All Leaders Challenge Pre-Game Show:
Game #10 - India/Asoka

http://www.civfanatics.net/~civrules/Article/Leaders/AsokaSM.jpg

In the next ALC game, I'll be playing as Asoka (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asoka), leader of India. This thread is to discuss, before the game, how to best exploit that particular leader's characteristics, which is the main feature and purpose of the ALC series.

Note: this will be the first ALC played with the Warlords expansion pack, complete with the just-released patch and its rule changes and improved AI.

The fact sheet:

Traits: Organized and Spiritual
Starting Techs: Mysticism and Mining
Unique Unit: Fast Worker (Replaces Worker; Strength: 0, Movement: 3, Cost: 60)
Unique Building: Masoleum (Replaces Jail; Cost: 120; Unique abilities: +2 happiness)


There's a certain irony here. Asoka is renowned as a warrior who swore off war once he converted to Buddhism. But that Organized trait, to me, encourages early warring to take advantage of its main feature: cheap courthouses to lessen the expense of early empire-building. In addition, the new unique building feature has given India the Masoleum, which really requires you to be warring in the late game to take full advantage of it, since it still retains the generic jail's -25% war weariness. With a +2 happiness bonus on top of that, India strikes me as the civ in the best position to pursue late game warring.

On top of all that, I've come to think of Spiritual as a warmonger's trait as well, since it allows you to quickly switch, with no anarchy penalty, from peacetime to wartime civics and back again. This is usually the only reason I will change to a "downlevel" civic, if you will. Since Asoka is not financial, being able to quickly switch without penalty to more lucrative civics as soon as they're available (Bureaucracy, Free Market, State Property) is also appealing.

In other words, Asoka strikes me as a warmonger's dream leader in many repects. Or maybe I'm just looking for any excuse to pound on my neighbours. :mischief: Whatever. In any case, I anticipate taking names and kicking butt. I mean, the name of the game is now Warlords, after all, and I'm interested in trying out those new game elements like Trebuchets and Great Generals. Woo hoo!

The only thing India lacks in the warmongering department is a powerful unique unit. However, you can't traipse around these boards without stumbling upon praise for the Fast Worker. They have only two differences from their generic counterparts: first, they have three moves instead of two; second, they are available from day one and never become obsolete--the only unit in the game of which that's true, as far as I can tell, aside from Settlers and Workboats, which are not nearly as multi-purpose as Workers. The Fast Worker can move onto a forest or hill tile and start work on it on the same turn; they can evade barbarians and enemy units with ease; and they can just get places faster, even without roads. Does anyone think this means you can make do with fewer Workers, however? In my experience, for the first 2/3 of the game, you can never have enough Workers. Another cool thing about this UU is that when you capture a generic Worker, they become a Fast Worker! "Oh, I'm working for India now! Suddenly my meager frame is imbued with the speed of a gazelle! Feets, do your stuff!" :lol:

Asoka starts with Mysticism and Mining, a great combination of opening techs in many respects--I suspect these have a lot to do with his counterpart Gandhi's popularity, along with that now-gone vanilla Industrious trait. We can pursue an early religion without having to scramble to get Bronze Working to defend ourselves afterwards. I'm thinking of going for Hinduism--the AI usually goes for the slightly-cheaper Buddhism, Polytheism is a pre-requisite for Literature and the Great Library, and besides, shouldn't India be Hindu? We could also get a jump on building Stonehenge, although it may be somewhat redundant if we snag that early religion. The Great Prophet points are very handy, though.

If we get that early religion and spread it--often via the sharp end of a pointy stick--would the University of Sankore be a worthwhile wonder to pursue? I'm looking forward to hearing everyone's recommendations surrounding the unique Warlords game elements.

I know the AI has been improved in the patch and I'm looking forward to that. I have not yet decided upon the level for this match--some people are even recommending dropping all the way to Noble! :eek: I will play a game or two over the next few days on Monarch level and see just how improved the AI is and contemplate dropping from Monarch to Prince for this game. Frankly, I'm reluctant to drop a level--surely the group mind can overcome the smarter AI, and even a defeat would be instructive. I look forward to opinions on this as well.

