|
I've started playing on Deity mode regularly for the first time in my civ history and get pretty frustrated that every single game seems to go the exact same way. First the AI starts aggressively boxing me in and out teching me so I have to rush an army and go to war with everyone around me, and when that is under control one civ starts snowballing on science and I have to go to war to stop them, and then when that is under control I have to go to war with civs that are approaching religious and cultural victories, and then by the time I deal with that I just go gently caress it and end up building a bunch of jet bombers and finishing everyone else off rather than waiting to grind out another victory type. It just seems so impossible to deal with anything if you fall behind on tech. Are there any tricks about keeping up without going to war?
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2020 02:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 18:49 |
|
|
Zyklon B Zombie posted:I've started playing on Deity mode regularly for the first time in my civ history and get pretty frustrated that every single game seems to go the exact same way. First the AI starts aggressively boxing me in and out teching me so I have to rush an army and go to war with everyone around me, and when that is under control one civ starts snowballing on science and I have to go to war to stop them, and then when that is under control I have to go to war with civs that are approaching religious and cultural victories, and then by the time I deal with that I just go gently caress it and end up building a bunch of jet bombers and finishing everyone else off rather than waiting to grind out another victory type. It just seems so impossible to deal with anything if you fall behind on tech. Are there any tricks about keeping up without going to war? I tried three Deity games and got obliterated by AI rushed instantly. In one, the game ended on turn 6. So I went Canada and the AI did not surprise invade me, now I'm way behind on technology but gradually catching up.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2020 02:36
|
|
|
Zyklon B Zombie posted:I've started playing on Deity mode regularly for the first time in my civ history and get pretty frustrated that every single game seems to go the exact same way. First the AI starts aggressively boxing me in and out teching me so I have to rush an army and go to war with everyone around me, and when that is under control one civ starts snowballing on science and I have to go to war to stop them, and then when that is under control I have to go to war with civs that are approaching religious and cultural victories, and then by the time I deal with that I just go gently caress it and end up building a bunch of jet bombers and finishing everyone else off rather than waiting to grind out another victory type. It just seems so impossible to deal with anything if you fall behind on tech. Are there any tricks about keeping up without going to war? I usually need that first war with at least 1 civ to get my own snowball rolling, but it really comes down to making friends with those AIs that I can and taking advantage of their quirks in trade, and planning districts as much as possible. That said diety for me is usually 100-150 turns of stressful play followed by 100-150 turns of boring city micromanagement with the occasional race because I prefer peaceful games to domination. I still prefer to play on immortal because that early stress period ends quicker, and it's possible to recover from early mistakes, but I wish there was a difficulty in between the two because that's where my sweet spot is
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2020 02:53
|
|
|
Settling your second and third cities has a huge impact on your early game momentum. I rush science as soon as possible in most of my games just to minimize the AI military tech lead then switch over to whatever my victory type is after getting a couple campuses up. So my first priority is almost always finding a decent campus location (+3/4) and planning where my government district/settler-building city will be. If you have 2 solid campuses down you shouldn't fall too far behind the AI. I'll let neighbors forward settle me/box me in as long as I have a solid enough base of science to push them back later. I also literally always take Oligarchy because I like the card spread and the +4 military strength. Slotting in the +2 Great General point policy card can be an effective strategy sometimes. It guarantees a GG in 30 turns (I think) and other civs typically won't be gaining GG points in the early game. In my experience, war is either unavoidable or incredibly beneficial so I usually go for 1 or two early game wars to gain some land then settle down.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2020 02:57
|
|
God I fucking love Diablo 3 gold, it even paid for this shitty title
|
The AI is generally bad at prosecuting war and because of the stringent movement rules if you have a modest mass of archers from early slinger->upgrades and semi-defensive terrain it's usually pretty easy to funnel the AI's sea of warriors and slingers into locations where they'll just die trying to move in. And once your archers reach their first and especially their second promotion it's extremely difficult for AI units to do much of anything since early in the game it's difficult for the AI to mass the horsemen and swords that would typically shrug off this type of defense even on deity. With all that said, if your opponent is a civ with good early military bonuses or a good early UU that it can spam relentlessly cause of the reduced resource cost, or it's Scythia, then you're probably just screwed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2020 03:10
