Civ 4 : Early game strategy
Paul Hyett
I normally wait until my first city gets to about size 3 before building
workers or settlers, since doing so stops them growing for the duration
of the build.
Which buildings are your first choices? Technologies?
--
Paul 'Charts Fan' Hyett
><(((°>
"Paul Hyett" <p...@nojunkmailplease.co.uk> wrote in message
news:kXqFe5L$c9RH...@blueyonder.co.uk...
Same here - no settlers or workers til city pop 3.
Set city to max food for growth.
Til then continious warrior.
I explore with these hoping to find and pop goody huts.
Once city is 3 either settler if I see horse or bronze otherwise worker.
If really lucky I pop a hut and get bronze working.
Find copper and plonk 1st settler straight on it.
Warriors kill a few lions wolfs etc and gain exp.
Once copper city is up best warriors are converted to axemen
Any rival city with no archers defending watch out....
General:
I like India / Ghandi as civ / leader.
(love the fast workers and quicker great people)
I try for Stonhenge but make the orcacle a must have.
Slavery and city set for food n' growth helps.
If things are going really well I get writing then research monarchy.
I time getting monarchy to coincide with the oracle wonder.
(switch to building something else if necessary the switch back)
Hey presto - feudalism.
1st great person - Prophet gets Theology.
Then build Hagia Sophia Wonder.
With Serfdom & Hagia Sophia fast workers soon chew the landscape into
shape.....
Techs:
Meditation / Buddism 1st
Wheel, Animal husbandry & Bronze working after.
Then again it depends a bit on what bonus resources you have near.
Priorities: secure a scorce of copper or horse - preferably both.
HTH
Öjevind Lång
news:kaT1j.31753$dN2....@newsfe6-gui.ntli.net...
>
> "Paul Hyett" <p...@nojunkmailplease.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:kXqFe5L$c9RH...@blueyonder.co.uk...
>> At the start, what do you usually build first?
>>
>> I normally wait until my first city gets to about size 3 before building
>> workers or settlers, since doing so stops them growing for the duration
>> of the build.
>>
>> Which buildings are your first choices? Technologies?
No settlers or workers until size three, but if I have Fishing and there is
seafood in the fat cross, I'l make a work boat after my first warrior. By
the way, some time ago (playing as Elizabeth, one of my favourites), my
starting point had a jewelry plot and a seafood plot. What would you folks
have built first - worker or workboat? I chose worker, but it was a tough
choice.
I like to found an early religion; it really gives you a boost. So
generally, I start with researching Mysticism-Polytheism. If I miss founding
Judaism, I try for Judaism, which is no detour since I want to discover
Masonry early. I like to try to build the Pyramids because early PR is
awesome. I almost always seem to fail to build the Oracle. Before or after
Masonry (depending on whether I managed to found Hinduism or not), I
research Agriculture and Animal Husbandry, and then Bronze Working.
Stonehenge is nice, but if you fail that it is very important to build
monuments early. Baracks can wait until a little later, and it's usually
just a waste of time and resources to build them in all your cities. Early
axemen are necessary. if you don't have either copppr or horses near where
you start, then you just have to research Iron Working before Shaka or
Montezuma has you for lunch. Wth BtS, getting a big army early is vital if
one wants to survive.
I'm generally a peacenik, but of course, if I find I have a neighbour
nearby and no one is home, I let my warrior walk straight into it. Once that
was Julius Caesar, and he lived just six or seven plots away. Of course, it
would have been suicide to let him live, and besides, past experiences with
him made the sound of screams and things crashing as I destroyed Rome very
satisfying.
Öjevind
Andre
> " ><(((°>" <nos...@butfish.com> skrev i meddelandetnews:kaT1j.31753$dN2....@newsfe6-gui.ntli.net...
Why Elizabeth?
Jeffery S. Jones
<p...@nojunkmailplease.co.uk> wrote:
>At the start, what do you usually build first?
If I have fishing and a sea resource, a work boat. If I have a food
bonus to irrigate and the tech to do so, a worker. A good commerce
resource to improve (gold or silver or gems for example), also means a
worker, because that means faster research.
If I can build them, scouts are good for early builds. They are
worth more in the early exploration phase than later. If not, a
warrior is always a good early choice.
>I normally wait until my first city gets to about size 3 before building
>workers or settlers, since doing so stops them growing for the duration
>of the build.
While it is true that a worker stops growth, if you have something
for the worker to improve right away, the long term benefit is
generally good enough to make building the worker first a good idea.
