Koreans and the Early Game

[Harovan]

Originally posted by Arrian
I've come to really enjoy early archer wars.

You will join us. Resistance is futile!

For the newbies among us: I remember a thread about the most useless unit, and Arrian said hands down, the archer.

About the land issue:

A standard map has 100x100/2 = 5000 tiles (land and water), with 8 civs that is 625 per civ.

A huge map has 160x160/2 = 12800 tiles, with 16 civs that is 800 per civ.

Both values have to be multiplied by 20%, 30% or 40% to get the land tiles available on average. The huge/16 map gives more tiles per civ.

[vmxa1]

I have to cop a plea on that as well. I was not fond of archers as they upgrade to Longbows and that is a long time later.
I am much more tolerant of them now and have a bit more respect for longbows as well.
So I will take my lumps as well. Won't be the last time I get the foot in mouth disease.

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

So, if a huge world offers about 125% land of the standard world, how many core cities should one build before attacking?

[Harovan]

If you're archerrushing 1 civ, 2 cities with barracks are enough. If you have more neighbors (like on a huge map) and need more forces, 3-4 cities. If you attack later, with horses and swords, you should have much more cities, like 8-10 at least. Not because these units are worse than archers, but because by then the AI also has more military.

[TheArsenal]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph

A standard map has 100x100/2 = 5000 tiles (land and water), with 8 civs that is 625 per civ.

A huge map has 160x160/2 = 12800 tiles, with 16 civs that is 800 per civ.

Both values have to be multiplied by 20%, 30% or 40% to get the land tiles available on average. The huge/16 map gives more tiles per civ.

Interesting. It seemed like there was more room per civ, but I've never seen the math. How does this break down with max civs a Large Map?

[Harovan]

Originally posted by TheArsenal
Interesting. It seemed like there was more room per civ, but I've never seen the math. How does this break down with max civs a Large Map?

130x130/2/12 ~ 704

[Arrian]

For the newbies among us: I remember a thread about the most useless unit, and Arrian said hands down, the archer.

I did, in fact, say that. I retract that statement. I was wrong.

As for # of cities prior to (main) attack...

I will often have 10-12 cities on a standard map by the time I open up the big can 'o whoopass (this does not count early settler bopping and whatnot). So, I guess I'd say 12-15 on a huge map.

-Arrian

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

And assuming your foes have a similar number of cities, and you have no military edge (Korea), how many troops of what nature will you build? Will 15 vet swords still be enough, or will have have additional backing troops? (I know I've asked this question a number of times in different forms, and there's no "definitive" answer, but, sue me.)

[BRC]

Originally posted by Yahweh Sabaoth
And assuming your foes have a similar number of cities, and you have no military edge (Korea), how many troops of what nature will you build? Will 15 vet swords still be enough, or will have have additional backing troops? (I know I've asked this question a number of times in different forms, and there's no "definitive" answer, but, sue me.)

Using concentration of force, 15 swordsmen will be enough to knock down a few cities probably. Then you can sue for a very favorable peace. I would bring vet spearmen to cover each stack of swords, and maybe a few horsies, but those swords will cause plenty of damage. Once your momentum slows, start thinking about terms of peace.

Now if you don't like swords, then packs of horses work amazingly well against the AI. I actually prefer horses, as their 2 movement allow me to oscillate on a few AI's, instead of just crushing one.

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

Originally posted by BRC
Now if you don't like swords, then packs of horses work amazingly well against the AI. I actually prefer horses, as their 2 movement allow me to oscillate on a few AI's, instead of just crushing one.

I also prefer horsemen, but they're not too hot on mountainous terrain, and I've noticed that the Koreans get packed in pretty easily by their neighbors, meaning that short-distance troops such as swords might be a better choice.

I've also noticed that the Koreans tend to start around a lot of mountain ranges, if they're near any river. Now, this could obviously be coincidence. But this has happened to me about 15 times in a row (my world settings are "standard").

[Arrian]

I like to use a combination of the two (horse/sword). That works best.

As for # of troops... well, that depends on what you're after. Do you want to build, while doing a bit of fighting. Or do you want to fight, while building a bit?

To the best of my knowledge, the choice of civ has no bearing on what type of terrain you start on. Korea could start in a jungle on game and in icy tundra the next.

-Arrian

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

Originally posted by Arrian

To the best of my knowledge, the choice of civ has no bearing on what type of terrain you start on. Korea could start in a jungle on game and in icy tundra the next.

-Arrian

And in my experience so far, it is this sort of terrain they tend to start on. But this too shall pass.

As for number of troops v. building... building can wait until those Mongols, Chinese, Indians, Japanese, Arabs and Persians are gone, thanks.

[Arrian]

Oh, ok then. The answer is lots.

-Arrian

[Arrian]

Getting them to fight each other can be a real help too, and being commercial means writing (need embassies for alliances) is just around the corner. Get them fighting each other and they will most likely bleed each other dry. You can land the killing blows.

-Arrian

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

Originally posted by Arrian
Getting them to fight each other can be a real help too, and being commercial means writing (need embassies for alliances) is just around the corner. Get them fighting each other and they will most likely bleed each other dry. You can land the killing blows.

-Arrian

I was working this this morning - had the Vikings doing the Indians real nicely - when the Vikings doublecrossed me an took a border city.

Oh, I could've recovered, but I had to go to work in 5 mins anyways, so I just aborted. Back to the drawing board for ole' Wang Kon.

[Master Zen]

I would suggest you try the Ralphing city placement scheme on huge maps, works wonders since you will get a huge amount of military camp cities early.

