Diety. Can you do it?

[tomjackson22]

Alright, where I live the Civilization Revolution game is very popular, we live right outside of the town where Sid Meier lived in Canada(Sarnia). We all play the games here, and we have been since we were little. But the thing is was that I found, none of my friends can do the hardest difficulties.
I'm sorry to say but someone who cant bring their skills to the emporer rank hasent truelly grasped this game. It is like algebra and it clicks eventually and you can do even more crazy equations.

All I really want to know is that can you play the game on diety and at least acheive an economic victory?

[iOPTICz]

yea i need assistance i cant win on the king level

[Poida12]

Yes. Yes I can.

[Poida12]

yea i need assistance i cant win on the king level

What kind of playing style do you use? Do you build lots of cities early or lots of troops and try to overun enemies early, or a little or both, or what?

[iOPTICz]

i was kidding i ranked 4th in h2h i dont think i need help

[Frimmel]

I don't think I can do it with the Mongols but I can win on the highest difficulty level.

[MadDjinn]

er, yeah.. the AI isn't that hard to beat.

(I've used mongols on Diety and won easily).

if you can't win deity easily then you haven't grasped the game.

[danthechan]

yea i need assistance i cant win on the king level

i thought we were having a break through after the over inflated ego session.

[iOPTICz]

haha yea ok

[SVPM]

Build lots of cities, try to micro-manage your city at the beginnig. Production 2 warriors to explore growth, expand crazy and you'll win easily, check the strat on this forum.

[wicked_chelsea]

I didnt think Diety was possiable in the begening either, but now Im trying to beat Diety with every victory with every civ (had trouble with the mongols). It only takes a little time and dont be afraid to start over.

[Caboose_Nor]

Beating the AI with every victory with every civ is boring and pointless to me.

The AI gets old real fast. Just like in any other game.

[MadDjinn]

yeah, I stopped bothering with that as well since there's no trophies....

[outlawtown]

i have some issues with deity. i usually play on kingm and sometimes emperor, as its more fun you can kind of relax and know its not going to be too much of a challenge, and you can just enjoy the fun and not take it too seriously. still, ive won every victory on deity and i can do it when i need to, and i can hold my own in MP. i dont play too often nowadays though, only really GOTW a few times. ive been playing a lot of COD5 and Halo Wars now that ive got it

[danthechan]

its mostly 1 or 2 runs at gotw for me. i tried mp yesterday but it is so frustrating. i did a roman mega expansion and ended up with some great cities. the other players ended their turn early almost always. sometimes, if i had a lot of buildings being finished, i never even got thru them all. i had ships with multiple turns set that never got to move because i couldn't finish a turn. finally i just rushed wonders and took cities with gps and got the cultural win.

[Caboose_Nor]

I play Emperor to practice strategies. Why? Because the AI gets a 100% production and trade bonus or something on Deity. I have no trouble beating it, but it's not a good way to measure how you would do in MP. Neither is Emperor, but at least there they don't spam units like hell, or research faster in the start so I can't get the bonuses I normally could.

I only play singleplayer to test things out anyway, or if there's no one online.

[pineaway]

i think this game has one of the easiest diety levels of all civ games

[Maximus]

Upon moving up to Deity, my first time through I lost with every Civ except the Indians.

Bascially it seems the AI sends 3 out of 4 Civs at you in full attack mode whilst one wins the game.

Maybe the best stradegy would be to figure out which one that is, and attack it.

[SVPM]

i think this game has one of the easiest diety levels of all civ games

No doubt about it.

[tomjackson22]

Alright Im very, very sorry for not coming around. Please excuse me because I travel alot and bring my Xbox with me everywhere. Add me on Xbox live and such its the same user as my 2k username.

I havent read all the responses and I will get to them, sorry for the wait Ill be around for now on.

[tomjackson22]

I know alot of you guys probably dont need help, but most of the time when people reference forums they tend to need help, because its easier to get help from people.

I can throw some tips out there.


