EPTCiv IV BTS anyone? - Page 6
| Forum Index > General Games |
Zelniq
United States7166 Posts
| ||
|
zer0das
United States8519 Posts
From my perspective what happened was Zelniq killed my early scout, but I was able to figure out we were probably on one of two massive continents. Panda got a bit pissy when I moved my chariots near his border, so I got pissy in return and tried to capture an empty city (which turned into razing stuff and then sitting on top of a hill fortified with a level 3 axeman). I was kind of looking for an excuse to fight him because I had a huge swath of forest/jungle protecting me from any northern attack, and the south was nothing but wasteland. Panda was expanding pretty rapidly since he rushed for courthouses/Confucianism, while I had taken a bit conservative approach. At that particular point I could only build army because I overextended a bit, so I was like, eh, why not. From there, we lost quite a few people...Panda left, and so did Zelniq. Both of their ais produced a million units and left me quite hard pressed to gain ground (Panda's ai in particular like tripled in power in an astronomically small amount of time, whereas we had been pretty even before that). Eventually iamk and bdares split their continent. I get forced back by Panda's ai replacement, but I have a huge amount of ground to fall back on, and eventually start pushing it back (it was expanding toward me). At this point Zelniq rejoins and wars Panda's ai for a while, before giving up. Then Falcynn connects and plays as Panda's former empire (without any errors!), and he finds a completely ruined economy and a million units because the ai cheats. From there I refused to undeclare with Falcynn repeatedly, despite knowing the equivalent of a 2/2 terran ball was coming at me, because I had a ton of ground to fall back on, and I also had several distinct advantages. Primarily, elephants, a tech advantage, and the fact that I was the Mongol empire and my capital building produced mounted units with 17 exp in 1-3 turns (or crossbowmen/macemen with 13 exp in a similar amount of time). This was due to a lot of great generals from battle experience, but also a free one I got from a random event (I could have gotten a free great merchant or spy too... I couldn't choose the city for that, but it happened to be my capital). So I harass Falcynn as he tries to march on my nearest city, and fortify it with elephants, crossbowmen, and a few macemen. He didn't have any pikes, and he had mostly mounted/melee units with some bowmen/crossbowmen... anyways, long story short, he loses about 20 units to kill 1 war elephant. That more or less seals that continent's fate. Bdares and iamk start fighting, and iamk is really far behind in tech and gives up. Bdares disconnects, and then again, so me and Falcynn agree to stop playing because the game is essentially over. Bdares was a tiny bit ahead of me in tech, but there was a huge ocean separating us. I had about twice as many cities to conquer, and it wouldn't have really been a problem to at that point. The main question is when he would make landfall with a sizable army, and it's quite difficult to say (my guess is, a really long time, since as far as I am aware, he hadn't even reached the real transports). We could play it out, but suffice to say the game would be a tossup between us (unless bdares started feeding Falcynn with tech, but I'm not sure how much difference that would make at that point... my manufacturing base was way stronger than his, and my tech infrastructure was as well, not to mention the ridiculous xp units build in my capital had). And that game took like... 7 hours (not including setup time)? Oi. I suggest we use simultaneous turns next time if we don't use pitboss... it only has a huge, huge impact early on. We only made it to like turn 230 or so.. It will go like 7 times faster with simultaneous turns. :> | ||
|
raiame
United States421 Posts
| ||
|
Zelniq
United States7166 Posts
it totally matters for even lategame ill explain later busy atm | ||
|
zer0das
United States8519 Posts
Let's put this in perspective. If we have 6 players going 2 minutes each for every turn from 200 to 400, that's 40 HOURS. DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA HOW MUCH TIME THAT IS?!?! Even if everyone is taking half that much time, its still 20 hours. Not to mention the frequent issues that pop up. Personally if someone wants to spam crap to get the first move, whatever. I'm playing for fun, not to make my living playing Civ4. Anyways, there's far more luck based things in Civ4: like oh, combat, spawns, random events (hello free great general! it didn't even cost me any additional great general points to get another one), spies getting caught, whether the ai gets pissed at you or not, who you spawn next to, who happens to get to Buddhism/Hinduism first, or liberalism for that matter. | ||
|
BottleAbuser
Korea (South)1888 Posts
Aside from the fact that it took about 3 hours to actually get it going, and that we lost like 2 players before it ever started... I'm sitting in the NE side of my approximately square continent, Falcynn is in the NW side, and iamk is on the SW side. Falcynn dropped about 30 turns in and the AI took over, which was awesome because I suddenly didn't have to worry about attacks coming in at unexpected times any more. I figured I should sit tight and tech as fast as I could, which turned out not to be all that fast after all, and iamk started taking all of Saladin (Falcynn AI)'s cities. When my bordering city caught sight of iamk's stack (something like 10 swordsmen and catapults with level 3 raider), I left one city dedicated to building wonders and the rest started making units. Around this time is when my caravel reached the other continent and zer0's caravel reached mine. I think we swapped 2 techs each, but I was up by 3 or so. I swapped maps with zer0, but this map seemed a bit outdated in