Sid Meyer's Civilization

[Qwertystop]

Ah. Your problem is the AI. Sadly, the best advice there is simply to always assume you will be betrayed. Especially by Alexander.

I know that (now), but the problem is that if I put out any more than, say, two units per city, nobody wants to trade equally because I'm warmongering.

Maybe just take the difficulty down a notch or two? Which difficulty are you on now?

...The "normal" one? Or maybe the "easy" one? I forget, and I could never keep track of the names they put on them anyway.

[Darth Credence]

I never won with France in the old system but they don't seem to be the best culture Civ to me since you had to have lots of cities to get the most out of the bonus and once you go past 4 cities policy costs get too high. Egypt, Ethiopia and Siam could do it much easier, before 1900 if I was really trying. France was good at keeping up at culture when doing other victories but its bonus just got less and less important the more options you have and then completely disappears.

Maybe it is just me. I breezed through a culture victory with France a couple of times. I think it was because you got such a jump at the beginning - starting with three compared to everyone else having one culture from the first turn was what really did it for me.

Its very possible. Even domination is possible since there's a "One City Challenge' option that automatically razes any city you take.

Cool - I'm going to try them today.

Finished, and got a tourism victory with Pocatello. I am very happy with Brave New World. The ideologies actually have made the end game interesting. I used to get to the end game and just stop playing a lot of the time, as it got so slow I was bored. But there is enough different things going on at the end now that I didn't feel that way. While the ideologies aren't ground breaking, and are really just a different way to do culture, it was still enough different to put some interest in the end.

[Xefas]

...The "normal" one? Or maybe the "easy" one? I forget, and I could never keep track of the names they put on them anyway.

I'm curious how and where you're placing cities, and what Civs you're playing as, and what maps you tend to play on.

Good city placement can make all the difference in the world (and knowing whether a particular Civ does better with a few big cities or a lot of little cities). It can be worthwhile, for instance, to put your "frontier" cities in highly defensible positions, even passing up a few resources, if it means that you can run lighter on the military while pursuing a peaceful victory condition.

Scout early. Rarely, I even go with two Scouts at the very beginning, just because scouting is that important.

If you're running pre-Brave New World, don't forget the value of rivers! If you're playing Brave New World, don't forget the value of coastal cities. It's difficult for Civs on another continent to hate you, they usually have a few different luxuries, and sea based trade routes are awesome.

[factotum]

Eh, I wouldn't know. In Civ4 which is usually remarked as the most advanced game in the series it's actually difficult to win Emperor/Immortal/Deity.

That isn't due to the AI being better in those difficulties, though--it's due to it cheating its butt off (for instance, it will take the AI less resources to build anything than it does for you to do it when you're playing at harder difficulties).

[Winthur]

That isn't due to the AI being better in those difficulties, though--it's due to it cheating its butt off (for instance, it will take the AI less resources to build anything than it does for you to do it when you're playing at harder difficulties).

Which is the case for every game in the series. In Civ2 the AI literally doesn't know what it's doing and you have the ability to win the game whatever way you please, the only thing restricting you is that your cities can't grow past size 1 without precautions while the AI can easily flourish but it won't. You settle like 60 junk cities by 1 AD and they will be more productive than one big city, and if the AI walks into an unprotected city then it's ok, you have 59 more, each producing at least 1 food, 1 shield and 1 trade, each costing you no maintenance. The AI even cheats in much more blatant ways than just giving itself bonuses and reducing costs. Civ3's Deity difficulty for example makes it so that you can't research techs too much yourself, you just max out the taxes and buy techs for money which the AI are too happy to trade with you until you finally get some techs and run them over. It's all relying on the AI's gullibility. Civ4 makes it unfair, of course - but the developers have mostly learned from their mistakes and sure there are some patterns and things you can easily time (such as the AI's weakness to Industrial Era wars, the strength of Liberalism or the fact that you can broker techs very lucratively, backfilling deficiencies in your economy) in order to win. It's been the case for every Civ game IMHO.

You can probably just make a list of tried and true patterns that let you win high difficulteis in any Civ game:
Civ1: Infinite City Sprawl
Civ2: Infinite City Sprawl, caravans, prioritize Monotheism
Civ3: Infinite City Sprawl, teching with the help of the AI, Right of Passage backstabs if necessary, wars in industrial/modern era
Civ4: Tech brokering, abusing Slavery, timing attacks (Ancient Era rush, then Industrial, then Modern Era usually), Liberalism race, cottages...