-Try to keep your civilization under three cities (A city of 25 people is better than 4 cities with 6 people) (Also you can work faster)

-Try to play on Play Scenarios (Gold Rush, Oasis World, Money that Matters,
or even the USA one are easier than most)

-At the starting of the game (4000bc. -1000bc) dont stress food or production (Work on science, if you have Rome this will be much easier)

-ALWAYS get irrigation before the ADs! (This adds population to your cities)

-Roman civilization is most likely needed to ensure a win (the Roman civilization starts off with Code of Laws as you know, and it makes it easy to expand without reaking havok on your capital city.) (or I suppose the Mongols)

-I stress that you do use the play scenario Money that Matters, if you want to win on other scenarios or a new game the process will take alot longer and you will be finding people are beating you for 60% of the play time. Thats pretty intimidating for players and they may just quit, the key is not to quit if you arent playing on Money that Matters.



If you do these things and stress science for a long time until you have a considerable lead (5-10 Techs) and then stress money and build markets and banks in your 2-3 cities). When these cities start pumping the gold, you can start building universities, and you will powerhouse the technology. Its very smart once you have build your three cities up, to imperialize. Take over like two capitals and like a bunch of cities, wipe out a threatning civilization but I do not think winning a domination victory going to be your easiest bet. Too ensure a late win you must also stress production, it is very much needed to discount troops.

[tomjackson22]

Upon moving up to Deity, my first time through I lost with every Civ except the Indians.

Bascially it seems the AI sends 3 out of 4 Civs at you in full attack mode whilst one wins the game.

Maybe the best stradegy would be to figure out which one that is, and attack it.

sorry for adding this other post, but this isnt true because I have had multiple enemies winning at the same time.

[Poida12]

I know alot of you guys probably dont need help, but most of the time when people reference forums they tend to need help, because its easier to get help from people.

I can throw some tips out there.


-Try to keep your civilization under three cities (A city of 25 people is better than 4 cities with 6 people) (Also you can work faster)

-Try to play on Play Scenarios (Gold Rush, Oasis World, Money that Matters,
or even the USA one are easier than most)

-At the starting of the game (4000bc. -1000bc) dont stress food or production (Work on science, if you have Rome this will be much easier)

-ALWAYS get irrigation before the ADs! (This adds population to your cities)

-Roman civilization is most likely needed to ensure a win (the Roman civilization starts off with Code of Laws as you know, and it makes it easy to expand without reaking havok on your capital city.) (or I suppose the Mongols)

-I stress that you do use the play scenario Money that Matters, if you want to win on other scenarios or a new game the process will take alot longer and you will be finding people are beating you for 60% of the play time. Thats pretty intimidating for players and they may just quit, the key is not to quit if you arent playing on Money that Matters.



If you do these things and stress science for a long time until you have a considerable lead (5-10 Techs) and then stress money and build markets and banks in your 2-3 cities). When these cities start pumping the gold, you can start building universities, and you will powerhouse the technology. Its very smart once you have build your three cities up, to imperialize. Take over like two capitals and like a bunch of cities, wipe out a threatning civilization but I do not think winning a domination victory going to be your easiest bet. Too ensure a late win you must also stress production, it is very much needed to discount troops.

Forgive me for being blunt but this is all just plain wrong. If you only build 4-5 cities then you are leaving a massive amount of geography for the ai to pick up. While perhaps one 25 pop city is better that six 4 pop cities 6 25 pop cities is much better than one. And 20 24 pop cities is best of all. It is perfectly possible to achieve this. This is terrible advice and there are heaps of other people here who will gladly back me up. Also getting behind on tech early isn't the end of the world but finding yourself with 2 or 3 small cities and no units or production because you focussed on science is. So please people don't listen to the advice i quoted.

Your best bet is to expand early amassing at least 6 but preferably above 10 cities by 0AD (i like to go much higher if i can) so that you can use those cities to amass large sums of gold and science while ensuring that any city losses (though two defensive armies per city will stave off most ai attacks) aren't the end of the world and a quick counter is possible. By amassing lots of cities (and i personally think 15-20 on the mainland by the end of the game is a good amount to aim for) you are making yourself stronger and weakening your enemy by ensuring they have less room to expand into. By the mid to late game this city advantage will give you enough of a lead to win any way you want.

