Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[janekk]

I'm quite far in my first playthrough, on level where AI starts to receive bonuses. I had poor early game with only 2 cities and German neighbours with 4 of them and only deposit of iron in this part of continent, also they were strongest nation on continent.

Somehow I managed to defend myself from their horde of warriors and archers in first war, hills, forests and saved up money to buy new warrior every turn helped a lot. In second war I was the one attacking, but at this point they had 5 cities, one recently built near my border, overlapping badly with mine. They were at war with my other neighbour. In advance I used up my great merchant on trade mission in city state where most of their army was (directly on quickest route from Germans to other country) so I can easily become allies with it. My army consisted of few units of horsemen, 2 longbowmen, and catapult to help with taking cities (had to trade for iron). German army consisted of horde of Landsknecht's and some archers. War with other country and hostile city state right where biggest bunch of their army was made it easy to pick them apart one by one (though I did lose some horsemen, they fail badly against pikemen) but that's only because of longbowmen, they are ridiculous with their range and quite heavy punch. I annihilated their army, razed overlapping city, took their capital city with couple of wonders and city with iron deposit and signed peace treaty because even though I could easily take their 2 remaining cities my economy was crippled enough as it is with all that negative happiness (awesomesauce mechanic).

Civ 5 is amazing, you have so many options, for example going for exploration nets you various goodies from ancient ruins, happiness from discoveries, going for culture gives you very nice policies etc. No matter what you do there is something tangible to gain there. Conquering shit out of everything no longer is only real option, especially considering that it's much easier to defend now so you don't need huge army if you don't want one. Research sure is one of the top priorities in most cases but its very long term investment so sometimes you are better off with bunch of military units than few libraries. Also investing heavily in research means less workers in city to build/farm/mine/trade/whatever (btw I really like that advanced units will mop floor with old stuff, I really hated Call to Power and hordes of knights destroying stealth bombers with swords  ). Also focusing on diplomacy is great option, one/two city states can really help you tip balance of forces in your favour (just like in my playthrough), they also provide nice bonuses and luxuries/resources.

It needs some tweaks here and there but its very polished out of the box, especially when compared to some other games. Even if you hate steam its very recommended buy.

[Ivefan]

Also focusing on diplomacy is great option, one/two city states can really help you tip balance of forces in your favour (just like in my playthrough), they also provide nice bonuses and luxuries/resources.

They're almost silly good if you got coin to pay them, especially marine states for the food.

About defense; Around turn 270 on King, I started the Egyptian - Chinese war, 3 cities and 2 newly made colonies versus their 20. I had Infantry but they got some maybe 10-15 turns later.
Friendly territory bonus 58%, Rough terrain, General and levels in rough & medic.
I didn't loose one unit.
The Chinese got tired of the meat grinder and offered peace, I grabbed Lux resources & gold which i used to upgrade my units to mechanized and then wiped out India with no resistance.

[Fikes]

I finished my third win last night. It was on King difficulty with the small continents map. I spawned on a small, private island. 2 other leaders had islands all to themselves as well.  Germany, France, Ottomans, English and Aztec spawned on a large island together. France had the worst starting location I have ever seen, deep in the tundra, not far from ice, with the ottomans blocking their exit east and the Aztecs not too far north. They were out in the 1300's

What I didn't realize is that Aztec had also conquered the English, giving them a massive stake on the largest land mass. Seeing where this was going I starting gifting units to Germany, but it was hopeless. By 1600 the Aztecs were huge.

I decided to take over another small island. I had planned on just having a few really big cities anyways, this brought me up to about 10 cities total. My score wasn't that far behind Montezuma so I thought I still had a shot. Then the "Pointiest Stick" report came out. I had around 6000 points while he had 22,000. I have never seen a military power that big.

I decided my only chance was a science victory and started heading for it. I built up a strong navy and Airforce to defend my most productive cities and set the science machine on go. For the last 100 turns of the game I only 3 types of cities, those producing science, those producing wealth (and great merchants), and those building space ship parts or defenses.

My military grew so “big” (I only had 10 cities remember) I ended up running deficit pretty bad, -70 or so. Every time I got close to economic collapse I’d get a great merchant or golden age. When I was building the last component at my capital, I pulled my entire army back to defend my capital. I had destroyers and subs patrolling the water to hopefully destroy the enemy before they could nuke me as well as tanks and helos CLOSE to my base (but far enough away to avoid the nuke) in case of a surprise ground attack.

I finally won without event.

TLDR: I won a game on King difficulty… barely.

I also learned, or at least relearned, that there are some serious downsides to having a “small” nation. Things like strategic resources are hard to come by. You get fewer points, get to field a smaller army, that sort of thing.

On the other hand, the huge city size (I think my science capital got up to 21 population) lead to nice benefits like 100+ research and culture.

