AU 206: Gallic Glory - Stories and Strategy Tips

alexman · February 27, 2003, 13:27

Did you bring Glory to the Celts, and honor to their Gallic Swordsman? Did you outRalph your opponents? Post your stories for Gallic Glory in this thread.

Dominae · February 27, 2003, 17:57

Figured I should get a head start on this one, since I've got a pretty busy week next week.

First off, thanks alexman for setting this thing up. Those little touches that you add to the scenarios are always welcome.

Hm, a game as Ralph, eh? I decided right away that I would not be "ralphing" this time. Although I really should try this strategy out, I think I'll be one of the few that will not do so in this scenario, making my experience good for comparison.

I originally thought I should research Mysticism first, seeing as 1) there is only one other Religious civ and 2) Monarchy is a good government to be in as the Celts. Then I come to my senses and realise this is (yet again) a perfect start location for Granary-REX. I click Pottery and queue up a Warrior.

Micro-management sidenote: I assume most people settled the start location, and sent the Worker to improve a Bonus Grassland. But did you all switch the Laborer from the Game Forest to the Bonus Grassland when there were 6 Shields accumulated? Doing so completes the Warrior at the same time, but results in two extra Commerce. Not a big difference, but something I thought I should point out.

The first Warrior done, I remember that the Celts are Militaristic by noting I can build Archers immediately. Whenever I think of Sir Ralph, I think "Archer Rush", so I queue up an Archer. I figure I can get in Warrior-Archer-Warrior before I start the pre-building the Granary. My Archer rush implementation is a bit different from Sir Ralph's however: I'll usually build 2-4 Regular Archers and harass my nearest opponent, something I'll dub "Super-Duper Archer Rush", although I'm not in any way expecting the name to stick.

My first Warrrior meets the Indians just as my first Archer is done. The Indians apparently already have Warrior Code, so I have absolutely no trading material other than 10 gold. In addition, Ghandi's got Bronze Working, Alphabet (Commercial) and Pottery! Did he start with a ring of Goody Huts around his capital?! Sigh.

But I quickly come up with a plan to turn this lemon into lemonade. I move my Warrior in next to an unprotected Worker while my Archer begins a beeline for Delhi. I nab the Worker the next turn. My Warrior is left facing two Indian Warriors, and manages to kill one and take the other down to 2 HPs. The bopped Worker begins a slow trek through the Mountains and Jungle, luring the remaining Indian forces away from the real action. My Archer arrives a few turns later, in time to see I've missed my chance to Settler bop as well. Darn.

Then I bite the bullet. I attack Delhi, which is defended with a Spearmen at this point, with my lone Archer. Yup, Delhi is on a Hill and those are not very good odds. But, knowing the AI, I figure I'll be able to sue for peace before Ghandi's Warriors reach my capital (I also have some insurance: by the time they get there, I'll have completed my Granary, and have some extra time to build up a 2-Warrior defensive force). The gamble essentially comes down to the fact that I have an ~25% chance of putting myself way ahead of the game early on, and a 75% chance of losing an Archer and ruining my relationship with India, but with (probably) no other real drawbacks.

And it works!

My Archer defeats the Spearmen without a single HP lost, and bops India's recently-completed Settler at this same time, plus another Worker! So now I'm up four (foreign) Workers, plus Delhi and down a Warrior. Quite lucky, I admit, but not blind luck.

Dominae · February 27, 2003, 18:03

But the fun is not over yet! India is now crippled, and quite ready to listen to my terms. I contact Ghandi, who gives me everything he's got (other than his only city), just so that my lone Archer will not unleash its fury upon him once again. Although you cannot see it in the screenshot, I get another 2 Workers from India, so that's a total of 5 extra (foreign) Workers by 2900BC!

Well, I'm off to a great start, with the help of a little luck. I'll post a full AAR in a few days, when I get the time to play some more.