Also you might want to try and take out at least one early opponent if not two by using horseman and catapults (maybe legion). This just makes the whole process easier and gets you a capital and a few cities basically for free. There is no down side to conquering enemies. I have used a system similar to this and won deity victories will all civs and almost in all victory types (i am missing a few space races) so i know what i am talking about. At the end of the day by reading some of the fine startegies on this forum you will find techniques that allow you to win against deity any day of the week and not just in the scenarios that are super easy anyway.

[Frelinder]

Hey mate

Its great that you post tips and always fun that new people find this forum.

However after reading your tips I'm afraid that I must say that many of them aren't that good and some of them actually sugests doing things that will have the opposite effect (by that meaning it will not improve peoples gameplay but rather keep them on base one or in worst case make them worse players)

I Respond here to some of the things you wrote but explanations on why and how to do things... I sugest to read strategies posted on this forum because otherwise this post would be very long. See link in the bottom.

I know alot of you guys probably dont need help, but most of the time when people reference forums they tend to need help, because its easier to get help from people.

I can throw some tips out there.


-Try to keep your civilization under three cities (A city of 25 people is better than 4 cities with 6 people) (Also you can work faster)

This make no sense. My tips is to read in this forum about expansion. How to do it and why its good. My advise is to build atleast 10 cities but 20 or 30 is even better.. The argument shouldn't be one 24 pop citie is better then four pop 6 cities. Try instead to argue against why one pop 24 citie is better then eight pop 20 cities.. I belive most people would choose eigth pop 20 cities...

-Try to play on Play Scenarios (Gold Rush, Oasis World, Money that Matters,
or even the USA one are easier than most)

This is ok I guess but it wan't let you become a good player. This because when you finally step it up and play whithout this handicap you will have to change your strategy completely.. You wan't be able anymore to rush libraries early in every citie. and rusch defensive units early when you need them when being attacked.. So playing these scenarios could be fun but it wan't realy help you understand how the game works..

-At the starting of the game (4000bc. -1000bc) dont stress food or production (Work on science, if you have Rome this will be much easier)

I recommend the opposit. In the beginning you should either focus on an rush/take over 1-2 AI cities or focus on expansion and growth. the early techs don't give you any important bonuses. Except Irrigation. If you get Irrigation after between 1300-1100 BC you will Always get it first against the AI. If Japan or Egypt is playing you should get it a few turns faster though.

-ALWAYS get irrigation before the ADs! (This adds population to your cities)

Agree!

-Roman civilization is most likely needed to ensure a win (the Roman civilization starts off with Code of Laws as you know, and it makes it easy to expand without reaking havok on your capital city.) (or I suppose the Mongols)

Rome is okey but when you are new to the game I would sugest using Chinese instead. They are easier to expand whith and also teching whith. Later on when you get better you can take whith you what youve learned and use this whith other civs..

-I stress that you do use the play scenario Money that Matters, if you want to win on other scenarios or a new game the process will take alot longer and you will be finding people are beating you for 60% of the play time. Thats pretty intimidating for players and they may just quit, the key is not to quit if you arent playing on Money that Matters.



If you do these things and stress science for a long time until you have a considerable lead (5-10 Techs) and then stress money and build markets and banks in your 2-3 cities). When these cities start pumping the gold, you can start building universities, and you will powerhouse the technology. Its very smart once you have build your three cities up, to imperialize. Take over like two capitals and like a bunch of cities, wipe out a threatning civilization but I do not think winning a domination victory going to be your easiest bet. Too ensure a late win you must also stress production, it is very much needed to discount troops.

Again you should have alot of cities and you should be focusing in making one strong goldcity. Its better to boost one large goldcity then spend turns/gold on building many markets/banks in many cities.

Here are strategies and good tips

http://forums.2kgames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=23378

*cheers*

[Frelinder]

Hehe.. beaten to the punch by Poidia..

