This was my game while growing up and I've been on and off it for years I couldn't work it out without watching these videos I feel like a pro now lol excellent content.
I've been playing this game for about 14 years, and I've learned it by trial and error. Now, I like watching your videos, because even tho' I know most of the information, it's still helpful to understand why certain things and features behave the way they do. They would have been more useful for me when I was learning, but keep up the good work, your videos are really enjoyable.
Amazing to see this much interest in such an old game. I keep an old computer going just so I can play this game. Been playing for a long time but after watching a few of your videos, I have not been playing very well.
Thank you so much. I've played this game so much over my lifetime, but I could just never really understand it. It felt like I was playing blindly. I appreciate the informative videos you've made! Maybe this time, I'll actually get it.
RE:Deez Noots. I don't even like automated pollution cleanup unless there are no other tribes at war with me on the same island or continent. Many times I've lost workers to enemies when the workers stupidly decide to locate at the edge of my border to cleanup and an enemy is right across the border. I've even seen my workers cross into enemy turf to clean pollution and get captured. I know, it is a pain to have to do it manually, but it is safer.
Thank you! Good tips. I never considered that despotism affects a golden age. One exception I will do if I am trying to beat an enemy to settle near a resource is that while my settler is being built I may road the pathway so my settler can get there quicker.
Love the tutorials! Would like to see more. I have two burning questions: 1- The Palace. What are the ramifications of building or not building a Palace when the people offer to build one for you? Seems like those resources could be used elsewhere. 2- I've always just let the city governor handle stuff while I went on to conquer the world, keeping an eye out and changing production when they get stupid. Sometimes, there is such a small array of things to build you would like to just stop production of units or facilities in the city for a while. What it the best strategy to deal with that in governor mode or do you have to manage the city yourself?
1)The palace building screen (f9) is just a mini-game. It doesn't have any implications on the rest of the game. (You also have the option of building the "palace" improvement in game. This building moves your capital to the selected city.) 2) I don't use the governor so I'm not the best person to ask here, but can't you just switch to wealth? Or would the governor switch it back? If that fails, maybe try the "contact governor" button on the screen when you zoom in on the city?
I figured out that in some cities far away from your capital, it's better to irrigate 100%(after leaving despotism of course). Those cities are so far away almost every shield is given to corruption. The only way to get the cities to do anything is to produce tonnes of food and make research from all the specialists you can feed.
@@suedeciviii7142 I guess it depends on your government(obviously not a good idea in communism). Speaking of which, could you make a short recap on government types? I feel like I have no idea on which ones are better, should I go through anarchy more than once etc...
If you're trying to maximize efficiency, no. If you need that particular job done ASAP, then yes. Although the shorter the job is, the worse the trade-off is for efficiency. So wasting one worker move to complete a road on a gem mountain 9 turns earlier is probable more worth it than wasting one worker move to complete a road on silk forest 3 turns earlier.
It looks like you didn't mention tundras. If you have engineering, it's (almost) always better to plant a forest on a tundra rather than a mine (can't irrigate a tundra). Forest = 🍪🔷🔷 Tundra Mine (no RR) = 🍪🔷 However, planting is longer than mining, and if you choose to preserve a tundra forest (before you have engineering) building roads on that will take longer too. This is probably not **that** useful, as cities engulfed in tundras are stunted by growth, and if it's not near the capital, corruption might make that work worthless. Complex technical game question: How exactly does resource spawning work? Are positions predetermined at the start of game, or are they determined after each tech is discovered? For example, chopping a jungle before steam power would: *(A)* potentially despawn an invisible coal resource *(B)* the game would simply "roll the dice" on Jungle/Mountain/Hill tiles after discovery of steam power. *(C)* # of resources is determined at the creation of the map, but are randomly placed on Jungle/Mountain/Hill tiles after discovery of steam power. If *(A)* was true, then it might be helpful for savescumming. And *(B)* & *(C)* would be useful becuase planting forests could "create" or "lure" rubber/uranium where you want. I'm just a bit curious myself. That would be a quite an edge case scenario. Edit: formatting
All true. I didn't even touch what to do with forests. The most important point is "chop forests on grassland because they're might be a bonus grassland underneath. Forests on plains and tundra are therefor lower priority". Chopping down jungle won't prevent coal from spawning on that tile. Resources are spawned as soon as the game begins. And, fun fact, the AI can actually "see" those resources from the start of the game. That's why they plant weird tundra/desert cities very early that end up having oil, and why they value those cities highly in diplomacy.
The only tundra cities even worth having(short of grabbing strat/luxury) are those with deer or fish since the extra food lets you work a few forests and get a little bit of production.
not "almost" but "always" it is better to have forest on tundra instead of a mine: 1) forests help battle Gwarming and pollution , 2) from a strategic POV a tundra with forest costs the enemy 2 moves and not just 1 for a mine. That being said, you may want to clear natural forests first to see if they have resources below + to harvest some extra shields for your city and then plant your own trees on top.
