Vel's Strategy Thread - Part Three

[Bblue]

Just stumbled across an oddity on how the Great Library works; not sure if it is a bug, the way it was intended, or just an eccentricity of the beast.

Basic set up was standard map, standard settings with the exception of high % of water, emperor level. I (Americans) start out on a 'stringy' continent with the Romans and Japanesse. Like all higher difficulty settings the AI beats me to the early wonders, with the Japs completeing the Great Library ~15 turns before I wipe them out (and claiming the GL for myself). Not a lot of good right off the bat with me only knowing one other Civ. So I go searching for the other 5 civs that should be in the game and I find that my 'stringy' continent is VERY isolated a full 2 turns over open sea the the nearest nieghbor so I don't make it to them in a galley (nor they to me) anytime soon. So Rome and I are falling way behind in the tech race (can tell by the wonders the other 5 are finishing before Rome or myself are even close the the tech requirements). Eventually... Lady luck and a bunch of sucidial galley captains later I manage to cross the great seas and don't fall off the edge of the world :P I make contact with 1 of the other 5 civs and pay kingly sums to get contacts with the others.. we do a little luxury trading and I happily await the next turn for some free techs all the way to and including Education (which most of you already know can be aquired through the library even as it renders it obsolite) Anyway.. next turn I'm hansomly rewarded for my seagoing ventures 4-5 techs, goodies like Invention and Education, which upon aquiring I get the notice the the GL is now obsolite, a few more units move on the map and then my soothsayers tell me that I have now learned Astronomy!!! (NOT what I was researching at the time) I had aquired it from the GL! even though the Gl was obsolite AND Astronomy has Education as a prerequisite!

So it appears as if the GL continues the work for the FULL TURN in which it becomes outdated. While I only gained 1 tech beyond Education I am left to wonder just how far up the tech ladder I could have gone had that galley not have made it and a few hundred more years would have pasted.. can see it now...Your Soothsayers inform you that you have learned Flight from the GL. :P

While not a Stadagy in itself, definately something to keep in mind for some of those 'strange' games

Personally I'm pretty sure the GL wasn't intended to work this way, but I didn't mind getting the 'extra' tech since the AI civ would have also gotten it if it were in my position, and besides there is anything you can really do about it anyway :P

[zeace]

I agree that most players will not find much use for mobilization or drafting citizens, but that's because if we're getting crushed by another civ we restart the game. These are very powerful last-ditch efforts for saving your civ againts an oppressor.

I'm sure that the AI uses these techniques every time it's about to get destroyed.

When MP is finally available, I think we'll see a lot more people using these abilities. It will actually make the last few turns of a bad game interesting. Imagine knowing that you need to hold this city so that your ally has a few turns to bring his enormous army to your continent. You turn on mobilization and start building infantry. You sell improvements to rush build them. And then to complement these troops you draft 3 more recruits. Do this every turn and you may be able to hold a key choke-point city for a few turns.

Ze Ace

[Lawrence of Arabia]

Well i wrote a whole thing, but then it got erased when I hit the wrong button, so I don't won't to rewrite it again so heres the shorter version.

Science

(1) Trade techs with the AI. The AI will trade with itself, and to keep up you must trade with them. Get into contact with other civs early. Besides, no one civ will invents all of the techs.

(2) Pop huts. A few extra techs will definatly help, esp if you are expansionist. Try to get ceremonial burial this way.

(3) Beeline for Republic and switch into it as soon as possible. There is better science and production output


Cities

(1) 8- 14 cities after REX-ing depending on map
(2) Build Temple (Culture 2, Upkeep 1) and Library (Cultre 3, Upkeep 1) in all cities with goal of getting culture of each city to at least 100 so you can get some land before AI cities lap against yours.
(3) Keep cities from going into civil disorder. Stunt growth at that limit. Build a worker for each city and then build roads so you get more commerce. Civs with luxeries can build larger cities, so thats a plus. Get growth to zero, transfer workers to commerce squares and improve those with mines and/or roads. Don't jsut build roads everywhere.

Why borders are broken

(1) I have a city with culture 1000+. The AI sends a settler to a square just outside my borders. He founds a city, and my borders are pushed back because the city has to have 1 square culture in each direction. While doing that, he takes my only supply of horses. Thats total crap. Borders should not move.
(2) I build a colony on some iron while I'm waiting for a settler to come along. Instead, the AI sends a settler next to my iron and he takes it. That should either not happen if you are at peace or be an act of war.

Culture

A city with 5 culture will take it 20 turns to expand its borders to size 100 from size 10. When you get The Republic, switch goverments, and go into the republic. Then, change all of your cities from zero growth to maximum. Since there is less corruption in Republic, you can afford more. Build all of the other culture improvements first, then do granery and marketplaces. Set luxeries at 20% and then have a pop boom.

