to Monarch, but I sometimes find myself 'lost' on Monarch games -- like the AI is constantly one or two steps ahead of me in some way or another.

Most of my games are played at Prince difficulty on Normal-sized maps running Normal speed.

I could list my milestones and goals, but since the very nature of this post is seeded in the fact I don't take much stock in them, it's kinda pointless.

So on to the questions:
  1. What kind of milestones do you guys go after (like n cities by X date or whatever)?
  2. What (if any) indicators do you use to let you know how far ahead / behind you are?
  3. How many beakers do you shoot for as an Empire and per Science city at the various +:science:% tech milestones?
  4. How many beakers do you shoot for as an Empire and per Science city at the various +:science:% tech milestones?
  5. See 3 & 4.

I play Monarch and rarely anything else... any higher and I'd have to be really hard core about various tech slingshots, Oracle, early rushes, etc

My personal milestones include:

- when I can get the Pyramids going up (if I either have stone or am Industrious or both).. Great Library too but I've found Pyramids and early Representation to be key.

- Currency. That extra trade route is absolutely necessary. Mercantalism with Banking later on is nice with Representation and (later) Bureaucracy and Statue of Liberty.

- Civil Service. Bureaucracy, hooray! I use my capital as a GP farm + Oxford + National Epic + Sci Academy and whip away unhappiness if it becomes a problem... which it usually isn't because I cram as many religions and religious buildings as possible into my capital.

- getting to Liberalism first for the free tech, which I usually use immediately on Nat to get Taj Mahal/Golden Age and then trade around. I'm sad to say that I can't consistently get to Liberalism.. or physics, economics, etc. etc. first, so my post-rush, pre-Liberalism game needs work. Maybe I need to change my leader to someone Organized because upkeep kills me.

- getting six major cities up. I almost lost my last game because I miscounted and wound up with five universities and no Oxford for seemingly ages and ages.

- don't bother setting hard numbers for beakers and stuff; that varies depending on map size and speed too much. Focus more on how you are doing *relative to the AI*.

EDIT: your playing style may vary so disregard the CS and other stuff if you have multiple science cities. But the way I play, with huge amounts of specialists and super specialists in my capital city + Bureaucracy + Representation, my capital is spewing out 300 beakers after Bureaucracy and over 700 beakers by the start of the modern era, standard map size and normal game speed.
 
EDIT: your playing style may vary so disregard the CS and other stuff if you have multiple science cities. But the way I play, with huge amounts of specialists and super specialists in my capital city + Bureaucracy + Representation, my capital is spewing out 300 beakers after Bureaucracy and over 700 beakers by the start of the modern era, standard map size and normal game speed.

700 beakers?? I play on prince and max I had was a bit over 600. You can get this consistently? is it because of all those settled specialist?
 
700 beakers?? I play on prince and max I had was a bit over 600. You can get this consistently? is it because of all those settled specialist?

Consistently only if I am Industrious and have stone. Without stone I am usually at the 600 mark or so--there is only so much Organized Religion can do. Marble is less useful but nice for the Parthenon, which unfortunately dies too early.

I build as many wonders as I can possibly build in my capital, even the useless ones, just for the Great Person points. National Epic, occasional bursts of Pacifism, and the Parthenon help with great people, too. Needless to say, my capital reaches Legendary status insanely early.

What to do with all of those great people? Settle them! Settled specialists, super-specialists, ANY specialist gets +3 beakers baseline with Representation. Tack on the baseline commerce from my capital, which usually has a river or coastline or at least some resources nearby that produce some commerce. (I usually have Colossus and Great Lighthouse in my capital if appropriate, though I usually lose the races to Sistine Chapel, Temple of Artemis, Chichen, and Hagia Sophia.. but I win the races to everything else) Also consider trade routes and University of Sankore, Great Library, etc.

Then consider: library, university, observatory, science academy, Oxford, and bureaucracy to inflate that baseline--the +50% production helps when building yet more wonders that generate great people that generate more settlers that generate more beakers. :)

P.S. If you go for the mega-science city, I think I did the math once and a settled scientist is almost always better than founding another science academy at some lesser city, if you have bureaucracy and Oxford.