[tomjackson22]

Poida12

That is your opinion, Im not here to tell you what you want to hear. Im just here to help, and I have all 1000 achievments on the Xbox 360, I have all the Civ games and I know for a fact that the way I play works. Im sorry if you play different ways, theres different things you can do. You can start off the game with alot of cities but Im telling EVERYONE that it isnt all that it cracks up too be. If you are smart you can imperialize at the end, when all those cities are needed for troop production, nobody ever said a country has to be huge too be powerful.

It is much better and quicker to examine 2-3 cities than it is to examine like 6 or more, and this game always gets out of control I know that most of you do not want to be playing it for like hours on end for no reason just because you think its right to expand at the beginning. It may be better in the long run but a Civ with 3 cities is going to take half as long as a Civ with 6 cities.

[tomjackson22]

I love your way of playing, you know what your doing. I will incorporate your tips into my playing.
The only thing I can say is Rome is the easiest to expand with, the Chinese dont have a republic at the start.

[tomjackson22]

-Try to keep your civilization under three cities (A city of 25 people is better than 4 cities with 6 people) (Also you can work faster)

Let me explain
The reason why I focus on 2-3 cities is because of the benefits you get from having good infrastructure. You only have so much you can do, and I understand that you can have huge amounts of large cities. But I'm trying to explain how to get an advantage, and if you have less cities you can buy and build more buildings for those cities, and the more people you have in a city the more resourses you can use (Obviously). Having more is fine, I never said it wasnt a good idea, its just easier for people to WIN IN DIETY if they arent fricken strained from hours of bull$#!T managing 10+ cities.
__________________________________________________ _____________

-Try to play on Play Scenarios (Gold Rush, Oasis World, Money that Matters,
or even the USA one is easier than most)

Im just saying try, if someone is looking for acheivements on the Xbox 360 they should probably play a scenario because there is insured resources on the map, and it just makes life a little easier.
__________________________________________________ _____________

-At the starting of the game (4000bc. -1000bc) dont 'stress' food or production.

To get an advantage in this game you must discover new technologies first, and get the bonuses from them, if you are doing a one city game which are pretty fun and fast to get that stupid achievement, you have an advantage because then you dont have to buy or build most of the buildings you get from certain technologies. Im not saying totally forget about food, I reccommend not micromanaging, and just choosing the science because it emphasizes food.
__________________________________________________ _____________

-ALWAYS get irrigation before the ADs! (This adds population to your cities)
__________________________________________________ _____________

-Roman civilization is most likely needed to 'insure' (rephrased) a win (the Roman civilization starts off with Code of Laws as you know, and it makes it easy to expand without reaking havok on your capital city.)

Also just backing this one up just because theres nothing wrong with having code of laws, it helps you expand easily.
__________________________________________________ _____________

Dont take this seriously,

-I stress that you do use the play scenario Money that Matters, if you want to win on other scenarios or a new game the process will take alot longer and you will be finding people are beating you for 60% of the play time. Thats pretty intimidating for players and they may just quit, the key is not to quit if you arent playing on Money that Matters.

I was just saying this because it makes it really easy to win. Its total handicap but its there to use if your not amazing at the game. It can also teach you a thing or two about the game because you can open your mind to new things.
__________________________________________________ _____________

If you do these things and stress science for a while until you have a considerable science lead. Than try too stress money and build markets and banks in your cities.(If you do this try using Democracy. When these cities start pumping the gold, you can start building universities, and you will powerhouse the technology. Its very smart once you have built your three cities up, is to Imperialize(Take over Civs, and expand your empire when your rich.) Too ensure a late win you must also stress production, it is very much needed to discount troops(Build near mountains)
(Rephrased)
__________


Sorry, If you dont need my advice just say so.

Thanks for having me here.

[Frelinder]

Hey

I know what you are coming from. We have all been there. Playing the game.. improving, wanting to learn more and then finding this forum. Give it some time.. After reading some of the strategies here and try them out and get a better understanding of the game you will see what I'm talking about. Your posts helps because there are probably many that do like you and that can improve. I'm not answering this post because I wan't to say... you are bad.. I'm better then you.. I'm answering your post because I'm glad to share whith you my knowledge of this game. Alot that I have learned I have learned from reading in this forum.. And ofcourse from playing the game alot

I will keep this short. About the Romans and Chinese thing. 2 things make Chines +1 pop in new cities better then Roamns Code of Laws.