While REX-ing

One more thing on Culture vs. Science. While you are REX-ing, build cheap warriors/spearmen until you have to start paying for them. Use them to wage Stone/Bronze age war. This will mean that by the time you switch to Republic you will have a big army and you will have hopefully gimped a neighbor or two.

Forbidden Palace Question

In the civil-o-pedia, it says that Forbidden palace can be build with 8 cities in a standard map. Is there any other requirements like a tech? How bout for Huge and large and small maps? How many cities. Thanks

[Dodgy Geezer]

Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia
1) I have a city with culture 1000+. The AI sends a settler to a square just outside my borders. He founds a city, and my borders are pushed back because the city has to have 1 square culture in each direction. While doing that, he takes my only supply of horses. Thats total crap. Borders should not move.

This can be used to your advantage. When attacking the homeland of another civ in the mid to end game, take a few settlers along for the ride. Build cities on the edge of your territory to extend your reach into theirs. Sometimes that extra square can make the difference between getting your tanks into their cities vs being caught in the open.

Once you have captured or razed all that you want, either leave the cities there or disband them.

[vmxa1]

I am sure we understand that it can be used to our advatange. That is not the issue. The point is that any units coming across a culture border should be an act of war and allow me to attack with out the penalty. I hate it that they can have a unit (often a miltary one and a settler) in my zone and I can tell them to leave and they agree, but do not. I finally have to attack and I am considered the aggressor. I do not want to deal with those cities that are created in my zone in any fashion, capture or disband. I want to whack the settler and not be force to war. It is to me as if we caught someone spying and the put them on trial and were considered the aggressor, that makes no sense. The invasion occurred when they came into your zone. You should be able to attack and no war is decalred by that act, they must decide to declare on you if they do not like losing the unit. I will allow a worker to pass as that is akin to a truly lost person having strayed across the border that was not mark clearly. Since they do no damage, it is a freebie. I also loathe the concept that I am beating the crap out of a civ and they agree to peace and I start to move troops out of their zone and the next turn they call to ***** about troops being there? Since I have no way of getting out in one turn, what is the point? Wait to see if I am leaving, then complain, if I do not move. Don't waste time when it is not possible to have vacated. I usually declare war for that contact and make them pay some more, why would you want to annoy someone who just kick your butt, with a demand that they leave at that point?

[Velociryx]

This, more than anything else, will be one of the best reasons to have "barbarian" units available to all. Keep a few on the prowl at the periphery of your borders, and you can play "Whack-a-settler" all day long when they violate your borders....no war, no fuss, no muss....

-=Vel=-

[DFHNY]

vel and grim:
How does one win on Monarch level? It appears that the AI starts to cheat massively in order to keep you on your toes.

a. I find the AI now wants to go to war ASAP... this slows me from building anything but swordsmen early on...then very often another civ will ask for a key tech and then declare war, often from very far away

b. send out swordsmen only to have them lose to warriors, how and why? AI samurai chop through my rifelmen...that should not happen, right? Who would bring a knife to a gun fight? What dice is the AI rolling?

c. The fun in the game seems to be gone above Regent level because many of my friends just "reload" constantly...arguing that at Monarch and Emperor one must play "perfectly". What they mean is that unless they win every sinlge conflict they reload. Metagame aside, that is just a pain in the ass. What are we doing wrong?

d. the starting position seems to be critical, so after 15 or so false starts I usually just start playing, palace is always touching the sea which sucks for corruption, but who gets a better start? not me.

thanks in advance

[Skeletal Dragon]

Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia
[(1) I have a city with culture 1000+. The AI sends a settler to a square just outside my borders. He founds a city, and my borders are pushed back because the city has to have 1 square culture in each direction. While doing that, he takes my only supply of horses. Thats total crap. Borders should not move.

Culture borders are determined by the -net- culture of your civ. The more culture you have, the more you push their borders back. So that probably means that they have around the same amount of culture as you.

And it is entirely possible to push a border back so that it touches the city itself. I've done that several times on occasion

[Dodgy Geezer]

Originally posted by DFHNY
How does one win on Monarch level?

I haven't had any real problems at Monarch, providing I get a good start position, and have won without pop rushing or any of the other exploits. Maybe this is because I always play on a Pangea map, with either a sci or religious CIV (although I am playing China at the moment and am leading the pack). Here is a few tips that I have found to be useful:

- Micromanage settlers at first. Get your cities going to max, then build roads to all cities, and to the AI to allow trade.

- To avoid getting whacked in the early game churn out a lot of warriors or spearmen - the AI seems to attack any side which has a shortage of military, regardless of the type. Spearmen have the advantage of being upgradeable to Infantry, so they are a good investment.

- Avoid having too much money saved up. Bigger, more powerful folk will try to bully you for it.

- Always agree to any demands for tribute - you don't want a war to somebody elses timetable. Just make sure you build up on the borders

- Trade as much as possible. This reduces the chances of others starting wars with you.

- Get to Republic ASAP, and churn out workers to improve the land and create your roads.

