Don't Knock them Iroquois!

History Guy · February 17, 2003, 21:54

Yes...yes...I know...the Iroquois weren't exactly the best choice for a civilization (a good sight better than the Sioux, though)...the only impressive things they really accomplished were getting around so much and forming a union of tribes...and the Mounted Warrior is incredibly poorly chosen...

But, look at the benefits...

In this game I'm playing now as Hiawatha...my very first Iroquois game (the only civ I hadn't tackled other than the French...who I don't intend to tackle...), and it's the most fun I've ever had in any of them, even the Romans didn't compare as far as playability. Here I was, the big Europe map from the downloads page, Salamanca being built in what is actually Germany, and my scouts immediately go out, and within a few minutes, get me up through Code of Laws, so that after I'm done researching Bronze Working, Writing, and Map Making, I'm on to Construction!

At the same time, my empire rapidly expands because of my high population. Culture is easy to control, and due to the excellent unit I have, the Mounted Warrior, I get to conquer everybody around me. Hitting Feudalism in 250 BC was amazing, I must say, especially since Medieval Times for me usuall comes at around 1 AD.

Right now, I'm in total control of all of the world up to the Alp's, and Navarre. Russia is nearly dominated (the land, not the civ). Remember that this is only a map of Europe.

The Chinese, Babylonians, Aztecs, Persians, Americans, and Japanese have fallen to my sword and my Mounted Warriors, and the Indians soon will follow. I'm researching Gunpowder. It's one heck of a game.

The fact that they are there may be annoying...but FIRAXIS...thanks!! THANKS for those Iroquois!!!

Nubclear · February 18, 2003, 00:03

notyoueither · February 18, 2003, 01:09

They are great.

I played the Iroquois in a PBEM game. The Persians started about 15 to 20 tiles away from me.

They wish it had been further.

I used the GA to build most of the significant Ancient Wonders while I planned the FP location in former Persian lands. Then I had to leave that game due to limitations on my time. I gave the position to the Persian. He liked it.

notyoueither · February 18, 2003, 01:15

btw, The Iroquois Confederacy is very deserving of inclusion.

They enjoyed permanent settlements, sustainable agriculture, and a sophisticated organisation of state and society. They were well set up for a long haul if other events had not conspired against them.

I agree the Mounted Warrior is unfortunately named. I'd give it the same stats, put them on foot, and call them War Parties.

Jethro83 · February 19, 2003, 01:29

Yes. The Iroquois are a very good civ. Being religious/expansionist, with a fast UU really tends to suit my play style.

However, in terms of rel/exp civs, I actually prefer to use the Arabs, as their UU comes at the best time for a golden age (by my opinion anyway), its even faster, and its also cheaper than its regular counterpart.

Hurricane · February 19, 2003, 06:50

The Iroquois UU is one of the very best. It was by far the best before auto-retreat was trashed, but it still ranks high up. The Persian immortal is slightly better, but it has no upgrade path (I'm talking vanilla Civ3 here). And expansionist kicks ass on big maps and high difficulty.

Romanus · February 19, 2003, 16:05

I hadnt played the Iroqouis until recently, when I tried the new 4-2 game in the Tournament at CFC....I find myself using them a lot now.They expand well for me, and I seem to have equal or better success culture flipping cities than I have had with other civs.

Chemical Ollie · February 20, 2003, 17:26

For a while I thought you meant the Iraqis. But I agree with you. The Iroquis rock, especially on huge maps.

(Now I have only 174 spams left to write before I get my custom avatar)

Yahweh Sabaoth · February 21, 2003, 13:12

Those Mounted Warriors are great, especially for taking out the damned Americans. I used them up until the age of Cavalry in my last game. Even then, I used them to take out wandering spearmen, knights, etc.

But after using these units to such great effect, corruption really brought my civ down.

Still, it was the greatest in the world, and that's what matters most, right?

pedrojedi · February 22, 2003, 22:59

Never tried a expansionist civ. Since I like building and improving, my rapid expansion soon follows a "stasis for establishment" fase, which normally sets my backwards when comparing me to other AI civs. I am improving my timing, but I still really suck when comes about planning turns.

Maybe I will try those iriquois... I got curious!

Abdul-Aziz · February 25, 2003, 17:42

Iroquis weren't the best choice, neither were Zululand.

Yahweh Sabaoth · February 25, 2003, 17:44

Quote:

Originally posted by Abdul-Aziz
Iroquis weren't the best choice, neither were Zululand.

Weren't the best choice for what?

Arrian · February 25, 2003, 18:16

Probably inclusion in the game (look back at the very first post). I disagree, though.

Anyway, the Iroquois are solid - I just don't particularly like expansionist. But the unit is the best in the game, and religious is generally acknowledged to be one of the top traits.

-Arrian

Yahweh Sabaoth · February 25, 2003, 18:21

Well, somehow the native Americans had to be included... why the Columbians, Brazilians and Venezeulans aren't, I don't know, but as they say, "that's a subject for a different thread."

Anyhow, I would beg to differ that the mounted warriors are the best UU in the game, though by very little. They are an impeccable unit, impeccable in the sense that they come along early and can be used for some time to subjugate your enemies. However, the same can be said for the Gaelic Swordsman, which has even better stats, excepting the cost.

