War Academy: Should We Research Horseriding More Agressively?

Robber Baron · July 12, 2002, 13:42

Pondering the map of possibilities before us, brave Apolytonians, I am becoming convinced we need to be able to put horsemen in the field soon.

I am not suggesting we delay Case Pink/Plan Eagle or alter its basic parameters (archer/spear stack[s] as strike force). I am looking past that initial conflict, to a second war.

As the situation currently stands, we have horses and we are nominally researching horseriding, but spending no money on science. We have 73 gold in the treasury, and we are earning 7 gpt. Playing around with our domestic slider indicates that we could acquire the tech in 34 turns (60% science, which would run a modest surplus of 1 gpt) or sooner if we are willing to eat into our surplus. (Have to admit I can't do all the math on this, since our army and barracks will increase our expenses in the turns ahead -- but it seems fair to assume that deficit spending will net us the tech in something like 20-25 turns.)
In other words, if we are willing to do the research ourselves, we can put ourselves in a position to begin building up a force of horsemen even as our archers are moving on our first enemy.

Alternatively, of course, we could wait and acquire the tech by trade. This course might prove efficient. Tested tactics developed by top strategists rely heavily on trading.
But relying on trade acquisition would leave us hostage to events. In our current situation, it might be argued we need to take the initiative ourselves. We have just this one little resource at this point (the horse tile), and we need to make the most of it.

Consider, as an example, a scenario we are discussing in other threads: we move against America first with archers and spear, our strike is successful, we target the French next. Without horsemen (not just the tech, but the units built and moved into position), we might be facing a scenario in which we are pitting archers and spears against pink swordsmen and horsemen. We want to strike France fairly quickly, given her territorial advantages, resource access, and AI expansion bonuses. As soon as we initiate hostilities against the Americans, the French will be on their guard.

Some might favor use of the war chariot, our UU. I feel this would be impractical (we would have to road a vast expanse of jungle to get our chariots over there). It would also be ill-advised, IMO, as it would trigger our golden age prematurely, before we are ready to fully realize and exploit its advantages.
(I do think we should build 3-4 war chariots later in the game, when we are less pressed, and use them as garrison troops in safe cities, so that we can use them later and thereby time our golden age for maximum impact.)

I am posting this thread as a "War Academy" thread because I want to emphasize that the issue is one with vital strategic and tactical implications -- and because I think we should be considering it with all the rigor and specificity our academy experts have brought to other questions (e.g., build ques in cities; timing of prepartion; size of forces built ...)

Your thoughts?

Sheik · July 12, 2002, 13:51

We shouldn't use the war chariot for the reasons you stated above.

As for getting Horsemen I don't think it is that necessary. I have never had good luck with horsemen for some reason. I also think we can trade for the tech and therefore it isn't important to research it ourselves.

UnOrthOdOx · July 12, 2002, 14:01

Let America research it, then beat it out of them...

Seriously, though. I thought that the horseman was not available to the Egyptians, so it would make little difference.

If it IS available, then we could put it to good use, but would it be worth the extra cost to produce?

I would say that we rely on either trading for it, or beating out of someone. Why?

1. We do not need it for the American War
2. While it would be nice, it is not a DIRE need for the next war
3. If we must trade for it, we can do so at a reduced price once the AI is done tech whoreing amongst themselves.

Consider: 34 turns at 6 gold, that's 204 gold. Even if we trade it for 200 gold, we save money. If we spend our 7 gpt (I think it was 21 turns...) it would actually cost more...

Inverse Icarus · July 12, 2002, 14:01

from my militaristic standpoint, yes. unless we can acquire some iron rather quickly after the "American War", which is doubtful (we can see the top of an american mountain near Washington, but we dont know if it has iron, and the nearest iron is near persia).

Horsemen does seem to be the best solution, as we have horses and they could stride the jungle and speed across the plains.