- Wherever possible, get others to fight your wars. If someone starts a war with you, get the Civ on the other side of them to attack them. Even better is to get another Civ to attack your target civ before you do, so drawing off its troops.

- Raze cities and build your own. Keeping cities close to an opponents capital is a real pain. Much better to start fresh.

- Buy sci whenever you get the chance.

- When trading anything (either buying or selling), try to buy or trade with weaker civs, or civs not on your borders. No point in helping the top dog by giving them extra cash.

It gets harder at Emperor level (obviously) - I generally stop producing wonders and science at Emperor, at least until the modern age and buy/conquor what I need. Buying sci can work out much cheaper than researching it.

[zorbop]

note on draining the ai money.
if the ai can't pay tribute that they owe you, then war is declared.
think about this

also, before you declare war offer x money per turn for all there money. they will have no money and you won't have to pay them because you are at war

[Arrian]

Monarch is the first level where the AI cheats, but I think it's a big jump up from Regent. First off, starting location is even more key than it was on the lower levels, and I'm not embarrassed to admit I restart TONS of times looking for an acceptable start spot (which, to me, includes fresh water and some bonus resouces like cows or wheat or deer). Second, definitely expand as rapidly as possible until you've got a solid core of cities and at least two luxuries. Third, the AI is definitely more aggressive, so I don't build spearmen for some time. Sounds counter-intuative, right? Wrong, the AI calculates "power" based upon unit count. So 2 warriors are more valuable early on in the game than 1 spearman. Plus, you can send those two warriors exploring in different directions. Fourth, if the AI demands some money from you early on... pay it. Fifth, build the Great Library. I beeline for Literature, and buy a couple of techs like the wheel and ironworking from the AI. In order to build the GL while not crippling your expansion, the best thing is to get a solid #2 city up and running, so that one can take over settler production while your capitol starts on the Pyramids or Oracle. Then, once you get Literature, switch to the Library. The Library will catch you up in tech. Now you want to build a few barracks (I do this in high-shield, low trade cities, at least until the high-trade ones have libraries) and start pumping out horsemen. Horsemen eventually become knights and then cavalry, so the more the merrier.

Anyway, you will probably end up fighting eventually, but hopefully not until you have a bunch of knights handy. Go for Theology and Feudalism and build the Sistine & Sun Tzu. If you can trigger a golden age at this time, it may be a good idea for you to do so. Once you have knights, shoot for Astronomy (Cop's) and if you haven't fought yet, you may want to pick a fight, depending on the situation. Aim to gain luxuries.

I recognize that one can vary what I've outlined and succeed, or ignore it totally and slash&burn instead, but this is my "builder" version of Monarch strategy. This is not to say it always works. When it does, it tends to work spectacularly. Then again, sometimes it blows up in your face (see "Great Library in 2" plus "The French city of Paris has completed the Great Library" ). It's kinda like putting your eggs in one basket.

-Arrian

[cully]

Vel/Arrian/Skanky can you help?

This is my first post on the thread but i have been an avid reader from the start, very helpful and almost certainly the best thread on the site.

Anyway, in a recent game i was the persians and went to war with the aztecs, the war dragged on for some time mainly due to stubborn aztec resistance (they started it by the way). Some time during the war my polite and very healthy trading partners the Babs & Romans became furious with me and i was wondering do you ever experience this kind of attitude change for what seems no apparant reason? Or better still do you know why their attitude would suddenly become furious even though we had very good relations and traded often? This type of thing has happened in previous games.

I would appreciate your vast knowledge on this one.

[Velociryx]

Monarch (DFHNY) – I’d have to agree with Arrian on this one….it does indeed represent a pretty big jump up from Regent level play.

Even with that, however, the same basic strats you use on Regent can be applied to Monarch….it’s just that at the higher level of play, there is less room for error.

Essentially, there are only three viable beelines in the ancient era. Two of them revolve around warmongering, and one revolves around building (The Great Library beeline, as described by Arri).

If you’re playing a Scientific Civ, and are looking to pick a fight early, then your beeline should be to Iron working (this works especially well for Persia, who has Industrious workers AND a rockin’ ancient era special, but will work for ANY scientific civ). Once a source of Iron is secured, the rest of the early game is about picking fights with your nearest neighbors to deny them their source(s) of iron. Do that, and it’s a lock.

The final beeline would be to horseback riding (especially effective if you’re Japan, on account of their starting tech). Grab it, and do pretty much the same thing as you’d do with iron working, ‘cept this time, you want to deny the AI’s their source of horses (and iron too, if you can swing it without destroying them utterly).

The main thing on the higher levels is this: You NEED to trade!!! If the AI’s have techs that you don’t, and they won’t give them up, then beat the snot out of them and force them to the negotiation table. Even if you wanna play the peaceful builder game (GL beeline) you still need to trade, but your focus will likely be more toward trading for lux items to keep the increasingly unruly populace in line). Oh! And as to that….once you deny the AI’s their ability to defend themselves (iron/horse resources), start looking toward the acquisition of lux items! Once you take their lux cities, you can trade your surpluses back to your former enemies to keep them cash strapped. A cash strapped AI is one you can compete head to head with and then some (negates their cheat bonuses).