The game will not really get under way for a few days, as I need to get used to Warlords (and I'm just finishing the vanilla Rome game I'm chronicling in Stories and Tales (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=4651805) right now). But I can at least post the starting position soon since there's always considerable debate about that. Look for it this weekend.

Awesome. Finally a Warlords ALC!

If you found an early reiigion, I've found the university to be a worthwhile pursuit. Even better than the minaret. I don't usually prioritize divine right so I'm not usually the one to build the minaret. The university, however, is available with paper (?), I think, which is a key tech in any game because of liberalism.

Those fast workers are clutch for chopping forest for early wonders.

in this first Warlords ALC, will you be doing any extra explaining/translating for those of us who do not play Warlords, or should i find a good reference manual somewhere? ;)

A few random thoughts:

If you're going to pursue religion, shouldn't Asoka be Buddhist as you pointed out in the introduction? :p
Admittedly, Hinduism is normally an easier grab on Monarch than Buddhism unless you get a 3C tile to work from the start or luck out with the non-mysticism civs.
If going for Sankore, consider pairing it with the Spiral Minaret as aelf did to great effect in EMC2.
You need just as many fast workers as you do normal workers, since it still takes them the same number of turns to actually build improvements (I wish they'd change it so worker movement points contributed to build speed).
As far as I can tell (looking at the readme), the main AI improvements are in city placement and terrain development. It'll still suck at war which is where it's always been worst, so stick with Monarch initially. Better a tough, challenging game than a cakewalk.
Unless they've changed anything about resource distribution in the new patch, you're much more likely to have horses or iron than you are bronze, so consider making AH an early research priority - with the attack bonus against axes, chariots are now the anti-barb unit of choice.

A few random thoughts:

If you're going to pursue religion, shouldn't Asoka be Buddhist as you pointed out in the introduction? :p
Admittedly, Hinduism is normally an easier grab on Monarch than Buddhism unless you get a 3C tile to work from the start or luck out with the non-mysticism civs.

Rather both, but with monarch I doubt you can get buddhism, only if you are really lucky and there is no religous leader around. Better be safe and with hinduism, then without both.

As far as I can tell (looking at the readme), the main AI improvements are in city placement and terrain development. It'll still suck at war which is where it's always been worst, so stick with Monarch initially. Better a tough, challenging game than a cakewalk.

Couldn´t agree more. Stay with monarch!

Unless they've changed anything about resource distribution in the new patch, you're much more likely to have horses or iron than you are bronze, so consider making AH an early research priority - with the attack bonus against axes, chariots are now the anti-barb unit of choice.

Nods, Chariots got a real boost and are better then axemen in anti-barb duty.

Good points, and good luck with the ALC, Sisiutil!

Unless they've changed anything about resource distribution in the new patch, you're much more likely to have horses or iron than you are bronze, so consider making AH an early research priority - with the attack bonus against axes, chariots are now the anti-barb unit of choice.

They did give barbarians spearmen which should make chariots powerful but not as ridiculously powerful as they were.

It would be more fun (and interesting) to play it by the seat of the pants.


Also, interesting that you see Organized as a warmongering trait, and I guess it can be used that way effectively, but I see it as encouragement to build settlers in order to take advantage of the same set of bonuses. It sure goes good with spiritual because you do not have to worry about switching inot costly civcs. Great synergy with these traits, I feel.

As for Spiritual, I think it is the single most powerful trait when used correctly. Financial? Sure, but so easy to use, even a caveman could do it! Apiritual you have to exploit the flexibility, but the payoffs are higher than financial if you are warmongering late game when a civic switch cost you 2-3+ turns and a lot of commerce. You can even swicth from slavery to rush and then Draft on the same turn, if you are savvy in your anticipatory preparations.

Last pestering words. Go down to Noble and wing it. Yes, the vocal enthusiasts will moan about it being too easy, but I truly believe that most followers (and Civ players in general) play at Noble or lower, so the greatest benefit and reach is to that (mostly) silent majority and it will bring in a bunch of fresh blood (no offense to the venerable, long tooths).


And why play Warlords and not play a new leader like the much mailgned (but most awesome) Brennus? :cry: This has me most heartbroken of all.