There is a case for roading commerceless grassland first so that your city can grow and generate enough revenue for the luxury slider to maintain happiness.
Maybe in some niche cases, where you're building the great library or something, and only have happiness issue in one city. In that case, solving those problems in one city costs you a ton of gold in other cities. Otherwise (like if you're still on 3 cities), I just run the luxury slider at 50% or whatever and DGAF
Thanks for the work on Civ 3, been playing since Civ 1, 4 is great but the stack of doom just annoyed me. Civ 5 just seemed like the AI was just dumb. Haved 6 but have not played it. Civ 3 i have on disc and installed going to go back to it cause of your fantastic videos.
Wow - great. That's what I was waiting for. :) I am playing at Emperor difficulty, and never know the rule "mine green, irrigate brown". Of course, it doesn't apply to every situation, but keeping that in mind will help me a lot. Btw, any chance for another video on Emperor difficulty? I really enjoyed last one, and it seems to me, that you can beat any situation on that difficulty (even if you start surrounded by jungle, thundra's, or marches), and yet, Emperor don't force to rush your stuff, like Sid does.
Yeah, I think I'll mostly play on emperor from now on. It's just so much less stressful, and it's easier to explore different areas of the game aside from the same conquest playstyle. I was thinking I'd find a start with intentionally bad land and play it on emperor.
@@suedeciviii7142 Great. Ir would be awesome to see how you manage bad lands in a long term. Do you decided what nation you will take? Any chance to play with Russians?
What do you think about lategame situation, when u have 20 citizens in your city (and big fat cross is filled); but city still can groth: what's better, shields or food, mine or irrigations for some cells? Maximum production with 20 citizens or 25-30 citizens with less production, with overpopulation problems , but with all these additional scientists/tax officers?
Good video but a couple of things I did not see mentioned in the comments. My games have always been on Huge / Emperor+ (mostly Sid...) so dealing with a ton of workers is a regular thing. Instead of saying "never stack workers", I think the pro tip is to actually STACK your workers in various teams as soon as possible. In early game, it is normal to have all your workers spread out but as soon as you build/capture some more (10+), it is time to stack some of them. With stacks, you improve the tile now , on the same turn, and then you move the squad to the next tile. For example, instead of waiting 3 turns to complete 6 tiles of road with 6 workers, make 2 roads a turn with 2x3 stacks. Depending on your Civ / Era, you might have something like: - 3 workers (6 captured) for 1-turn-road builders in early game. - 4 workers (8 c) for 1-turn-Railroad builders - 8 workers (16 c) for 1-turn-pollution cleaners - X miners, farmers, tree planters, etc. *note that these are grassland/plain values. I like to have several 12 sized squads for heavy duty improvements (like forts) or for basic ones but on high mountains and several smaller squads for hills/forests Such stacks help completing higher priority improvements faster and you get the bonus from that improvement on the same turn. Also, stacking workers in task forces makes it easier to move them around and defend - you deal with ~20 stacks, not ~200 individual units. Having several stacks of 1turn "military" road/railroad-builders with your army is essential to be able to bring reinforcements faster, connect newly captured cities with yuor empire, move your slower units around. fortify positions, etc. Having said all that, I would argue for building road prior any other improvement. You deploy a bunch of 1turn roadster stacks to make the basic roads (if you have Railroad - you make that right after normal road). Then, you send the rest of the force to improve what needs to be improved. I guess cutting natural forests comes as the only thing that should be done before laying the basic road. So if you have to deal with forests, send the choppers first and send the basic road guys with them - on the same turn. This way, whatever needs to be completed (lets say, a mine with railroad), it will be completed on the next turn as once you have basic road, the worker army will get it all done in a single turn. I guess you are aware of this already but since you spent some time defending the other side and never mentioned stacking can be a good thing, I decided to share my thoughts with anyone else who might be interested. Please let me know if you disagree :) 20x
I think I made the case pretty clearly in the video. The "improvement being finished" sooner factor is small compared to the efficiency gains of smaller stacks. Finish a mine a few turns sooner, and you'll net a few shields. Finish a mine more efficiently (consuming fewer worker moves), and you'll be netting dozens of shields throughout the game. Because it means that every single other worker job that that worker does will be completed earlier. Unless you badly need that tile worked immediately for a specific reason (to finish a wonder sooner, a road leading to an invasion, or as you mentioned, reinforcing cities you've taken), you're better off not using stacks. At least until the number of useful tasks left to do is smaller than the number of workers you have. I do use worker stacks. But out of laziness in the late game, not because it's efficient. The exception is railroads. Since you're not wasting worker moves getting to the tiles you want to improve, the logic i mentioned in the video doesn't apply. That means that yes, building railroads using stacks is better, because you can use them sooner at no penalty.