This is most true if you have agriculture and a food bonus which can
be improved by it, or flood plains. The worker delays your growth,
but once built the increased food speeds it up more than enough to
make up for the delay.
>Which buildings are your first choices? Technologies?
Granary and Lighthouse, Library and Marketplace, Courthouse. Most
other buildings are built when needed -- Barracks is only needed in
cities which will build military units.
Tech depends so much on the starting situation, leader, and goals,
that there isn't just one to pick. But techs to make use of
resources, the wheel (generally necessary for everyone), and
mining/bronzeworking for better units, production, chopping and
slavery, are prime goals.
Religious techs are worth shooting for if you can get them. If not,
though, you can be better off skipping the early ones, get alphabet
(before anyone else if possible), then trade for the early techs and
get a later religion. But if you have mysticism to start, you have
such a good shot at getting an early religion you should try for it.
--
*-__Jeffery Jones__________| *Starfire* |____________________-*
** Muskego WI Access Channel 14/25 <http://www.execpc.com/~jeffsj/mach7/>
*Starfire Design Studio* <http://www.starfiredesign.com/>
Öjevind Lång
news:700d4639-3284-4772...@r31g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
[snip]
>> No settlers or workers until size three, but if I have Fishing and there
>> is
> seafood in the fat cross, I'l make a work boat after my first warrior. By
> the way, some time ago (playing as Elizabeth, one of my favourites),
>Why Elizabeth?
She is Financial and Philosophical. That means she generates lots of money
and produces Great Persons at twice the normal rate. That is awesome.
Öjevind
Eddie Grove
> At the start, what do you usually build first?
>
> I normally wait until my first city gets to about size 3 before building
> workers or settlers, since doing so stops them growing for the duration of the
> build.
You and everyone else posting here are crazy. Build a worker first thing
while researching agriculture. Without a worker, you cannot grow quickly.
[Obviously if you have fish or deer for food and no rice/wheat things will be
different.]
Test it out. Next game, play normally until you build a worker. Check the
date on the turn it is produced. Then, restart the game building a worker
first, and then building exactly the same other things you built the first
time before the worker. Continue until the same date, and compare what you
have built and how much food is in the food box and how many resources have
been worked. I bet you will decide worker first produced better results.
Eddie
Andre
>
> - Show quoted text -
What I'm trying to say is: what traits do you find in Elizabeth that
would give you and advantage? The other poster said Gandhi because of
the fast workers. I'd like to start a poll to see which civs are
people's favourite and why. And is there really an advantage picking
one over the other or do they even out eventually?
Andre
><(((°>
"Andre" <ANDREJA...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:eab2b527-f963-4fbb...@r60g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
Andre
My fav Civ - India, Leader - Ghandi
Compare with Lizze / English......
The philosophical trait of both Ghandi & Elizabeth is really helpful for
getting great people early in the game.
Elizabeth has financial as 2nd trait - ok, but I prefer Spiritual because it
elininates anarchy (lost turns of production) when changing civics or
religions.
Also although Lizzy's special units are supurb (redcoats) they are a late
game unit (for me anyway) whereas fast workers are available from year dot
to end of game.
Just my 2 penny worth.
Öjevind Lång
[snip]
>What I'm trying to say is: what traits do you find in Elizabeth that
would give you and advantage? The other poster said Gandhi because of
the fast workers. I'd like to start a poll to see which civs are
people's favourite and why. And is there really an advantage picking
one over the other or do they even out eventually?
In addition to Elizabeth's leader traits, which I have mentioned ina nother
psot, her unique unit (Redcoat) and unique building (Stock Exchange) are
also great, at least for my usual gaming style. You can save up Great
Persons and start a golden age when it's time to switch civics so you don't
lose production.
Öjevind
kaj.st...@helsinki.fi.invalid
I seem to have a somewhat different starting approach from you guys
(probably because I am a builder and go for a huge empire with tons
of cities): For the first city I go for a location (within 1-2 turns)
to find a good food place. The first unit is then a worker, which I
automate (for some time) to improve land around that city. Meanwhile
my extra unit scouts out the neibourhood some 10 steps all directions
(stop if I see huge deserts or such in the direction, not likely an
enemy city will emerge there early in the game).
When scouting is complete I return the warrior/whatever to
my city and fortify it. I now know the nearby terain and my city is in
good shape due to the worker. The worker is now set to build a road to
where I want the next city, while my first city is building a settler.