P.P.S. If you have a holy city + shrine in your capital along with enough specialists that generate gold (e.g., prophets, merchants), then even if you set the science slider at 100%, your capital's market + grocer + bank is producing a ton of cash. Once you get Spiral Minaret on top of that, you will be at 100% science for the remainder of the game, if you weren't already (depends on how well you spread your state religion to everyone else for the shrine income).
 
I have had 2500+ by the end of the game on normal speed, standard map without a huge amount of territory. Top city at 600. Yes, it was on Immortal, but cottage spam with emancipation can do wonders. And yes, it is possible to beat the high levels without the crazy rushes and slingshots. My milestones are:

CoL. This is where you can start expanding to more cities with sustainable science.

Monarchy. Essential on high levels for happiness. A size 7 city isn't nearly as productive as a size 13 city. working cottages with the extra pop quickly pays for the extra maintainance cost of the troops sitting around.

CS. For bureaucracy. A very important civic. With an academy, you can have 100+ beakers at 200AD with CS.

Democracy. Here is where the cottage spam begins to pay off hugely. If you have just captured some land full of lovely AI farms, cottage them up and wait 150 years for your science to skyrocket. As in from 1/4 of lead AI to triple lead AI from 1600 to 1750! Having 15 cities at over 150 science per turn is really powerful!
 
P.P.S. If you have a holy city + shrine in your capital along with enough specialists that generate gold (e.g., prophets, merchants), then even if you set the science slider at 100%, your capital's market + grocer + bank is producing a ton of cash. Once you get Spiral Minaret on top of that, you will be at 100% science for the remainder of the game, if you weren't already (depends on how well you spread your state religion to everyone else for the shrine income).

I noticed this on my last game. I was Montezuma on Archipelago. I tend to play Archipelagos over-heavy on Navy and commerce with the idea of a UN or Domination victory in mind.

Anyhow, I founded Hinduism and Judaism in my capital, Tenochtitlan, before founding my 2nd & 3rd cities.

After bee-lining to Optics and spreading my religions and converting everybody but Alexander (who was a devout Christian), I noticed my capital had a ridiculous amount of raw gold production even before Banking.

- getting six major cities up. I almost lost my last game because I miscounted and wound up with five universities and no Oxford for seemingly ages and ages.

Do you REX your first 6 cities? I always run into major -:gold: issues with expansion because of maintenance and distance. I often wonder if my city placement is just off or something. Most of the time, I REX 3 cities and stomp my nearest neighbor after slingshotting CoL.

What to do with all of those great people? Settle them! Settled specialists, super-specialists, ANY specialist gets +3 beakers baseline with Representation.

I think this is where I'm going wrong. Not only do I tend to neglect my specialists, but I tend to use my GPs for slingshotting in the early game. I guess I focused so much recently on starting good that I lost focus of the long term repercussions.

I have had 2500+ by the end of the game on normal speed, standard map without a huge amount of territory. Top city at 600. Yes, it was on Immortal, but cottage spam with emancipation can do wonders. And yes, it is possible to beat the high levels without the crazy rushes and slingshots.

Yeah ... I'm totally doing something wrong. No wonder I'm finding the jump to Monarch so unnerving.


You guys got any end-game saves you'd be willing to post for me to reverse engineer? I'm going way wrong somewhere along the lines of city sites, tile improvement, specialist assignments and wonder-placement. Hopefully I can glean even more useful insight by spying on your cities :scan: .


Thanx to everyone so far for your help ... I can't wait to see if paying more attention to this stuff has helped (it sure seems to have helped my confidence, at the very least.)
 
I also play only on Monarch at the moment. I still lose a few games but usually win them.

I've never set milestones concerning number of cities or teching. It's always been dependent on the AIs. If I'm on a large continent with lots of AIs I may want to conquer a lot of land even if I fall behind economically since I'm not worried about another smaller continent keeping up. On the other hand, being on a smaller continent then economy is very important and scoring the Great Library becomes crucial (to also keep it from the hands of an AI on a bigger continent).