I sorta find that Civ4 just kind of has you exert more effort than the older games in the series. On the other hand though, at least you no longer waste production/research points because of the overflow system, so the game is less micro-intensive. Wouldn't call it dumbing down personally, Civ4 makes up for the "loss" due to Slavery mechanics and certain diplomacy nuances

I can't say anything about Civ5, the game upon release was much more of a mess than it is today and things are different. I don't play Civ5 myself.

[Razanir]

Does anyone have a good Tradition strategy for BNW? I had a good one from civfanatics, but it got destoryed in BNW. I can't sell luxuries for 250 gold apiece anymore

Also, the heart of my strategy, regardless: Food. Science, Gold and Production may be useful in the short term, but none are as invariably useful as food. With well fed citizens, you cities will grow faster. And more citizens means you inherently get more science, gold and production. So by focusing on food, you focus on everything.

[factotum]

And more citizens means you inherently get more science, gold and production. So by focusing on food, you focus on everything.

But more citizens also means more unhappiness, so you have to build things to keep your people happy, which cost gold to maintain--so there's still a balance to be found there.

[Cikomyr]

I wanted to ask people around here if Brave New World really bring good things to the game. I haven't seen a CivV thread, so maybe some Civilophiles here might answer me?


I really liked Gods and Kings's new religious system, as well as its new City-State seduction system. These were the two main new features of the expansion, and I felt it was really worth it. What do you think of BNW?

(and please don't tell me "it gave us X and X new civ", I never really cared for new civ. I WANT MOAR GAME FEATURES!!! )

[Dhavaer]

It brings tourism, which completely changes cultural victories, and trade, which gives gold and science bonuses in exchange for giving smaller bonuses to the civ you're trading with, and also interacts with the tourism and religion systems.

[Cikomyr]

It brings tourism, which completely changes cultural victories, and trade, which gives gold and science bonuses in exchange for giving smaller bonuses to the civ you're trading with, and also interacts with the tourism and religion systems.

Hmm.. interesting. I also seen something about the new diplomatic system features. Anything good on that front?

PCGamer (or IGN?) qualifies this new expansion a re-tool of the modern endgame. Making it something more interesting and open to change than the mere carryover from the startgame.

[Dhavaer]

Hmm.. interesting. I also seen something about the new diplomatic system features. Anything good on that front?

Once someone has discovered all the civilizations, they create a world council that votes every so often on various policies, like banning particular luxuries or running a world fair. You get more delegates (votes) if you're hosting, through some techs and council decrees and by having allied city-states. Once you get to the final age, you can try for a diplomatic victory, which requires a hell of a lot of delegates.

[Cikomyr]

Once someone has discovered all the civilizations, they create a world council that votes every so often on various policies, like banning particular luxuries or running a world fair. You get more delegates (votes) if you're hosting, through some techs and council decrees and by having allied city-states. Once you get to the final age, you can try for a diplomatic victory, which requires a hell of a lot of delegates.

Thanks for shedding some light about it. I heard mostly positive things about the expansion... ....and my freakking compulsive nature kind of forced me to purchase it five minutes ago...

[Dhavaer]

I'm thinking of creating a new civilization in a mod, and the special ability I'm considering would give science and/or culture and/or faith when razing a city. How much do you think would be balanced? Making it a multiplier based on population would probably be the best way, but how big a multiplier? I'd think it should be pretty big, razing a city isn't the easiest thing to do.

[Cikomyr]

I'm thinking of creating a new civilization in a mod, and the special ability I'm considering would give science and/or culture and/or faith when razing a city. How much do you think would be balanced? Making it a multiplier based on population would probably be the best way, but how big a multiplier? I'd think it should be pretty big, razing a city isn't the easiest thing to do.

That would certainly be interesting. But maybe spice it up a bit. How about basing this civ on Venice, and forcing your to have only 1 city to administrate in the first place?

How would you call this Capital of Blood? Minas Morgul?

[Dhavaer]

That would certainly be interesting. But maybe spice it up a bit. How about basing this civ on Venice, and forcing your to have only 1 city to administrate in the first place?

How would you call this Capital of Blood? Minas Morgul?

I was thinking that, but it felt too much like I was ripping Venice off. Also, it sounded complicated and I've never modded Civ before.

[Cikomyr]

Btw, I want to know something. I have seen AngryJoe supply food from a city to another with a trade caravan. I wanted to know if this means the origin city has less food available for its own development?

[Dhavaer]

Btw, I want to know something. I have seen AngryJoe supply food from a city to another with a trade caravan. I wanted to know if this means the origin city has less food available for its own development?

The originating city loses no food. Yes, this is incredibly powerful.

[Cikomyr]

The originating city loses no food. Yes, this is incredibly powerful.