After that I try to maximise production of workers/settlers in the fast
growing empire, but this of course depends on the landscape and my opponents.
My first goal is to create 6-10 cities, all connected, tightly
packed (ideally 4 squares in between), all in good food spots. This way
I can assure good internal intelligence, and good production base
capable of performing in-debt defence if needed (I always give peace to
anyone approaching me, but generally I do not offer free passage early in
the game when I do not need it myself). Resources are generally no problem,
my 10 city empire will cover enough ground to find practically anything.
> What I'm trying to say is: what traits do you find in Elizabeth that
> would give you and advantage? The other poster said Gandhi because of
> the fast workers. I'd like to start a poll to see which civs are
> people's favourite and why. And is there really an advantage picking
> one over the other or do they even out eventually?
Intriguing question. In my case experience seems to indicate that my
games tend to run basically the same way regardless of traits or intended
strategy. I beliewe that my own basic personality influences my games
much stronger than any trait I choose. One thing though: in my huge
empire/loads of cities the critical face comes when "empty" territory is
becoming scarce. I then have too few units for effective defence.
Diplomacy is a must here, but also few but powerful units. So I go for
traits with the strong unit being before gunpowder units, and usually a
defencive one. With a lot of cities and science hovering round 80-90 per
cent (at war and special occasions down to 50-60 per cent) I can be
almost certain to be the first discovering my main technological goals:
gunpowder and railway. And particularly the gunpowder I do not give
away. (Huge empire = needs to have mobile army, therefore railway).
--
Kaj
David Littlewood
Jones <jef...@execpc.com> writes
>
>Religious techs are worth shooting for if you can get them. If not,
>though, you can be better off skipping the early ones, get alphabet
>(before anyone else if possible), then trade for the early techs and
>get a later religion. But if you have mysticism to start, you have
>such a good shot at getting an early religion you should try for it.
I always like to found a religion fairly early. I have noticed that the
AI (almost) always seems to go for meditation (Buddhism), so I always go
for polytheism (Hinduism) and usually get there first, at least up to
Noble level.
David
--
David Littlewood
Bert Byfield
for him to get Buddhism.
Bert Byfield
Do you think 4 or 5 steps between cities (i.e., 3 or 4 blank squares
between them) is more efficient? What about wider spacing? How reliable
do you think the blue hint circles around potential city sites are?
Paul Hyett
>I usually play Stalin, but I like the Byzantine guy because it's easy
>for him to get Buddhism.
Wonder why they have Stalin, but not Hitler... :)
kaj.st...@helsinki.fi.invalid
I was talking about building a core, early. A city uses two spots
out for its' own use. So early I go for this, there is usually no real
information to react to. Blank spot? Any city has a radius, two each
seems optimal (2 + 2 = 4). I absolutely hate having to produce offensive
units only to get rid of some city, and then there probably is a war
going on too. I hate wars, they cost too much. Better wait until you
can perform a proper genioside.
The blue rings (=recommended spots) too often do not coincide
with what I want/plan to do. But I always check why. Obviosly, it depends.
But up to maybe 25 cities I tend do micromanage cities. And I newer
trust the advisors...
--
Kaj
Öjevind Lång
news:fid6gh$660$1...@oravannahka.helsinki.fi...
[snip]
> The blue rings (=recommended spots) too often do not coincide
> with what I want/plan to do. But I always check why. Obviosly, it depends.
> But up to maybe 25 cities I tend do micromanage cities. And I newer
> trust the advisors...
You found as many as 25 cities? What map size do you play on? Or do you go
for dominance and aggressive war later on?
Öjevind
kaj.st...@helsinki.fi.invalid
> [snip]
Early, yes. I mentioned that I am a builder, I have every victory mode
turned off. I cannot check (windows only on a computer in a room where my
wife sleeps right now), but I wouldn't be surprised to see 200 (two hundred)
cities by the year 1900, map large or huge.
In my best games I have not had a single war before roughly
1400 AD. And by then a war is a side affair, no reason to involve more
than the basic border cities. Even if in a face of a major war, my
production capasity surpases anything anyone can muster.
(In Civ 3 corruption for building many cities was almost prohibiting. I tried
to cope, mostly in vain. My technique seem to work in Civ 4 though )
--
Kaj
Paul Hyett
plus micro-managing a lot of cities is a nightmare.
kaj.st...@helsinki.fi.invalid
(This my be mine):
>>(In Civ 3 corruption for building many cities was almost prohibiting. I tried
>>to cope, mostly in vain. My technique seem to work in Civ 4 though )
>>
> In Civ4, I find the financial penalties for expanding too fast a PITA,
> plus micro-managing a lot of cities is a nightmare.