======

I seldom build the Pyramids. They are so costly that often there are better options in which to invest your hammers. If I'm aiming for a SE the Great Library is pretty easy to get since even after the patch you won't see an AI aiming for it. With careful managing I can get enough Great Scientists to lightbulb my way toward an early Liberalism: usually the first GS builds an Academy, the second lightbulbs Philosophy and the third a part of Education. I've been known to disregard an Academy (mostly when I'm not Philosophical) and go for Philosophy -> Paper -> Education pops. Not sure which is actually better. Most of the time when I do either of these I'm so far ahead there's no actual race for Liberalism.

======

About number of cities: in most of my games I have 3-4 cities before my first war. In SE I emphasize production since I'll start wars early and go to war often after that. In CE I aim for commerce heavy sites. That means I won't decide my whole strategy before the start even with a Financial or Philosophical leader. If the land isn't suitable for one kind of economy why should I still employ it? That said, most of the time Financial = CE and Philo = SE. :D

What gives me a clue if I'm in front or behind? Well, I always try to either tech hard or build hard. First in production means you can outproduce your future victims and even if you have to fight with slightly outdated units enough of them will still get through. That's the "Montezuma" politic. First in tech means that given a large enough territory I can tech peacefully toward a Space Race. Diplomacy is more important here, having to play the others against each other so that you won't be dragged into wars while you happily run away with the tech lead. That's the "Mansa Musa" politic. There are of course other nuances in between.

======

About specialists in general: I tend to use them in type specific ways, instead of settling all of them like mad. A shrine can help a lot if the religion is already pretty spread while the settled Great Prophet, even if it pays off in the long run, might not help you get back on your feet exactly when you need it most. A Great Merchant's trade mission may mean money for mass upgrades from Macemen to Grenadiers, which in turn means a quickly won war. (ever seen what City Raider grenadiers do to Riflemen?!) A Great Engineer can mean the Taj Mahal and a free golden age while you're preparing for the next expansion, or a part of the Space Elevator to boost your race to the stars. Great Artists are trickier, but I've used them to culture bomb cities in an ongoing war so that my troops could catch up to fortify the city and the wounded ones could heal faster. Don't discount even lightbulbing with other great people than Great Scientists, as sometimes they give you precisely the tech you need! Consider Great Engineer -> Machinery for the Chinese as a perfect example. Settled great people under Representation are well and dandy, but a) you won't get the Pyramids all the time and b) sometimes a short boost can help more than a long term plan.

I'll take a look at my saves during the weekend and see if there are any that could illustrate the above. I hope I remember the story behind them too, it's probably more important than the final outcome.

======

In the meantime, don't forget to take a look at Sisiutil's "All Leaders Challenge" games and aelf's "Emperor" and "Immortal Masters Challenges". They are very instructive write-ups covering different strategies step-by-step. I also posted a military oriented game with Churchill, you'll find the details here: Great Generals game. Hope these help.
 
I noticed this on my last game. I was Montezuma on Archipelago. I tend to play Archipelagos over-heavy on Navy and commerce with the idea of a UN or Domination victory in mind.

Anyhow, I founded Hinduism and Judaism in my capital, Tenochtitlan, before founding my 2nd & 3rd cities.

After bee-lining to Optics and spreading my religions and converting everybody but Alexander (who was a devout Christian), I noticed my capital had a ridiculous amount of raw gold production even before Banking.



Do you REX your first 6 cities? I always run into major -:gold: issues with expansion because of maintenance and distance. I often wonder if my city placement is just off or something. Most of the time, I REX 3 cities and stomp my nearest neighbor after slingshotting CoL.



I think this is where I'm going wrong. Not only do I tend to neglect my specialists, but I tend to use my GPs for slingshotting in the early game. I guess I focused so much recently on starting good that I lost focus of the long term repercussions.



Yeah ... I'm totally doing something wrong. No wonder I'm finding the jump to Monarch so unnerving.