Dominae · February 27, 2003, 21:41

I was trying to figure out if this is funny...then I realised it's hilarious. alexman, you're really trying to prove the Celts suck, eh?

badams52 · February 27, 2003, 23:28

When I first downloaded the AU206 1.29f version, I found I could not build warriors, only archers, workers and settlers, so I started a game without warriors. I built my archers and started exploring and looky what I found...

alexman · February 27, 2003, 23:39

And for what do you need iron? I thought you had the game wrapped up before Gallic Swordsmen!

Seriously though, impressive opening, Dominae. I rarely fight that early, and I really should do it more often. Even so, I would have settled for peace after I got the worker. I'm not big on early risks.

I was debating whether it was better to move the worker to chop the forest first, or mine the grassland first, as you did. It turns out what you did was the better choice.

Keep us posted!

badams52 · February 27, 2003, 23:40

This was too good for me to pass up. A chance to eliminate Beijing before they get a chance to get too big! Huge Mistake #1: Mao sees my archer heading for Beijing and calls me up to say get off my land. Then forgetting it's Mao's turn I negotiate asking for peace for his masonry. When he doesn't give it I declare war.

Immediately Mao moves in an extra warrior.

Oh well, I've come this far, so I attack and kill his warrior in Beijing taking a little damage.

Unfortunately, the God's didn't smile on my quick attack and Mao's other warrior attacked

and killed my archer.

I quickly recall my other archer back to the homeland for defense (my only other archer at the time) and build others like mad.

Mao's 2 archers approached Alesia. I move one archer into Alesia just in time while my other 2 attack his archers, but once again, God didn't look favorably on my quick attack and both archers fall.

Mao lost no time in taking Alesia and Entremont quickly. Next time, I play with warriors.

I was just too tempted to use my archer scout to attack when Mao wouldn't be expecting it. Had I won the attack...would have been a great start for me!!!

Dominae · February 27, 2003, 23:59

alexman, re: chopping or mining, I've found it better to Mine a couple of Bonus Grassland tiles before chopping any Forest, if the goal is an early Granary. An early chop does get you 10 Shields ahead, but the extra Food does not actually let you grow fast enough to make up for the lost Shields from the absence of mines. In this game, I went Mine-Road-Mine-Road-Chop-Irrigate-Road, allowing 2 Warriors and a Archer before the Granary. I think that's pretty close to an ideal opening, barring any 3-Cattle crazyness. Thanks for giving it to us!

badams52, your game was too weird to continue, IMO. Things are pretty difficult without Warriors without even considering the fact that you could not upgrade to Gallics. What you did with the Archer was essentially what I did, though, only you got lucked out. You certainly had better chances taking the city, but my backup was better: I knew India had no Archers, and counted how many Warriors they should have. I was pretty confident in my chances with the counter-attack.

By the way, does anyone know when a respawned civ respawns? I'm thinking that I wiped India out before they founded their second city, and when I contacted them the turn of their demise, they had already respawned. This would explain their large number of Workers (4 by 2900BC, plus 2 Settlers). If so, I smell something close to an exploit: whenever you destroy a civ and it respawns, you can contact it immediately and get their bonus Workers (I'm playing Emperor). That's pretty abusive in the early-game...

Dominae

Arrian · February 28, 2003, 10:03

Dominae beat me to the punch: I'm not Ralphing either, and I opened almost as aggressively as he did.

Stock PtW, Monarch. 4 to 5 tile city spacing.

The first border I saw was to my north (China). I had two warriors moving in that direction anyway, so I ordered a third to follow. As 2 of my warriors were moving into position to bop a Chinese settler team, the other northern warrior popped a hut and received... a settler! So building 5 warriors, barracks, archer in Entremont prior to my first settler didn't hurt expansion much.

I mined/roaded 2 bonus grass before chopping the game forest, btw. Never did build a granary.

