I have been reading how people steal workers from AI early in the game. A real Newb question? How do you do this? I thought you just destroyed them.

Workers are never destroyed, always captured. Try it, you'll see.

It's really easy, click on an opposing Worker with one of your military units (Don't think Scouts/Explorers count). That Worker is changed to your side. You can also do the same to Settlers though they convert to a Worker as well. Of course you know, this means War...

On higher difficulty levels where AI starts with free archers, when you capture a worker, most likely the nearby archer will kill your weak warrior.

You should be careful when capturing a worker if you want to keep your warrior alive. Either capture a worker on hills, forest or jungle or try to capture the worker not right next to the center city square. If there are no roads that fasten the archer to kill your warrior, you might escape your warrior as well.

Of course, you can try capturing the worker with a quechua. Then, you don't have to worry to keep it alive :)

On higher difficulty levels where AI starts with free archers, when you capture a worker, most likely the nearby archer will kill your weak warrior.

You should be careful when capturing a worker if you want to keep your warrior alive. Either capture a worker on hills, forest or jungle or try to capture the worker not right next to the center city square. If there are no roads that fasten the archer to kill your warrior, you might escape your warrior as well.

Of course, you can try capturing the worker with a quechua. Then, you don't have to worry to keep it alive :)

Aye, you have to be careful, but even if it's a suicide mission, a worker is far more valuable than a warrior.

Yeah, i never mind sacrificing a warrior for a worker. I'd rather sacrifice my warrior now than wait for the worker to move somewhere else and maybe never get another chance.

Yeah, i never mind sacrificing a warrior for a worker. I'd rather sacrifice my warrior now than wait for the worker to move somewhere else and maybe never get another chance.

I agree worker is more valuable than the warrior, but your capital is more valuable than a worker as well. Several times I lost the initial warrior and as I was building barracks or fishing boats, the wandering archer attacks and wipes my civ out. :mischief:

Well, at least that makes for a quick game and you can then start a new one! :lol:

Well, at least that makes for a quick game and you can then start a new one! :lol:

yep, very quick game :) Fastest conquest loss ever in 15 turns :)

Yeah, i never mind sacrificing a warrior for a worker. I'd rather sacrifice my warrior now than wait for the worker to move somewhere else and maybe never get another chance.

Yeah but if the warrior dies, then there's noone to escort the worker back to your city

Thanks for the replies. Civilazation is an amazing game. Easy to get into, yet so complex. I am still finding new things out all the time. Now I know how to do this, should help me in the early game.

Have to say my own experience on stealing workers is that it's very risky, and doesn't always work. In particular:

1. You can only capture the worker if it actually is working at the edge of the AI cultural borders next to your warrior on the turn you declare war. Otherwise the AI pulls the worker into its city before you can take it. And the time your warrior is spending lurking on the AI borders waiting for a worker to show up in the right spot is time that the warrior isn't exploring and isn't opening goody huts.

2. On monarch and above, you end up in an instant war with a civ that has archers when you don't. That's not so bad if the civ is some way distant from yours, because they'll usually accept a peace treaty before their pursuing archers have reached your borders, but it can be very dangerous for a nearby civ. At this stage in the game one hostile archer is all it takes to give you a very rapid conquest defeat.

3. On prince and below, the problem is there aren't any AI workers at the beginning. By the time you've waited for the AI to build them for you to capture, you've potentially lost quite a few turns when your worker could've been doing something useful if you'd just built one yourself (this isn't so much of an issue if you're researching early religion and neglecting worker action techs initially). Also, by the time the workers are around, the AI's cultural borders are bigger so it's less likely the worker will wander on to a square at the border that he can be captured from.

Because of all those issues, I've become inclined not to use a strategy of relying on capturing a worker. I just build one myself anyway. If of course, a good opportunity arises to steal a worker then I will take it, but I don't plan on that happening. And I don't spend warrior-time lurking on AI borders unless it's about the time a worker ought to appear AND I notice a resource on the border that the AI is very likely to beeline to hook up.