You are now returned to your previously scheduled thread....

As far as I can tell (looking at the readme), the main AI improvements are in city placement and terrain development. It'll still suck at war which is where it's always been worst, so stick with Monarch initially. Better a tough, challenging game than a cakewalk.


The AI may still suck at war but Blake improved it's pop rushing. I'm pretty certain Blake made some changes so that it was less likely to hoard all it's troops in it's cities but I'm unclear if that part made it into the patch.

Just a couple cents to throw on the green felt:

1. I suspect the new Wonder you'll be thinking about most will be the Great Wall, not Sankore. Unless the patch changed anything, Paper isn't a high priority for the AI, and you should be able to get it fairly easily if you're leading at that point. Unlike Stonehenge and the Oracle, the GW is a lot more dependant on the map you get, especially on Continents. Too much wasteland to the north or south can make it a lifesaver; a lot of neighbors and easy to fog bust terrain can make it a luxury, or even a waste of hammers.

2. Stick with Monarch, certainly. You've taken one of the best AIs out of the game (Gandhi), and the Continents map still favors the human player quite a bit. Combined with the group mind of the ALC, the differences shouldn't be that great.

3. The big changes- Vassal States, the new Wonders, Trebuchets, etc- will be a lot easier to learn than the new "flow" of the tech tree, in my experience. Remembering that you can't force Capitulation before Feudalism, for instance, was hard for me to remember right away, likewise with Engineering unlocking Trebs-- you'll know it in your head, certainly, but internalizing the changes can take a while. YMMV.

The University of Sankore is a good wonder....not great, but it does provide a nice little boost, comes on a tech the AI doesn't care for, and is fairly cheap hammer-wise. Plus, it lasts a good while and can be gotten at a key time in the tech race(i.e. the race for Liberalism)

As for Stonehenge....screw it. Your techs lend themselves quite nicely to Oracle, and pretty quick too(not to mention the likelihood of snagging Hinduism)! While your barking up that religious side of the tree, snag writing quick and capitalize with a CoL slingshot(which you should be able to pull pretty fast). The Great Wall isn't too hard to get(I'd say too easy if you have stone), but the AI values it and Masonry highly, in my experience, and you really shouldn't get too greedy......

in this first Warlords ALC, will you be doing any extra explaining/translating for those of us who do not play Warlords, or should i find a good reference manual somewhere? ;)
It would be more fun (and interesting) to play it by the seat of the pants.
Based upon this, some of you might prefer it if I make this my first-ever Warlords game? Then it would serve that purpose as well, as a sort of Warlords walk-through for those of us new to it. At the very least, I would be approaching the game with "beginner's mind", at least regarding the Warlords elements. In some ways, we'll all be in that boat, since the patch has just come out and we'll have to mutually adjust our gameplay accordingly. Not strategically, I don't think, but tactically.

This would also mean that I would start the game sooner, of course. ;)

I like the idea. :D It's probably what I'll do.

Regarding drkodos' other point about the new leaders, I am committed to going through the civs in order, so after India will be Tokugawa of Japan, and then ALC 12 will be the first played as one of the new leaders of the expansion pack: Wang Kon of Korea. Looks like he'll be fun, especially since his UU and UB come fairly early in the game, and he has one of the new traits.

Regarding drkodos' other point about the new leaders, I am committed to going through the civs in order

You're going in alphabetical order by civilization name though, right? If you were so inclined, you could certainly rationalize backtracking to hit Carthage and Celtia before returning for India.

Carthage is one of the two or three standard suggestions for which leader to use in your first Warlords game (Ragnar and perhaps Wang Kon being the other one or two). Brennus is very underrated. His unique unit is kind of lousy, but Charismatic / Spiritual is outstanding, and his unique building isn't bad at all. Even the unique unit isn't so much bad (like the pre-patch jaguars) as it is not good. That is, it isn't ever worse than the regular unit. It just isn't usually a whole lot better.

