The Svarts are similar to the Sidar in that they both have bonuses to their Recon units. Where they differ is in how they build their economies and the specific benefits they have.
Sidar have a specialist economy, and have extra mobility on their units. Svartalfar have an Elven forest/cottage economy, and more powerful units. Because of this, the Svartalfar have some different options. For one, you can go for Fellowship of Leaves. While it isn't required - Esus is also strong - it is very good to at least dabble in to get some ancient forests up. However, if the circumstances call for it Guardian of Nature supercities are always quite good.
Additionally, the Svarts can actually afford to focus more on Recon units than the Sidar can. Because of the additional 1 attack strength they can make up for their city attack penalties to an extent, and be powerful front line units. You still need to abuse their mobility (easy with Raiders), and with Faeryl it's still good to grab some arcane support, but you can focus more on religious techs instead of going for a secondary combat unit like mounted units.
However, they don't grow as fast as the Sidar do, nor are they as able to threaten an alpha strike. Sidar can abuse the hell out of aristofarms, while all Elves are tremendously bad with this. Elven aristofarms are simply worse than everyone else's aristofarms. They do the same thing and come out slower. Sidar can also really throw their recon units all over the map with divide soul, allowing for some crazy plays.
If I was playing the Svarts I would probably feel a lot more comfortable with the Calabim, as I also would have raiders and my forests would slow him down considerably. However, the Illians would be scarier because I can't threaten them as quickly, and the Ljosalfar would be a bigger threat as well because I don't have the opportunity to threaten them early on.
I've already talked about the Balseraph. They kind of do a little bit of everything, and don't excel in any one area. They are a bit of a noob trap - you want freaks, and mimics, and courtesans, and puppets, and religion, and suddenly your mages are facing champions, phalanxes, and catapults.
If I was the Balseraph I would probably feel the same about Perpentach (since we would, by definition, be fighting over the same things), I would probably be more scared of the Illians since I don't have an early defense or threat, and the Calabim would still be super scary. Really, I wouldn't want to be near anyone as the Balseraph. I would need to get lucky on a trait switch or pull of some nice diplomacy, because I don't actually think the Balseraphs excel anywhere enough to do well without making their own opening.
I'll actually have to be careful about that - I don't want to help the Balseraph fight a war or something and then not benefit as much
Anyway, there isn't much more to say about them for now.
The Malakim are a large departure from the rest of the civs talked about. The big thing with the Malakim, or at least Varn, is that you loooove religion. Your world spell gives you priests with experience based on how spread your religion is. Spiritual is arcane for divine units, and you have the cool lightbringer, who upgrades into religion units and has sentry. Your pagan temple replacement also gives bonus experience to divine units.
Deserts, while still awful, are at least usable by you. It's nice because you can scorch defensively and not lose out as much and you can have cities in places other players wouldn't be able to support.
I would probably have gone for early runes or OO, and then switch into Empyrean much later. Being spiritual is a huge help in that - I can afford to switch often because I have no anarchy. Aristograrianism would come online faster because of that as well.
I wouldn't be as scared of the Calabim. There is a window of opportunity where they can attack me and I'm weak, but if the map is heavily water based, or I can scorch out enough desert barriers, or if he delays I can have some really powerful priests running around. I might even splash order for bless on my units.
The natural way to accompany these units is to go down the melee line to get the different metals, as well as horseback riding for mobility. Just get a bunch of religious priests and melee units, and make use of all the religious spells. Get Empyrean high priests, a few order priests, potentially some cultists, pump out a chalid, some runes priests, and I have a very tough army.
A lot of that comes from the fact that non-AV priests tend to have support spells. Bless, shield of faith, tiger summons, water walking. All of those are really good, but get better if you can stack them on top of already good units. I would probably try for an altar victory, or at least go down that path. It just synergizes perfectly - aristofarms to power out priests, who power out altar pieces, who make the priests and divine units I already want even better, which makes me safer and more able to afford priest specialists, and so on and so forth.
Elves would be a threat, because they can spiral out of control and my game plan doesn't really peak until high priests. I could threaten Thessa, but only at great cost. Balseraphs would be annoying, but it really depends on what they do. I wouldn't have been scared of them in particular. Illians would be less scary, because as long as I can reach a religion I can get free units from my world spell to defend with, all without diverging from my intended tech route.
Once again the elven economy would be the ultimate goal here. Unlike Thessa, Arendel doesn't have traits as strong at building, and spiritual pushes me towards the divine line rather than the arcane line. Creative isn't as good for late game building, but it really helps skyrocket early territory control. I would probably rush up to WotF to get my world spell and settle very aggressively. As long as I got my world spell up in time no one can really threaten me, and I would then try to just sit back and let my elven economy grow me to victory.