1: You start whith 3 pop.. you can get out warriors faster.. then put 2 on forrest and 1 on food. 5 turns later you will have 1 new settler and your city will be back at pop 2.. when you settle the new citie you will have 3 pop in that and pop 2 in your first city.. total pop 5...

Whith the romans if you put 2 workers on forrest you have hammered a settler after 5 turns but you wan't be back to pop 2 again because you haven't worked any food. also the new city that you settle you will only get a pop of 2 in.. so this mean a total of pop 3.. instead of the total pop of 5 that yopu would have with the Chinese..

2: Chinese starts with Literacy wich is a pre-tech for Code of Law. So you can get Code of law fast and after that you will both have Code of Law AND the + 1 pop bonus in every new city

About the fact it takes longer to manage more cities then few cities.. yes thats correct. However if you expand fast and alot and get up to 20 cities your game will end much earlier.. you will get tank armies in year 1000 AD instead of 1900 AD and you can win the game in any way you wan't in year 1500 AD instead of in year 2000 AD isch.. meaning less turns.. My games rarely lasts longer then 2 hours and I build 15-40 cities..

Anyways.. I sugest read these three strategys and the explanation about expanding. Try the strategies out and post here later

http://forums.2kgames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=25163

http://forums.2kgames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=21381

http://forums.2kgames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=24902

http://forums.2kgames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=21510

My strategies are mostly for Single Player but can ofcourse be used in MP. Mortes Chinese strategy is known as the "horse rusch" and that one works good in both MP and SP.

I hope you don't feel that I'm trying to put you down mate. Just wanna help

*cheers*

[tomjackson22]

Hey

I know what you are coming from. We have all been there. Playing the game.. improving, wanting to learn more and then finding this forum. Give it some time.. After reading some of the strategies here and try them out and get a better understanding of the game you will see what I'm talking about. Your posts helps because there are probably many that do like you and that can improve. I'm not answering this post because I wan't to say... you are bad.. I'm better then you.. I'm answering your post because I'm glad to share whith you my knowledge of this game. Alot that I have learned I have learned from reading in this forum.. And ofcourse from playing the game alot

I will keep this short. About the Romans and Chinese thing. 2 things make Chines +1 pop in new cities better then Roamns Code of Laws.

1: You start whith 3 pop.. you can get out warriors faster.. then put 2 on forrest and 1 on food. 5 turns later you will have 1 new settler and your city will be back at pop 2.. when you settle the new citie you will have 3 pop in that and pop 2 in your first city.. total pop 5...

Whith the romans if you put 2 workers on forrest you have hammered a settler after 5 turns but you wan't be back to pop 2 again because you haven't worked any food. also the new city that you settle you will only get a pop of 2 in.. so this mean a total of pop 3.. instead of the total pop of 5 that yopu would have with the Chinese..

2: Chinese starts with Literacy wich is a pre-tech for Code of Law. So you can get Code of law fast and after that you will both have Code of Law AND the + 1 pop bonus in every new city

About the fact it takes longer to manage more cities then few cities.. yes thats correct. However if you expand fast and alot and get up to 20 cities your game will end much earlier.. you will get tank armies in year 1000 AD instead of 1900 AD and you can win the game in any way you wan't in year 1500 AD instead of in year 2000 AD isch.. meaning less turns.. My games rarely lasts longer then 2 hours and I build 15-40 cities..

Anyways.. I sugest read these three strategys and the explanation about expanding. Try the strategies out and post here later

http://forums.2kgames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=25163

http://forums.2kgames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=21381

http://forums.2kgames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=24902

http://forums.2kgames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=21510

My strategies are mostly for Single Player but can ofcourse be used in MP. Mortes Chinese strategy is known as the "horse rusch" and that one works good in both MP and SP.

I hope you don't feel that I'm trying to put you down mate. Just wanna help

*cheers*

Hey, I know your a regular on this forum but even if you have 200-300 some odd posts it doesnt just mean you can straight up say your better than someone. You havent even played online with me on my 360, or I could bust out the PC games, been kinda waitin on a new PC game so I havent been playing III or IV. Preferably just add me on 360. ill play a game with you and you can prove your point, but dont just think because I'm posting a strategy for people who need an easy way in beating the Diety difficulty.