I am really interested in seeing the Mausoleum in action though. I haven't played India since switching to Warlords (haven't played at all in several weeks actually), so I haven't had a chance to try it myself.

so after India will be Tokugawa of Japan, and then ALC 12 will be the first played as one of the new leaders of the expansion pack: Wang Kon of Korea. Looks like he'll be fun, especially since his UU and UB come fairly early in the game, and he has one of the new traits.

Toku has one of the new traits so you wan't have to wait that long, He's Agg/Prot probably be one of your favourate Warring Leaders Especially once you get into the industrial age Drafting units with 3 Free Promotions straight out of the City

Actually, I'd be a bit less inclined toward trying to score the cheap religions. The religion chase leaves you slow off the mark for worker techs, which delays the leverage of your UU. My quick analysis, drawing on memories of Vanilla (if you agree with the ideas, check that they are still right for warlords)....

Organized supports expensive civics and large empires. So you should be looking away from tight victory conditions like cultural and instead be looking toward domination or space.

The cheap courthouses are a big deal; unlocked by Caste System. Since you are Spiritual as well, this tech is a big deal as it unlocks another civic and a religion too.

Now, the goal here shouldn't be to rush to Code of Laws, because that misses the point - the goal isn't to have your big techs as early as possible, but to be able to leverage your big techs as early as possible - cheap courthouses don't mean very much when you have one city.

Given that this is Monarch, that probably means preparing for some relatively early war. That should make Sisiutil happy :hammer:

With that in mind, instead of leaning on Mysticism in the opening, I'd lean on Mining. Get Bronzeworking finished, with the coincident warrior and worker poprush, chop out some expansion (either some warriors/settlers, or stonehenge ~ careful here, as I recall chopping now dumps hammers to the city rather than the top item in the queue) while developing the food tech.

Secure the copper if you can, and keep in mind the notion of zim zamming between Slavery and Caste System (ie, surplus food to run specialists) as you choose your city sites.

If you reach a good point to hurry out the Oracle, that's fine, but I think you still have time to lightbulb confucianism with the prophet from the Henge (not sure on this one). For this call I might end up relying on the specifics of the terrain (how much you crave Calendar impacts how hard you want to be pushing for Stonehenge), and the proximity of Creative civs.

If you are stretching yourself out early, don't forget that Currency becomes a bigger deal (how much bigger depends a lot on how you express the early expansion, but even internal trade routes help). You need Math to unlock Bureaucracy anyway.

And since I haven't gotten my Slavery article finished yet, let me expand on the Worker-pop formula: seven turns at 3/?/0 + 1 turn at 1/?/2 + 1 turn at 2 x 1/?/2 finishes a warrior, six more turns invested in a worker allows you to pop rush the worker if you researched Slavery out of the gate. The worker appears on the same turn if you built it from scratch, but you've gotten a "free" warrior out of the deal. You could shuffle things around a bit, to get the worker done a turn sooner and the warrior after the worker, but that's probably the wrong sequence when Organized.

(This last bit is someone else's technique - when BW out of the gate is the right play, I think this makes the play stronger, so I've been adopting it. I'm not generally fond of BW first, but it does seem like the right play for Asoka.)

OK, maybe that wasn't as quick as I had in mind....

If your going for an Early war and you want early level 3 units

Oracle Slingshot to Codes of Law and Assign a Priest in your Oracle City, that's 5GPP a turn so you'll pop theology with your Great Prophet in 20 turns more or less and start build your army with barracks and Theocracy civic

OR

Ignore Codes of Law for courthouses untill you second War with Cats, The Organised trait should be enough to keep your maintainance cost down when you expand by War.
Use your Oracle Slingshot for theology and start a really Early war with level 3 Units. Remember Theology Requires Writing just like Codes of Law.

If you found an early reiigion, I've found the university to be a worthwhile pursuit. Even better than the minaret. I don't usually prioritize divine right so I'm not usually the one to build the minaret. The university, however, is available with paper (?), I think, which is a key tech in any game because of liberalism.

Those fast workers are clutch for chopping forest for early wonders.

I'd say that the Spiral Minaret is slightly better than the University of Sankore as gold is actually worth more than beakers in many games. See my analysis in aelf's thread post 410 (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=187982&page=21).