What I have had much more luck doing is beelining for animal husbandry, and if I can build chariots early on, use them to steal a worker (along with declaring war and pillaging to keep an AI weak until I have something strong enough to start taking cities with).

I see it quite often in MP games. Two situations :
1. Other players are not too experimented. Pretty good idea.
2. Players are motivated or experimented. They will be much less open to a peace treaty in 20 turns than the AI. Human nature can make them throw all their force against you in a Vendetta that will cost much more than an early worker.
I've seen a lot of players not taking this factor in consideration, declaring war, takin the worker and suffering in a terrible early war (pillaging everywhere), and eventually quitting the game in disgust.
Worker stab ok : but take your responsibilities.

Edit : Because it's an act of War and at that time of the game no intelligent preparation has been done in either side. So it's allmost just like rollingthe dice to me.

And I don't spend warrior-time lurking on AI borders unless it's about the time a worker ought to appear AND I notice a resource on the border that the AI is very likely to beeline to hook up.

At Immortal, no need to lurk, and no need to be lucky. The first AI you encounter will definitely have a worker or two in arm's reach before you've even finished circling half their city to get to the other side.

I guess this strategy is mostly good on higher levels. I didn't know it wasn't good on lower levels because i never play those.

At Immortal, i don't even build a single worker anymore, unless i'm alone on an island.

I agree Zombie. Theres really no risk. I've never been attacked one time after stealing a worker. I've never lost a warrior after stealing a worker. Not including barbs however.

The AI's units are in its city. its worker is typically 2 spots outside of its city on the ring. Take the worker, move it. Next turn he MAY move his archer next to your warrior, but then just start moving your worker. 10 turns later you get peace.

I agree Zombie. Theres really no risk. I've never been attacked one time after stealing a worker. I've never lost a warrior after stealing a worker. Not including barbs however.

The AI's units are in its city. its worker is typically 2 spots outside of its city on the ring. Take the worker, move it. Next turn he MAY move his archer next to your warrior, but then just start moving your worker. 10 turns later you get peace.

I've had one game on monarch in which stealing a worker lead to my quick demise. Maybe I could've got peace after 10 turns, but my capital was < 10 turns from his (Montezuma's IIRC) capital. Also lost the warrior a couple of times (if the worker has already built a road on the square you capture it from then the archers can reach your warrior that turn). There is I'd imagine also a small chance that you might be unlucky and the AI might have an archer who happens to be exploring near your territory.

Perhaps the key is to only steal workers from civs > 10 plots from your capital? (which in practice is almost always the case)

Yeah I usually steal workers from civs that are further away. Mainly I don't want to piss them off to the point they enter in a war w/ me before I am ready.

If you're so worried about it, then build a warrior first (this way you'll have proper defense), and go steal the worker. Anyway you slice it, this is better than making the worker yourself.

But what's about your reputation , saying that it'll cost you some goodwill in Trade when there is allways this -4 "you declared war on us"

But what's about your reputation , saying that it'll cost you some goodwill in Trade when there is allways this -4 "you declared war on us"

They're your neighbors. You were destined to piss them off.

I find it more of an oppertunistic thing. If you see a chance go for it, If you don't then I find I'm usually better off exploring.

something that helps though, woodsmanII. nothing could touch the worker as the pair ran across the pangea at 2x regular speed
:)

I wonder if three workers. One to cover your city, two to move. One risks his ass to take the worker, the other to escort it to your territory.

But That would only work if you wanted an early rush...

I typically grab a worker before or slightly after i finish my first warrior, so for me there can be no escorting warrior besides the one who grabbed it, if he's lucky enough to survive. I wouldn't call waiting for the 3rd warrior an early rush, on the contrary, that's pretty late in my book. Of the the advantages of grabbing a worker is that it's actually faster than making one!

