What's so great about bribing cheap barb units?

debeest · June 6, 2002, 13:57

Lots of people are very enthusiastic about bribing barb units (just for the purpose of getting "cheap" units, as opposed to defensive or other reasons). Why? A bribed barb unit is somewhat cheaper than a unit you rush-build for yourself, but it still costs slightly over two gold per shield, which is the exchange rate when buying improvements. That's not especially "cheap." How big an advantage is it?

Since the exchange rate for rush-building improvements is better than the rate for rushing units, that's where I generally spend my money; I build units naturally, with shields. Obviously there are times when it makes sense to buy units, but am I making a big mistake in allocating my money mostly where I get the best rate? (I realize that at a certain point a rush-built caravan/freight will immediately more than repay its cost, but I'm talking about the early to mid game where money is tight.)

TCO · June 6, 2002, 14:13

opportunity cost, son...

I play an agressive style. I rarely want any buildings. But I do want soldiers for the onslaught.

atawa · June 6, 2002, 17:38

And to get NON units when in Rep or Demo

Goingonit · June 6, 2002, 17:54

Barb units don't take any of your cities' time to bribe, as opposed to if you rush-build.

-Jrabbit · June 7, 2002, 08:18

I'm far from an expert, but what I like about this approach is that you can maintain a cheaper city defense by using diplomats with 1-2 phalanx/pikes, especially in the early-mid game when you're busy expanding. No support cost

and no rushbuilding defenders. Just bribe a barb attack unit and use it to chop down the incursion while your city remains stable. Instantly in battle, the unit is often a vet, and you get a LOT more leader kills

this way. When you consider that, it's more like a break-even or slightly profitable approach over the course of a game.

After each attack, I send the new unit to where it's most needed and re-home (unless it's NON), again expediting expansion. Since adopting this approach, barbs have become almost

welcome.

Marquis de Sodaq · June 7, 2002, 16:47

They come with gold. A horseman will cost you 41 gold, but then you take the king that same turn and get 150 gold. Net cost +109 gold and one horseman. Or +68 gold and two horsemen. Not a bad deal, if you ask me. As an added bonus, you still have your diplomat, as well.

Milking a spawn area can fund a lot of projects in your empire. Kill/bribe barbarian, capture leader. Repeat ad nauseum.

rah · June 7, 2002, 17:04

Yes, it works better with horsemen or other 2x movement types since the king is more likely to get seperated from his protection. With archers, they don't get seperated. So when that archer comes up next to your city you either have to bribe the one that isn't doubled up to attack the other one/with king (and you don't get the king) or hope it dashes itself against your defender.

atawa · June 7, 2002, 17:06

Yup, free money and units almost better then demanding tribute from AI

debeest · June 7, 2002, 19:52

Certainly, if you can catch a barb leader, that makes it more than worthwhile. And if you can get NON units at barb prices, that's a good deal. But I'm talking about the people who get excited because there's a barb city nearby, and they loiter near it with a dip, bribing each unit as it comes out, just to buy cheap units. It just doesn't seem like that big a deal; they're not all that cheap.

TCO · June 7, 2002, 22:30

Did you understand my response regarding opportunity cost?

Marquis de Sodaq · June 8, 2002, 15:01

Quote:

Originally posted by rah
Yes, it works better with horsemen or other 2x movement types since the king is more likely to get seperated from his protection. With archers, they don't get seperated. So when that archer comes up next to your city you either have to bribe the one that isn't doubled up to attack the other one/with king (and you don't get the king) or hope it dashes itself against your defender.

When next to a city, a barbarian always attacks the city. You can move a warrior behind a barbarian legion, he is safe. then grab the leader after the legion dies.

Mercatia · June 8, 2002, 15:46

The only time I bribe barbs is when they have captured a city (typically once a foriegn city).... I then use them to capture the city and make it my own.

This can be done without penalty of causing war and is a great way to sometimes split a foriegn country.