You guys got any end-game saves you'd be willing to post for me to reverse engineer? I'm going way wrong somewhere along the lines of city sites, tile improvement, specialist assignments and wonder-placement. Hopefully I can glean even more useful insight by spying on your cities :scan: .


Thanx to everyone so far for your help ... I can't wait to see if paying more attention to this stuff has helped (it sure seems to have helped my confidence, at the very least.)

Looking over the responses to this thread, it's a sign of a well-designed game when people have multiple ways of winning and they all work. I don't even care about SE v CE, I start off SE for production and whipping and start hybridizing later. Like I said, my style is intensely bureaucratic right now, though I've experimented with other playing styles and light-bulbing instead, and lately I have not been founding ANY religions but just going for early conquest and subsequent rexing.

I don't rex six cities early due to maintenance problems; I usually only have 3 or maybe 4 cities when it's time to pick up the axe and crush my neighbor, keeping his best cities and razing the rest, backfilling later. Re: my five-city problem: the problem was that I was stuck on the smaller continent all alone for my last game and wasn't used to having to actually, you know, FOUND that many cities instead of CAPTURING them, so I lost track and came up with only five cities instead of six at a time when my capital was ready to Oxford-ize. By the time my sixth city cranked a university out, my capital was in the middle of Statue of Liberty, so I had to wait forever for that to finish before I could Oxford-ize, since others already had democracy and I was worried that if I paused to Oxford-ize, I'd lose SoL. I still won by bribing the giants of the map to fight each other but had to space-race it and won in the 1960s, but that's not my preferred victory condition.

Also, island maps are somewhat unusual, so you might want to experiment and figure out what works best on those maps. There is nothing inherently wrong with using a specialist to light-bulb, but you better know what you're sacrificing that GP for.

A super-scientist generates 9 research base with representation, for instance, and library, uni, observatory, oxford, bureaucracy = +225%, so that super-scientist would be producing 29.25 beakers per turn under those conditions, not to mention generating a baseline hammer (and culture if you have Sistine Chapel). Over the course of, say, 100 turns, that's 2925 beakers difference NOT INCLUDING the side benefits of that hammer--faster wonder production and also, hammers convert to beakers at 100% rate if you tell the capital to produce research. My capital tends to be a production superpower in midgame thanks to having dozens and dozens of specialists/superspecialists + Bureaucracy, so frequently I can build even wonders very quickly (with industrious and Organized Religion especially, and I usually have stone, copper, and iron on hand.. also marble sometimes) and let the capital produce research for the rest of the time.

So it's actually best to light-bulb critical stuff early OR to light-bulb nearer the end of the game when the game won't last long enough to make settlling worthwhile.

And at higher difficulty levels, you almost HAVE to light bulb a little bit at first just to catch up to the AI's cheating.

Also, Angkor Wat makes priests into all-purpose specialists that generate 2 hammers, 5 gold, and 6 beakers baseline, making that a favorite Wonder of mine, as it lets you sit at 90% or even 100% research pretty easily if you have any decent infrastructure at all. (However, be prepared to increase engineer and scientist count to match, unless you want all of your great people to be prophets.)

P.S. I agree with the above about not founding a holy shrine early; the payoff sucks if only 2 cities have your holy city's religion; I'd rather either pop the prophet or (you guessed it) settle him.
 
Looking over the responses to this thread, it's a sign of a good game when people have multiple ways of winning.

Totally agreed on that! :D And this also adds some competition for those of us that play it as a single player game only. Making different strategies work, or work better, is what gets me back to the game time and time again.
 
Totally agreed on that! :D And this also adds some competition for those of us that play it as a single player game only. Making different strategies work, or work better, is what gets me back to the game time and time again.

Hehe sorry for editing my post, I wanted to say "well-designed game" to clear up any ambiguities around "good game." And also to add commentary that at higher levels of difficulty, light bulbing is more attractive.
 
There aren't any milestones I use except to compare myself against the AI's. I want each game to be different - if I played the same way every time it gets boring.