Well, I'd say it's incredible USEFUL. It's certainly a viable (and HISTORICALLY RIGHT) approach to boost one's Empire's expansion.

I.. may just have fallen in love with this expansion, then. The idea of building up an economic infrastructure to directly impact development is something I have craved for years. This is why I loved EU3's new colonization systems, where you actually have to supply your colonies over a long period of time for them to be viable, instead of just "send settlers".

[Reinboom]

BNW just made me finally enjoy Civ5. I'm in love. So much mechanical goodness.

As a long standing Civ4 player who primarily plays 4X games more for the playground of mechanics than anything else, I avoided Civ5. Besides, Civ 4 gave me the toolset to fix what I need. Stacks of doom? Modify game dll to limit stacks to 3. AI having difficulty with weird situations? Modify game dll to address case. etc.

Civ5 BNW tickles my fancy in a different way though. There's subtle mechanical brilliance to most of the new mechanics. Each piece showcases a different piece of design creativity, each addressing long standing civilization problems in a very clean manner.

The trade system for example is great. If you make a low city count empire, it feeds you as a gold churning power house. Which you can then wield for more diplomatic power and in turn wield to improve and expand your trade network. If you make a high city count, then it turns internal. Letting you boost production or food of off placed cities.


I love what the policy system does for wonder sniping (or rather, what it does towards reducing wonder conflict. I despise wonder sniping). Not getting certain wonders no longer feels as bad since it's more of a choice you purposely opt out of in order to go for other wonders.
Incidentally, this also slightly increases the power of not city sprawling versus city sprawling. (Note: not to say that city sprawl is not still overpowered when well managed. Just that it's power was slightly hit).


I'm very impressed. Would promote some more.




Also, on a slightly different note:
I recommend any of you to try out the Civilization board game. If that's a valid sub-subject to this subject. :P

[Castaras]

I recommend any of you to try out the Civilization board game. If that's a valid sub-subject to this subject. :P

Assuming you're referring to the newer one, not the older one. The older is much worse imo. New one is fun, especially with the expansion.

Although it does screw people over who don't know the game, to begin with.

[Reinboom]

Assuming you're referring to the newer one, not the older one. The older is much worse imo. New one is fun, especially with the expansion.

Although it does screw people over who don't know the game, to begin with.

The one released in 2010.
Is there another Sid Meier's Civ related board game? A google search reveals a 1980 I-doubt-it's-related board game.


For most board games though (or multiplayer 4X games in general) I generally expect the game to not be friendly the first time around. Given (at least the one I'm referring to) it's a Fantasy Flight game and like all FF games has 10x more pieces than is perhaps necessary, even more so.

[Cikomyr]

The one released in 2010.
Is there another Sid Meier's Civ related board game? A google search reveals a 1980 I-doubt-it's-related board game.


For most board games though (or multiplayer 4X games in general) I generally expect the game to not be friendly the first time around. Given (at least the one I'm referring to) it's a Fantasy Flight game and like all FF games has 10x more pieces than is perhaps necessary, even more so.

The first computer game was based on the board game. Didn't you knew that?

[Closet_Skeleton]

Maybe it is just me. I breezed through a culture victory with France a couple of times. I think it was because you got such a jump at the beginning - starting with three compared to everyone else having one culture from the first turn was what really did it for me.

That's useful, but its just a more reliable version of a culture ruin.

I know that (now), but the problem is that if I put out any more than, say, two units per city, nobody wants to trade equally because I'm warmongering.

Warmongering penalty in CivV is nothing to do with how many units you have. Its gained by taking cities (sometimes even in self defence which is where things get confusing) and especially capitals.

In Brave New World I've found that warmongering is very easy to avoid if you know what you're doing and you can conquer anyone you need to. You just have to realise that you don't get the penalty with Civs who have denounced the guy you're taking cities from. If someone gets denounced by an AI, denounce the party you don't want to ally with and you can form alliance blocks that won't betray you (unless they're say Catherine, but she only backstabs you if you're weak and if you wreck her armies and don't take her cities she'll learn her lesson and can be a friend for the rest of the game if you make a quick peace).

There are also guys like Denmark who if you beat them up they like you more.

I made a massive mistake with Alexander in my first Brave New World game when I beat him and liberated one Civ he'd already conquered but didn't finish him off. He then smashed me to pieces once he'd invented bombers, which were a joke in the hands of the AI before the expansion.

Does anyone have a good Tradition strategy for BNW? I had a good one from civfanatics, but it got destoryed in BNW. I can't sell luxuries for 250 gold apiece anymore

Any tradition strategy. Seriously, its still the best since liberty is still nerfed. The best strategy is being in a corner that's hard to attack.