I know this is not a forum or so... but I still have a question. I have in some tiles at a later stage of the game some squares around the tile, and I cannot use it anymore to produce shields or food. Why is this?
@@suedeciviii7142 No it is not pollution. I also considered I built cities to close to each other and the tiles are used by the other city but this is also not the case. Can I send you a screenshot somehow?
If you see this comment, thanks for the cool vids. Did you happen to touch on air combat in any of your videos? I find flak, SAMs, fighters, and bombers kind of confusing. Anti-aircraft seems weak and I also suspect bombing enemy cities is wasteful when they have fighters.
I actually just released a video using the WWII in the Pacific Scenario. It gets a little into the nitty gritty of air combat. I also play multiplayer future start a lot on my stream, but that scenario is modded. In fact, WWII in the Pacific is modified too (lethal land bombard is disabled), and that's because as you mentioned, air combat is super messed up in C3C. It's meant to be overpowered so that the game ends quicker. But if you're curious as to basics: Set a unit to intercept, and it will intercept bombing or airdrops (not recon) anywhere within its operational range. Then combat happens, the intercepting unit's attack stat is what matters (even though they are defending in a sense). You can bomb air units in cities and kill them. You cannot bomb air units in an airbase. So if you're struggling with your fighters being bombed right after being build, then put them in an airbase. Alternatively, put them under some flaks. Flaks, and any other unit with the anti-air stat (like the battleship), have a flat chance of destroying an air unit doing a bombing run on their tile. The bombing unit is destroyed outright, no combat happens. Stealth bombers are 10x less likely to be intercepted, but they fall prey to the antiair stat just as often as non-stealth units. Other than this, flaks behave like any other land unit. Since flaks only guard one tile though, they're pretty useless against a human player. If you airdrop onto a tile occupied by a unit (even a worker!) you lose all the units you dropped with. Hope that helps!
Hmm, so if I'm defending a city against Stealth bombers, it sounds like flak/SAMs are better to have than fighters. Last question if you don't mind before I go find that video: If an enemy bombs my city with five stealth bombers, what is the best number of SAMs to have in that city? 1, 5, or 10+? In other words, do the odds of shooting down bombers go up with lots of anti-air units? Thanks again!
@@Joe-hq9xc It does stack. I looked it up, it seems more flaks are effective until you have 4. Any more than 4 won't increase the odds of a shoot down. And yes, flaks are better against stealth precision bombing, or resource tiles. If they're using stealths to kill crater your tile though, you'd be better off with just a ton of jets. Against a human player, they'd just recon to check which tiles didn't have flaks. You'd have to cover every single tile to be safe if you're using flaks. Usually the AI is predictable enough, it only goes for a select few tiles, few enough that you can cover each with flaks.
Mine everything. Irrigate grassland and the food is wasted to the despotism penalty. After switching out of despotism you can irrigate a couple bonus grasslands.
1. Agricult civs don't get 2 food from irrigatining non-desert tile? 2. What about using 2 workes for even-turned actions? Then a get shileds/food/jungles away in the first twice faster for operating with two tiles and a start benefitis from half of the turns. But I may waste worker's moves probably so how to count what's better? 3. What is the priority of city conection to decrease not only corruption but waste?
1)Agricultural civ tile yields are the same, except they get an extra food in the city center (unless they are in anarchy or despotism and the city isn't on a river or lake), and irrigating desert tiles gives +2 food instead of +1. 2)That works fine. Just remember, the bigger problem is spending more time walking. If you road tiles seperately, and then use worker stacks for irrigation and mines afterwards, that's fine! And it's always ok to waste a few moves if a task is high priority. 3)I assume city connection reduces waste but I'm not sure. I'll experiment with that.
@@user-tr2tc2de8k If non-agricultural, city center is always 2 food. If agricultural and in despotism/anarchy, you get 3 food in your city center if it is next to a river or lake, and 2 food if not. If agricultural and in any other government, the city center always gives 3 food.
Hey Suede. Did you ever played Master of Orion 2? I can't recommend enough that gem. It's several years older then Civ 3, yet provides similar freedom and possibilities. What is even better, the AI don't cheat on higher levels (from my knowledge), yet it plays smarter. Very difficult on highest level. Also, have you played newer Civ's? I kinda liked Civ 4... but 5 and 6 was just pure bordernes for me. At first, I thought that unstacked unit can provide more strategic fun, but then realized it was somewhat boring and unrealistic (they should have at least allow 3-5 units to be in stack, and imho, it would be much better). Also, these games are constantly bombard you with unimportant choice making desitions (like, do you want +5% worker speed, or 10% city happiness). I was like: "wtf... take whatever you want... and let me play... and don't disturb Emperor with this stuf... ever"! But they disturbed me, over and over, until I gave up (I felt like receiving spam mails). Just to make it clear, I never lost games in Civ 5 and 6 (neighter won), and was in pretty good positions most of the time, but I just couldn't find a fun to play them anymore. Your thoughts?