I tend to have a theme plan for each game - what I want to try and achieve that game. And if I am on track to achieve my plan, then I am doing well. If the AI's have knocked me off course and my plan is looking dodgy then I am not doing well.

For example playing as Ragnar, I am playing an Ice Age game on Monarch. The general plan is to see if I can use financial to fund a rapid expansion and fast galleys to ship troops extremely quickly for a coastal expansion on my starting continent. Things that will help this game are Great Lighthouse (since I am planning to hug the coast and take coastal cities) and siezing military resources quickly. I'll know I am doing well if I can take out an opponent in the BC years and still have a strong economy plus a good navy/army force to rapidly expand beyond that. I won't worry about the great library, pyramids or Oracle, but I do want the great lighthouse and possibly later on the collosus.

I also want to be first to circumnavigate, but I don't need to be first to liberalism this game - first to Astronomy would suit me better. And I want to try out an intercontinental invasion with frigates/galleons to see whether I can use ultrafast ships to pull off a domination win. If I fail to do this I want to experiment with what can be done with a late game navy.

Not because the above is the most surefire approach to win, but its a way I can leverage this leader into a game that is different from previous ones. Next game the goals will be completely different.
 
I usually play monarch, although I can win at emperor if I focus a little.
I have no strict milestones, but I often decide on the victory condition very early (when selecting my leader ;)), so I have some rules for that.

If I go for domination, I want :- good exploration done by 2000 BC (not a strict timeline of course)
- a good offensive unit , and a good second city for miltary production by 1000 BC
- a plan, including diplomacy and who gets down in which order before launching my first attack
(after that, I check the victory screen to see where I'm going)
- good "commerce" (could be specialists, that's why I use the "") base at 1 AD (= enough to fund landgrabbing)
- liberalism for nationalism before 1000 AD (early enough at monarch level)

If I'm going for cultural, I want :
- 1 or 2 early religions (= amongst buddhism, hinduism, judaism) founded in my cities
- an early landgrab of at least 6 cities, with at least 3 good cottage cities by ?00 AD (I have written 500 AD, but it's too late)
- at least 4 religions by 1000 AD
- liberalism by 1200 AD (I don't mind if i'm not first, I care more about the GA from music and a shrine if possible)

I'm not comfortable with other victory types (i've won every type of victory, but not often enough to have a timeline).
 
I only have rough timelines, but my timelines are ... well, strange. It's more a playing style, but here's a good guide for Prince level (what I normally do anyway):

- bronze working and second city before 2000BC
- a strategic resource before 1000BC
- completely destroy one civ before the AD era
- Six cities before 500AD
- liberalism before 1200AD (still don't believe stories that it can be pulled off before 300AD. Best I could do was before 500AD)
- grenadiers, rifles OR cavalry before 1500AD
- modern era before 1700AD
 
Even though it's hard to have an exact time line of building, even these general ideas are pretty helpful. A trend I'm seeing here that's already helping me is the number of cities people are running. I tend to have a pretty puny empire (likely because I'm such an early warmonger), but if I can start to apply those extra city tactics effectively, it would definately take off the strain I've been feeling some games.

Mostly in the aspect of "I'd really like a library in this city, but I need to crank out two more units." Well if I had planned properly to have an extra city up and running (particularly a production city, since the capital tends to be very commerce friendly), it would take that strain off.

Finding just the way to go about that I'm sure takes practice, and I doubt any one person does it the exact same why... but then like it was said in this thread, it's a sign of a great game when there is a huge variety of ways to win!
 
Even though it's hard to have an exact time line of building, even these general ideas are pretty helpful. A trend I'm seeing here that's already helping me is the number of cities people are running. I tend to have a pretty puny empire (likely because I'm such an early warmonger), but if I can start to apply those extra city tactics effectively, it would definately take off the strain I've been feeling some games.

Mostly in the aspect of "I'd really like a library in this city, but I need to crank out two more units." Well if I had planned properly to have an extra city up and running (particularly a production city, since the capital tends to be very commerce friendly), it would take that strain off.