Im sorry I dont go on this forum enough, I dont want to be a nuisance. Im not trying to say Im better than anyone else either, just play one game and you can see who's better. Sounds fair to me.
And if all that any of you guys do is just pick these things apart than Im just going to leave, I dont have a problem with it.

[Frelinder]

Sorry mate.. I'm on Ps3 and currently I even don't have an internetconection to my Ps3.

Anyways the discussion shouldn't be if you are better then me. It should be about tips and strategys.. Having 300 posts certanly don't give me the right to say I'm better then you.. I'm just giving my opinion to you and to others who wanna listen. Same as you do mate..

I like this forum because if you post something here you get feedback/critics People tell you what they think sounds good/bad. What could be done better and so forth..

If you are looking for a challange though I bet there are people here on this forum that play Xbox that would like to play against you..

*cheers*

[Poida12]

Poida12

That is your opinion, Im not here to tell you what you want to hear. Im just here to help, and I have all 1000 achievments on the Xbox 360, I have all the Civ games and I know for a fact that the way I play works. Im sorry if you play different ways, theres different things you can do. You can start off the game with alot of cities but Im telling EVERYONE that it isnt all that it cracks up too be. If you are smart you can imperialize at the end, when all those cities are needed for troop production, nobody ever said a country has to be huge too be powerful.

It is much better and quicker to examine 2-3 cities than it is to examine like 6 or more, and this game always gets out of control I know that most of you do not want to be playing it for like hours on end for no reason just because you think its right to expand at the beginning. It may be better in the long run but a Civ with 3 cities is going to take half as long as a Civ with 6 cities.

First and foremost don't insult me. An opinion is an idea someone has without any proof of in depth thought to back it up. They just figure it is true. This isn't my opinion this is a thought that has been tested and proven not just by me but by pretty much everyone on this forum. Winning on Deity is much easier if you have more cities than your enemy. That's just simple logic. This particular thread is about making it easier for inexperienced players to win on Deity. So maybe i am giving good advice and you are not. Is this advice all it cracks up t be? Depends what you mean? Do you mean will it help you win quicker and easier? Then yes it is all it is cracked up to be. Sure you will probably win if you a good player ith 4-5 well managed cities and maybe if you are really good you will win well. But most of the people who will look in this forum for advice are not the kinds of people who can make your startegy work. They just are not experienced enough with civ. If they we're they probably wouldn't be here.

Secondly I have 1000/1000 too. I have also been playing since civ1. Are you seriously trying to tell us your style is better because the game will be shorter so i can go do something else sooner? Why don't i just play a 1 city challenge that i can complete in 20 minutes? Because there is a lot of the game i am missing and also it is very difficult for an inexperienced player to do. Further there is no real need to micromanage lots of cities just because you have lots of cities. Micromanage a few and set the rest to automated workers in whatever style you need. For someone who claims to enjoy civ you don't seem to want to spend much time playing it.

That aside, a game with 15-20 cities will still finish in a couple of hours (non-domination) and around 1800-1900AD which isn't all that long if you enjoy the game. A dom vic can be as quick as you want.

At the end of the day you are right and your style is valid. But it is the kind of style that makes for a less fun experience that will end in a loss for an inexperienced player. So it isn't very useful to place it in a forum as advice for winning on Deity.

Oh and all this talk of achievements isn't relevant. This is for winning on Deity not getting achievements quick isn't it? I had all the achievements in the first month i owned the game and never went down the scenario route. Is a month too long? Seems like a good amount of time to be enjoying a game to me.

[K31 Hawkeye]

With all due respect to the many great players here on the site, Tom Jackson is not revealing any great strategy for online play. His strategy here is simply to help people who are having difficulty beating the AI on Deity. In that sole purpose, his strategy works well. He is not claiming it will help someone top the online leaderboards for H2H or FFA games. This is exactly why his topic is posted in the General Discussion section rather than the Strategy section. It is also why he chose the topic title "Deity. Can you do it?" rather than a Civ-specific title like you find in the strategy section of the forum.