Of course one shouldn't expand _too_ fast. But that depends on terrain
and opposition. Early on I try to expand "as much as possible". However,
up to the maybe 25 cities there is no problem with micromanagement
(workers, after seeing to a town, can be let free), since in my games I
get practically everything, only in the border cities does the order of
getting things matter, and even then on occasion.
(Aah, of course one game for me lasts for 4-10 6 hour sessions...)
--
Kaj
col
The only exception is where i have a sea food available and can build a work
boat.
Food food food. Everything else can wait.
"Eddie Grove" <eddie...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:87fxyvc...@hotmail.com...
Paul Hyett
>
>(This my be mine):
>>>(In Civ 3 corruption for building many cities was almost prohibiting. I tried
>>>to cope, mostly in vain. My technique seem to work in Civ 4 though )
>>>
>> In Civ4, I find the financial penalties for expanding too fast a PITA,
>> plus micro-managing a lot of cities is a nightmare.
>
>Of course one shouldn't expand _too_ fast. But that depends on terrain
>and opposition. Early on I try to expand "as much as possible". However,
>up to the maybe 25 cities there is no problem with micromanagement
>(workers, after seeing to a town, can be let free)
I stack lots of workers together so they can make improvements really
quickly.
>, since in my games I
>get practically everything, only in the border cities does the order of
>getting things matter, and even then on occasion.
BTW, what game speed do people here prefer?
As a builder, I usually go for the longest option.
Eddie Grove
I'm a builder, but the game is too long to go for long options.
I generally play standard size, standard time, continents.
I'd rather play pangea, but at emperor/immortal pangea is beyond me.
I find a core of 7 cities is barely enough if everything goes right.
Eddie
Öjevind Lång
news:877ik4c...@hotmail.com...
[snip]
> I'm a builder, but the game is too long to go for long options.
> I generally play standard size, standard time, continents.
> I'd rather play pangea, but at emperor/immortal pangea is beyond me.
>
> I find a core of 7 cities is barely enough if everything goes right.
I usually play Epic on Large maps. Nine cities are necessary to really get
things done on a map that size; if one gets a few more, that's a bonus. (And
I'm a builder too.)
I'm not too good at micromanagement, but anything is better than leaving
things to the moronic workers. And I always keep the option "automated
workers leave existing improvements alone" and "automated workers don't cut
forests" checked.
Öjevind
albert hall
wrote:
Got to agree with this. Worker or work boat is always my first build
now. After playing Civ 3, it took me a while to realize that in Civ 4
you can go for a few builds before you need military units after the
free initial scout or warrior (for exploring). Early animal barbs don't
come into your cultural borders and no civ has ever declared war on me
straight away, not even thugs like Monte and Shaka. I hardly ever build
warriors -- I prefer not to build military units until I've got archers,
axes or chariots. By that time I've also got mines, farms and a good
basic infrastructure working for me.
albert hall
<p...@nojunkmailplease.co.uk> wrote:
>
>BTW, what game speed do people here prefer?
>
>As a builder, I usually go for the longest option.
I like Epic because it seems to give a better match with history, e.g.
knights tend to appear around the 11th century, railroads in the 19th,
space race starts in the 20th, etc. The pace of the game feels about
right to me at that speed.
On the other hand, sometimes the fastest speed on a Tiny or Duel map is
great for a quick blast.
Hank Stalica
Might have to change it up while I wait for BW or something and throw a
war in there, but usually that.
Paul Hyett wrote:
> At the start, what do you usually build first?
>
> I normally wait until my first city gets to about size 3 before building
> workers or settlers, since doing so stops them growing for the duration
> of the build.
>
Paul Hyett
>
>I usually play Epic on Large maps. Nine cities are necessary to really get
>things done on a map that size; if one gets a few more, that's a bonus. (And
>I'm a builder too.)
> I'm not too good at micromanagement, but anything is better than leaving
>things to the moronic workers. And I always keep the option "automated
>workers leave existing improvements alone" and "automated workers don't cut
>forests" checked.
Yes, you don't make *that* mistake more than once! :)
Jeffery S. Jones
Beyond The Sword changes this preference. It is simply because
Buddhism is a bit cheaper, so in isolation it is the better pick when
trying for a religion, that the AI goes for it. But if every AI does
that, only one can get it. A smarter AI will take a wider range of
options.