I used my free settler to build my 2nd city on the river just south of Beijing: next to a hill that I later discovered had iron. Meanwhile, my quick war vs. China ended. I didn't get much from them (besides, of course, two slaves and the fact they were now hurt). I built some more cities, and meanwhile met the Persians and Indians. I popped Bronzeworking from a hut, which was nice, as I researched Mysticism to start. I then did IW as fast as I could, then dropped back to minimum research toward Monarchy.

I wandered up to Persia with a reg warrior and vet archer, and decided to mess with them too. I broke a bunch of terrain developments near Persopolis (thus delaying their hooking up iron by a bunch of turns) and made a favorable peace, though I lost my 2 units. Then the Indians beat my settler to a spot (well, 1 tile over) I wanted, so I took the 3 archers I had in that area and broke their new city, and killed a bunch of their units. Peace provided me with some tech and contact with Rome.

All this time, my cities were buildling temples, barracks, warriors. Occasional spears and archers.

Next, I archer attacked India again, but... FAILED! I lost a goodly number of archers and didn't manage to take a single city. *shrug*

At this point, my empire was straining under my military expenditure. I had built up 1200+ gold, but was now starting to lose gpt. Though I was still ~10 turns from Monarchy, I decided it was time. 15 Gallic Swordsmen marched into Persia. Persia was my target because not only had Persopolis built the Colossus, but also the Pyramids! I saw 1 immortal. He died, on defense. I also generated my 1st Great Leader, who made an army (I know, I know, I advocate 1st leader = FP, but this was different).

I left them with 1 city and wheeled on India, switching to Monarchy in the process. I knocked them down to 1 city. I also generated leader #2. My forces continued southward, and invaded Rome. The Leader marched with them. I broke through the mountainous chokepoint with little resistance (1 spear on a mountain, who died to my 2xGallic army) and captured several cities. I decided I wanted my FP on the River north of Rome (you know how there is 1 plains tile on that river, next to the cow? That's where I moved a badly placed Roman city and rushed the FP).

It is now 400AD. My forces are preparing to march on Rome itself. The FP is down. The Pyramids, Colossus and Great Lighthouse (heh, I actually built that and have yet to build a galley, silly me) are mine. I'm a Monarchy, and am just finishing research on Construction, which will kick me into the Middle Ages. I have all but destroyed 2 of my 4 neighbors, am actively butchering a 3rd, and the 4th was rendered toothless ~2500bc.

The Americans, somewhere overseas, have made their presence felt by building the Great Library and Great Wall.

In any case, I do not feel the unit needs "fixing." As both Nathan and I have said, Militaristic + dominant unit = more than the sum of the parts. The extra cost just helps balance things out.

-Arrian

alexman · February 28, 2003, 10:04

Quote:

Originally posted by Dominae
alexman, re: chopping or mining, I've found it better to Mine a couple of Bonus Grassland tiles before chopping any Forest, if the goal is an early Granary. An early chop does get you 10 Shields ahead, but the extra Food does not actually let you grow fast enough to make up for the lost Shields from the absence of mines.

Of course this all might change when you have an industrious civ, where having a worker chop a forest gives an average of two extra shields per turn instead of one from that chop, and finishes in time to improve another tile even before the gity grows.

Arrian · February 28, 2003, 10:06

Dominae,

Yeah, the respawn immediately - the same turn you "destroy" them. They get 100 gold, several techs, workers, etc. My friend Tom loves nailing civs with warrior rushes and then getting that 100 gold & the workers for peace. He does it often.

Exploit? Maybe, maybe not.

I typically don't open quite as aggressively as he does... but my later aggression makes up for it.

-Arrian

Dominae · February 28, 2003, 10:12

Quote:

Originally posted by alexman
Of course this all might change when you have an industrious civ, where having a worker chop a forest gives an average of two extra shields per turn instead of one from that chop, and finishes in time to improve another tile even before the gity grows.

Yes, I was only considering the non-Industrious case.

