If you share their religion they won't trouble you. An exception is Montezuma,
if he's not Friendly you can't trust him.
Before moving up a level, I suggest to play a huge map with raging barbs, so an axe rush isn't an option anymore.
Yuck, it's time for Monarch
- Thread starter CivCorpse
- Start date
if he's not Friendly you can't trust him.
Before moving up a level, I suggest to play a huge map with raging barbs, so an axe rush isn't an option anymore.
I can beat Prince level in my sleep, using any random Civ, or leader. I have yet to beat Monarch level. I think the main problem is that I'm used to being ages ahead of AI on Prince level, and get quickly discouraged when I see AI ahead of me on Monarch. One of these days I'll try to actually to play a Monarch game through to completion...
I only played rome the last game. The game before I was assigned asoka and achieved a 59,000 point diplomatic win in the year 1622. All games are on standard maps at marathon speed. I wish someone besides augustus had the cre/org trait combo. Prats really do imbalance the game, but as I am not much of a warmonger I think the traits are more important. If I had been more blood thirsty I probably could have finished off most of my rivals long before I did.
Agent Cooper
Lynch's Creation
Another even more important thing when playing Monarch compared to Prince, is diplomacy and tech-trading. Beware who you ally ourself with and who you alienate. In a good game you decide which wars you will fight and when - in a not-so-good game, your opponents make that decision for you.
so maybe you're ready for monarch
.My personnal experience was :
- noble has always been easy, never lost at this level. I played it for a few games, just to get the feeling for the new game mechanics.
- prince was hard at first. lost many games, before looking for better advice here on the forum. After checking hendrickszon's GotM 2 spoiler, prince got suddenly very easy
. Never lost a prince game after that. I still played a dozen or so of those games, with various leaders and maps, because I lacked confidence to go up.- when it was obvious I wouldn't lose a prince game, I tried monarch. I started with a cultural game, those I'm most comfortable with. I had to replay the same game a few times, but I made it. So you could say I lost 3/4 monarch games, before getting accustomed to the level. I didn't lose any monarch game on vanilla after that. But when warlords came out, I won "easily" (afterwards, I realized it was closer than I thought) my first monarch game, then lost a bunch of games where I tried some exotic moves. Now, I'm pretty comfortable (90% odds I win any monarch game I start) at this level.
- I tried a few emperor games, won some (cultural game or domination playing rome
), lost some (well, not really. I gave up on a few where I had a few unlucky starts, like constantly (!) losing with egyptian war chariots against zulu chariots). I think I'm at this level now, if I try hard enough.
Harbourboy
Deity
The main thing about monarch is that you can't be quite as lazy as you can on Prince. But, hey! It's only a game! Try Monarch level. It's not like you really die if you lose. Sometimes losing a good game on Monarch can be more fun than winning easily on Prince. The extra tension adds drama, and if you lose, who cares? You can always try again.