In BTS, sometimes you have a clear shot for either first religion,
because no AI tries for them. Other times, several try for both, so
that neither one is in reach for a human player at higher
difficulties. Unless you start with mysticism, it is a big gamble to
try for early religions at higher difficulties.
OTOH, it is stil possible and worth trying for. Getting one of the
early religions means that an AI won't get it, and that blocks off one
of the early AI alliance advantages. It is even possible to get the
first three religions (or more), and that can make diplomacy much
easier (as well as finances from the shrines).
Hank Stalica
surrounding terrain). I use the first worker to chop another worker
then both to chop a settler. Gets the 2d city up really fast.
Bald White Male 47 165 lbs
10 turns. I like to wait until I've founded a
religion before building my 2nd city, so I can
have it's special building in the same city as
the oracle and stonehenge. Note that I haven't
used this strategy above prince difficulty.
Paul Hyett
>Very first thing I build is two workers, then a settler (depending on
>surrounding terrain). I use the first worker to chop another worker
>then both to chop a settler. Gets the 2d city up really fast.
'Chop'? I've not heard that used in this context before.
Eddie Grove
It means to cut down forests for the production to quickly build the unit.
I think a single worker is enough if you are very careful to plan everything
exactly, and I like to save my forests for the health benefit [crucial IMO at
emperor level], but many people report success with the tactic above.
Eddie
Paul Hyett
>Paul Hyett <p...@nojunkmailplease.co.uk> writes:
>
>> In alt.games.civ3 on Tue, 11 Dec 2007, Hank Stalica wrote :
>> > Very first thing I build is two workers, then a settler (depending on
>> > surrounding terrain). I use the first worker to chop another worker then
>> > both to chop a settler. Gets the 2d city up really fast.
>>
>> 'Chop'? I've not heard that used in this context before.
>
>It means to cut down forests for the production to quickly build the unit.
Oh right - Bronze Working is not one of my early priority techs.
>
>I think a single worker is enough if you are very careful to plan everything
>exactly, and I like to save my forests for the health benefit
Health benefit - I never realised that?
I normally just do a 'Texas chainsaw massacre' for farmland/food!
Eddie Grove
> In alt.games.civ3 on Wed, 12 Dec 2007, Eddie Grove wrote :
> >Paul Hyett <p...@nojunkmailplease.co.uk> writes:
> >
> >> In alt.games.civ3 on Tue, 11 Dec 2007, Hank Stalica wrote :
> >> > Very first thing I build is two workers, then a settler (depending on
> >> > surrounding terrain). I use the first worker to chop another worker then
> >> > both to chop a settler. Gets the 2d city up really fast.
> >>
> >> 'Chop'? I've not heard that used in this context before.
> >
> >It means to cut down forests for the production to quickly build the unit.
>
> Oh right - Bronze Working is not one of my early priority techs.
> >
> >I think a single worker is enough if you are very careful to plan everything
> >exactly, and I like to save my forests for the health benefit
>
> Health benefit - I never realised that?
Each forest [or jungle, but should raze those] adds .5 health. Production is
good too. I try not to chop any forests. If you have to choose, keep the
forests on a river. They get the trade bonus once you build lumbermills, so
for golden ages it is better to have forest on river plus non-river town
rather than town on river plus non-river forest. I've read that forests are
less likely to [re]generate on squares with a road, so try not to build roads
where you would like to see forests grow if that is feasible.
The main point of irrigation for food is to be able to use mined hills or
plains and the like. Food merely for the sake of increased population is a
mistake IMO. I'd rather have a town than irrigate for excess food to produce
a specialist, and I usually prefer a forest to a hamlet [growing to a town].
Eddie
><(((°>
I don't like forests on the tiles adjoining my cities and always chop them.
However I'll keep those within city radius but not directly adjoining the
city.
Reason: If attacked, the attacking units make a beeline for the forest tiles
and the defence bonus there makes it much harder to kill em'
Eddie Grove
> I try not to chop any forests. If you have to choose, keep the
> forests on a river. They get the trade bonus once you build lumbermills, so
> for golden ages it is better to have forest on river plus non-river town
> rather than town on river plus non-river forest.
That is wrong. My obsession with optimizing for golden ages has blinded me.
Assuming you manage 3 golden ages after lumbermills, that's only 24 turns of
added trade. If you need to use the cleared square significantly before
lumbermills, clearly you should clear the river square unless it is possible
to take advantage of the financial trait or something similar somehow.