Do you know the answer to my respawn question? Anyone else?

Arrian: nice opening. You really are bloodthirsty! I'm about at the same position now you were at before you got your Gallics: 800 gold, 12 Vet. Warriors ready for upgrade, nowhere to expand to but into China or the jungle.

Dominae

alexman · February 28, 2003, 10:12

Great game, Arrian!

I like your decision to go for an Army instead of a FP in this case. I get shivers just thinking of a GS Army.

Dominae · February 28, 2003, 10:15

Quote:

Originally posted by Arrian
Yeah, the respawn immediately - the same turn you "destroy" them. They get 100 gold, several techs, workers, etc. My friend Tom loves nailing civs with warrior rushes and then getting that 100 gold & the workers for peace. He does it often.

Thanks for the response, Arrian.

Surely this is not an exploit, since you still have to succeed in an very early rush. But the rewards are too high, IMO: 100 gold, 2 Workers, techs, all guaranteed because the AI is in its submissive mode. An easy fix would be to reset the AI's behaviour towards you when it respawns. Or, better, you lose contact with a civ when you destroy it and it respawns.

Dominae

Arrian · February 28, 2003, 10:21

Dominae,

After city #2 up by China, I built 2 cities inbetween there and Entremont, while also expanding eastward to cut off the Persians. Persia beat me to the horse on the southern end of their pennisula, but I built a city on a hill 2 tiles south of that horse. I had it build a temple, a barracks, walls, and lots of spearmen - just in case.

I also built into the jungle a bit - the Indian city I razed was ESE of me... down by the grassland wheat. I built right near there. I also built a city in the middle of the jungle on the river south of Entremont and just had him use the gold mountain for a few hundred years.

I actually didn't get around to building a city SW of Entremont for a long time - Persia beat me to the spot, which was the final "go, no-go" decision maker for my first GS war.

I had actually built more than 15 vet warriors. I could afford to upgrade 15, but I then upgraded perhaps 8 more piecemeal as the money came in. Still, even with that and manually built reinforcements and some horsemen to soften casualties... I don't have all that many left. Rome's still going down, though. They never did hook up iron

so I'm facing archers & spears.

Alexman,

Just wait until I get another leader from a GS... he too will join my army, giving me 14hp of GS (2 elite* + one vet) to throw around. Muwahahaha!

-Arrian

Arrian · February 28, 2003, 10:24

Dominae,

It should be the second thing you mentioned. In CivII, when you destroyed a civ early, they respawned as a totally different civ, often on another continent.

In CivIII, for whatever reason, the respawned civ is the same, and they remember you and still have contact with you. Bizarre.

I had a game once where I tried an early rush (this was back on Regent, maybe even Warlord) and succeded in nailing Babylon. Yet, they lived! But I couldn't find them, and they wouldn't make peace. 20 turns later a stack of bowmen showed up (given free by the respawn) and whooped my ass. The civ had actually gotten STRONGER by repopping.

-Arrian

Dominae · February 28, 2003, 10:27

Quote:

Originally posted by Arrian
The civ had actually gotten STRONGER by repopping.

India got a tech lead on me under 30 turns after I razed their capital and took all their free goodies. Sigh.

Dominae

Arrian · February 28, 2003, 10:29

Gotta love Emperor, huh?

Another thing I forgot to mention: I had some trading luck. After I beat up India the first time, I got contact with Rome. I established an embassy and then called them up to chat. I discovered, much to my surprise, than they had built up over 120 gold and didn't have alphabet or pottery. I traded them those two for all their gold. I later gave them Mysticism or something equally unimportant for 55 more gold and a world map. Poor, nice, accomodating Caesar.

-Arrian

Artifex · February 28, 2003, 10:36

One thing I have noticed about the gallic swordsmen and ancient units in general is that they are rendered much less useful on high levels like emperor. I play emperor and this units window of oppurtunity is miniscule before the AI reaches feudalism and fortifies its cities with tons of pikemen.