I've played Alpha Centauri before, but never Master of Orion. I haven't played Civ 6 yet. Generally, the way I feel about Civilization is as the series progressed, they added more interesting features and made some good changes, but they also changed the character of the game by making it too gimmicky. By gimmicky, I mean something that's fun when it's new, but not fun when you get used to it. The series was kind of founded on gimmicks. Wonders are really cool, and if well designed they can be both satisfying and well balanced. The worst additions to Civ 3 were gimmicks like military and scientific great leaders. Civ 3 also had a few great features that make the first two games in the series seem unplayable in comparison. The biggest one for me is cultural boundaries. Being able to see your nation's borders just makes the game look very crisp and clean. The tech tree is great, combat is great, and the new victory conditions are good. Civ 4 had some needed improvements, but added more gimmicks. Diplomacy was improved. Civics were solid. Combat experience, as you mentioned, just doesn't seem necessary for an empire management game. Great people were admittedly better designed than in Civ 3, but still gimmicky. Religion was gimmicky. Civ 5 was just over the top. I remember how it was at launch, just a mess. Combat mechanics were ridiculous. Social policies were super gimmicky, as was religion. And the way Civ 5 dealt with Civ traits is just careless. The civs were unbalanced, and were restricted to particular playstyles or else you get nothing from your civilization bonuses. Civ 3 also had the best mechanic for preventing over-expansion. Civ 4 used maintenance, Civ 5 used happiness, Civ 3 used corruption. It doesn't punish you for expanding too fast, it just limits the amount you can gain from those extra cities. It also just makes sense: Those far away cities you conquered are client states/vassals, who pay very little federal taxes unless you take efforts to bring them into your empire (courthouses/police stations, etc.) And I've never had any problem with stack vs stack combat. If you want a combat simulator, play a total war game.
@@suedeciviii7142 Thanks for the info. I've meant specifically Master of Orion 2 (no other versions). Thou, there is a modern remake, that's not too bad, but it's kind of a little boring. As for the first and second Civilization. I also enjoyed them. Still play 1 from time to time (nothing beats the research screen of 1, where scientist shows you what you discovered, music starts, and you see that something important is going on :) ).
Since i just got the game i will just at first try to start to learn my way around it all and get familiar with the game. 6:25 the city outline there at the time mark seems to be like the original one in Civ. 2 but i saw it´s more of a square like shape now in Civ. 3, what´s up with just that.
At first i start to wonder about any city´s ability to expand. So i´m not in the knowing about just how their placements should be. They grow and i just might have put them too closely together.
Low priority generally but yes. Grass forests should be chopped since they might have bonus grasslands. Plains forests are lower priority. But once you get to rails, the bonus on mines and irrigation is doubled. So you want everything chopped unless it's a tundra forest.
Why am I still learning how to play this game 15 years later? Thank you for sharing.
Because this is considered the best Civilization of all-time. I'm still playing this game.
Same, I didn't even know you could move as a stack until last night.
This was my game while growing up and I've been on and off it for years I couldn't work it out without watching these videos I feel like a pro now lol excellent content.
"If you're having trouble on chieftain....there are probably other games-" love the low-key shade being thrown by this slip-up lol
lmao. "Suede says uninstall Civ 3"
@@suedeciviii7142 Nawwww I play on chieftain and Im on 2000AD and my science still in stone age😭😭
I've been playing this game for about 14 years, and I've learned it by trial and error. Now, I like watching your videos, because even tho' I know most of the information, it's still helpful to understand why certain things and features behave the way they do. They would have been more useful for me when I was learning, but keep up the good work, your videos are really enjoyable.
Amazing to see this much interest in such an old game. I keep an old computer going just so I can play this game. Been playing for a long time but after watching a few of your videos, I have not been playing very well.
Same here. I have a pc since 2012 and its only use is to store some old photos and playing this game hahahah
Thank you so much. I've played this game so much over my lifetime, but I could just never really understand it. It felt like I was playing blindly. I appreciate the informative videos you've made! Maybe this time, I'll actually get it.
Nice! Very helpful especially for players who don't know the despotism penalty.
AI worker management is for when you already built up every possible tile and just want pollution cleanup dealt with by AI
RE:Deez Noots. I don't even like automated pollution cleanup unless there are no other tribes at war with me on the same island or continent. Many times I've lost workers to enemies when the workers stupidly decide to locate at the edge of my border to cleanup and an enemy is right across the border. I've even seen my workers cross into enemy turf to clean pollution and get captured. I know, it is a pain to have to do it manually, but it is safer.