Even if you do lose a warrior its ok. A worker is MUCH more valuable than a warrior.

They're your neighbors. You were destined to piss them off.


why There's not only the warlord tactic there are alot of other possibilitys. I'm about to finish monarch now without playing warlord like (only had 1 war until now and my Military is terribly weak ut I'm economicly strong)

There are other strategies, but conquering your neighbour is the most efficient and the easiest. Double your empire's size and then you can take on any challenge.

Besides, even if you don't attack your neighbour, you'll piss him off, if only because "our close borders spark tension". Eventually, he may decide to initiate the attack so the end result is the same.

Better to make sure he has one less worker!


Edit : typo.

Double your empire size and you are on competition level with the other AIs I tend to find (emperor) ;)

There are other strategies, but conquering your neighbour is the most efficient and the easiest. Double your empire's size and then you can take on any challenge.

Besides, even if you don't attack your neighbour, you'll piss him off, if only because "our close borders spark tension". Eventually, he may decide to initiate the attack so the end result is the same.

Better to make sure he has one less worker!


This Malus comes in at the moment where you allready had time to optimize relations (due to Religion, trade or whatever) this can be build up until the lvl of beeing able to declare war capture some citys and 4 turns later you allready get a peace treaty. (even from a direct neighbor) AND your relations restart on pleased or catius. seems to be a much greater advantage to be able to trade the whole game long than having one more worker in the beginning. In Addition they'll rarely declare war on you because of you'r good relationships.

You'd be surprised how powerful having a free worker in the beginning is, before you could even have time to build one yourself. And because you're not making one, your city can grow while spending its hammers on a barracks, letting you take out the crippled civ completely in short time. You'll be stronger early, while your target will be weaker because of the lost worker. Easy pickings.

I'd much rather have en empire that ecompasses the region of my late neighbour, then have him still alive and holding that spot but with nice relations with him.

You'd be surprised how powerful having a free worker in the beginning is, before you could even have time to build one yourself. And because you're not making one, your city can grow while spending its hammers on a barracks, letting you take out the crippled civ completely in short time. You'll be stronger early, while your target will be weaker because of the lost worker. Easy pickings.


I understand the sentiment but .... "before you could even have time to build one yourself"??? Let us say it takes 15 turns for your warrior to find where the other civ is (it'll only be that quick either if the other civ is very close, or if your warrior strikes it lucky and by chance heads straight off in the right direction right from the start). Could be a couple more turns walking round their borders to find where the worker is. Then assume you get the worker back by walking him at full speed unguarded. You're still talking about 25 turns to have your worker ready to start improving tiles. If your civ starts with hunting (scout not warrior at the beginning) it has to build a warrior first too.

Even on the worst starts on normal speed it usually only takes 15 turns to build a worker if that's the first thing you do.

Or do you play on Epic or Marathon?

DynamicSpirit:

It depends on what map you're playing. If you're playing a pangea its very common to have neighbors rather close and easy to find. Certainly easy to find in under 15 turns, other maps are like this too.

I understand the sentiment but .... "before you could even have time to build one yourself"??? Let us say it takes 15 turns for your warrior to find where the other civ is (it'll only be that quick either if the other civ is very close, or if your warrior strikes it lucky and by chance heads straight off in the right direction right from the start). Could be a couple more turns walking round their borders to find where the worker is. Then assume you get the worker back by walking him at full speed unguarded. You're still talking about 25 turns to have your worker ready to start improving tiles. If your civ starts with hunting (scout not warrior at the beginning) it has to build a warrior first too.

Even on the worst starts on normal speed it usually only takes 15 turns to build a worker if that's the first thing you do.

Or do you play on Epic or Marathon?

I play normal speed, but with slightly packed maps. It typically takes me about 10 to 15 turns to get to the civ, and another 10 or so to get the worker home. So technically, you're right, not as fast as making one (though it seems that way when you're doing it). However, by then my city has grown considerably and i've built a barracks or a bunch of warriors, so it does give me a great start.