Six Thousand Year Old Man · June 8, 2002, 17:35

Quote:

Originally posted by Marquis de Sodaq

When next to a city, a barbarian always attacks the city. You can move a warrior behind a barbarian legion, he is safe. then grab the leader after the legion dies.

I never knew this... have you tested this, M. de Marquis?

If that is always the case, then it is a very, very useful bit of information. I don't remember it in the barbarian papers either

debeest · June 8, 2002, 18:22

GP, I know what opportunity cost means. But not everyone is completely building-averse. Did you understand my posts? I'm not saying it's not worth bribing the barbs; it is cheaper than rush-building. I'm just saying, I don't see why people get all excited about it and go to some lengths to create the situation, when it doesn't save all that much.

When I'm building units to pursue a war, I want vets, and barbs are rarely that. Why buy weak units a little cheap when you can build or buy strong ones?

Scouse Gits · June 8, 2002, 18:35

debeest ... I agree. Unsupported units are nice when they fall into your lap...but I wouldn't even think about elaborate schemes to procure them as there are too many other important things to concentrate on.

----------------

SG(2)

rah · June 8, 2002, 19:34

Quote:

Originally posted by Six Thousand Year Old Man
I never knew this... have you tested this, M. de Marquis?

If that is always the case, then it is a very, very useful bit of information. I don't remember it in the barbarian papers either

They will attack 99% of the time. Good enough to book on it. That 1% is sometime real early in the game and you only have 1 city, I've seen barbs back off my capital instead of attacking. (but even this is rare, but it probably has happened a handfull of time over the many years.)

Yes, I too will move the unit out to try to get the king, but early in the game if you have only warriors or phalanxs on non-defensible terrain, I prefer not to let archers or legions attack.

TCO · June 8, 2002, 20:51

Quote:

Originally posted by debeest
GP, I know what opportunity cost means. But not everyone is completely building-averse. Did you understand my posts? I'm not saying it's not worth bribing the barbs; it is cheaper than rush-building. I'm just saying, I don't see why people get all excited about it and go to some lengths to create the situation, when it doesn't save all that much.

When I'm building units to pursue a war, I want vets, and barbs are rarely that. Why buy weak units a little cheap when you can build or buy strong ones?

no prob, pard.

1. If you like buildings, units will be worth less. Sure.

2. I usually use STWA to get vets. Provided the barbs win a conflict, they become vets. (And I can try top be gentle with them on the first ru t hrough.)

3. I often just use them as martial law dudes. (After warriors not available.)

4. I don't go to much trouble to set up the situation. But if it works out, some cheap barbs aren't bad...

TCO · June 8, 2002, 20:54

Quote:

Originally posted by Marquis de Sodaq

When next to a city, a barbarian always attacks the city. You can move a warrior behind a barbarian legion, he is safe. then grab the leader after the legion dies.

Very interesting insight. Just another example of how we have noodled out the exact rules that the AI follows.

Marquis de Sodaq · June 8, 2002, 21:25

Quote:

Originally posted by Six Thousand Year Old Man
I never knew this... have you tested this, M. de Marquis?

If that is always the case, then it is a very, very useful bit of information. I don't remember it in the barbarian papers either

It's never failed me in a game.

Also, a barbarian will change direction to attack you, but will generally not to attack the AI. An extreme example of this led me to pay attention more closely. A barbarian horsemen walked on a straight line within 2 squares of 6 AI cities, only to change his course after he got within 5 or 6 tiles of one of my cities. That is, straight line for about 30 tiles, then veered off to attack my city. I've never tested it, only paid attention - but it seems that this is the general rule. I suspect a unit draws him, as I've seen many of my undefended, freshly settled towns ignored until their first defenders are built. Then barbarians that were previously wandering aimlessly suddenly take an interest and approach.

This last idea may just be suspicion, as I'm sure we've all lost undefended cities to barbarians over the years.