I also reaffirmed the fact that it is nearly impossible to complete a cultural victory or research all techs. This game I tried extra hard to set up a high culture nation, but I still ended up with only 3 and a half policies complete.

[forsaken1111]

I also reaffirmed the fact that it is nearly impossible to complete a cultural victory or research all techs. This game I tried extra hard to set up a high culture nation, but I still ended up with only 3 and a half policies complete.

I have only played the normal "Prince" difficulty yet, but in my current game it is only 560 AD and I have 3 policies complete already.

[Ivefan]

I also reaffirmed the fact that it is nearly impossible to complete a cultural victory or research all techs. This game I tried extra hard to set up a high culture nation, but I still ended up with only 3 and a half policies complete.

Culture city states, get em.
It feels like you're crippling yourself when not building more cities, mostly because of gold and special resources

[Soulwynd]

Playing in the huge map is painfully slow in the modern era.

But... just to add my 2 cents of opinion. After having played 2 full games of Civ5, I believe that Civ4 was more addictive, Civ2 was better, and Civ3 still remains my favorite. They built all that hype over Civ5 just to sell it to people who didn't play Civ to begin with it, it seems.

[forsaken1111]

Playing in the huge map is painfully slow in the modern era.

But... just to add my 2 cents of opinion. After having played 2 full games of Civ5, I believe that Civ4 was more addictive, Civ2 was better, and Civ3 still remains my favorite. They built all that hype over Civ5 just to sell it to people who didn't play Civ to begin with it, it seems.

Really? I'm enjoying 5 far more than 4 and I never liked Civ 2 at all. The stackless tactical combat in 5 is immensely satisfying, especially playing against my friend in multi.

[Neonivek]

Well Soulwynd it sort of reminds me of Worms.

Each Worms game that comes out, that isn't the 3d ones, is almost EXACTLY the same as the last. The fans of the game are actually quite happy about that instead of the expected furious.

So I think your right in that they are trying to get new people to play this game. Otherwise they would make a slight rehash of the game they already have.

[Sowelu]

I liked civs 1 and 4 better than 2 and 3, and about equally within those comparisons.  I'm expecting 5 to be in the 'more favorite' categories for me.

...Once the expansions come out.

[umiman]

Definitely. No Civ game is complete before the second expansion.

[Sowelu]

Well, the first one was.  Heh.  Still my #1 favorite really I would have to say.  It had such wonderful flavor!  But maybe it's just fond memories of installing it on the middle-school machines in a way that they couldn't uninstall it (we only had DOS, and I put extended ASCII characters in the directory name that they didn't know how to make)

I think that was the high point of my being popular in school actually.

[Neonivek]

Well it was because in the first one you didn't know what was happening next or what any of the research actually did for the most part until it happened.

Thus it had the feeling of you actually playing a civilisation.

[Soulwynd]

Really? I'm enjoying 5 far more than 4 and I never liked Civ 2 at all. The stackless tactical combat in 5 is immensely satisfying, especially playing against my friend in multi.

That's understandable if you never liked 2. I didn't like the 'diplomacy' in 2, nor how the difficulty settings just meant how much the computer would cheat. That seems to hold true in civ5 as well. I didn't pay attention on my first game, so it started at difficulty 2, at dif 4, computers were creating wonders like 20-30 turns after the game started and they already had other cities as well.

Well Soulwynd it sort of reminds me of Worms.

I'm not a fan of Civ so it's not like I played several games in each game of the series, more like maybe 5-10 on each one (unlike my recurring x-com addiction. D: ). If you think of the improvements they have made, it sort of went up to Civ3 that had cultural winning and four was somewhat like that, just a bit more streamlined. Then on 5 it feels simplified and bland, but that might be just me feeling that way about it.


About Civ 1... I don't think I even remember playing it, so I can't give my opinion on that. =p

[Fikes]

I remember the first time I made it to the Modern era in Civ 1. I was so amazed. And then the first time I won...

I am going to say I like Civ 5 the best so far, and Civ 3 the least. 3 just had too many confusing issues. I remember having the highest defense unit in the game, on a bunkered hill that would still lose to a single tank. It seemed like computer cheating was at the worst there.

I think Civ 4 was the hardest, the AI seems a little inept in 5. Why the hell didn't Montezuma attack me before I won? Can the even do navy invasions? 4 however, suffered from the "Oh sorry, no copper or iron for 500 squares, Good luck surviving until gun powder". At least 5 helps with this some what.

As for limiting myself based on the number of cities, my last game was kind of an experiement. Each city increase the policy cost buy 30% and in my game they were over 5000, so founding a city increased the cost by 1,500. The average (no wonder) city produced about 35, which means it takes them 42 turns to pay of their own cost, not counting building time. I do suck with city state management, but I also seem to suck with money management, which means it can be very difficult to keep the influence up. Any suggestions on city states?

[Ampersand]

My favorite is still Alpha Centauri.