So you're right, not really as fast as making one from turn one, but certainly more efficient.

Part of the point of stealing your neighbors worker is as Zombie pointed out to make your First Victim weaker in the process. If after I take the Worker and that warrior survives I try to find a good defensive spot to place him outside the city so the AI will kill its first few units on him. As this is going to be where you are going to expand to anyways so you might as well start early.

If you allow your Enemy to build workers and settle cities for you then you don't have to and you can focus on building your military which you are going to need anyways. Follow the warmongers motto and you shall do well..."It is better to take it by force than to build it yourself" so my first typical first three units are warriors as this allows my City to grow while giving me defenses and worker stealer/explorers. Then as soon as I get Axe's they go finish off that Civ and now I am in a much better starting position no matter what victory I want to go for.

I always do this to the closest civ, and I never make peace. I jack the worker and use a few warriors to keep the AI cowering in his home city. This way I get to expand into twice the land and once I get axemen I get another capitol city spot.

It's totally win-win, and managing archers with just Warriors is very realistic.

Chris Woods

I usually steal 2 workers if I can. Relations can get better, especially if you share a religion. And you don't get the "You declared war on our friend" negative either. It is a huge bonus to be able to go straight to the oracle or go straight militayr and allow your city to grow instead of having to chop or cut yet.

I dont even think you get a "You declared war on our friend" modifier if you do it early when people havent all met yet. Suppose the other civ has only met you? Take this example:

I meet Peter. Peters worker is building a road unprotected.

I steal the worker and run off to my capitol. Peter gets pissed.

Later, Peter meets Hatsepsuth. Peter is still mad at me but Hatsepsuth doesnt care because it happened before she met either of us.

This also leads to a weakened Russia and enables you to charge right in when you get axemen (You will probably get them before him because of his new handicap). If it works you will have won a free city and a free worker :king:

I havent tried this before as i am quite peacefull... but maybe i should.

"Hi i am Montezuma. I am the local bully."

"All your base are belong to us!:scan: "

"Huh?" *Gets trashed*

I dont even think you get a "You declared war on our friend" modifier if you do it early when people havent all met yet. Suppose the other civ has only met you?


Yes, that's a good advantage of early war declarations.


This also leads to a weakened Russia and enables you to charge right in when you get axemen (You will probably get them before him because of his new handicap). If it works you will have won a free city and a free worker :king:


Have to admit, although it seems eminently logical that worker stealing should weaken a civ, I've never noticed that it seems to significantly, judging from the power graphs of civs I've stolen workers for. (Logically I guess if the civ has only one city when you do it, it should delay their development by however many times it takes them to build another worker. If they have two cities, then it probably has less effect.

Also - dunno if it's relevent - but I generally avoid declaring war and attempting to take cities until I have something with at least the strength of swordsmen (or horse archers). I'll declare war and pillage earlier than that, but attempting to take archer-defended cities with axemen always strikes me as likely to lose you too many units.

How do you get there and back without dying to barbarians?

"Hi i am Montezuma. I am the local bully."

"All your base are belong to us!:scan: "

oh man do you have any more of this cutting edge humor because I can't get enough

How do you get there and back without dying to barbarians?

Safest ways are:
1. With warrior guarding, as far as possible over forests/jungle/hills.
2. If no warrior available, move the worker one square at a time so he can retreat if he sees danger. In that case you're trying to avoid forests/jungle so as far as possible the worker has an extra movement point to retreat if necessary. And certainly avoid hills because that increases the danger (the worker can be seen by any 2-movement point animals 2 squares away - they'll likely attack that turn)

Either way if I can I'll be simultaneously moving an extra escort from my territory out to meet the worker. Scouts are especially good for this very early in the game when the only likely danger is from animals.

Safest ways are:
1. With warrior guarding, as far as possible over forests/jungle/hills.