On high levels the AI will reach feaudalism lightning quick. Once feudalism is reached any AI with any sort of decent power or land will render this unit useless, pretty much.

The point is the window to use the GS on emperor level for me at least is always so small I am lucky to conquer one little civ and secure maybe 1/3rd of the continent with it (standard map large landmass).

Then I am basically looking at a couple of real powerful neighbors and I have a useless army I might as well disband. Sorry but Swordsmen going up against 2-3 fortified pikemen in cities get slaughtered. By the time oen civ gets feaudalism (usually frighteningly quick) then trades it to every other civ the same turn..your army goes from being powerful to a joke.

So this unit would be powerful on lower levels when your oponents don't gain techs lightning quick and reach feudalism in no time at all.

On emperor it is weak, by the time you get a good force of them (they aren't cheap) and are ready to go on a spree..opps the ai gets feaudalism. Game over.

Never forget how quickly the AI gains and trades techs on emperor....they get feudalism very fast.

Anyone else see this?

Arrian · February 28, 2003, 10:37

I was toying with an idea as I was trying to fall asleep last night... and I'd like to know what you guys think.

The only scientific civ I know is Persia. They have 2 cities at this point. They are behind me in tech, as I am on the cusp of the Medieval Age.

I know that there is something like a 90% chance that they would get Monotheism free upon entering that age. I, meanwhile wish to research feudalism so my next leader may rush Sun Tzu. But I'm vaguely concerned about America "over there" builing the Sistine - so I want Monotheism quickly too.

What if I gift Persia the techs needed to get to the middle ages, and then try to extort Monotheism? Do you think it would work? Or, after two wars with me and the high price of that tech, would they just go out fighting and refuse to fork it over?

-Arrian

Arrian · February 28, 2003, 10:40

Artifex,

Yeah, that's a problem on Emp.

The only solution I see is to try targetted archer strikes to prevent as many neighbors as possible from hooking up iron. No iron, and feudalism is useless.

I know it isn't an easy thing to do by any means, but it's the only thing I can think of.

-Arrian

Dominae · February 28, 2003, 11:19

Arrian, re: giving techs to Persia, it depends. Is Persia weak? If so, beat them down real small, gift them the techs, then extort Monotheism (your original plan). If you're not going to deal with Persia fast, though, I would recommend against ushering them into the second age.

Artifex, I disagree with your point. I'm playing Emperor and I think my Gallics will be plenty useful. My AAR will tell. You can attribute this to my lucky start, but the fact is that early units are still useful on Emperor. In the 'Son of SVC' AU, most people played Emperor and had to use Legions to fight their way up the tech tree (it's a metaphor, if you know what I mean - Ani reference). Anyway, in general, it is not the case that mid-early UUs get the shaft at Emperor because the AI is so quick. And if your nearest neighbor is overly powerful, that's the nature of the game; you cannot expect your UU to run over the opposition every single game (unless you're play the Germans...that's different).

Dominae

Arrian · February 28, 2003, 11:43

Dominae,

As my (rather long-winded, I admit) earlier post explained, the Persians have 2 cities. That qualifies as weak, I think. At the very least, I figure I can renogotiate a peace treaty and get the tech on the cheap.

Unfortunately, I won't be able to play any more until Sunday, since I'll be away for the weekend.

-Arrian

nbarclay · February 28, 2003, 12:27

I didn't have nearly Dominae's luck with archers. I actually went with a very early archer rush strategy trying to take out China instead of my usual granary-REX strategy, but China had good luck with promotions when my archers failed to kill their spearmen and it was my third war with China before I could accomplish anything more than razing a city too small to survive (per war) and a bit of extortion. (My losses were simply too high for my attacks to continue.) In the end, I did take Beijing and extort a couple cities, albeit cities far enough away for corruption to be a big deal. That also bought me some room to expand.