@@munsters2 they go into enemy territory to clean stuff? These workers are relly nice
Thank you! Good tips. I never considered that despotism affects a golden age.
One exception I will do if I am trying to beat an enemy to settle near a resource is that while my settler is being built I may road the pathway so my settler can get there quicker.
I didn't even know about despotism penalty before.
Thank you!! I've been looking all over for something like this. I can't seem to find any good videos on CIVIII
great timing for these videos as I'm finally getting into this game
THANK YOU! Please make more tutorials. This was the only good one I found
Thanks for the usefull video. Congratz on 300 subs, keep it up!
Great video!
You don't mention clearing forests - do you have another video that touches on that?
After 500 hours playing I learned here about the happiness and scientific slider KEKW.
This is really cool. Thank you very much. There is a few of tutorials in the Internet.
Thanks, I've been looking for something like this
Love the tutorials! Would like to see more. I have two burning questions: 1- The Palace. What are the ramifications of building or not building a Palace when the people offer to build one for you? Seems like those resources could be used elsewhere. 2- I've always just let the city governor handle stuff while I went on to conquer the world, keeping an eye out and changing production when they get stupid. Sometimes, there is such a small array of things to build you would like to just stop production of units or facilities in the city for a while. What it the best strategy to deal with that in governor mode or do you have to manage the city yourself?
1)The palace building screen (f9) is just a mini-game. It doesn't have any implications on the rest of the game.
(You also have the option of building the "palace" improvement in game. This building moves your capital to the selected city.)
2) I don't use the governor so I'm not the best person to ask here, but can't you just switch to wealth? Or would the governor switch it back?
If that fails, maybe try the "contact governor" button on the screen when you zoom in on the city?
I figured out that in some cities far away from your capital, it's better to irrigate 100%(after leaving despotism of course). Those cities are so far away almost every shield is given to corruption. The only way to get the cities to do anything is to produce tonnes of food and make research from all the specialists you can feed.
Yup, that's a good strat! Usually by that phase of the game I'm too lazy to micro though.
@@suedeciviii7142 I guess it depends on your government(obviously not a good idea in communism). Speaking of which, could you make a short recap on government types? I feel like I have no idea on which ones are better, should I go through anarchy more than once etc...
@@sagiezov3969 I have a video on that! Check my tutorials playlist
Moving workers in stacks might be useful in some circumstances for tiles that take up more turns (roading or mining a mountain, clearing a jungle)
If you're trying to maximize efficiency, no. If you need that particular job done ASAP, then yes.
Although the shorter the job is, the worse the trade-off is for efficiency. So wasting one worker move to complete a road on a gem mountain 9 turns earlier is probable more worth it than wasting one worker move to complete a road on silk forest 3 turns earlier.
Always move stack. U use improved tile. There is almost everytime just 1 needed to improve tile. If more u need more workers
It looks like you didn't mention tundras. If you have engineering, it's (almost) always better to plant a forest on a tundra rather than a mine (can't irrigate a tundra).
Forest = 🍪🔷🔷
Tundra Mine (no RR) = 🍪🔷
However, planting is longer than mining, and if you choose to preserve a tundra forest (before you have engineering) building roads on that will take longer too.
This is probably not **that** useful, as cities engulfed in tundras are stunted by growth, and if it's not near the capital, corruption might make that work worthless.
Complex technical game question:
How exactly does resource spawning work? Are positions predetermined at the start of game, or are they determined after each tech is discovered?
For example, chopping a jungle before steam power would:
*(A)* potentially despawn an invisible coal resource
*(B)* the game would simply "roll the dice" on Jungle/Mountain/Hill tiles after discovery of steam power.
*(C)* # of resources is determined at the creation of the map, but are randomly placed on Jungle/Mountain/Hill tiles after discovery of steam power.
If *(A)* was true, then it might be helpful for savescumming. And *(B)* & *(C)* would be useful becuase planting forests could "create" or "lure" rubber/uranium where you want.
I'm just a bit curious myself. That would be a quite an edge case scenario.
Edit: formatting
All true. I didn't even touch what to do with forests. The most important point is "chop forests on grassland because they're might be a bonus grassland underneath. Forests on plains and tundra are therefor lower priority".
Chopping down jungle won't prevent coal from spawning on that tile. Resources are spawned as soon as the game begins. And, fun fact, the AI can actually "see" those resources from the start of the game. That's why they plant weird tundra/desert cities very early that end up having oil, and why they value those cities highly in diplomacy.
The only tundra cities even worth having(short of grabbing strat/luxury) are those with deer or fish since the extra food lets you work a few forests and get a little bit of production.
not "almost" but "always" it is better to have forest on tundra instead of a mine: 1) forests help battle Gwarming and pollution , 2) from a strategic POV a tundra with forest costs the enemy 2 moves and not just 1 for a mine. That being said, you may want to clear natural forests first to see if they have resources below + to harvest some extra shields for your city and then plant your own trees on top.