In my only complete huge map game I've ever played (France, emperor) , I had my super-dense Ralphed empire with about 6-7 camp cities cranking horsies, got the GL and Leo's then made a mass upgrade to Knights (about 35) and unleashed them against my neighbors the Germans (talk about 1940 the other way around! )

The Germans were the most powerful civ in the world, had like 25 cities... they were totally wiped out in 20 turns and the game was de facto won.

The advantage of this is that I was allowed all the ancient age to build up so warmongering really didn't take much from the economic needs, plus, with the Musketeers I got my GA at a very nice time.

Ok, my point is that Ralphing works on huge.

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

Some results from my Korean game from this weekend, if anyone is interested:

Settings: Huge, 16 civs, continents, regent, roaming, 4 billion, normal, cultural linking on, all victory conditions.

Neighbors: Aztecs (!) to the East, China to the south. To the West of China, Persia, and the west of Persia, the Ottomans. Right south of China, Arabia. Circling Arabia/China, West to East: Japan, Zululand, Babylon, Mongols, Iroquois, and India. Elsewhere in the world: Europe.

Huts: Not terribly awesome, not too many barbarians.

Homeland: Lots of rivers, thank God. And forests. Good land, not terribly diverse. 2 luxuries.

I wanted to try a few things this game that I've never tried before, and they worked out nicely for me.

First of all, I researched pottery at 80% or 90%. I got it around the time I made contact with the Chinese and Aztecs. I believe this game I irrigated some cattle instead of mining them, as I am wont to do. This gave me good REXing capability, esp. after I got some granaries built.

Cut back to 10% research and went for Writing. Built barracks in every city that was slow-growth, and later built barracks in the fast growers too. I traded for IW but did not connect iron until late in the Ancient Era. Built scores of veteran warriors, and nothing else, unit-wise.

Luck: the Mongols vs. everyone war occurred way to the South of me. It was not a threat to me, but it involved every other civ, not including the Aztecs who have been good trading/warring partners the entire game. I believe this war greatly reduced the propensity of the other civs to build wonders.

I began pre-building wonders early in this game. Scores of workers converted my lust grassland into productive mines. Built the Great Library. WOW! Got 4 free techs this way (Code of Laws, Philosophy, Construction and Republic). Later on, I built the HG as well. I also built every medival wonder as well (except JS Bachs! which I captured after a lengthy war)

During this game I built almost NO temples! This is unorthodox for me, but it worked very well, as by the mid-Middle Ages, I had 5 luxuries under my control, and most of my cities had marketplaces. NOTE: This also helped me avoid a cultural victory too early... I currently stand poised to achieve Domination in a few turns.

The scientific trait, plus the GL, gave me a tech lead by the early middle ages. No one else could keep up since then. My 40 swordsmen, combined with some horsemen, took out China, and then Arabia, and I gradually phased out the swordsmen/med. infs. in favor of knights, and then cavalry. Needless to say, skipping temples and cathedrals gave me more time to build knights (later on, I built the temples anyways, but I still haven't built too many cathedrals).

I won't bore you with the rest of the game... this thread is about the early game, after all. But, thanks to you all for your advice. I followed it, and I worked. So my conclusion:

1. Stay away from really early wars. Build those vet warriors, upgrade, and kill.

2. Pre-build your wonders and get that GL! I did a fair amount of trading but I hardly needed to, thanks to that one wonder.

3. This isn't something you have any control over, but... GOD it's nice to have neighbors that won't immediately attack you, and it's also nice to have an expansionist civ vivisected early in the game. If you have the opportunity to arrange such a war, somehow, do it.

Anyhow, I hope this thread doesn't just die out now. Maybe some of playing Korea on higher difficulty levels might need, or offer, some advice?

Thanks everyone...

[Arrian]

Sounds like you did things right. You were also lucky enough to be left alone long enough to build up & bust out.

I tried a game as Korea this weekend. I was doing great until it dawned on me that I had neither horses nor iron. I tried taking some away (Japan), but the losses + the time = too much. If I had managed to get some iron in my territory (this was not a failure of my REXing, but rather just the luck of the draw) without having to fight an archer war for it, things would have been different. I was bigger, richer, and more productive than my neighbors, and had prebuilt a bunch of vet warriors. Oh, what might have been.

So then I went and played Rome. 1 bad game (curse you, RNG!), followed by an awesome one (I worship thee, RNG!).

-Arrian

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

I must admit, I'd dread playing Korea SURROUNDED on a higher difficulty level. Good late-game traits, but what does the late game matter if you get creamed in the early game?

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

And that H'wacha: pathetic! I built one after my GA just to see how much it would rock. And guess what: it DOESN'T rock! In fact, it just sits there! I used it three times. The first time, artillery bombardment failed. The next two times, I took off 1 hit point from a unit. Whoop dee doo! What a waste! Now, if it had a ROF of 2, or a greater range...

[Mountain Sage]

Originally posted by Arrian

Regarding the distance issue... is there more land per civ on a huge/16 than a standard/8?

-Arrian

Not really, but it depends on the setting. On Pangea, roughly yes, on Archipelago, you can be alone on a fair-sized island (or the AI can!).

Soooo, 20'000 gold with a commercial civ? Add 'industrious' and you'll see. You will like Carthage: early UU (not that bad), commercial + industrious. If you don't finish with 40'000+, you shoud drop a level.

[Yahweh Sabaoth]

I've saved Carthage for last...

Korea does flourish quite nicely in the later game. It's totally amazing the sheer size of the empire you can maintain. I'm set to win a domination victory, and my farthest-from-the-capital size 12 cities are still producing 3-5 shields. This is under Monarchy with courthouses but no police stations! That's a miracle, in my book.

Scientific I'm not totally hot on, but I'd rather build libraries than temples to spread cultural boundaries. All in all, a good large-empire civ.

To build the empire, though, I might go with Rome...