|
|
|
Super Jay Mann posted:The AI is generally bad at prosecuting war and because of the stringent movement rules if you have a modest mass of archers from early slinger->upgrades and semi-defensive terrain it's usually pretty easy to funnel the AI's sea of warriors and slingers into locations where they'll just die trying to move in. And once your archers reach their first and especially their second promotion it's extremely difficult for AI units to do much of anything since early in the game it's difficult for the AI to mass the horsemen and swords that would typically shrug off this type of defense even on deity. I always make good friends with Scythia because Tomyris very much has the look like she would murder you with her bare hands.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2020 03:35
|
|
|
Huh. Apparently there's a bug with Work Ethic in which a pillaged Holy Site won't get back the production bonus you're supposed to get, so uhh watch out for that I guess.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2020 04:10
|
|
|
Bluff Buster posted:Huh. Apparently there's a bug with Work Ethic in which a pillaged Holy Site won't get back the production bonus you're supposed to get, so uhh watch out for that I guess. Yeah I just noticed that in my russia game with my holy site near a volcano. Luckily it wasn't one of my mega tundra holy factories but still very annoying
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2020 07:19
|
|
|
Whoa, the Nihang unit you get from that one City-state is actually really good. It upgrades its combat strength if you have more advanced Encampment structures. I built a Barracks and they jumped from 25 combat strength to 40, comparable to my Legion troopers. Deadly in the early game. I appreciate why they did that, to keep the unit relevant as you advance through tech ages. It's not-quite like a Warrior Monk but pretty dang close. I like it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2020 10:24
|
|
|
Speedball posted:Whoa, the Nihang unit you get from that one City-state is actually really good. It upgrades its combat strength if you have more advanced Encampment structures. I built a Barracks and they jumped from 25 combat strength to 40, comparable to my Legion troopers. Deadly in the early game. PotatoMcWhiskey had those guys running at 80 strength or something ridiculous in his Norway game, but I forget what combination of things got him that high.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2020 13:44
|
|
|
Chad Sexington posted:PotatoMcWhiskey had those guys running at 80 strength or something ridiculous in his Norway game, but I forget what combination of things got him that high. Once you get a military academy they're 70 strength, as strong as an infantry (which are an era later than military academies). A nihang corps would then be 80 strength. e: Also they have a promotion that gives them +10 strength as long as you remain suzerain of the city state.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2020 14:49
|
|
|
CapnAndy posted:I played my first game ever as Alexander because I like conquest victories in 4X games and got crushed because, okay, it was my first game. So I did a second game as English Eleanor and steamrolled through everything by loyalty-flipping anything on my borders, until by the end of the game I had my choice of how to win. So I thought, okay, I've got the hang of it now, and started a new game as Alexander, and I'm right back to getting my rear end kicked. Does conquering cities in the game really, really suck, or do I just suck at it? If you want to go early conquest then you should only settle 1-2 cities and then start building units. The AI does not prioritise walls in the early game and you can take cities with archers and warriors. Midgame warfare becomes a slog once the AI starts building walls and encampments, but an early conquest can easily snowball and you can develop your core territory later.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2020 15:25
|
|
|
Chad Sexington posted:PotatoMcWhiskey had those guys running at 80 strength or something ridiculous in his Norway game, but I forget what combination of things got him that high. I first encountered Lahore in a Gran Colombia game I decided to go faith/dom in, and from some combination of bonuses I was buying 80 base strength Nihangs for 50 faith (90 for an army) in my cities and just laying waste with the Comondante Generals I had. Just making GBS threads out armies Llaneros and Nihangs as far as the eye could see. They're absurdly good in the midgame and plus, they look cool as hell. One of my favorite additions, so they will probably get nerfed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2020 15:35
|
|
`
|
Barry Shitpeas posted:If you want to go early conquest then you should only settle 1-2 cities and then start building units. The AI does not prioritise walls in the early game and you can take cities with archers and warriors. Midgame warfare becomes a slog once the AI starts building walls and encampments, but an early conquest can easily snowball and you can develop your core territory later. I don't usually go for early combat but I just played a Gilgamesh game where I settled my first city and then took 3 city-states, an enemy city, and an enemy's settler before I ever trained one of my own settlers.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2020 15:56