some parts because it didn't show the cities and cultural borders correctly. About 30 turns later, iamk still didn't attack, so I declared on him because I wanted to use my units for something. I also gave Falcynn (now playing Panda's civ) Guilds for his map, mostly because I wanted him to hold up better against zer0. I lost connection twice a few turns after that, before we actually started really fighting, but I guess iamk didn't want to deal with my attacking stack because by the time I got back in, he'd apparently gone to bed and the others were going too. One thing though.. I thought I would have a pretty sizable tech advantage with my Representation civic (+3 beakers for every specialist), which I coupled with pretty much as many specialists as I could cram in (including 2 scientists per city from the libraries)... but I didn't. Can someone explain -_- Also, it does kind of sound like simultaneous turns are going to be the way to go if we have more than just a couple of players. Let's try at least one game with that. When are we next playing? | ||
|
zer0das
United States8519 Posts
I had two really science specialized cities, but I don't use specialists much (I think they make your cities weaker overall, and I hate that). Basically your top 3 science cities were 109, 51, 43, and mine were 91, 79, and 31 (believe it not, the 31 was the city in the 2nd picture). I had a slight advantage on the smaller cities (since my style doesn't really neglect them either), and I think I had a few more and you had a few garbage ones. I think if you had built more cottages, you would have solidified your lead a lot more. I was also running like 70% science or so, and still getting like 4 cash per turn (or maybe it was 60%). You were at 40%, and could go as high as 60%. I could jack mine up to 80%. I did lower mine to about 50% so I could upgrade a few axeman to maces so I would be able to win the war with Falcynn. I also had an advantage in the fact that my manufacturing was by far superior to everyone else's that had decent tech (iamk had a slightly better manufacturing base). Pretty much every single one of my cities had 2-3 hills and a shield resource. So I was throwing up universities and crap immediately after deflecting Falcynn, and they would have been done in like 8 turns. I think my economy was #1 or a close #2 as well. You were 4 techs ahead of me, but for the record, I was 1 turn away from liberalism while you were 7 away (ha!). I got some pretty sweet land to start with, and I abused it well. :> I have the save file if you want to poke around, but I think my civilization might be passworded (I could give that to you though.. or maybe get rid of it). | ||
|
iamke55
United States2806 Posts
I haven't beat Noble yet and am very new at whipping btw. | ||
|
zer0das
United States8519 Posts
Basically you need something to deal with the extra +1 unhappiness (charismatic is useful for this, so is hereditary rule), and then something to deal with the obnoxious upkeep. Cottages help a lot, but ultimately courthouses are needed on top of cottages to really get things under control. It's wise to just stop expanding before you get some cottages in place, and have dealt with any potential unhappiness, at the very least. But once you've dealt with it, there's no reason to stop yourself from getting big. I took my 7th city as soon as I felt comfortable with my science output. Also: razing those stupid barbarian villages that pop up everywhere is probably wiser than capturing them. They're usually in really suck locations and they just jack up your maintenance. Edit: Also since you joined midway through, a large amount of units might have contributed to the problem. You get a set number of maintenance free units that aren't workers or settlers (I think that's the restriction?) and if you exceed that, they cost 1 gold per unit. I don't remember exactly when you joined, but for example, when Falcynn joined as Panda's former empire, he had like 50-70 units, and depending on the civic, that's a lot of maintenance to eat. Also, if you venture out of your territory into someone else's and you're at war with them, it costs double to maintain your units. Sometimes it is just better to disband an unneeded warrior than to eat the 1 gold per turn it would cost to keep it. | ||
|
BottleAbuser
Korea (South)1888 Posts
| ||
|
Falcynn
United States3597 Posts
lololol I poisoned that city and was ready to poison it again, but we decided to quit  Edit: and I can play again tomorrow. I'll be out for most of today. | ||
|
fonger
United Kingdom1218 Posts
| ||
|
Not_Computer
Canada2277 Posts
| ||
|
zer0das
United States8519 Posts
On January 07 2009 01:36 Falcynn wrote: lololol I poisoned that city and was ready to poison it again, but we decided to quit Edit: and I can play again tomorrow. I'll be out for most of today. Poisoning water supplies sucks so much it isn't even funny. I mean, I guess it renders a city somewhat less useful for 10 turns or so, but it's not like you lose population or anything. | ||
|
Zelniq
United States7166 Posts
what would be ideal though, is to play with teams next game, like 3v3 if we have 6. hopefully we get an even number. then if we could do simultaneous team turns, meaning one team goes simultaneous, then the other team goes after. that would work pretty well I think, plus that gives each team some extra time to communicate together during their offturn, and i think people wouldnt mind waiting 1 extra turn. EDIT: nevermind, BTS DOES support simultaneous team turns. Multiplayer Changes Simultaneous Team Turns - Players in multiplayer team games on the same team take their turns simultaneously from the BTS manual | ||
|
zer0das
United States8519 Posts
| ||
|
Falcynn
United States3597 Posts
| ||
|
Not_Computer
Canada2277 Posts
| ||
|
Falcynn
United States3597 Posts
| ||
|
SK.Testie
Canada11084 Posts
WHAT THE FUCK IS GOING ON IN THIS THREAD?! I DEMAND ANSWERS. | ||
| ||