My personal top choice for #1 UU is the Chinese Rider. The unit rocks the party. It conquers and it holds. And it moves not 2 but 3. Wowee zowee.

Mounted Warrior, though, is a strong contender for the #2 slot. My last game was as the Iroquois, and I used the MW to take down 2 small and 1 quite potent AI civs. Still, it triggers the GA a bit too early for my tastes, in general.

Abdul-Aziz · February 25, 2003, 18:43

Yahweh, for Civ3 obviously...

Yahweh Sabaoth · February 25, 2003, 18:52

Quote:

Originally posted by Abdul-Aziz
Yahweh, for Civ3 obviously...

That still doesn't answer my question. "Weren't the best choice for Civ3." What does "best choice" refer to? Best choice to include? Best choice to play as?

Abdul-Aziz · February 25, 2003, 19:05

To include.

Arrian · February 26, 2003, 10:18

Quote:

My personal top choice for #1 UU is the Chinese Rider. The unit rocks the party. It conquers and it holds. And it moves not 2 but 3. Wowee zowee.

Mounted Warrior, though, is a strong contender for the #2 slot.

I actually whaffle between those two. The Rider is my favorite, and I love playing China, but I think the MW is slightly more powerful. My reasoning is that it represents a 50% increase in attack power from the horseman, and that it allows you to confidently take on the Greeks or Carthage in the ancient age. It never happens in my games, but imagine throwing Riders up against Samurai. OUCH! That would be horrible. Fortunately for the human player, even if you allow Japan to live that long, it is unlikely that they will use their Samurai properly to counter your Riders.

In short, the MW owns its age. The Rider, while awesome, does have competition.

-Arrian

Yahweh Sabaoth · February 26, 2003, 11:07

Quote:

Originally posted by Arrian
In short, the MW owns its age. The Rider, while awesome, does have competition.

Well, I'd certainly agree with that. I'd say that the Rider owns its age, too, though, simply by credit of the Japanese never really having their act together enough to effectively use their Samurai. On the other hand, with Ansar Warriors and Keshiks around, life's a little different.

Theseus · March 4, 2003, 23:55

Bullpucky.

Immortals rule. I've said this forever... 4 attack is dominant in the ancient era, and now with an upgrade to 6 attack the investment has legs.

Yeah yeah, retreat shme-treat. Gimme some hills and mountains... or even forest and jungle...

Not that MWs aren;t great... they are. But I wanna own my neighbors.

Powell doctrine: Overwhelming Force.

notyoueither · March 5, 2003, 05:56

Give me Exp and I'll eat your lunch before you have a chance to pick it, Theseus.

Yahweh Sabaoth · March 5, 2003, 11:09

Um, uh, Immortals with an attack power of SIX? Is this something I COMPLETELY overlooked when I purchased PTW?

Back to the Iroquois though, I was hoping someone could point me in the direction of a good thread about maximizing the potential of expanionist civs. (actually, this wasn't a problem for me when playing as the iroquois, but maybe as those that need a little boost in the beginning... Mongols, Scandanvians, etc.) There's no way it can be ALL luck...

Arrian · March 5, 2003, 11:14

Yahweh,

Theseus was referring to the new upgrade path that allows you to upgrade Immortals to Guerillas (6/6/1, Replaceable Parts). IMO, it's a crap unit, and does nothing to improve the investment in slow movers.

Yahweh, do a search for posts by Aeson - he has had a lot to say about the power of expansionist civs.

-Arrian

Yahweh Sabaoth · March 5, 2003, 11:18

Well, how in God's name do I do a search around here? Everytime I try I get something I don't want. Is there a search button I'm missing, or something?

BTW, I share your opinion about the immortals. But that doesn't mean the Persians don't rock.

pedrojedi · March 5, 2003, 13:24

Quote:

Theseus was referring to the new upgrade path that allows you to upgrade Immortals to Guerillas (6/6/1, Replaceable Parts). IMO, it's a crap unit, and does nothing to improve the investment in slow movers.

In usual games, the Guerrilla is all that is bad and causes cancer, but there is a exception: when you don't have the "right" land. And, by "right" land, I referring to rubber.

In my last game, with the Carthagians, I did not have rubber on my territory, which was a blow to my army, since I could not build infantry and was playing a basically defensive game. The salvation was a war with the indians, which had a really close snow-island with oil and rubber. And the guerrillas, which did not require the rubber to do them. So I made a quick with surprisingly little cost war against them, where my guerrillas succesfully dominated the island, defended by 2 infantry and 2 riflemen (2 cities). It was my initial move to world diplomatic domination.

Panag · March 5, 2003, 13:29

hi ,

they are okay , .... an early UU but after that , ....

ones the golden age is done for them , .....

have a nice day

babieca · March 5, 2003, 16:30

I agree that the GA does come a bit too early to be ideal, but upgrades to Knights and then Cavalry give the MW serious longevity

I actually quite like Babylonian Bowmen as well. Not a big fan of Scientific civs, generally, but those guys are cheap as chips and quite handy.