|
|
|
Just had the weirdest culture win with Kristina. Got lucky with an early relic and a religion that let me get Reliquaries so I went for Mont St. Michel. Except nobody really went for a religious victory this particular game, it was like pulling teeth trying to get my apostles killed for the relics. Still pulled it off due to an absurdly productive capital (spawned next to Vesuvius) and a lot of wonders, but it would have finished a good 30 turns earlier had I just been able to get those apostles killed. Mary Leakey finally got me the win.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2020 16:21
|
|
|
showbiz_liz posted:I don't usually go for early combat but I just played a Gilgamesh game where I settled my first city and then took 3 city-states, an enemy city, and an enemy's settler before I ever trained one of my own settlers. Yeah I mean obviously if you have a warrior UU you can just go hog wild
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2020 17:12
|
|
|
I call this SSL 3
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2020 17:45
|
|
|
I feel like Liang is way more important when I play in Apocalypse mode, especially if I'm near a volcano (those are never dormant for me). It's great making your stuff immune to damage while the volcano just keeps pumping up the yields.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2020 17:48
|
|
|
BaronVonVaderham posted:I feel like Liang is way more important when I play in Apocalypse mode, especially if I'm near a volcano (those are never dormant for me). It's great making your stuff immune to damage while the volcano just keeps pumping up the yields. Everything except the population loss, she can't prevent that. But the tile yields keep going up and up and that means you can replenish your population pretty quick regardless.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2020 17:49
|
|
|
Yeah I usually have my city far enough away to mitigate that, then just let the city sprawl out toward the volcano and build mines and farms against it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2020 17:55
|
|
|
I think on apocalypse mode you’re guaranteed to start near an always active volcano right?
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2020 23:54
|
|
|
Tom Tucker posted:I think on apocalypse mode you’re guaranteed to start near an always active volcano right? Reasonably close to one, though not always. That's 'cause we gotta have the option to sacrifice people to the volcano, of course.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2020 00:20
|
|
|
I wish you could sacrifice people to the volcano in every mode. No mechanical advantage. Just as an expression of disdain for all life, kind of thing. You know what I like about secret societies? For months I've been thinking we need a victory type where your goal is to drill a hole through the center of the Earth or blow up the moon or something. Getting the climate change all the way to the top would be a major part of the process, and you'd have a couple of late-game buildings and improvements that benefit from tiles ruined by global warming. And secret society mode doesn't have a new victory type, but you do get to play a crazy supervillain weirdo, and I can't wait for that. I might never uncheck again that once it's available. I can't decide between starting as voidsinger Eleanor or voidsinger Trajan.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2020 01:03
|
|
|
Voidsinger Trump
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2020 01:27
|
|
|
I hate to ask such a dummy question, but here goes: I’ve always liked the idea of civ games, but really have only ever given any amount of time to the streamlined Civ: Revolutions, and that was ages ago. I picked up both Civ V (w Brave New World) and vanilla Civ VI on my iPad when it was available for free or $1 or whatever. I’m not going to spend any more cash at this point, but I’ve got time and attention now to actually learn how to play this series properly. Which one would be recommended for a relative newcomer, or is it totally up to taste (like in which civs are featured, for example)?
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2020 01:59
|
|
|
Play Civ V, it's much more approachable and streamlined.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2020 02:15
|
|
|
Kaal posted:Play Civ V, it's much more approachable and streamlined. I dunno, Civ Vi was the first Civ I ever played and it gelled very quickly for me. I honestly can't stand the look of CIv V, it is so bland, there's no color, and the cities are so boring. They have no individuality compared to how different every city in VI is due to the various districts. I'll admit, Civ VI's culture win is a bit opaque, but outside of that 
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2020 02:30
|
|
|
I'd rather play Civ 5: Brave New World than vanilla Civ 6, personally. Some 4x games are great out of the box (Amplitude!) but in my experience, Civ games need more stuff before they're really complete.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2020 02:57
|
|
|
Do they have gathering storm on all platforms now? If I was gonna play some bad version of Civ 6 on vacation or whatever would it run better on a 1st gen Ipad Pro or a switch?
