Ban HG in Duels and/or MP games - Page 4

War4ever · January 25, 2003, 14:55

vet legions are ok...but they have a hard time with phalanxes on good terrain i have noticed

Ming · January 25, 2003, 15:10

Non vets do... but I've had no problem with vet legions, even if the phalanxes are on decent terrain. You can usually go on a real terror with them if you get them early. You take a few cities, and scare the hell out of the person so that all he is doing for the next couple of thousand of years is building defense

War4ever · January 25, 2003, 15:16

they have trouble with phalanxes on mountains though...i do remember that...

Ming · January 25, 2003, 15:47

hell... vet cats have problems with phalanxes on mountains... everything does

War4ever · January 25, 2003, 15:53

i had no problem taking out a couple of phalanxes on mountains last night

DrSpike · January 25, 2003, 16:06

Quote:

Originally posted by War4ever
haha...so what do i do when i get masonry and WC...hm..pyramids or sun tzus

Depends.

My preference would be pyramids in your Rah rules games.

War4ever · January 25, 2003, 16:09

that depends too, vet troops out weighs growth, vet troops will prevent many from attacking for fear of going up against vets and b/c everytime you win you get vets....

but pyramids are good for growing mountain cities

again its all situational

Ming · January 25, 2003, 20:30

While sun tzus is a fine wonder... it's really just as easy to build a few barricks and crank all your vet units out of them.

However, it's true strength is the "fear factor" attached to it, becuase people KNOW your units are vets, and given a choice, will usually attack somebody else

War4ever · January 25, 2003, 23:11

Ming you are wise, plus your non vets become vets in battle

trev · February 2, 2003, 20:20

Vet units, GW are generally a waste of time early in games, almost never build them, prefer HG, MC, JSB etc as these assist in expansion and city development/ growth.
But of course my strategy is tailored towards completing a game to its conclusion over a number of sessions, I have no interest in short 1 session matches and will only play with people who i expect to resume the match at a later date with me.

Early wars usually cost too dearly in expansion and city development, so i give all wonders of military significant a wide berth normally

DrSpike · February 2, 2003, 20:28

Quote:

Originally posted by trev

Early wars usually cost too dearly in expansion and city development, so i give all wonders of military significant a wide berth normally

You'll fit in nicely with the Aussie game......you're not allowed to attack before 1800.

Expansion is all well and good (though happy wonders can become a crutch) but you have to be able to stop people taking it all away from you.

Alexander's Horse · February 2, 2003, 20:42

If everyone played multi session games like us then I think most people would avoid early war. The reason is if one player isn't engaged in the war they get an unbeatable advantage through peaceful development.

Ming · February 2, 2003, 20:44

That's why you involve EVERYBODY in wars

And a single player going to war can really give you a big lift. While somebody else is building the important wonders, you are building the army that will take it away from them. Usually far cheaper than building the wonders

Alexander's Horse · February 2, 2003, 20:52

Its not usually possible to engage everyone in the war. Someone will be tucked safely away somewhere.

The units thing - I can see that in 2x, much harder in 1x.

Deity never builds any wonders and he plays better than anyone I know.

Ming · February 2, 2003, 20:55

It works the same in 1x. You use your military to take the cities away from people that they have been building them so nicely for you

And you even get a free science out of the deal. It's the one two punch. Send in a dip, steal a tech... take the city, and get another one

Alexander's Horse · February 2, 2003, 21:01

No it doesn't. All good in theory though.

Ming · February 2, 2003, 21:07

It works well in practice for me...

Alexander's Horse · February 2, 2003, 21:10

You don't play 1x.

Ming · February 2, 2003, 21:13

I used to... I've probably have played more 1x1x games than you have... and it just got boring... too slow

Just because I prefer 2x production now doesn't mean I don't know how 1x works

Alexander's Horse · February 3, 2003, 00:24

your comments suggest you forgot how 1x works.

Anyway, your theory is going to get a workout soon - I know what you mean and I agree it can work.

Ming · February 3, 2003, 00:50

Quote:

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
your comments suggest you forgot how 1x works.

Anyway, your theory is going to get a workout soon - I know what you mean and I agree it can work.

Nahhh... my comments prove I remember 1x well

And give it a try. Especially if you get off to a crummy start. You can get to iron works/Legions quick(something to consider when you get warrior code and it drives you off the monarchy path) ... and vet legions can be VERY effective early in the game. Marching them in pairs to avoid bribes (unless you don't play unit bribes) you can drive an opponent absolutely crazy. Keep them on rough terrain, and they are almost impossible to take out early. They can totally destroy a persons civ early. March out a few diplos with them, and you can catch up in techs really quickly

Alexander's Horse · February 3, 2003, 01:15

Pardon me if I bridle at the teacher/student tone but we have tried it.

Although not with legions, crusaders more the weapon of choice

Back on-topic, do I assume from this thread that War just missed out on HG a few times recently?

Ming · February 3, 2003, 01:42

Nahhhhh... he never builds it early, so he doesn't want anybody else to do it either

And on the other thing... While vet crusaders can get on a roll... by then, vet pikeman are in place, and few well placed vet cats can take care of it as well. Early legions against phalanxes and warriors is killer. Even multiple horses attacking them on bad terrain isn't going to kill them.

War4ever · February 3, 2003, 02:13

gr...thats not why i want the cost raised gr.....

Alexander's Horse · February 3, 2003, 02:19

Quote:

Originally posted by Ming
Nahhhhh... he never builds it early, so he doesn't want anybody else to do it either

Ah

Quote:

And on the other thing... While vet crusaders can get on a roll... by then, vet pikeman are in place, and few well placed vet cats can take care of it as well. Early legions against phalanxes and warriors is killer. Even multiple horses attacking them on bad terrain isn't going to kill them.

I can't remember the last time I saw someone build a legion. We usually move through the tech tree so rapidly that you really need modern units to take someone out once you're in AD.

Ming · February 3, 2003, 03:04

Im talking about attacking around 3000 BC to 2000 BC... screw waiting till AD.

Hydey · February 3, 2003, 07:30

We tend to use larger maps so often we are not close enough to wage war that early in the game.

Alexander's Horse · February 3, 2003, 07:41

Quote:

Originally posted by Ming
Im talking about attacking around 3000 BC to 2000 BC... screw waiting till AD.

You can't do what you are talking about at that time - you have no cities and no troops.

DrSpike · February 3, 2003, 07:45

No cities by 3000BC = toast
No cities by 2000BC = charred remains of what was formerly a piece of toast.

Ming · February 3, 2003, 08:26

After 3000 BC you should have some core cities in place and start your planning... By 2000 BC you should be able to start an offensive... and people won't be anywhere near ready for it if they are thinking like you AH

And you still have over a 1000 years before anybody can really stop you...