There is a case for roading commerceless grassland first so that your city can grow and generate enough revenue for the luxury slider to maintain happiness.
Maybe in some niche cases, where you're building the great library or something, and only have happiness issue in one city. In that case, solving those problems in one city costs you a ton of gold in other cities.
Otherwise (like if you're still on 3 cities), I just run the luxury slider at 50% or whatever and DGAF
Thanks for the work on Civ 3, been playing since Civ 1, 4 is great but the stack of doom just annoyed me. Civ 5 just seemed like the AI was just dumb. Haved 6 but have not played it. Civ 3 i have on disc and installed going to go back to it cause of your fantastic videos.
Good tips. Many thanks.
You know...
I feel like I used to know this, but I just realized I've played five or six games without following this rule.
Wow - great.
That's what I was waiting for. :)
I am playing at Emperor difficulty, and never know the rule "mine green, irrigate brown".
Of course, it doesn't apply to every situation, but keeping that in mind will help me a lot.
Btw, any chance for another video on Emperor difficulty? I really enjoyed last one, and it seems to me, that you can beat any situation on that difficulty (even if you start surrounded by jungle, thundra's, or marches), and yet, Emperor don't force to rush your stuff, like Sid does.
Yeah, I think I'll mostly play on emperor from now on. It's just so much less stressful, and it's easier to explore different areas of the game aside from the same conquest playstyle.
I was thinking I'd find a start with intentionally bad land and play it on emperor.
@@suedeciviii7142 Great.
Ir would be awesome to see how you manage bad lands in a long term.
Do you decided what nation you will take? Any chance to play with Russians?
@@bobankrsmanovic9398 Russians sounds like a good idea.
Can you make a general instructional video for civ3?
Like a video with some basic ideas on how to improve your score, etc.
Here it is if you haven't seen this.
ruclips.net/video/-1A9i20JFBs/видео.html
What do you think about lategame situation, when u have 20 citizens in your city (and big fat cross is filled); but city still can groth: what's better, shields or food, mine or irrigations for some cells? Maximum production with 20 citizens or 25-30 citizens with less production, with overpopulation problems , but with all these additional scientists/tax officers?
Good video but a couple of things I did not see mentioned in the comments. My games have always been on Huge / Emperor+ (mostly Sid...) so dealing with a ton of workers is a regular thing.
Instead of saying "never stack workers", I think the pro tip is to actually STACK your workers in various teams as soon as possible. In early game, it is normal to have all your workers spread out but as soon as you build/capture some more (10+), it is time to stack some of them. With stacks, you improve the tile now , on the same turn, and then you move the squad to the next tile. For example, instead of waiting 3 turns to complete 6 tiles of road with 6 workers, make 2 roads a turn with 2x3 stacks. Depending on your Civ / Era, you might have something like:
- 3 workers (6 captured) for 1-turn-road builders in early game.
- 4 workers (8 c) for 1-turn-Railroad builders
- 8 workers (16 c) for 1-turn-pollution cleaners
- X miners, farmers, tree planters, etc.
*note that these are grassland/plain values. I like to have several 12 sized squads for heavy duty improvements (like forts) or for basic ones but on high mountains and several smaller squads for hills/forests
Such stacks help completing higher priority improvements faster and you get the bonus from that improvement on the same turn. Also, stacking workers in task forces makes it easier to move them around and defend - you deal with ~20 stacks, not ~200 individual units.
Having several stacks of 1turn "military" road/railroad-builders with your army is essential to be able to bring reinforcements faster, connect newly captured cities with yuor empire, move your slower units around. fortify positions, etc.
Having said all that, I would argue for building road prior any other improvement. You deploy a bunch of 1turn roadster stacks to make the basic roads (if you have Railroad - you make that right after normal road). Then, you send the rest of the force to improve what needs to be improved. I guess cutting natural forests comes as the only thing that should be done before laying the basic road. So if you have to deal with forests, send the choppers first and send the basic road guys with them - on the same turn. This way, whatever needs to be completed (lets say, a mine with railroad), it will be completed on the next turn as once you have basic road, the worker army will get it all done in a single turn.
I guess you are aware of this already but since you spent some time defending the other side and never mentioned stacking can be a good thing, I decided to share my thoughts with anyone else who might be interested.
Please let me know if you disagree :)
20x
I think I made the case pretty clearly in the video. The "improvement being finished" sooner factor is small compared to the efficiency gains of smaller stacks. Finish a mine a few turns sooner, and you'll net a few shields. Finish a mine more efficiently (consuming fewer worker moves), and you'll be netting dozens of shields throughout the game. Because it means that every single other worker job that that worker does will be completed earlier.