As for going down to 1 GPT to get it sooner, i don't think thats necessary. if we put the minimum possible (i didnt check if it was 10% or not) we would still get it in a max of 40 turns, which isnt that far away really. Case Pink will be in action, and we need a few turns for settler production and maybe even a temple or two to appease the culture mongers. we shall see, but as it stands right now, I'd like to get horseback riding at the lowest possible tech %.

also, before you flame, this is a war academy thread and i didnt start it. dont say im undermining officers like you always do. the war academy will slap you

Inverse Icarus · July 12, 2002, 14:03

Egypt can build horsemen, but they cost more in terms of shields.

they can build both War Chariots and Horsemen, and both upgrade to knights (so we cant amass an army of Chariots and upgrade to Horsemen, i just checked with an another game i'm playing as egypt).

UnOrthOdOx · July 12, 2002, 14:10

Well, that's good.

I think minimum to get the 40 turns was 20% at the moment. If we are to research, we shouldn't go above the minimum for a mere 6 turns. And Uber, even you can admit the need for temples. Temples=happy workers=more production=more military...

Robber Baron · July 12, 2002, 14:41

Quote:

Originally posted by UnOrthOdOx
Let America research it, then beat it out of them...

Yeah, I thought of that. Then I got nervous, thinking: if we want horsemen for our second war (and unless we get iron in American territory, we really do), then the only people we'd be able to beat it out of would be the Americans.
And what if they didn't have it?

(Which might not be too likely a possibility. I just don't know.)

Inverse Icarus · July 12, 2002, 14:45

Quote:

Originally posted by UnOrthOdOx
Well, that's good.

I think minimum to get the 40 turns was 20% at the moment. If we are to research, we shouldn't go above the minimum for a mere 6 turns. And Uber, even you can admit the need for temples. Temples=happy workers=more production=more military...

to slice and dice a homer simpson quote:

i agree with you d0x, in theory. in theory communism works. in theory.

Robber Baron · July 12, 2002, 14:46

Quote:

Originally posted by UnOrthOdOx
Well, that's good.

I think minimum to get the 40 turns was 20% at the moment. If we are to research, we shouldn't go above the minimum for a mere 6 turns.

I just wanted to be sure the timing would work out. (And I wasn't confident enough in my own abilities to do the working

) We want the horsemen on line in how many turns, ideally? If 40 + , say, 10 more (to build them) + another 8, roughly, to get them to the French border coincides nicely the timeframe for consolidating our American gains (counting my chickens before they're hatched here), then great: the minimum would be fine.

(btw, would that figure change much, once we get city number 4 on-line?)

Inverse Icarus · July 12, 2002, 14:58

Quote:

Originally posted by Robber Baron

I just wanted to be sure the timing would work out. (And I wasn't confident enough in my own abilities to do the working

) We want the horsemen on line in how many turns, ideally? If 40 + , say, 10 more (to build them) + another 8, roughly, to get them to the French border coincides nicely the timeframe for consolidating our American gains (counting my chickens before they're hatched here), then great: the minimum would be fine.

(btw, would that figure change much, once we get city number 4 on-line?)

not likely, unless we get movign on improving the terrain NOW for the city LATER. we're supposedly plopping it down with 2 useable grassland tiles (from my last known tile) that have no shields, no river, and no improvements. I'll be b1tching at the turnchat. dont worry

UnOrthOdOx · July 12, 2002, 15:06

That settler comming out this chat?

Robber Baron · July 12, 2002, 15:19

Not to beat a dead horse here (

), but it seems to me we do want to AT LEAST slide our research to the minimum NEXT TURN.
The time to begin long-term planning for war number 2 is now.

GoodFella · July 12, 2002, 15:43

Do we have horses in Apoltonia? If not, are there in America or anywhere else? Basically, can we aquire a source of horses fairly easily once we have horseback ridin?

Robber Baron · July 12, 2002, 15:47

We do have horses -- in the tile directly north of our capital.

UnOrthOdOx · July 12, 2002, 15:47

We have horses handy, right outside our doorstep, already roaded.

Micaelus · July 12, 2002, 16:36

Personally, I believe the switch in research would be a poor one. For our current position, trapped by the jungle, the horsemen would prove to be inefficient. I believe that we should attempt to trade for the tech or research it after the American war, perhaps, and build the horsemen/chariots in captured American cities (if we do not raze them...it would be a shame if we did).