A religio-scientific strategy works well for a Spiritual leader. The ability to switch into civics such as Caste System and Pacifism for a few turns allows efficient use of food and specialists (mainly scientists). Switching back to OR or Theocracy and Slavery allows cheaper buildings and missionaries or better units for war. Three of those key civics need a state religion. So if you need a religion make the most of it... right? Hence the association with Spiral Minaret and University of Sankore.

Those 2 wonders allow each city to get 4 gold and 4.4 beakers from a temple (half cost for Spiritual) and a monastry. They only costs about 100 hammers or 3 whipped pop when built with civic switching technique outlined above. The widespread temples allow cathedrals to be built in the larger cities for another +3 happiness and more gold and beakers. The temples and cathedrals also allow a lot of priests to be run (regardless of civics) and so that makes Angkor Wat a complimentary wonder.

I think the religio-scientific strategy works best with a mixed or hybrid economy. You need farms to feed the specialists and the slavery habit, but cottages don't hurt in areas that have limited food. You can run each city as best suits it and civics will be swapping regularly so no need to make hard and fast decisions about SE or CE, get the best bits of both with little loss. What is more that will suit Sisiutil's style, he can never stay in a civic for long or ever make up his mind about a victory condition :p

Hmmm, he can sit on a CoL slingshot for a little bit, even on Monarch I'm guessing. The AI is usually slow to build the Oracle anyways. Poly is a decent tech and priesthood is cheap as dirt, but maybe Sis is better off letting some one else found the religion, as VoU suggests. Why waste the beakers when you can get some one else doing the research for you?:hammer:

I'd say that the Spiral Minaret is slightly better than the University of Sankore as gold is actually worth more than beakers in many games. See my analysis in aelf's thread post 410 (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=187982&page=21).

Also true. I suppose what I meant to say is since I've been using Warlords, the university of sankore fits in better with my strategy. I wouldn't argue (in fact, I'd agree) that gold is better than beakers especially by that point in the game. It's just that I find acquiring the minaret more often than not is a sidetrack to a path I'm pursuing. However, if it works out that I can acquire divine right in a peace treaty and/or have a GE laying around at the right time to rush the minaret, it's foolish not to go for it. The university/minaret combo provides an awful lot of extra beakers and gold, and works wonderfully when founding a religion (not to mention, both wonders produce until computers is researched). I'm more apt to go for the minaret when running a SE, instead of a CE or hybrid, where I have other priorities.

The University of Sankore/Spiral Minaret strategy was done by Aelf with great success. Perhaps try something new. You see to be talking about taking the way of the sword for this game, why not shoot for a conquest or domination victory. I would like to see a conquest victory personally. Just a thought.
By the way stay at monoarch.

I havent seen a conquest victory on continents. Maybe it is me that is jut too lazy to do too much warfare with boats. That doesnt take full advantage fo your cheap courthouses though? Also please stay at monarch. Myself I seem to do alot like you when it comes to actually winning the game. I allways fiddle around a bit too much.

What is more that will suit Sisiutil's style, he can never stay in a civic for long or ever make up his mind about a victory condition :p
The journey is just as important, perhaps more so, than the destination, grasshopper. :p Which is a condescending way of saying that it's a game and I like to have my fun.

I think I'm getting better about the civics changes though; in a recent off-line game I had very few--I was warring constantly and never once went into Vassalage or Theocracy because Bureaucracy and Organized Religion were more advantageous overall. Of course, who needs extra XPs when you've got Praetorians? ;)

Now what about the other features of Warlords? We've discussed the UofS; it comes late enough that we can make a decision on it based upon the sitch, methinks. The worth of the Great Wall, as has been said, depends very much on the map and your neighbours. What about the Temple of Artemis? It looks a lot like the Great Lighthouse or the Parthenon to me--nice to have, but I'm likely to have bigger priorities, especially if I don't have marble.

Trebuchets sound awesome. I'm already starting to go after Engineering earlier to make warring a little faster, and Trebs just add to the attraction. (On my off-line Epic games I'm also a fan of the Hagia Sophia and its quicker worker improvement times, but I find that's less of a priority on Normal speed.) What about Triremes? It their value map dependent?