The idea of building a Civ in the form of 3 great cities (1 gold, 1 production, 1 science) and then expanding Empirically is a good idea. Once your 3 city civ has grown enough, it can pump out an army each turn (1 by production, 2 by rush) and you still have plenty of research and gold production. This leaves the AI to build cities for you instead of you having to micro-manage a multitude of cities from the beginning. For some players this is an easier process and it will work very well against the AI.

Another aspect of TJ's strategy is that when playing the AI, they will often plant new cities 1 tile away from one of your own cities, effectively cannibalizing any resources that you had planned on using for your own city. By expanding Empirically, you avoid this negative effect on future cities. It also negates the need to make a push for Code of Laws regardless of the Civ you use as the Romans already have it and the others don't necessarily need it for this type of expansion.

Now, had TJ suggested that this strategy would work online then I would have issue with that, although I must say that if the layout of the map was beneficial for a 3 super-city strategy, this would work well if you could hold off the initial rush from other players.

Cheers,

JFC

[Caboose_Nor]

The only thing I mind about your strategy is that you say pick the Romans, because then you can expand easier, but keep your civilization under 3 cities. Huh?

Other than that I think it's a valid strat to have few, large cities.

[vrap]

Let's take it easy, guys. There's no need to get upset over different strategies, just because someone gives advice doesn't mean it's the be-all-end-all of techniques, nor is any critique of it a put-down.

[tomjackson22]

First and foremost don't insult me. An opinion is an idea someone has without any proof of in depth thought to back it up. They just figure it is true. This isn't my opinion this is a thought that has been tested and proven not just by me but by pretty much everyone on this forum. Winning on Deity is much easier if you have more cities than your enemy. That's just simple logic. This particular thread is about making it easier for inexperienced players to win on Deity. So maybe i am giving good advice and you are not. Is this advice all it cracks up t be? Depends what you mean? Do you mean will it help you win quicker and easier? Then yes it is all it is cracked up to be. Sure you will probably win if you a good player ith 4-5 well managed cities and maybe if you are really good you will win well. But most of the people who will look in this forum for advice are not the kinds of people who can make your startegy work. They just are not experienced enough with civ. If they we're they probably wouldn't be here.

Secondly I have 1000/1000 too. I have also been playing since civ1. Are you seriously trying to tell us your style is better because the game will be shorter so i can go do something else sooner? Why don't i just play a 1 city challenge that i can complete in 20 minutes? Because there is a lot of the game i am missing and also it is very difficult for an inexperienced player to do. Further there is no real need to micromanage lots of cities just because you have lots of cities. Micromanage a few and set the rest to automated workers in whatever style you need. For someone who claims to enjoy civ you don't seem to want to spend much time playing it.

That aside, a game with 15-20 cities will still finish in a couple of hours (non-domination) and around 1800-1900AD which isn't all that long if you enjoy the game. A dom vic can be as quick as you want.

At the end of the day you are right and your style is valid. But it is the kind of style that makes for a less fun experience that will end in a loss for an inexperienced player. So it isn't very useful to place it in a forum as advice for winning on Deity.

Oh and all this talk of achievements isn't relevant. This is for winning on Deity not getting achievements quick isn't it? I had all the achievements in the first month i owned the game and never went down the scenario route. Is a month too long? Seems like a good amount of time to be enjoying a game to me.

I beg my ****ing pardon? Please quote' when I 'insulted' you, just because I have all the achievements for this game doesnt mean here to be a ******* and tell everyone what to do. Im not like that, and I apologize if you take me this way. What Im defs saying now is that you obviously cant take someone giving you advice (thats called narcissistic rage), meaning you cant take advice because you think everything that other people think is insuperior to yours (so you get mad about it). Im not getting any other jive from this one other than you are a complete narcissist.

I apologize for not being informative on this post, I cant just keep bothering you guys with this stuff unless someone needs it. Im not trying to prove any points and I hope I didnt insult anyone else.