Cully (on the AI-PMS-Mood Swings)
The AI (especially on the higher levels of play) will hate you for being too weak and for being too strong.

Too weak (note that “weakness” in this case means that you have fewer military units than your rivals, irregardless of quality), and they’ll be out for blood, ganging up on you if they can. Too strong (if you’re way ahead in tech, or doing “too well” in a war you’re in the midst of) and they’ll feel threatened (in most cases, rightly thinking that they’re next on the hit list), and attack you while you’re still busy (and even if they don’t attack, you can watch your relations with them plummet).

-=Vel=-

[Velociryx]

PS On Ancient Era Beelines:

The only exception to these three beelines being utterly dominant in the game would be if you're playing an 'pelago map with tons of islands and high water. In that case, unless you've got company on your starting island, the ONLY relevant beeline is map making....

-=Vel=-

[Arrian]

Cully,

Are you winning vs. the Aztecs? Have you gotten a LOT stronger because of the war? The AI will start to get "annoyed" and then even "furious" if you get too strong w/o giving it things.

For instance, I have a SICK world map game going in which I allied with the Romans to take down the Iroquois. With Rome's help (and they really did help- it was great to have legionaries protecting my flanks from counterattacking Mounted Warriors), I almost utterly destroyed the Iroquois. This resulted in my Power nearly doubling. As soon as the war was over, the Romans went from "gracious" to "cautious" and I noticed several of the other civs had gone from "polite" or "cautious" to "annoyed." My solution was to trade stuff with them - as much as I could, even if I got terrible prices for my goods, and gift them my world map (since my empire is huge, my map is apparently quite valuable). This helped quite a bit with most of the AI's, although Rome remained cautious... which got Caesar killed I now own all of Asia (incl. the Middle East), Europe and the northern 1/2 of Africa. Keeping the AI's happy is getting tough, b/c I'm way up in tech too. So I sold them medicine, sometimes for peanuts, and even gifted the really poor civs small sums (50 gold). That helped a bunch. I will generally check on them every few turns too see if more tinkering is necessary.

Vel - I think you just summed up the various ancient era strategies perfectly. You either hole up and shoot for literature like me, and pray you don't get hit, or you shoot for one of the warrior techs (Iron or Horses) and start crippling your neighbors. Personally, if I'm gonna pick a fight, I'd prefer horses, since they have a MUCH longer time in the sun... swordsmen don't upgrade.

-Arrian

[Velociryx]

Other thoughts on Ancient Era Beelines

Now you've gone and done it Arri...lol...got my brain churning on teh subject, and I realized there was more to say about each of the beelines we've gone over here, so I figured I'd ramble for a bit and see what shakes out of this dust-laden noggin of mine....

Total truth to the statement that horsement have a much longer lifespan than swordsmen. IIRC, they cost the same, and for your (30?)--doing this strictly from memory here cos I'm at work-- shields you either get a 3/2/1 or a 2/1/2.

As has been discussed in various threads in this part of the forum, mounted troops have an almost insane advantage over their foot-based counterparts, and that is sheer survivability. The retreat option makes them powerful indeed. Some would argue (myself included), that it makes them too powerful.

But despite the power of horse-based troops, foot soldiers do have their place in your plans, depending on the civ you're playing.

For example:
If you're playing a Scientific Civ, you're only one tech out from Iron Working, and thus one tech away from being able to build Swordsmen. By the time you research that tech, unless you're alone on your continent, you've no doubt found at least one of your neighbors, and can get right on the construction of a very early game attack force.

Also, many of the disadvantages of the footsoldier vanish if you play an Industrious civ. Send a worker or two toward your enemy building roads and your infantry can speed their way to the site of the future (or pending) battle. (Of course, the same can be said--and even moreso--of horsemen travelling on your road network, so this is clearly not an advantage that your infantry based attackers have a lock on!

Another key advantage lies in and with combined arms. Infantry and Catapults move at the same rate, and with the aforementioned road network in place, you can speed your combined force along with frightening efficiency toward enemy lines.

And finally, there's each Civ's special unit to consider. In the ancient era, there are some truly awesome UU's based around infantry troops (esp. the Immortal, Hoplite, and Legionary). Perhaps most frightening of all though, is the lowly Jaguar Warrior of the Aztec, which combines the cheap price of the Warrior with all the key advantages of mounted troops.

So....I DO agree that if you're looking at economy of production (that is to say, build a cadre of units and preserve them so as not to have to spend time rebuilding), then horsemen are the way to go (at least until we see what, if anything, the next patch does with regards to toning down the retreat ability of mounted troopers), however, strong cases can be made for swordsmen produced in quantity, and certain civs simply beg for the production en mass of their UU, infantry based or no.