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2020 03:11
|
|
|
I’m thinking I’m going to focus on V for awhile. There’s an awful lot of content there that I’ve already paid for, and while VI is really pretty (and the cities appear to my untrained eye a lot more customizable), it just feels a lot smoother to play Civ with a full keyboard than without.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2020 03:22
|
|
|
My second culture win was a lot smoother sailing, won with a total of 1 national park and 0 rock bands, just took every great work early and a whole pile of wonders, sea/ski resorts and policy boosters, thanks thread.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2020 03:47
|
|
|
Reveilled posted:You were fine with Ley Lines and Cthulhu cultists, but drew the line at Vampires? To me, that's a 
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2020 04:11
|
|
|
As a person who never bought any dlc for Vanilla Civ6, Civ5 is still the better game unfortunately. I love the 'de-stacked' cities schtick, but as a whole product in regards to mechanics, balance, and fun start to finish Civ5 is still better. I'm just holding out for the "kitchen sink" bundle once they wrap up #6, as buying all that crap piecemeal is expensive considering I got EVERYTHING in #5 for $17.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2020 04:28
|
|
|
Ragnar34 posted:I'd rather play Civ 5: Brave New World than vanilla Civ 6, personally. Some 4x games are great out of the box (Amplitude!) but in my experience, Civ games need more stuff before they're really complete. This. The last few Civ games have really proven that it's probably not worth jumping in until at least the first expansion - and with V specifically, the second.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2020 04:30
|
|
|
also even though the map I guess is a little bland I really loved the art deco visual theme of 5
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2020 04:30
|
|
|
Oh, do I get to be that guy? The guy who laughs at people debating over Civ V vs Civ VI when Civ IV is still far and away the superior third option to both of those?  Cause I love being that guy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2020 04:31
|
|
|
Stefan Prodan posted:also even though the map I guess is a little bland I really loved the art deco visual theme of 5 If there was a mod that brought the Art Deco look from Civ V over it would probably rocket straight to #1 or #2.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2020 04:36
|
|
|
Super Jay Mann posted:Oh, do I get to be that guy? The guy who laughs at people debating over Civ V vs Civ VI when Civ IV is still far and away the superior third option to both of those? Vanilla, though. No governors, golden ages, loyalty, government plaza, weird cool civs like the Maori, environmental effects, Machu Picchu, or a lot of other things. Or vampires! What about the vampires.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2020 05:26
|
|
|
Super Jay Mann posted:Oh, do I get to be that guy? The guy who laughs at people debating over Civ V vs Civ VI when Civ IV is still far and away the superior third option to both of those? This is part of the reason I asked, as I understand how much some people love IV, and how much some recommendations of any of the titles depend on what you’re willing to shell-out to complete the experience. I don’t mind playing an older game in a series if the later games go off the rails at some point, but if just general QoL stuff were so much better between V and VI, I wouldn’t bother with V at all. That doesn’t seem to be the case.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2020 07:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 18:49 |
|
|
Minus1Minus1 posted:This is part of the reason I asked, as I understand how much some people love IV, and how much some recommendations of any of the titles depend on what you’re willing to shell-out to complete the experience. I don’t mind playing an older game in a series if the later games go off the rails at some point, but if just general QoL stuff were so much better between V and VI, I wouldn’t bother with V at all. That doesn’t seem to be the case. I have enjoyed playing Civ6, though ultimately I've got a lot more hours in Civ5. But the reason I suggested Civ5 is because you're coming from CivRev, and so having a more streamlined experience would be a better introduction. Civ6 is very much a "kitchen-sink" approach, and I could see that as overwhelming. Play Civ5, then check out Civ6 when you're ready for something new.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2020 13:17
|
|