Stop. How do you even get there in the first place without your first warrior dying? It's uncommon I can get to another civ's cultural borders without my warrior dying.

Stop. How do you even get there in the first place without your first warrior dying? It's uncommon I can get to another civ's cultural borders without my warrior dying.

you should end your warrior turns in forests or even better forested hills

would thios stragety be better if wou were india? would your captured workers have 3 movement points???

would thios stragety be better if wou were india? would your captured workers have 3 movement points???

YES! outrunning wolves!

you should end your warrior turns in forests or even better forested hills

No duh. Warriors only have one move though, and I've yet to see a line of forested hills from my capitol to an opponent's.

No duh. Warriors only have one move though, and I've yet to see a line of forested hills from my capitol to an opponent's.

only a general rule
obviously you cannot plant trees with your warrior, so you'll need to cross "open terrain" tiles, but you can reduce this as much as possible.

i lose a warrior to animals only once every 2 or 3 games (beware of bears!), and i go an worker robbery every time.

of course, the warrior loses to the AI archers more than that, but the crime is done.

i lose a warrior to animals only once every 2 or 3 games (beware of bears!), and i go an worker robbery every time.


Hmm... do you always use a very cramped mapsize/number of players? This might explain how this is actually possible.

Hmm... do you always use a very cramped mapsize/number of players? This might explain how this is actually possible.

no, but i always give my warrior woodsman I (sometimes 2) after 2 lion attacks, and i'm really careful about forest/hills path
after 1 animal attack i choose a forested hills (or just forest, if none available) and heal back to 100%.

I'm playing monarch currently (and can't say i win with ease) so maybe you play on a higher level with less "vs barbs" bonus.

no, but i always give my warrior woodsman I (sometimes 2) after 2 lion attacks, and i'm really careful about forest/hills path
after 1 animal attack i choose a forested hills (or just forest, if none available) and heal back to 100%.

I'm playing monarch currently (and can't say i win with ease) so maybe you play on a higher level with less "vs barbs" bonus.

I'm playing on Emperor, so that might be it. A couple of the people talking about this strategy here are on Deity though...

Edited to note that I mistook Immortal for Deity. :D

I'm playing on Emperor, so that might be it. A couple of the people talking about this strategy here are on Deity though...

well, on deity, the maps are very crowded, and people tend to push it so (more civs than standard), making the barbs very rare, and the travel distance very short

So I just tried this against Genghis on Emperor. He wouldn't give me peace, GG me.

Second try vs. Egypt. Worker stayed on inner ring for a bit, then was guarded by an archer. 20 turns of hanging around with my warrior got nothing.

Second try vs. Egypt. Worker stayed on inner ring for a bit, then was guarded by an archer. 20 turns of hanging around with my warrior got nothing.

high difficulty you wanted, high difficulty you got ;)

i know why i like prince best :lol:

high difficulty you wanted, high difficulty you got ;)

i know why i like prince best :lol:

Oh, absolutely, but Zombie says he's using this strategy on Immortal. If it's not a useful strategy for high levels, that's fine, but I'd like to know.

Oh, absolutely, but Zombie says he's using this strategy on Immortal. If it's not a useful strategy for high levels, that's fine, but I'd like to know.

i found it harder, but still very useful on monarch
above this i can't say.

one hint : don't try it on creative leaders (or only on second city), the borders are quickly above the fat cross and the workers don't have to go on the limit

I've done it on Deity in my current game. Tokugawa started his second city almost right next to my capital and i stole the worker in less than 10 turns. No need for escort back home, since it was almost straight from his cultural border to my cultural border. Then i got lucky and spoted copper in my capital's fat cross, and took over two of his cities quickly.

With the huge bonuses on Deity, he actually had two workers right next to one another when i got there less then 10 turns into the game, but sadly i only had 1 warrior, so i had to settle for only stealing one worker.

My warrior died, but since my first build had been another warrior, my capital was safe. Besides, he was a coward and didn't send anything my way.