One thing too, that can extend the usefulness of swordsmen just a bit is this:

If you're building a hefty attack force, it's a good bet that you're going to be expanding, and probably by quite a lot. This, in turn then, will see your corruption problems increasing many times over.

So, as your early expansion wars end, and you're moving into the Middle Ages (where your swordsmen become obsolete in the face of Knights and Pikemen), a good final use for them is to port them to your corruption-ridden cities and disband to help whip out infrastructure, post-Reuplic switch (if you're in Despotism, you may as well burn a pop-point or two to get the basics in place). The swordsmen have already paid for themselves many times over by being the foundation upon which your expansion was laid, so you're not really "losing" anything from a mineral standpoint, and the shields (7?) they provide on the disband will help jumpstart the wretched production at your outermost cities as they offer up their armor and weapons to be melted down for the cause....

Of course, if you would rather opt for a more peaceful game, then build warriors and workers out the wazoo (has not been 100% verified, but as workers DO show up on your military screen as part of your military, it seems the AI counts them when it makes a determination about whether or not to smack you arouond), sit tight and gun for the GL!

-=Vel=-

-=Vel=-

[Skeletal Dragon]

I actually prefer Horsemen over Swordsmen in the Ancient Era because they have the extra movement The extra attack of Swordsmen doesn't really matter in the long run anyways because the attack/defense of the Ancient Era units are so low that battles usually go either way. A Swordsman and a Horseman would win about the same number of battles. The only time when Swordsmen would actually matter is when the opponent starts to get size 6 cities or enough city walls so that it becomes more difficult to punch through. Nevertheless, Archers/Horsemen still do a great job

And you can upgrade horsies later

[cully]

Vel/Arrian

Thanks very much for the replies, its nice to know that even though you fellas have been around for a while that your prepared to help the new comers.

The war in which i mentioned has gone well, the aztecs were a major force and after they declared war (which admitedly i was spoiling for because of their vast gem supplies) i enlisted the help of the non too small greeks. To say they were a help was an understatement, between us we calved up the aztecs practicallly 50/50, i even found myself rushing to beat the greeks to the final spoils just to keep things even! The AI has come a long way since CIV2.

One thing i have just thought of while writing was if the aztecs were trading the gems to the romans & babs, would the fact i secured these luxuries be part of the reason they were non too pleased? I can honestly say im not sure if they were trading the gems to these civs though.

I also need to tell you that im only playing on warlord at the moment, still finding my feet im afraid.

[Arrian]

Cully,

Yeah, I think that would do it! The luxuries are key, and the AI will get really pissed if you have stuff it doesn't, but aren't trading it to them. Besides, you can make money by doing it, so call 'em up and trade. Oh, about me being around a while.. LOL! I still think of myself as a "newbie" to this website. Not the game, though By the way, you're probably gonna have to take the Greeks down sooner or later, though I'm sure that had occurred to you.

Vel,

Ok, first off, we agree on the power of mounted troops, but probably disagree on the solution (I think a minor tweak to the AI regarding building barracks and upgrading will do a LOT). Check out the "units by era" thread again... I posted an example of a friend's war vs. the Aztecs and why I thought it illustrates perfectly that, if the AI built barracks and upgraded, we'd have a lot more trouble rushing them with nothing but Cav.

I still think horsies are the way to go, unless you are Persian (and maybe even then, if you want to hold the golden age for later) or you are fighting the Zulu or Aztecs. Like Skeletal said, there isn't much difference in a 3 vs. 2 and a 2 vs. 2, and the horsie gets to run away if it gets beat up. I see your point about disbanding the swordsmen, but that is simply a way of using them once they become useless for anything else... and the horsies don't become useless until Tanks come around, and even then can be used for pillaging (or disbanded a-la your swordsmen for 20 shields each).

I question. You mention the ease of getting Ironworking as a reason to use swordsmen early as a scientific civ. True, seeing iron and being able to build swordsmen is a really nice thing. But can you really build up enough swordsmen to cripple a civ before you have horseback riding. More to the point, doesn't this require that you stop expansion to build swordsmen? If you are really boxed in, then I definitely see the value in this. But if you have land to settle... wouldn't it be better to delay the fighting until you've built up a bit?

-Arrian

[Velociryx]

Good points all, brother Arrian!

I think that speaks more to differences in our playing styles than anything....remember, I generally plant my cities with three blank terrain tiles between them, which is a bit closer than you IIRC. The turn advantage this creates in the early game is negligible, but it is still there (esp. with a focus on road-building early on), and I've found that I can generally have 3-5 cities up and running by the time Iron Working is added to my tech portfolio, the iron resource in my neighborhood has been tapped into, and I'm ready for my first attack.

Rush one barracks in place close to the front, and upgrade all existing warriors to swordsmen, and I'm ready to roll with an attack force of 7-8 Swordsmen (figure an average of four cities, each with a warrior garrisoned, and 3-4 warrior scouts that can easily be pulled back for upgrading and a quick war)--note here, that yes, this means I'm stripping my cities completely empty....NO defense anywhere....my closest cities will, of course, start working on Spearmen in between settler builds to bulk up the front, and my cities further out will do so when it's convenient or when they're threatened, but this generally does not cause significant delays to expansion.

