Rate the Expansionistic trait. Do you love it or hate it, take it or leave it?

[Artifex]

I am curious who likes this trait? I play Emperor and was thinking of using some of the expansionst civs..I have rarely played them but some of them have great UUs (Arabia, Russia).

I assume it is best to play it on the pangea map.

One trick I heard. When popping huts the huts won't give you the same result when poped on the same turn. So if you want a settler then wait and try to pop 3 or 4 huts on the same turn..same goes if you want a desirable tech. Also, you will never get a tech from a hut that you are currently researching.

I also heard that on higher diff levels the results are toned down from huts. If you get a tech it will be the cheapest one still available. Settlers are more rare.

I play Emperor..I know on Sid it can be a tough trait. So how do you like to use this trait. Tricks? Strategies?

[Harovan]

Expansionist is the more useful...

- the bigger the home landmass is (tiny archipelago = worst, huge pangaea = best)
- the less civs are on it

When I played huge undercrowded maps, expansionist was a must have. On standard random shaped map it is mediocre to bad. If I choose my civ and don't let it be drawn randomly, I avoid it. It's a gamble trait, which is 7 times out of 10 bad, once mediocre, once good and once awesome, even though it has been improved by moving back connection trading. All you need is Alphabet and 1-2 Curraghs, and you don't need no stynkin' Scout.

[The Templar]

On non-archapeligo maps, expansionist is good for a strong opening boost. By the early middle-ages though, I find the initial boost has leveled out and the trait has only minimal value in improvement cost reductions.

[Artifex]

Is it good on a standard pangea 8 civ game or do you need to cut down the civs to 4 or so?

[asleepathewheel]

Along with what Ralph is saying (though I disagree with him overall ), it really sucks to move your scout out five turns and run into an enemy scout.


On continents and up it can be very explosive. However, if you play max civs, you won't get to as many huts. Must maximize effectiveness by building a second scout first, using the slider if happiness problems come about.

Unless I'm imagining things, I've popped multiple huts on the same turn and gotten the same result.

[Artifex]

When you play expansionist how many opponents do you choose?

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by Artifex
Is it good on a standard pangea 8 civ game or do you need to cut down the civs to 4 or so?

try a game once, speed through the first 25 turns or so, to get a feel from it. If it feels too crowded for you, cut down to 6 or so. 4 I think would be too few, but thats just me.

[Rhothaerill]

I guess I'm in the minority here, but I really like the expansionist trait...of course I think all the traits are useful.

With the expansionist trait you uncover the map quicker, discover other civs quicker (and possibly have a chance to do a lot of tech trading), find the best city sites quicker, and of course pop huts with no barbarians. All of those things are nothing to sneeze at. Yes the expansionist trait loses it's usefulness after a while, but what it does is set you up with a better early game...and the early game is the most important part of the game.

[vmxa1]

I agree with Sir Ralph.
I would prefer to go with 8 civs on a large pangea if using Exp.

As to std size and less civs, it is a function of terrain and neighbors. As asleepathewheel points out if you bump into a scout early, it will spoil the day. So if no other exp civs are close to you, it should be fine. If you have a bunch of mountains/jungle it will reduce the scouts value.

[Inverse Icarus]

expansionst is good (especially in MP) for the early game boost.

it's simple math. if you have 2 cities on turn 5 of the game, you'll have more cities on turn 20, because you can build more.

and free techs are nothing to scoff at.

also, meeting everyone first is awesome. last MP game i was seafaring on a pangea, and built a bunch of curraughs, and met everyone before anyone met anyone else. i wh0red techs for half of the ancient era. expansionst does the same thing on land

[Plotinus]

I agree with Sir Ralph too. It's a bit of a gamble, compared to something like Religious or Industrious that you know for sure will come in handy.

But I also think that Expansionist is more useful the better you are at the game. Why? Because Expansionist is only useful early in the game. The better you are at the game, the more quickly you are likely to win, and therefore the trait will be useful for a greater proportion of the game. Being a fairly good but not brilliant player, most of my games go all the way down the line (especially as I like big maps), so I don't like this trait very much. I agree with those who think that it has, to a certain degree, been superceded by Seafaring, which also allows you to explore quickly and make those vital contacts, but which remains useful throughout the game (assuming you're doing anything with ships, anyway).

[Harovan]

Originally posted by Uber KruX
also, meeting everyone first is awesome. last MP game i was seafaring on a pangea, and built a bunch of curraughs, and met everyone before anyone met anyone else. i wh0red techs for half of the ancient era. expansionst does the same thing on land

Well, that was my whole point when I said, that all you need is curraghs. On maps smaller than large (and even above), practically every civ has sea access and will be found in a reasonable time. On large and huge maps, where sea travel lasts longer, scouts and the expansionist trait overall gains strength. The early exploration is just not worth that much, if there is not much to explore. On standard and smaller maps all boils down to the gamble if you get a settler out of the 3-4 huts you find first or not. When if you find a settler later, the advantage is practically zero. What use do you have from a settler found as late as 1000 BC on the opposite part of your landmass?

I usually have Alphabet early due to a Philosophy beeline and build 2 curraghs between settlers in a coastal city. One goes clockwise, the other counterclockwise. This way, I am usually the first to have all connections on my home landmass and mostly beat even expansionist AI civs, since AIs rarely build scouts.

[geniemalin]

I hate not being in contact with all the other civs and be able to techwh0re early.

So I've solved the problem by playing Portugal - I get good contact on anything from archipelago to pangaea.

OTOH both traits (Seafaring and Expansionist) are weaker the smaller the map is - on a small or tiny map a 2-square-a-turn curragh may be all you need...

[chequita guevara]

When you're playing with 31 civs, expansionist is useless.

[ducki]

Also, long ago(heh, not that long) Aeson(I think it was Aeson) wrote a thread on "Scouting" which is, I think, linked from Theseus' Must Read Threads thread - great info there from a knowledgeable veteran - how to read the map, why to build more scouts, etc.

Edit: Here's the link to "Scouting" http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...threadid=68531 which does have info about the above as well as when to pop huts, how not to waste Scout movement, how to guess where to send your scouts and more. Not _exactly_ what you asked for, but quite related, I think, and definitely helpful.

[steven8r]

One advantage that Expansionist has over Seafaring is that Curaghs can't pop huts, nor can they carry units that can.

Scouts can get contact AND techs/Settlers.

Steven

[joncnunn]

My take on Expansionist, in most important to least important.

Less than # of civs usually allowed on the map : Helps Expansionist a lot.

Overloading the # of civs usually allowed on the map : Hurts Expansionist a lot.

Improved when immedate neighbor isn't also exapansiot. A futher improvement when immedite neighbor isn't agricultural either.

Usually a bad choice for Archepello unless you are playing SP and want a challenge.

Better on Pangena.

Improved by less water than normal.

Usefullness decreased by more water than normal.

Coment: It's a lot like the inverse of Seafaring in how terraign affects it.

[geniemalin]

Yep - so the Portuguese are inherently balanced on any map type