I'm really looking forward to my first Great General! What is the best use for these guys? Academy? Instructor? Warlord? Based on what I've been reading, it sounds so far like the third option is the preferred one. If so, what's the best way to implement the Warlord to distribute the XPs and protect him from destruction?

And finally--since I'm planning on doing some conquering (surprise surprise), what approach should I take to capitulation and vassals? Under what circumstances should I consider accepting capitulation, and under which ones should I refuse?

Myself I seem to do alot like you when it comes to actually winning the game. I allways fiddle around a bit too much.
Et tu, Brute? ;)

Now what about the other features of Warlords? We've discussed the UofS; it comes late enough that we can make a decision on it based upon the sitch, methinks. The worth of the Great Wall, as has been said, depends very much on the map and your neighbours. What about the Temple of Artemis? It looks a lot like the Great Lighthouse or the Parthenon to me--nice to have, but I'm likely to have bigger priorities, especially if I don't have marble.
I agree you're likely to have bigger priorities, but as soon as we say that you'll roll a coastal start and have marble, so... ToA gives a one-city 100% boost to trade route income that stacks well with the capital (think bureaucracy) and GL, and which aelf has taken good advantage of in EMC3. If you're planning on lots of warring, you may not have the trading partners to really take advantage of it.
Trebuchets sound awesome. I'm already starting to go after Engineering earlier to make warring a little faster, and Trebs just add to the attraction. (On my off-line Epic games I'm also a fan of the Hagia Sophia and its quicker worker improvement times, but I find that's less of a priority on Normal speed.) What about Triremes? It their value map dependent?
Trebs definitely needed a slight nerfing in the patch, as once Engineering came around the only reason for building anything else for your offensive armies was to protect your stack of trebs. Since the AI loves to defend with longbows in that era, trebs are essentially maces with a reasonable retreat chance and collateral damage, so you definitely want to be building a fair few and piling on the CR promotions. Bear in mind that the AI tends to favour the Engineering path, so pursuing it yourself may limit tech-trading options, but if you're at war with them anyway, that doesn't really matter.

As for triremes, the AI always builds a couple of them, so if you've got seafood resources you'll need them to protect the fishing boats. Apart from that I've never been in a position where building them seemed worth the hammers.
I'm really looking forward to my first Great General! What is the best use for these guys? Academy? Instructor? Warlord? Based on what I've been reading, it sounds so far like the third option is the preferred one. If so, what's the best way to implement the Warlord to distribute the XPs and protect him from destruction?

And finally--since I'm planning on doing some conquering (surprise surprise), what approach should I take to capitulation and vassals? Under what circumstances should I consider accepting capitulation, and under which ones should I refuse?
GGs and Vassals have had a fairly big overhaul with the patch and I haven't played with the new settings yet, but I think the defaults (use the first GG to make a medic 3 unit and settle the rest in the HE/WP city; avoid vassals unless you're on the way to domination and can't be bothered capturing tundra/island cities) I tended to play by may well no longer be optimal.

Incidentally, I just had a quick breeze through a Warlords game (patched) up to 800BC, then flicked on worldbuilder to see what the AI was up to. City placement is definitely better - even the barb cities were in spots I'd have chosen - and there's a tendency to settle on top of resources to make best use of the land as a whole rather than grabbing specific tiles and a load of junk. Some of the AI civs also seemed to have built a lot more archers than before, especially the ones that hadn't got metal hooked up. If you're planning on rushing an enemy and taking their capital, you'll probably need a couple more units than in the past.

GGs and Vassals have had a fairly big overhaul with the patch and I haven't played with the new settings yet, but I think the defaults (use the first GG to make a medic 3 unit and settle the rest in the HE/WP city; avoid vassals unless you're on the way to domination and can't be bothered capturing tundra/island cities) I tended to play by may well no longer be optimal.
I noticed that the Medic III unit was what aelf chose to do with his first GG in EMC 3. So it sounds like you'd want to chose one unit rather than several for the Warlord unit so it gets all 20 XPs? (Level 1 - 2 XPs: Combat I; Level 2 - 5 XPs: Medic I; Level 3 - 10 XPs: Medic II; Level 4 - 17 XPs: Medic III, right?)