I researched most of the way to Pottery and then ended up trading for the rest of it plus ten gold. Next, I researched Mysticism at maximum rate before settling back going for Polytheism and Monarchy on the 40-turn plan. That left me with enough gold to upgrade 15 of a little over 25 vet warriors I'd built. (I also had an unconnected city in the jungle that had a barracks and could keep building vet warriors.) Unfortunately, Rome was the only one of my three significant rivals that hadn't gotten Monarchy yet, so I couldn't trade it for nearly as much as I'd hoped for.

With Monarchy in place and Iron connected a turn later (I got the supply along the former Chinese border), it was time to do some damage with GS's. I sent my archer force with a spearman to deal with China's cities on the north of the continent and used GS's to take their capital. I then had a brief war with Persia to take a city they'd founded near the Chinese iron and one other city before making peace to acquire Literature so I could build the Great Library with a newly acquired leader. (GS's are fantastic against immortals!)

Next, it was India's turn. I switched to Republic when I got it from the Great Library, and war weariness started causing problems before I could finish them off, but they're down to three cities. And my Gallic Swordsman force is up to 38 after focusing my production on them for an entire GA. (I even have a handful of warriors left.)

I think it's time to gamble on an Arrian Deception attempt in an effort to take out Persia before they get Feudalism (or at least before they can do much upgrading with it). My war with India only lasted halfway through the peace treaty with Persia, and I really don't want to give them extra time. Of course that does mean I'll have to make heavy use of suicide galleys trying to meet the other continent so I can make use of the Great Library (making sure not to trade contact with the civs on my own continent, of course), but once I capture Persia's Great Lighthouse, that should be at least a little easier.

My preliminary analysis of Gallic Swordsmen is that they are definitely worth using. Their speed makes for quicker wars and rapid movement from one front to another, and their ability to retreat makes their survivability a good bit better when they lose. And after my archer campaigns in the early game, having enough vet warriors just for my initial upgrade would have been a problem with conventional swordsmen, but GS's give a lot more mileage out of each warrior upgraded. (Not to mention the effect larger numbers of conventional swordsmen - and the warriors to upgrade to them - would have had on my budget.) I think given the choices available, 50 is the right cost for them; drop it to 40 and they'd be too overpowering when used correctly. (If only the cost were changed, I'd have more than 50 of the things ready to rampage over the rest of the continent at this point, albeit at the expense of completely ignoring marketplaces and libraries thus far.)

Here's the southern part of my empire in 190 AD.

Nathan

Dominae · February 28, 2003, 12:54

I would like to support one of Nathan's comments: the Gallic is well-priced at 50 Shields, because any lower and it would be a no-brainer to just put all cities on Gallics until the continent is secure. They're the best unit of the era in terms of stats, which means they trounce the AI in open combat. At 50 Shields, however, they force the player to seriously commit to using them, at the expense of other projects. Any lower and it would quickly become obvious that a NIC-type game is all that's required.

Dominae

nbarclay · February 28, 2003, 12:59

They trounce conventional AI units in open combat. Hoplites, Numidians, or Legionaries could be a whole different ball game. My plans for Rome involve large-scale horseman-to-knight upgrades (once I take a horse city from Persia), using knights against legionaries and my surviving Gallic Swordsmen against lesser units. Edit: If things work out right, I may try to use a leader to rush Leo's before doing the knight upgrades, though.

Arrian · February 28, 2003, 13:25

Nathan,

Good work. Especially in light of poor luck with your archers. 38! GS's, huh? Wow. I used a good chunk of my GA to get marketplaces & libraries down in my core cities, so my troop strength is lower. Is Persia your next target? Or are you saving everything you've got for Rome, and mop-up later?

Damn, your screenshot gave some geography away (I see brown in the SE). Luckily, I will most likely have forgotten all about that by Sunday, when I can play again.

Dominae,

Quote:

At 50 Shields, however, they force the player to seriously commit to using them, at the expense of other projects.