The biggest threat would be shortly after everyone finishes expanding. I would still be trying to consolidate my empire, I would have stepped on some toes, and I would be spread thin with only a single bullet to defend myself. If the other players were smart they could bait out my March of the Trees and then just threaten my again a few turns later. However, good diplomacy would be a huge help here. If I only had to defend on part of my empire, or if I could afford to save my march until they get too deep, I would be in a much better position.
I would probably go for archers with my priests. Satyrs could then be added and used for any aggressive moves, including picking off enemies who wander too close. Archers would be my bread and butter fighters, while priests offer up a constant wave of disposable tigers. I wouldn't feel too required to get mages, because if I played correctly I shouldn't need to fight anyone, so collateral isn't as important.
Illians are scary to the Ljosalfar, but I could rush into WotF, switch to conquest/nationalism, or go for lots of archers and Gilden. I wouldn't be too worried about them. Balseraphs I would watch out for, but as long as I avoid letting them team up with someone against me I would feel safe. Calabim would be super scary, but I would have a lot of ability to pressure them into attacking someone else. It just isn't fun to attack into ancient forests, archers, and endless waves of disposable tigers. The enemy Thessa would be a problem, but it would mostly be a race to see who is a better builder. My creative priests, or Thessa's expansionistic mages. It would really suck to fall behind though, because there really isn't any way to fight back if she gets ahead. The best I could probably try to do is rush out an altar victory before she can get the tower of mastery up and running.
0. Player Requests: The player's requests take precedence, even if they contradict the following guidelines.
1. Balance: The map must be balanced, both in regards to land quality and availability and in regards to special civilization features. A map may be wonderfully unique and surprising, but, if it is unbalanced, the game will suffer and the player's enjoyment will not be as high as it could be.
2. Identity and Enjoyment: The map should be interesting to play at all levels, from city placement and management to the border-created interactions between civilizations, and should include varied terrain. Flavor should enhance the inherent pleasure resulting from the underlying tile arrangements. The map should not be exceedingly lush, but it is better to err on the lush side than on the poor side when placing terrain.
3. Feel (Avoiding Gimmicks): The map should not be overwhelmed or dominated by the mapmaker's flavor. Embellishment of the map through the use of special improvements, barbarian units, and abnormal terrain can enhance the identity and enjoyment of the map, but should take a backseat to the more normal aspects of the map. The game should usually not revolve around the flavor, but merely be accented by it.
4. Realism: Where possible, the terrain of the map should be realistic. Jungles on desert tiles, or even next to desert tiles, should therefore have a very specific reason for existing. Rivers should run downhill or across level ground into bodies of water. Irrigated terrain should have a higher grassland to plains ratio than dry terrain. Mountain chains should cast rain shadows. Islands, mountains, and peninsulas should follow logical plate tectonics.
Your start, with the traditional caveat that I reserve the right to change pretty much anything expect your civ and leader:
Happy planning!
Merovech's Mapmaking Guidelines:
0. Player Requests: The player's requests take precedence, even if they contradict the following guidelines.
1. Balance: The map must be balanced, both in regards to land quality and availability and in regards to special civilization features. A map may be wonderfully unique and surprising, but, if it is unbalanced, the game will suffer and the player's enjoyment will not be as high as it could be.
2. Identity and Enjoyment: The map should be interesting to play at all levels, from city placement and management to the border-created interactions between civilizations, and should include varied terrain. Flavor should enhance the inherent pleasure resulting from the underlying tile arrangements. The map should not be exceedingly lush, but it is better to err on the lush side than on the poor side when placing terrain.
3. Feel (Avoiding Gimmicks): The map should not be overwhelmed or dominated by the mapmaker's flavor. Embellishment of the map through the use of special improvements, barbarian units, and abnormal terrain can enhance the identity and enjoyment of the map, but should take a backseat to the more normal aspects of the map. The game should usually not revolve around the flavor, but merely be accented by it.
4. Realism: Where possible, the terrain of the map should be realistic. Jungles on desert tiles, or even next to desert tiles, should therefore have a very specific reason for existing. Rivers should run downhill or across level ground into bodies of water. Irrigated terrain should have a higher grassland to plains ratio than dry terrain. Mountain chains should cast rain shadows. Islands, mountains, and peninsulas should follow logical plate tectonics.
So I have what looks to be two scouts (at least one is a hero scout), a settler with the starting bonus, a warrior, and supplies. I can see land to the northwest, although I can't tell if it's the same landmass or not.