Finding just the way to go about that I'm sure takes practice, and I doubt any one person does it the exact same why... but then like it was said in this thread, it's a sign of a great game when there is a huge variety of ways to win!

Dood, I totally agree ... this post has improved my game leaps and bounds already!

I played a random game last night and rolled Hatsephut on a Small Pangea. I was on the SouthEast side of the map with Tokugawa to the North and spreading west: Isabella, Gandhi & Montezuma.

I went for Animal Husbandry first and BAM horses right in Thebes' fat cross!!!

Even though I knew I wanted to trounce Japan and Spain before they could get their UU up and running, I stuck to Carl Corey's advice and built 3 good cities before dishing out the pain.

OMFG did that make every difference!

Long story short, my War Chariot campaign was so short and successful that I was able to immediately move West and swiftly conquer all of Spain -- keeping only the Holy City of the Buddha, Madrid.

Monty declared war on my thinned-out army as soon as Madrid's revolution ended, but using another post's advice on defensive pillaging, I was able to win a war of attrition without losing (or gaining :( ) any cities.

My war machine was subsequently brought to bear on Monty in full force shortly after I discovered CS and bought all my Axemen shinny new Maces.

So that's where I'm at now with that game ... I'm trying to decide if I want to go for the easy conquest against Gandhi or let it ride for a while for the fun of it.
 
Hehe, nice to see you all enthusiastic here! :D War Chariots are something to be feared if you get them early enough, aren't they?

By the way, lesson 1 of Civ is: Monty will attack. Count on it. It's like death and taxes. Even if I bribe him to attack others I know there will come a time when he and I are one too many on the same continent. I'm glad to hear you managed to hold his offensive despite it coming at the end of your war! I wouldn't be too sad about not gaining any cities right away, as you'd have to make your way through the hordes he's willing to build and throw against you. In one of my games we fought half a war over the control of one city, and despite me having the most advanced forces it wasn't an easy task.

About Toku and Gandhi. If they don't get along, expect Toku to declare on him. He'll have the weaker military of you two. You can either take Toku's side and later become friends with him (he's pretty reliable if you keep him on your side) or help Gandhi and finish Toku. I know, it's hard against Samurai, so if the war happens at that moment I'd join Toku. In the long run though you're better off with Gandhi as an ally. He techs well, he'll be happy to trade and he won't pose much of a military problem.

Hope to hear about a win next time! :D
 
Dood:

2600 BC: emerge as a great city
2500 BC: overrun Sumeria under king Mesannepada
2340 BC: sacked by Sargon the Great
2100 BC: golden age under Third Dynasty
1950 BC: sacked again by king Kindattu of Elam (OMFG!)
600 BC: revival under Nebuchadnezzar II
500 BC: abandonment
 
Hehe, nice to see you all enthusiastic here! :D War Chariots are something to be feared if you get them early enough, aren't they?

By the way, lesson 1 of Civ is: Monty will attack. Count on it. It's like death and taxes. Even if I bribe him to attack others I know there will come a time when he and I are one too many on the same continent. I'm glad to hear you managed to hold his offensive despite it coming at the end of your war! I wouldn't be too sad about not gaining any cities right away, as you'd have to make your way through the hordes he's willing to build and throw against you. In one of my games we fought half a war over the control of one city, and despite me having the most advanced forces it wasn't an easy task.

About Toku and Gandhi. If they don't get along, expect Toku to declare on him. He'll have the weaker military of you two. You can either take Toku's side and later become friends with him (he's pretty reliable if you keep him on your side) or help Gandhi and finish Toku. I know, it's hard against Samurai, so if the war happens at that moment I'd join Toku. In the long run though you're better off with Gandhi as an ally. He techs well, he'll be happy to trade and he won't pose much of a military problem.

Hope to hear about a win next time! :D

Ugh I hate Ghandi for never giving me a straight deal.. I always practically give away my techs when trading with him. But I hate Toku even more because he won't even trade techs in the first place until it's so late into the game that he shouldn't even bother.
 
Back
Top Bottom