I wonder how many times I have made this error. Live and learn.
Eddie
Paul Hyett
>> >I like to save my forests for the health benefit
>>
>> Health benefit - I never realised that?
>
>Each forest [or jungle, but should raze those] adds .5 health.
Jungles give -0.25 health, according to the wallchart - which I should
have thought to look at before... :)
> Production is
>good too. I try not to chop any forests.
Sometimes you have to though, or you have nowhere to grow food.
> If you have to choose, keep the
>forests on a river. They get the trade bonus once you build lumbermills
But those aren't an option until way into the game.
>, so
>for golden ages it is better to have forest on river plus non-river town
>rather than town on river plus non-river forest.
I rarely utilise Golden Ages myself - I tend to use Great People for
other priorities.
Paul Hyett
>
>I don't like forests on the tiles adjoining my cities and always chop them.
>However I'll keep those within city radius but not directly adjoining the
>city.
>
>Reason: If attacked, the attacking units make a beeline for the forest tiles
>and the defence bonus there makes it much harder to kill em'
>
noticed that if they face a really strong unit, they flee in terror,
leaving a brown trail behind them! :)
Öjevind Lång
news:937DGJHe...@blueyonder.co.uk...
[snip]
> I rarely utilise Golden Ages myself - I tend to use Great People for other
> priorities.
If you are building a couple of Great Wonder, nothign beats a Golde Age for
ensuring that you finish them before somebody else does.
In one game, I used a GP to start a Golden Age while building the Taj
Mahal. During the second Golden Age which followed without any intermission
when I had finished Taj Mahal, I used two GPs to start a third Golden Age
after the second one. I never looked back after that.
Of course, the fact that I had built the Mausoleum of Mausollos also
helped.
Öjevind
><(((°>
"Öjevind Lång" <bredba...@ojevind.lang> wrote in message
news:5scdopF...@mid.individual.net...
Yep...
If you get the Mausoleum of Mausollos wonder GA's are very worth doing.
I do like to keep some Great Engineers in stock though for my 'must have'
wonders:
Pentagon & 3 Gorges Dam.
Lately I've stopped doing power stations of any sort and get the damm after
a rush to Plastics tech.
Much lowered pollution in every city that way.
Paul Hyett
> Of course, the fact that I had built the Mausoleum of Mausollos
I have no idea what that is?
> also
>helped.
><(((°>
"Paul Hyett" <p...@nojunkmailplease.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4fpCsdDV...@blueyonder.co.uk...
It's the wonder that serves to extend your Golden Age duration by 50
percent.
Paul Hyett
>
>"Paul Hyett" <p...@nojunkmailplease.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:4fpCsdDV...@blueyonder.co.uk...
>>
>>
>> I have no idea what that is?
>
>percent.
>
Öjevind Lång
[snip]
>>>> Of course, the fact that I had built the Mausoleum of Mausollos
>>>
>>> I have no idea what that is?
>>
>>It's the wonder that serves to extend your Golden Age duration by 50
>>percent.
>>
> Must be one from the most recent expansion pack, then?
Yes, and a pretty cool one too. Another good wonder to secure, whether one
is a builder or a warmonger, is the Statue of Zeus, which increases the war
weariness of civs at war with you by 100%.
Öjevind
kaj.st...@helsinki.fi.invalid
> [snip]
Where do you find the time??!
(work, wife and teenage child, 10hrs/month max of computer game)
--
Kaj
Paul Hyett
>
>>>>> Of course, the fact that I had built the Mausoleum of Mausollos
>>>>
>>>> I have no idea what that is?
>>>
>>>It's the wonder that serves to extend your Golden Age duration by 50
>>>percent.
>>>
>> Must be one from the most recent expansion pack, then?
>
>Yes, and a pretty cool one too. Another good wonder to secure, whether one
>is a builder or a warmonger, is the Statue of Zeus, which increases the war
>weariness of civs at war with you by 100%.
Does that only happen if *they* start the war, though?
Öjevind Lång
I don't believe so, which means that warmongers should find it quite sueful
too.
Öjevind
Öjevind Lång
news:fjufiq$c93$1...@oravannahka.helsinki.fi...
[snip]
> Where do you find the time??!
>
> (work, wife and teenage child, 10hrs/month max of computer game)
Properly speaking I haven't much time for it right now. Still, I have a
freelance job, so I can pretty much dispose of my time as I see fit.
Öjevind