During this time, assuming the AI has been keeping pace expansion wise, they'll have 3-4 cities of their own (I give them slightly less here, cos even on Emperor, I can usually outpace the AI's expansion), meaning my 7-8 swordsmen are more than enough to blow through whatever resistance might be found in their cities (generally, this is one of the following configurations):

2 Warriors

or

1 Warrior
1 Archer

or

1 Warrior
1 Spearmen

If it's the first or second case, I'll win nearly every time without losing a man (here's where the power of the swordsman really shines....while it's true that 3 v 2 (swordsman v. horseman) isn't all that big, when you compare it to a 1 defense, it's pretty significant!), if it's the third configuration (given that my swordsmen were built sans barracks, I may lose one). Repeat over the course of two cities, and the AI has been chopped in half, and is ready to talk.

That's the kind of speed and economy you simply can't get from horse troops. In tests I've run, I find that I can finish 1-2 wars with my rivals using upgraded warriors before I can even get a sufficient force of horse troops developed to think about making an attack with them (extra time to research the needed techs gives the AI more time to build and entrench), and the sheer turn advantage of having the productivity of all those cities that much sooner is really telling later on.

I have noted though, that my most successful runs with horses were made in games when I found neighbors who had relevant techs early on (Japanese - The Wheel), or got lucky with free techs from goody huts. If you find stuff like that very very early, you can make an early game horse rush really pay....otherwise, I like the sheer speed of upgrading those warriors!

-=Vel=-

[Aeson]

AI unprovoked displeasure...

One thing that really dampens a relationship with the AI is withholding any spare resources/techs that they feel are important. Often in a war I will take over a few cities, and then everyone else becomes angry at me. Why? Because I just took the supplies of luxury or strategic resources they were trading with my enemy for. Sometimes even waiting a turn or two to trade a tech or luxury they need can mean the difference between polite and annoyed, so trade them right when you get them. Not sure if this is the reason you are having trouble Cully, but it's one I've run into a few times.

Monarchy tech beeline...

On the subject of tech beelines, often on the higher difficulty levels shooting straight for Monarchy (only if you start with ceremonial burial though) will give valuable trading techs that the AI hasn't researched yet. Even on Deity (with the patch) I can get Mysticism first half the time, and usually get Polytheism and Monarchy first as well. The exception is when there is a lot of landmass, as the AI seems to get most of the huts pretty quickly, which often gives them these techs they wouldn't research normally.

Getting 3 techs to trade to 8 or more AI can really catch a person up quick. With the "during your turn" tech trading though, it cuts into this a lot. Some games I've gotten as many as 10 advances for the 3, other times just 1 or 2. I don't see a problem with the AI trading on your turn if you just got the advance from another AI, but it really is cheap for techs you do manage to research first.

Early Swordsmen...

I think for very early city aquisition (pre-horsemen), Archers can do a better job than Swordsmen. Usually the first couple cities the AI has will be defended by Warriors, and an archer or two can get there in time to make use of the fact. Also the AI will have only a few cities, making them easier to get to the bargaining table. By the time Swordsmen are available, invariably the AI will have spearmen defending the city. 2a v 1d is better odds than 3a v 2d. It doesn't work on Deity, but I've made good use of Archers to gain an early city or two on every other difficulty level. And doing this doesn't mean you can't still go for Iron Working first, if you happen to be the Germans (Scientific, Militaristic), or can trade for Warrior Code with your non-Bronze Working starting tech very early (giving the AI Bronze Working defeats the whole purpose of getting Warrior Code).

GL (not that one) for possible tech superiority...

On maps with good amounts of water, the beeline for Map Making and the Great Lighthouse can be a lifesaver. It's a bit of a gamble, as sometimes there are safe Galley crossings without the Lighthouse, and sometimes the crossings are too far for post-patch Lighthouse aided Galleys. But when it does work, it can be huge. Often the AI won't try for the Lighthouse, and I've found it to be the only ancient wonder that I can rely on getting in Deity games (gotten it perhaps 80% of the time I tried). Pre-patch it was golden, and could singlehandedly keep me at the Tech front, better than even the Great Library. It still can be, but there is that risk that it wont help at all. Of course I have never been able to get the Great Library on Deity, even with extensive reloading, using the editor for the designing of "perfect" city sites, and even "sabotoge" (in the editor, and/or with military units in game) of other civ's placements to some extent have all failed. I wouldn't say it's impossible, but without a Great Leader, it might be. The Great Lighthouse is the only GL wonder that has helped me stay in the tech race without military action on Deity.

[Aeson]

A couple more things about the Great Lighthouse...