Yet it is valid isnt it, thanks for pointing that out. People dont want to play 15-20 city games, everyone that I watch play this game dont make anywhere close to that many. Im sure if you want to build a Russia sized civilization you can still govern it, but can you govern it well? They say that was the problem in the Soviet Union or the Russian Empire because it was way too hard to govern that land mass. Due to the fact that I never play online, because thats what COD4, and Halo is for I post this strategy for people who want to win a game in !diety! and not spend 5-8 hours in denial governing a massive continant in diety and most people will quit after 2 because they wont be winning at all.


If that bothered you read about it **(It is not to be confused with anger) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissistic_rage
(Most people wouldnt coin this like I did, just most people just think of people like you as self centred *******

[tomjackson22]

The only thing I mind about your strategy is that you say pick the Romans, because then you can expand easier, but keep your civilization under 3 cities. Huh?

Other than that I think it's a valid strat to have few, large cities.

Well alright, when ya start and you build settlers it takes away from your city that you built them in (Obviously), the reason why it makes life a little quicker and more efficient is because you can build your cities without taking a full 2 population away. I find I have built with other civs and my capital gets wrecked down to 1 population. The Chinese might be better, because of their benefits.
But the Romans are the Romans, and they picked some of the worst Roman city names.

I wonder how many 1 population cities Poida accumulates XD!

[tomjackson22]

With all due respect to the many great players here on the site, Tom Jackson is not revealing any great strategy for online play. His strategy here is simply to help people who are having difficulty beating the AI on Deity. In that sole purpose, his strategy works well. He is not claiming it will help someone top the online leaderboards for H2H or FFA games. This is exactly why his topic is posted in the General Discussion section rather than the Strategy section. It is also why he chose the topic title "Deity. Can you do it?" rather than a Civ-specific title like you find in the strategy section of the forum.

The idea of building a Civ in the form of 3 great cities (1 gold, 1 production, 1 science) and then expanding Empirically is a good idea. Once your 3 city civ has grown enough, it can pump out an army each turn (1 by production, 2 by rush) and you still have plenty of research and gold production. This leaves the AI to build cities for you instead of you having to micro-manage a multitude of cities from the beginning. For some players this is an easier process and it will work very well against the AI.

Another aspect of TJ's strategy is that when playing the AI, they will often plant new cities 1 tile away from one of your own cities, effectively cannibalizing any resources that you had planned on using for your own city. By expanding Empirically, you avoid this negative effect on future cities. It also negates the need to make a push for Code of Laws regardless of the Civ you use as the Romans already have it and the others don't necessarily need it for this type of expansion.

Now, had TJ suggested that this strategy would work online then I would have issue with that, although I must say that if the layout of the map was beneficial for a 3 super-city strategy, this would work well if you could hold off the initial rush from other players.

Cheers,

JFC

Alright everyone, this is exactly what Im talking about. Out of the park

But Im still going to stress producing science and food at the beginning of any non handicapped civ, and if your playin Money that Matters you can stress complete science, and win some great benefits. The production is just not needed entirely at the beginning, unless you are thinking about devoting a ridiculous amount of turns to building somthing not needed.

[Caboose_Nor]

Well alright, when ya start and you build settlers it takes away from your city that you built them in (Obviously), the reason why it makes life a little quicker and more efficient is because you can build your cities without taking a full 2 population away. I find I have built with other civs and my capital gets wrecked down to 1 population. The Chinese might be better, because of their benefits.
But the Romans are the Romans, and they picked some of the worst Roman city names.

I wonder how many 1 population cities Poida accumulates XD!

1 population? You start with minimum 2 population when settling a city.

It doesn't make sense to choose Romans for their Republic if you're only going to have 3 cities. And I think you should watch your psychoanalysis of the people here who you don't know at all...... You don't come off very smart when you attack people in this manner because they objected to your theories.

And by the way if there's anyone in here with an anger problem it's clearly YOU.

[Maximus]

sorry for adding this other post, but this isnt true because I have had multiple enemies winning at the same time.

I meant as a generality, not a firm rule.

Its seems in general, the AI has certain CIV's doing the dirty work while one or more CIV's builds and stays out of the fray, at least that has been my experience.