With the huge bonuses on Deity, he actually had two workers right next to one another when i got there less then 10 turns into the game, but sadly i only had 1 warrior, so i had to settle for only stealing one worker.


LOL! I've just been experimenting (still on monarch). Had my warrior travel I guess about 20-30 squares and encountered Alex with a worker on the borders. So nicked the worker and beat a quick retreat, warrior guarding worker.

Then on the way back I happened to pass by French territory and saw a Napoleonic worker available. So I left the Alex-worker just outside the French border and nicked it. My warrior immediately got deaded by a French archer but I had two workers! Sadly the ex-French worker almost immediately got eaten by a lion, but the ex-Greek one safely made it across the local jungle, to where he got met by an archer-scout pair that I sent out to meet it. (By now this was the age of barbarian archers so I kept the scout with the archer - he was next to defenceless on his own)

Only got one worker out of it and it took a lot of time (real time not game time) but was very satisfying :-)

LOL! I've just been experimenting (still on monarch). Had my warrior travel I guess about 20-30 squares and encountered Alex with a worker on the borders. So nicked the worker and beat a quick retreat, warrior guarding worker.

Then on the way back I happened to pass by French territory and saw a Napoleonic worker available. So I left the Alex-worker just outside the French border and nicked it. My warrior immediately got deaded by a French archer but I had two workers! Sadly the ex-French worker almost immediately got eaten by a lion, but the ex-Greek one safely made it across the local jungle, to where he got met by an archer-scout pair that I sent out to meet it. (By now this was the age of barbarian archers so I kept the scout with the archer - he was next to defenceless on his own)

Only got one worker out of it and it took a lot of time (real time not game time) but was very satisfying :-)

think about how the 2 AIs are backwards without their worker!
i'm pretty sure you can go back to peace with Alex, with little loss
for France, it will be harder : you lost a unit = no peace without reward (and you have nothing to give him).

Yeah but if the warrior dies, then there's noone to escort the worker back to your city
Yeah but the worker is much faster than the military units at that stage of the game.

This strategy should be valid at every difficulty level. I try to do it every game (playing on Monarch) and the games where I cannot pull it off are always a good bit tougher. It is one of the reasons I find islands maps more difficult than continents and pangeas (unlike Civ 3). A worker stolen in the first 10-20 turns of the game is HUGE, well worth the risk of your starting warrior. My first build is always a warrior unless I am playing an island map so even if my "slaver" gets stomped my capital is reinforced long before any enemies can arrive.

I have given this a number of tries, with mixed results. The most common result is that the AI will immediately kill my warrior with his archer, and the worker gets eaten by animals on his way home. Next most common result, warrior doesn't get attacked or manages to beat the archer, worker gets eaten on his way home.

I've pulled it off successfully a couple of times, but it seems that having a close-by enemy alerted to my desire to kill him and all the implications thereof is more of a penalty than the worker, should he make it home, is a benefit. If I get the worker early enough there sometimes isn't even anything for him to do!

Stop. How do you even get there in the first place without your first warrior dying? It's uncommon I can get to another civ's cultural borders without my warrior dying.

Hmm, now that's a good question. Sometimes, the random Barbarian generation just hates on you. Other times, you'll have four Woodsman II Warriors running around.

Yeah but if the warrior dies, then there's noone to escort the worker back to your city

No need to escort the Worker. If you lose it, you lose it. Just don't let it auto-path back to your capital. Actively move it each turn. Even if you lose it, you've set the AI back a little bit. I've done this to AIs clear across a map with little hope of getting the Worker to me (I had already snagged one from my primary target, and was looking to snag a second from him within the next few turns anyway). Sometimes opportunity is as strong a motive as intent.

Perhaps the key is to only steal workers from civs > 10 plots from your capital?