When I said it was the only wonder I could reliably get on Deity, the 80% success rate is assuming doing nothing other than building 2 warriors, hooking up a luxury, and building a temple. If I dont start with Ceremonial Burial, that is part of the "beeline", and usually after I've researched writing, it only takes 8-12 turns to research. I will also trade my non-Alphabet starting tech for it if at all possible. I was using this mostly in OCC Deity games with the Indians (Ceremonial Burial, Alphabet), and trading Ceremonial Burial for Pottery. The British (Alphabet, Pottery) would also be a good choice, and their UU would benifit as well. I was just using the Indians for their War Elephants, as Iron usually doesn't end up in my borders. With how cheap Pottery and Ceremonial Burial are to research (after the first '40' tech), it shouldn't make too much of a difference. Also, when applying this to non-OCC games, the chances for the Lighthouse are decreased quite a bit. Expansion could be delayed, as there would be island expansion opened up, or a later military campaign can make up for the lack of cities altogether. Of course if it doesn't pay off, this leaves you even farther in the hole than just playing normally, as trying to "spillover" into the Great Library never works... say hello to the 200 shield granery.

A first or worst gamble, but hey, worst is where everyone starts in Deity anyways

On Vel's Warrior upgrading.

I had never thought of that, how much do Warriors cost to upgrade to Swordsmen? How often do you see no spearmen defending when using this tactic? With a good city site, the first Archer can be out and looking after 7 turns, which is usually quick enough to find the lone Warrior in an AI Capitol (which won't be razed, even if its size 1). The early Archers also double as Scouts, and happening upon a barbarian infested hut (the best ones, other than settlers) almost guarantees that they (elite now) will take their city. Archers don't upgrade to Swordsmen though right? (If you can't tell, I've never built or upgraded to a Longbowman). Nothing saying that the Archer and Swordsmen tactics can't be combined either way (Germans look good for that eh?).

[Arrian]

Ah-hah! I totally forgot about the warrior -> swordsman upgrade path. I do it myself, actually, just not as an intregral part of my strategy. Aeson - it's 40 gold per. I use them as city defenders - usually along w/a spearman. That way, if my main attack force of horsemen goes out to fight, I have some swordsmen ready to defend the homeland - defending with "defender" troops only is a surefire way to get pillaged to death. Swordsmen tend to work fine, b/c on defense you get the movement advantage of roads, and the invader doesn't.

Come to think of it, wow, Vel, that's a damn good idea, particularly if you're boxed in early on. You could "oscillate" with them, beating on your neighbors in turn, hopefully getting your troops up to vets and elite and maybe, just maybe a leader (why did my mind go there? Because, in my heart of hearts, I'd still want the Great Library) while gaining cities, tech and gold. Meanwhile, adding more here in there to beef up your force, or bringing in horsemen to reduce casualties. Or, alternatively, just hit once and settle down until the Middle Ages (knights).

Sortofunrelatedquestion: what do Jag Warriors upgrade to?

-Arrian

[Velociryx]

Hey guys! And yep...Arri beat me to the punch there....40g each (which is easy to do if you leave your tax slider alone--50/50--since you won't be spending money on thechs from your neighbors....bust up a few barb camps while you're exploring and you should be all set with the money).

The upside to pulling your attack off that way is that you get a core group of effective attackers up and running with frightening speed....8 swordsmen heading toward your first rival in 2000-odd BC is almost impossible to counter, and as Arrian mentioned, it's altogether easy to pull 1-2 cities off of the expansion train and replace any casualties taken with horsemen as they become available.

Result: You create an absolutely terrifying assault force before your opponents can defend against it, you chop them in half or better before they can entrench, which all but guarantees their vassal status to you--and perhaps their eventual destruction--and if you repeat that basic pattern with every civ on the continent with you, you wind up in firm control of the continent long before you otherwise might be.

Best of all, since you're relying on your initially made warriors, you're not slowing your expansion down greatly, if at all (defensive replacements --spearmen-- can be made in-between settler builds, allowing cities more time to grow.

Downside: You *must* pay attention to the exact position of any and all units of your rivals (including sneaky flanking landings by the token warrior in the galley). Since you're sacrificing ALL defense to put the attack force together so quickly, overlooking even a single unit can really set you back!)

PS: Hmmm....I dunno what Jags upgrade to, if anything....I've never tried it....then again, IMO, the Jag is the best unit in the game....I'd prolly not be as happy with whatever unit it upgraded to anyway....

-=Vel=-

[Velociryx]

To the question of how often do you see no spearmen:

First war: Figure that you'll capture two enemy cities, one of which will have a spear-chucker defending.

Second war (different civ as the target): Figure that you'll need to capture 3 cities to bring your foe to the table, all with at least one spear defending. MUCH more costly after that first war!

-=Vel=-

[Nakar Gabab]

Jags upgrade to swordsmen, if they work like most UUs... I much prefer 2 move to 3 attack... it's all about the timing, and jags are there right away.