One thing to notice is that the 6 specialists from putting all the guilds in one city with garden/national epic really screws over its growth. So be mindful to either spread the guilds out or dedicate a few trade routes to feeding your national epic city.

Another trade route trick I haven't used yet is that sending production to build a wonder needs a workshop, but sending food to make up for a city focusing on pure hammer producing tiles only needs a granary. I screwed one of my cities over by starving it for a few turns in order to build a wonder.

Hanging Gardens is more science in the long run than the Great Library and so is the Temple of Artemis, but on the other hand the Great Library has two great work slots so is more of a culture wonder now.

Selling luxuries isn't a nerf. If you're not growing so fast you don't need to trade every luxury for another luxury you're doing something wrong. Having over 2 happiness is for the mid game.

[Reverent-One]

The one released in 2010.
Is there another Sid Meier's Civ related board game? A google search reveals a 1980 I-doubt-it's-related board game.

The 2002 one.

[Illieas]

okay started my easy run for Civ5 BNW. I have always been scatter brained on how to run my country. I usually scatter shot all the different win conditions.

THis time gunning for the culture victory after conquering the continent german style. Man germans get units fast going barbarian hunting is a lucrative task.
Do culture wins need small empires? policies are taking a while with like 10 cities that i own right now.

I having a tough time converting an other country to my faith. I sucessful did two so far but they were on pantheon setting and a prophet did the rest. but i up against another major religion. How best to take it over? every 1.5 turns i get enough funds for 1 missionary. Is it best to get the satallite cities or should i gun for the main head city. I know attrition happens lost a few that way but there is a back door at their capital (1 turn attrition), So the option is there.

Lastly I always been terrible at diplomacy. I don't know how to work this system at all. I don't know how to make them like you. I don't know what is making them hate me or to see what the status amoung the group is.

way back a game i Started and lost where every one and their mother is like join us and attack this guy. I say okay I am attacking this guy! then suddenly. everyone denounces me they make peace with the guy in like one turn. and then all of them declare out war on me. What am i doing wrong?

[Dhavaer]

Do culture wins need small empires? policies are taking a while with like 10 cities that i own right now.

They used to, I don't think tourism is affected by the number of cities, but policies cost an extra 10% for every city after the first.

I've been getting an annoying bug playing on my Surface Pro: if I use the pen instead of my finger on the touchscreen, as soon as I release the pen the view pans up to the top of the map. Google is being unhelpful, does anyone know why this is?

[Darth Credence]

I don't think the size of your empire will impact culture wins any more - if anything, larger is probably better. You are no longer going for a number of social policies to win. It is amount of culture against amount of tourism. You can run out of places to put your artifacts if you have too few cities, which will stop your tourism growth.

Remember to pay attention to where things are stored. The museum of Shoshone Renaissance art is worth more tourism than the museum of random art thrown together. Some places want parts from multiple civs and time frames, some want all the same, and some need archaeological artifacts. So just keep checking to see what other civs are willing to trade, and try to keep the bonuses full. It makes a huge difference - you can almost double your tourism if you put things in the correct places.

[Illieas]

I don't think the size of your empire will impact culture wins any more - if anything, larger is probably better. You are no longer going for a number of social policies to win. It is amount of culture against amount of tourism. You can run out of places to put your artifacts if you have too few cities, which will stop your tourism growth.

Remember to pay attention to where things are stored. The museum of Shoshone Renaissance art is worth more tourism than the museum of random art thrown together. Some places want parts from multiple civs and time frames, some want all the same, and some need archaeological artifacts. So just keep checking to see what other civs are willing to trade, and try to keep the bonuses full. It makes a huge difference - you can almost double your tourism if you put things in the correct places.

wait how do you know what wants what?

[OrcusMcP]

wait how do you know what wants what?

There is a "Culture Overview" screen with a button in the top right beside diplomacy. In it, it shows where all your works of art/writing/etc are being stored.

For some buildings and wonders, there will be a "+0" sign next to them if they can hold two or more pieces. If you mouse over that "+0" it will tell you what is necessary to get the theming bonus.

Get these theming bonuses, get them hard. They are CRUCIAL to getting enough tourism going, and if you get policies/abilities that boost theming bonuses, so much the better.

Also, get a bunch of archeologists. Risk pissing people off in order to get artifacts from their lands.

[blueblade]

• Fave Civ - Any Arabs, incl Babylon/Egypt, etc (for personal reasons, not mechanical advantage)
• Fave Game - Civ 2. Most time sunk in any single game by far. If it's allowed, shout out to AC.

Also, can the TC please update the thread title to get the man's name right (Sid Meier)?