I think the mistake you made was stealing a worker from Montezuma. From what I've seen, most AIs will leave you alone for a long time, even if you stay at war with them. Montezuma is a known psychopath (and my favorite civ to make friends with; he's the only one that can aptly assault another AI civ), and, without a doubt, the worst civ to attempt this on.

So I just tried this against Genghis on Emperor. He wouldn't give me peace, GG me.

I don't know if the AI's bloodthirst is dependent on difficulty, but base AI "personalities" are editable in the XML. Genghis, being an Aggressive civ (and the more aggressive of the Mongol leaders), is only slight worse a choice to steal from than Montezuma (see above).

I always do this to the closest civ, and I never make peace. I jack the worker and use a few warriors to keep the AI cowering in his home city.

Peace gives them some time to develop the land that you will be taking. Keeping the AI cowering within a single city will, invariably, result in one of two outcomes.

In one case, you've managed to seal off a section of land, and keep the remaining land open for yourself by penning an AI in. The problem here is that you're going to run into a lot of Barbarian activity unless you post a number of fogbusters. Given how long it takes to actually kill the targetted civ, it's probably more economical to just secure your military resources, then allow them to expand into inoffensive locations.

In the second case, you pin down your nearest neighbor, and obvious primary target. The problem here is that, while working to secure military resources in order to take the primary target, enemy civs have expanded into the space the primary target was intended to expand into. This is worse than allowing the primary target to expand, as now a third civ has more land than usual, and is occupying the land you intended to take.

To refer back to the above quotes from Alraun, it's very much important to broker for peace as soon as possible. As I said, the AI will eventually march a stack of Archers at you (even if you're camped outside their city with Warriors; heck, they'll even manage to settle under Warrior supervision). And you can run into the two expansion problems I referred to above. So, in order to allow some natural expansion by the primary target, and to reduce Barbarian activity, you need to make peace.

The best way to achieve peace is to put your Warrior to better use than just nabbing the Worker. Planting it in a Forest is, obviously, ideal. Getting the Archer to attack across a river is the next best possibility. Aggressive civs can use their first promotion on Cover instead of Woodsman I, and further add to the odds of taking out that initial Archer retaliation. Killing that Archer will almost assuredly guarantee that the AI will accept a peace offering. If necessary (and the AI is sufficiently close), you may want to use two Warriors to nab the Worker; one to grab it, and die, and the other to camp in a Forest in order to kill the one unit needed to guarantee peace.

Above all else, make sure to pursue peace negitations as soon as the civ is willing to talk to you.

And you don't get the "You declared war on our friend" negative either.

Seeing as few, if any, friendships have been established at this point, this is true. The one risk is that a religion is shared before you steal the worker. It's the only possible means of improving relations at this point in the game.

Referring back to the above statements on peace negotitations, you can actually avoid becoming a civ's Worst Enemy by brokering peace as soon as possible, particularly if you use this against a civ who's at a great distance from you.

I think the mistake you made was stealing a worker from Montezuma. From what I've seen, most AIs will leave you alone for a long time, even if you stay at war with them. Montezuma is a known psychopath (and my favorite civ to make friends with; he's the only one that can aptly assault another AI civ), and, without a doubt, the worst civ to attempt this on.


i agree with you on all the rest, but here i'm dubious.
I try to get rid of him asap. He can be bribed against anyone (including you!), by everyone (including you, that's true). I just can't have a psychopath neighbour.
If i see monte's limits, i send my best warrior to steal his workers, and if necessary i sacrifice one to pillage his improvements (gold!).

he's one nasty bastard that won't give you peace fo a loonnng time, unless he's defeated to the ground.

I agree, leaving Monty around is probably not worth the risk that he might side with you some day in the future, and might not backstab you. I've been eliminating him asap whenever he's on the same continent as me (I usually play continent maps), and have recently even started declaring war on him right at the beginning when he leaves his scout hovering around my capitol. He'll send multiple scouts to replace him, presumably for recon (though god knows it's a dumb thing to do during war)...but it's just a free promotion for your own units hehe.

oh man do you have any more of this cutting edge humor because I can't get enough

Certainly :)

My name is the same on this forum:

http://www.forumplanet.com/planetthemovies/topic.asp?fid=15472&tid=1869051&p=15

Glad you like my humor btw :P

I'm pretty sure Gebstadter was being sarcastic when he made that comment.