[pchang]

I just tried playing with the Iriquois and let me tell you, that early scout is awefully useful. It found me Moscow and Thebes just as I was completing that 2nd warrior. My 2 warriors marched over to Thebes and took it over (it was only defended by 1 warrior) and captured an Egyptian worker all before by 1st settler had founded my next city (build queue: warrior, warrior, settler). Talk about jump starting your development. Anyway, I killed off the last AI city in 280AD. It took a while to track down that last island with 2 AI cities on it. It also takes a long time to ferry invasion forces over when you only have galleys.

[Aeson]

On the power of 2 movement troops...

I was looking at some save games for my GOTM2 over at CivFanatics, and noticed something very weird. During the whole game I had built roughly 60 Horsemen units. I hadn't built a single Knight or Calvary in the game, all I had were from upgrade Horsemen. By the end of the game, I had 30 of those units still alive. This was over the course of several hundred battles. I had taken out over 100 AI cities with them alone(Monarch/Large/Pangaea with 2 seperate landmasses), and later on they were part of the final Mech Infantry/Modern Armor invasion that took out 100+ more cities. I was almost constantly at war in some area of the world from 500AD till 1850AD, even when not taking cities. A very conservative guess of 10 battles per horse unit (more likely 20+) would mean that I lost ("its too close to retreat") about 1 in 20 fights with them. A 5% mortality rate is pretty darn good.

This is the main problem I have about using Swordsmen against anyone but the Zulu's (Not sending Horsemen against Impi's ever again). They do quite well in the early game, but the production invested in them is wasted after the ancient era, as they never have an upgrade option. You can disband them for a limited return, but compared with upgrading horse units, that is pitiful indeed. With upgrading as cheap as it is, the Horsemen-> Knights-> Calvary path just becomes that much more powerful. The game needs a Middle Ages footsoldier with offensive punch (man-at-arms type 5.2.1) that swordsmen can be upgraded to, and later to riflemen. Mobile units were a big part of Middle Age offensives, but ground troops were as well.

[Arrian]

Yeah, that pretty much sums it up. Horsemen are nearly immortal, in two different ways:

They retreat, so most survive.
They upgrade twice, and their final incarnation is faster than anything other than modern armor.

Swordsmen, useful as they may be if you plan on using Vel's upgrade gambit for an early war, just don't cut it once feudalism rolls around. They probably should upgrade to musketmen.

Given the way Civ III combat works (strange things happen... you run into that UBER spearman or whatever that eats up 4 attacking units w/o a stratch, for instance), the retreat ability is the best way to make sure you don't lose units you "shouldn't" lose. For instance, a Cavalry unit, based upon its stats, should thrash spearmen. Normally, they do. However, the vagueries of Civ III combat mean that eventually, the Cav's gonna lose. Retreat means you don't lose that unit unless you leave it out in the open undefended. My decision to concentrate on mobile troops, a decision made soon after I got the game, probably kept me out of the "Civ III sucks b/c the combat system is screwy! Where the hell is firepower!" crowd. By the way, I understand their frustration, and mean no offense to either side in that unsavory debate.

-Arrian

[Velociryx]

You won't hear a peep of disagreement out of me about the sheer usefulness of horsemen! Especially with their withdrawl ability as it stands right now (and I think Aeson's 5% Mortality figure is proof enough that *something* needs to be done to re-balance fast troops), there's just no comparison!

However, I'm a pretty big believer in swordsmen-driven early wars (and I'm talking *very* early here!), and as I've been playing more, I've been able to come up with ways of getting that early game attack force without resorting to pop-rushing swordsmen (warrior upgrades, with spearmen rebuilt later to re-garrison my cities).

It is certainly true that swordsmen have a relatively short shelf life, but considering how quickly you can put together a truly terrifying force of them--and do it without significantly hindering early game REX-ing activities--they actually wind up being *faster* than horsemen in the very early game (Japan being the likliest exception, since they start with "The Wheel" and have a terriffic shot at getting a "Mongol Horde" up and running in about the same timeframe, esp. with a bit of goody hut luck).

Consider that, at the time you launch your attack you have 4-5 cities.

Your first war, you capture two enemy cities, and found two additional ones while your troops are off fighting.

For the duration of the war then, you've doubled your expansion rate, and are now sitting on a pretty substantial Empire of 8-9 cities (all this in the 4-digit BC's!). Your now veteran and elite swordsmen, augmented by whatever horse-troops you have been able to build in the interim do an about-face and go bother your next nearest neighbor.

Attrition during the course of the wars you fight will slowly whittle your swordsmen away, thinning their ranks to be replaced by horse troops, but in the meantime, you clamp down hard on your nearest rivals, pulling their teeth before they have a chance to even think about becomming a viable threat, and, when the dust settles, the swordsmen that remain can still be sac'd for a few shields.

As far as gaining early game momentum goes, it's mighty hard to top the swordsman (and of course, replacing their losses with mounted troops will help ensure you KEEP that momentum!).

-=Vel=-