As for settling the other GGs, that sounds a lot like the Great Scientists--use the next one for an academy (military in this case rather than scientific) in the military city and use the remaining ones as instructors in the same city (super-specialists).

Since you asked . . .

Temple of Artemis: a real sinkhole for Hammers. The payback is less than a Shrine- and you can't do anything, really, to improve it- and it obsoletes just about the time the payoffs start getting big (since Chemistry comes so soon after Astronomy, and enables such a great unit.) I've only built it as Ramses, when I've had GEs coming out my ears and half the wonders built anyway.

Triremes: Actually, this has made the threat of an invasion even more remote, since the AI builds the stronger unit to explore. With only Galleys, the AI didn't have to make a choice-- now they do, and it (usually) benefits the human player. On the flip side, you'll have to pump up your early navy even more, should you decide to go "over there", as there will actually be a defense force now, more often than not.

Great Generals: Before the patch (and yet another thing you won't have to unlearn, lucky you), the reason for attaching a GG to a unit was the increased Levels needed for Heroic Epic. Now, settling for XP is the main choice, especially with Barracks being reduced in effect. (With a settled GG, for instance, you can build Level 2 Siege units without a civics change.) Sure, you could get one great unit, but quantity is usually more important than quality, especially on Monarch, on a guess. 15-20 Level 2 units will get you further than one Level 6 as the AI SoDs react on defense.

Capitulation: One of the biggest headaches- Cultural pressure- has been taken away with the patch. Before, I had a strong incentive to leave a Vassal with only a couple crappy cities, because holding on to turf I'd won handily was such a headache. Basically, Capitulation makes Conquest a viable victory condition-- eliminate an early rival or two, then beat up on the remaining five or six for an early win (less if the other continent had someone like Monty or Napoleon on it.) Instead of trying to finesse percentages to prevent a Domination, you can just go kick butt until nobody's left standing.

Just the way things have gone for me, so far.

whenever i capitulate i always make sure my vassal gets caught up with me in tech, and is strong so that the become a use full ally

One should say it's situational, but in almost every game I personally have chosen to use the first GG on a Medic III.

The benefit is good and you can't get it any other way (except sort of through the March promotion but that's much harder).
It preserves your "investment" compared to the option of a super-GG attacker that could die.
Getting a level 6 unit (attaching the GG to a unit already with 6 XP or 5XP + one mop-up combat) ensured that you could build Heroic Epic and West Point. But in the Warlords patch they changed Heroic Epic back to the way it was in vanilla, requiring a level 4 unit rather than a level 5. (West Point is still changed from vanilla to require a level 6.) So the value of using the first GG on a Medic III is a little lower now.

Oh, it looks like the Military Academy is different in the patch too: better, but requires Education. Before the patch it did not seem to be very popular.

A few additional changes stood out for me:


Bureaucracy: High upkeep
Civil Service requires Mathematics
Masonry has higher religious weight


All of this sounds like it's intended to deal with the various CS slingshots. You need another prerequisite tech, the civic costs more (possibly offsetting the commerce boost in the capital until later when its cottages are more mature), and the last item sounds like a Great Prophet may pop for Masonry before CoL and/or CS--can anyone confirm?

Overall, I like the changes--it sounds like they've strived to close some "exploits", or at least easy routes to an advantage and victory. Usually that takes a whole version iteration, as it did from III to IV. The game may be a lot more challenging, and that means FUN. :goodjob:

On the other hand, I may need to insert substantial addendums to my strategy articles after I have some experience under my belt. Work, work, work...

I will try, in this first Warlords ALC, to take more time--playing fewer posts in each round so I can check back regarding decisions. There are so many minor changes to keep track of! Firaxis has also obviously attempted to make some of the under-used game elements (like Guerilla and Drill promotions, Divine Right, Forts, etc.) more attractive. Not only do I want to avoid blundering into a new challenge, I also don't want to miss taking advantage of a new or improved option.