Seriously. Also, losses are excruciatingly painful. When you lose a unit worth 50 shields to a regular archer (GS attacking), it hurts. I'm used to campaigns as Japan or China using hordes of horsemen, where losses are somewhat higher, but sooooo much easier to replace. I still prefer those civs to the Celts.

-Arrian

Dominae · February 28, 2003, 13:29

Quote:

Originally posted by nbarclay
They trounce conventional AI units in open combat. Hoplites, Numidians, or Legionaries could be a whole different ball game.

By "open combat", I mean non-siege combat. In my experience, defeating an AI civ involves routing its standing army. Once they go into "defense mode", you've won the war. All you need to do is amass sufficient units at each city to overcome the standard number of defenders (typically 2 plus an Archer/Catapult, more in a capital or Wonder city).

I believe this still applies to the units you mentioned. A human player can run circles around 3-defense units (sometimes literally), waiting for the right moment to attack with minimal losses. Gallics have almost a 50% chance of defeating these units in clear terrain. Add in the retreat ability and the AI's poor tactics, and even those scary UUs fall pretty quickly. So I think I'm justified in saying that the Gallic trounces all AI units in open combat.

And this is why I think the cost is balanced at 50 Shields.

Dominae

BigDork · February 28, 2003, 13:43

Hi everybody...

It was definatly not a good start for me. I started out making a few warriors and sending them off to explore. I popped a few huts but nothing too good. I did get Pottery.

I was focusing on getting as many cities out there as possible while still maintaining a usable army. I had no intentions of an early war before the GS but still wanted to not appear too weak. Well that didn't work.

First Mao demands some money and a tech from me. I didn't think much of it. I figured he was bluffing. Nope. So now I'm at war with China. A few turns later Julius wants some gold from me. Whatever, he's kinda far away, he won't declare war. Wrong. Next turn China talks peace-loving Ghandi into the war on his side. WtF? This wasn't the Ghandi I learned about in school.

So anyway I'm fighting three civs all before 1000BC. I'm now falling far behind in tech. I've lost two cities to the Chinese. I'm managing to hold off the Indians in the south. Mao keeps sending in archers one or two at a time so it's not too hard to fend him off but still a pain. Rome has only made one apperance so far but thanks to the RNG I almost lost my capital. I did manage to grab one iron so now I'm building some GS. But I'm more focused on spearman for defense. I tried to attack with a few archers and a few GS on different occasions but all my attempts at an offensive have been thwarted. Friggin' AI. And the worst they will take peace but are asking for a lot for it. Not worth it yet. If I lose one or two more cities I may have no choice.

And through all of this the stupid Greeks(or is it Persians) are grabbing up unused land left and right. They aren't in the war so they are focusing on building up their empire. Not a good start at all. I got fed up and switched to a different game. I'm finishing up my second Regent game. That's going a lot better I'm not winning but I'm not getting stomped either.

I plan on playing some more tomorrow. I hope to turn this around somehow. And in the end Mao will pay. Maybe not for 1500 years but he will pay.

BigD

alexman · February 28, 2003, 14:28

Let me just add my vote to keep the Gallic Swordsman as it is, and here's the reason:

A Veteran Gallic Swordsman attacking a fortified regular spearman wins 66% of the time, and retreats 18% of the time. The expected loss of shields is 0.16*50=8.

A Veteran Swordsman attacking a fortified regular spearman wins 70% of the time. The expected loss of shields is 0.3*30=9

So on average, you lose more shields by attacking with regular swordsmen than you do with Gallic Swordsmen, even if the latter cost 50 shields compared to 30!

What about 3-defense units? Same story. GS against fortified hoplite wins 54% of the time and retreats 24% of the time, for an expected 11 shield loss. Swordsmen win 58% of the time for an expected 12.6 shield loss.

I am amazed at the good job Firaxis has done balancing most of their units.