I'll probably send a scout into the hill 1E to see what I can find. Right now I think 2S1E has potential if there is a river or other resource in the fog. It would save me from having to research fishing early on. However, without another resource or some river it would be a poor city outside of the resources. Lots of tiles I can't really farm up usefully.
Maybe I'll find something NE as well. The river is up there, and I think that looks like a flood plain (<3 flood plains).
As for the supplies, I think I'll save that for a hunting lodge, potentially in my second city.
Finally, I need to switch out of pacifism if Merovech hasn't done that for me, so I can afford to wait a turn to settle, since I have anarchy regardless.
Also, if I see lots of barbs I might use my world spell immediately. Being able to freely explore with my starting units is a huge bonus, although it does give up my ability to use the world spell later on (like potentially the cheesy Into the Mist -> run to enemy capitol -> declare war -> CoE keeps my units there, immediately take capitol.)
Avoid the Illian rush. Ideally this means not being his target, but if he goes after me I can survive. Divided souls will easily be ready by the time a PoW rush is coming for me, and I can use them to force him home. If he leaves any priests alone I can probably assassinate them as well.
Then it's just build up time. I want aristograrianism running early to power my tech through most of the game. I also want to start producing adepts. No matter what adepts will be useful - either as mages later if I need them, or wanes if war doesn't seem to come.
I can tech up the recon path if I mainly have trouble with barbarians, or if I want to pressure others. I can also tech up for horse archers if I want to start being aggressive. Ideally though I tech up the econ branch of the tree. Get some council of Esus tech up, grab a Gibbon, maybe some shadows to be fancy with, and try to push a tech advantage.
Once I can get shadowriders on the field I will have hit my high point. Shadowriders with powerful recon units dancing around and mages in the back will be extremely powerful. I can either try to take someone out, or at the very least threaten people and force concessions. The biggest advantage I will have is that my force is extremely hard to catch - even if I get declared on I should be able to keep most of the fighting away from my lands just by constantly running through enemy lands.
After that I need to reach for a win condition. I could run up the arcane branch and go for ToM, I could go for militaristic win, or I could try to cheese out a culture win with liberty. If the elves and calabim drop out I might be able to cheese out a religious win, but as long as anyone is going for a non-Esus religion I can't really do anything about it.
____
My goals with diplomacy are thus:
Try to avoid the Illians. I gain nothing by fighting them, and I also gain little from allying them.
Try to fight the Ljosalfar. They will out-build me in the late game. I want them taken out or crippled before that happens.
Try to ally the Calabim. They are the most threatening civ in the mid game, and thus are very useful (and scary.) However, I expect to out-build them in the late game.
Try to figure out the Balseraph. They are an X factor right now, because they could really do anything.
However, I will take anything I can get. If the Calabim are breathing down my neck and I need to ally the Elves to survive, I will do so. If the Illians become a huge power I will try to win them to my side. I might not even need to worry about the Illians at all this game, depending on how builder friendly and rusher unfriendly the map is.
___
Some world wonders I might want to grab:
The Great Library, Syliven's Perfect Lyre (move it around to win culture wars anywhere), Crown of Akharien, Guild of Hammers, Nox Noctis.
TGL and GoH are great because they improve my specialists further. If I get both I can make some pretty dramatic switches in my empire as well. Run a bunch of scientists until I reach my desired tech, and then switch all of that into production instantly. Other Civs can only dream of such a sudden shift. They would also keep my aristofarms competitive the whole game, without forcing me to resort to other means. In fact, I could shift out of Aristocracy to get that extra food once my cities are happy enough, and just run more super specialists.
The Lyre and Crown are just pretty good in general. The Lyre I like a lot just because I can move it to any new or newly captured city and instantly get a huge amount of culture there. It isn't as important as the rest though.
Nox Noctis is just good, and I can grab it off a merchant so I don't have to run any crappy priest specialists. Perhaps even the mercantilism free GM.
Not at all! Welcome aboard! I was hoping to grab a ded-lurker at some point.
As for my skill level: I've played a lot of CivIV and EitB, so I have good knowledge of the game. I generally know what everything does and have ideas on how to use it.
When I do SP I rarely actually challenge myself that much, so I've mostly done Prince difficulty, although I don't doubt that I could easily go up at least one and probably two difficulty levels with no issue.
My biggest weakness will come from multiplayer skills - I've only really done SP Civ, so I don't have as much experience facing people who can tech alongside me and make good decisions along the way. However, I have read through a bunch of PBEMs so I'm not completely blind. For example, I figured out that recon is much better in multiplayer because you can actually threaten cities/workers, instead of watching the enemy have an army at every city :P
![[Image: Sidar%20Start.png]](http://dl.dropbox.com/u/110995178/Sidar%20Start.png)