Unless you badly need that tile worked immediately for a specific reason (to finish a wonder sooner, a road leading to an invasion, or as you mentioned, reinforcing cities you've taken), you're better off not using stacks. At least until the number of useful tasks left to do is smaller than the number of workers you have.
I do use worker stacks. But out of laziness in the late game, not because it's efficient.
The exception is railroads. Since you're not wasting worker moves getting to the tiles you want to improve, the logic i mentioned in the video doesn't apply. That means that yes, building railroads using stacks is better, because you can use them sooner at no penalty.
Very helpful
How to do pull up all the different options for the worker? Usually it jsut shows like the 5 main ones
Preferences menu, advanced unit actions
I know this is not a forum or so... but I still have a question. I have in some tiles at a later stage of the game some squares around the tile, and I cannot use it anymore to produce shields or food. Why is this?
Is it pollution?
@@suedeciviii7142 No it is not pollution. I also considered I built cities to close to each other and the tiles are used by the other city but this is also not the case. Can I send you a screenshot somehow?
@@cassini6600 yes. Send it on twitter (@suedeciviii) or to my email suedeciviii@gmail.com
thank you
If you see this comment, thanks for the cool vids. Did you happen to touch on air combat in any of your videos? I find flak, SAMs, fighters, and bombers kind of confusing. Anti-aircraft seems weak and I also suspect bombing enemy cities is wasteful when they have fighters.
I actually just released a video using the WWII in the Pacific Scenario. It gets a little into the nitty gritty of air combat. I also play multiplayer future start a lot on my stream, but that scenario is modded. In fact, WWII in the Pacific is modified too (lethal land bombard is disabled), and that's because as you mentioned, air combat is super messed up in C3C. It's meant to be overpowered so that the game ends quicker.
But if you're curious as to basics: Set a unit to intercept, and it will intercept bombing or airdrops (not recon) anywhere within its operational range. Then combat happens, the intercepting unit's attack stat is what matters (even though they are defending in a sense).
You can bomb air units in cities and kill them. You cannot bomb air units in an airbase. So if you're struggling with your fighters being bombed right after being build, then put them in an airbase.
Alternatively, put them under some flaks. Flaks, and any other unit with the anti-air stat (like the battleship), have a flat chance of destroying an air unit doing a bombing run on their tile. The bombing unit is destroyed outright, no combat happens. Stealth bombers are 10x less likely to be intercepted, but they fall prey to the antiair stat just as often as non-stealth units. Other than this, flaks behave like any other land unit. Since flaks only guard one tile though, they're pretty useless against a human player.
If you airdrop onto a tile occupied by a unit (even a worker!) you lose all the units you dropped with.
Hope that helps!
Hmm, so if I'm defending a city against Stealth bombers, it sounds like flak/SAMs are better to have than fighters. Last question if you don't mind before I go find that video: If an enemy bombs my city with five stealth bombers, what is the best number of SAMs to have in that city? 1, 5, or 10+? In other words, do the odds of shooting down bombers go up with lots of anti-air units? Thanks again!
@@Joe-hq9xc It does stack. I looked it up, it seems more flaks are effective until you have 4. Any more than 4 won't increase the odds of a shoot down.
And yes, flaks are better against stealth precision bombing, or resource tiles. If they're using stealths to kill crater your tile though, you'd be better off with just a ton of jets.
Against a human player, they'd just recon to check which tiles didn't have flaks. You'd have to cover every single tile to be safe if you're using flaks. Usually the AI is predictable enough, it only goes for a select few tiles, few enough that you can cover each with flaks.
@@suedeciviii7142 Great info. Thanks again.
What if surrounding land is all green no brown/ plain how to choose what to irrigate and what to mine?
Mine everything. Irrigate grassland and the food is wasted to the despotism penalty.
After switching out of despotism you can irrigate a couple bonus grasslands.
@@suedeciviii7142 Thanks for reply mate... People usually dnt reply coz it's very old game 😅😅... 😘😘😘
1. Agricult civs don't get 2 food from irrigatining non-desert tile?
2. What about using 2 workes for even-turned actions? Then a get shileds/food/jungles away in the first twice faster for operating with two tiles and a start benefitis from half of the turns. But I may waste worker's moves probably so how to count what's better?
3. What is the priority of city conection to decrease not only corruption but waste?
1)Agricultural civ tile yields are the same, except they get an extra food in the city center (unless they are in anarchy or despotism and the city isn't on a river or lake), and irrigating desert tiles gives +2 food instead of +1.
2)That works fine. Just remember, the bigger problem is spending more time walking. If you road tiles seperately, and then use worker stacks for irrigation and mines afterwards, that's fine!
And it's always ok to waste a few moves if a task is high priority.
3)I assume city connection reduces waste but I'm not sure. I'll experiment with that.