The full guide is posted. My sig contains the link.

I'm pretty sure Gebstadter was being sarcastic when he made that comment.

Well, i guess that proves that text is the worst way of sending a sarcastic/ironic message eh? :P

I think it was fairly easy to pick up, with the word choice, and the absence of smilies and exclamation mark giving a rather drab feel. But i guess if you've previously convinced yourself that the humour he refered to was great, then you might lack the objectivity to see it.

Maybe i was a little slow to pick up on the finesses but it was 0:30 at night here to be fair. However i still think your last bit was a little uncalled for :/

I used to steal workers, but since I've started playing on huge fractal maps with low sea level, I don't bother. Other civs are usually 30 turns movement away...

2 different matters affect the ability to effectively steal workers:
1) distance
2) difficulty level

1) distance
I found that distance is not a good reason not to steal, but seriously reduces the effect (when you finally find a faraway victim, he already has improved all he should, and probably has a second worker built, while you still have your poor, lonesome warrior).
I usually wait for distant civs to build a second city before stealing : only 1 tile cultural border :), low defense = no attack on the warrior.

2) my current level is monarch, and it's pretty tricky to steal workers.
At prince level it's the most efficient move i can think of. And i have the feeling that it's quite effective on higher levels (when the AI's have a worker right from the start) if distance is adequate, but cannot tell for sure.

Some other "special effects" that make stealing difficult sometimes :
- if you start with a scout, you can't steal early! build a warrior anyway, but don't expect good payback.
- if your opponent's archer is scouting next your empty capital, it may be better not to piss him off!
- if you don't see an obvious "to be improved" tile, you may wait on the wrong side of the city. keep moving.
- creative civs are tough, for this matter (as they are for axe rush, too).

Humour is always cutting edged when backed by axes; the punchline didn't get quoted: "huh?" *gets trashed*.

2. On monarch and above, you end up in an instant war with a civ that has archers when you don't. That's not so bad if the civ is some way distant from yours, because they'll usually accept a peace treaty before their pursuing archers have reached your borders, but it can be very dangerous for a nearby civ. At this stage in the game one hostile archer is all it takes to give you a very rapid conquest defeat.

I found that to be a problem when I started stealing workers, but I've found that I can "tease" the AI into following my warrior to a forest/hills tile...at which point I fortify, get attacked and usually win. The AI often won't give me peace until I kill a unit, but once I do it usually agrees right away...

I found that to be a problem when I started stealing workers, but I've found that I can "tease" the AI into following my warrior to a forest/hills tile...at which point I fortify, get attacked and usually win. The AI often won't give me peace until I kill a unit, but once I do it usually agrees right away...

:goodjob: that's the "lucky" part (not much luck : 2 + 75% + promotions? = 3,5 vs 3 for an archer)!
Of course if the archer kills your warrior, don't expect to find any peace.:sad:

But in my experience, the AI don't leave their borders when they only have a few archers = early robbery is safe.

I guess with the new patch this is more useful strategy. I tried it today got the worker back all 14 squares to capital but lost warrior. Only issue is 4 cities later the AI still wont make peace unless i give up a city. No copper grrr. Should have gone for iron earlier. That being said the Ai has not attacked me yet. Persia has three cities and just seems to like being at war. -8 this war spoils our relationship. Just cause i nicked your worker get over it!!!!!!


Apart from the AI bad attitude this strategy has wings if you can get worker back and assuming the AI worker leaves the city. Pends on starting techs i guess. Although you could be popping huts instead.

I always try to take a worker to start a war. Even early.

Prince, ready for Monarch.