@@suedeciviii7142 1. If the central tile is next to the river or lake, then it doesn't matter, whether your civ is agricultural or not?
@@user-tr2tc2de8k
If non-agricultural, city center is always 2 food.
If agricultural and in despotism/anarchy, you get 3 food in your city center if it is next to a river or lake, and 2 food if not.
If agricultural and in any other government, the city center always gives 3 food.
Hey Suede. Did you ever played Master of Orion 2?
I can't recommend enough that gem. It's several years older then Civ 3, yet provides similar freedom and possibilities.
What is even better, the AI don't cheat on higher levels (from my knowledge), yet it plays smarter. Very difficult on highest level.
Also, have you played newer Civ's?
I kinda liked Civ 4... but 5 and 6 was just pure bordernes for me. At first, I thought that unstacked unit can provide more strategic fun, but then realized it was somewhat boring and unrealistic (they should have at least allow 3-5 units to be in stack, and imho, it would be much better). Also, these games are constantly bombard you with unimportant choice making desitions (like, do you want +5% worker speed, or 10% city happiness). I was like: "wtf... take whatever you want... and let me play... and don't disturb Emperor with this stuf... ever"! But they disturbed me, over and over, until I gave up (I felt like receiving spam mails).
Just to make it clear, I never lost games in Civ 5 and 6 (neighter won), and was in pretty good positions most of the time, but I just couldn't find a fun to play them anymore.
Your thoughts?
I've played Alpha Centauri before, but never Master of Orion. I haven't played Civ 6 yet.
Generally, the way I feel about Civilization is as the series progressed, they added more interesting features and made some good changes, but they also changed the character of the game by making it too gimmicky. By gimmicky, I mean something that's fun when it's new, but not fun when you get used to it.
The series was kind of founded on gimmicks. Wonders are really cool, and if well designed they can be both satisfying and well balanced. The worst additions to Civ 3 were gimmicks like military and scientific great leaders. Civ 3 also had a few great features that make the first two games in the series seem unplayable in comparison. The biggest one for me is cultural boundaries. Being able to see your nation's borders just makes the game look very crisp and clean. The tech tree is great, combat is great, and the new victory conditions are good.
Civ 4 had some needed improvements, but added more gimmicks. Diplomacy was improved. Civics were solid. Combat experience, as you mentioned, just doesn't seem necessary for an empire management game. Great people were admittedly better designed than in Civ 3, but still gimmicky. Religion was gimmicky.
Civ 5 was just over the top. I remember how it was at launch, just a mess. Combat mechanics were ridiculous. Social policies were super gimmicky, as was religion. And the way Civ 5 dealt with Civ traits is just careless. The civs were unbalanced, and were restricted to particular playstyles or else you get nothing from your civilization bonuses.
Civ 3 also had the best mechanic for preventing over-expansion. Civ 4 used maintenance, Civ 5 used happiness, Civ 3 used corruption. It doesn't punish you for expanding too fast, it just limits the amount you can gain from those extra cities. It also just makes sense: Those far away cities you conquered are client states/vassals, who pay very little federal taxes unless you take efforts to bring them into your empire (courthouses/police stations, etc.)
And I've never had any problem with stack vs stack combat. If you want a combat simulator, play a total war game.
@@suedeciviii7142
Thanks for the info.
I've meant specifically Master of Orion 2 (no other versions). Thou, there is a modern remake, that's not too bad, but it's kind of a little boring.
As for the first and second Civilization. I also enjoyed them. Still play 1 from time to time (nothing beats the research screen of 1, where scientist shows you what you discovered, music starts, and you see that something important is going on :) ).
@@bobankrsmanovic9398 I meant I haven't played any games from the series.
Since i just got the game i will just at first try to start to learn my way around it all and get familiar with the game.
6:25 the city outline there at the time mark seems to be like the original one in Civ. 2 but i saw it´s more of a square like shape now in Civ. 3, what´s up with just that.
I'm not quite clear on what you're referring to. Do you mean the big fat cross pattern?
@@suedeciviii7142 yeah
At first i start to wonder about any city´s ability to expand. So i´m not in the knowing about just how their placements should be. They grow and i just might have put them too closely together.
@@mr.t114 3-5 tiles apart is generally how far you want cities. So 2-4 tiles between cities.
How much time do you spend under despotism?
Depends. As long as you need. You should have a plan to switch to republic but don't switch too early.
and what about forest and jungles? chop always the forest? removing the swamp costs a lot of time...
Low priority generally but yes. Grass forests should be chopped since they might have bonus grasslands. Plains forests are lower priority.
But once you get to rails, the bonus on mines and irrigation is doubled. So you want everything chopped unless it's a tundra forest.
AI decides to only mine all the time when there is a choice between +1 food versus +1 shield. It's a little odd.
If there's no fresh water computer controlled workers will mine.