Oh, it looks like the Military Academy is different in the patch too: better, but requires Education. Before the patch it did not seem to be very popular.
I could see that. If you have Heroic Epic, you already have a huge boost to military unit production. But the +2 XPs from a military instructor would allow you to build Level 3 units without using the "war civics" (Vassalage or Theocracy) or having West Point, so I can see that option being more attractive.

A further +50% boost (as opposed to the original +25%) to military production, however, might be very handy in mid-game, when the units are about to become more expensive. By that time I often find I need a 2nd military city--so being able to give it that boost would be very attractive. Since the option lends itself to having more than one specialized military city, it may make the Red Cross a little more attractive for that city as well.

I noticed that the Medic III unit was what aelf chose to do with his first GG in EMC 3. So it sounds like you'd want to chose one unit rather than several for the Warlord unit so it gets all 20 XPs? (Level 1 - 2 XPs: Combat I; Level 2 - 5 XPs: Medic I; Level 3 - 10 XPs: Medic II; Level 4 - 17 XPs: Medic III, right?)

As for settling the other GGs, that sounds a lot like the Great Scientists--use the next one for an academy (military in this case rather than scientific) in the military city and use the remaining ones as instructors in the same city (super-specialists).

At first playing with Warlords, I used to use the first GG setting up the military academy/production in my main production city, but I lately became more found of Aalf's approach: burden af selected unit with XP's merging the first GG - the second GG will give additional XP's to all units in the city where he is located (main production city). The 25% boost I usually don't need because my main production city will already be outputting macemen every 3-4 turns... ;) Sometimes I merge the GG with a level 4 unit to get a level 6 unit -> unlocking building of all the military powerhouses down the road.

Oh, this was my first post in the forum! (I found this forum only a month ago) :D

Looking forward to your first Warlords game!

disclaimer : I did not play patched warlords, and i never used blake's mod, so I may be wrong in many things

My idea on fast workers :
1) if you pair them, you can build a road in one turn on any terrain = road opening for settlers/army.
2) they are your best scouts. Typical example : you move one worker into the next tile of your early settler. He sees if there is a threat or not. If there is, he moves back, regardless of terrain!
3) they are much faster for chopping/jungle clearing (no turn of work lost). Meaning that pyramids may be doable? highly dependant on available forest, but I'd try it if the map allows it. + mathematics is required for CS and masonry will be popped by a prophet if you don't research it (if i read well :confused:)

My thoughts about build/researching order :
1) it depends on the map! If you have forest all around, going for BW is a must. And I'm with VoU about warrior first, then worker (in fact i'm one of those guys who argued about this strat a while ago) . If you have a few oasises, religion first and buddhism is cheaper (if you have 2 oasises, you may grab buddhism and hinduism, but i'm not fond of the hydra strat : it costs too many great people IMHO). If you have none of those 2 situations, it comes down to commerce available or not for the religion strat. If you have gold and wait a religion, work the gold hill while building a worker... (no growth lost, and commerce comes in)
2) CoL is a big thing for organized and for spiritual, it's really high priority IMHO. A good enough goal for the Oracle
3) Even though caste system allows you to run scientists without libraries, a library still gives 25% research boost. So it's better to whip away some unhappies for a library than to stop growth by running "early specialists"
4) great wall is really strong. Barbs were hard to deal with at vanilla monarch, they are much harder to deal with at warlords monarch, and i don't recall any nerfing of barbs in the patch. The GE GPP are not the only advantage!

My idea on this game :
go for it! Your honor won't be lost if the game is lost. So stick with monarch. :goodjob: going for an early patched public game.

edit : you're not playing gandhi, so i was a little overboard

I say stick with Asoka since you've gotten this thread started, but do go back in the alphabetical order to play the Celts after this and demonstrate their real power! ;) Please don't play Carthage, though. It would be like playing Rome. Maybe worse.

About the use of a GG, it really depends. If you see yourself building lots of units (especially expendable ones) in one production city in the early game, settle your 1st GG as instructor. If you want to rely on a smaller army or speed up your campaigns without having to build many units, go for the Medic III warlord. Besides giving you access to Heroic Epic and (potentially) West Point, the effects of Medic III are not to be considered lightly. You can always settle your subsequent GGs for future benefit.

By the way, it still fits the character of Asoka if you fight lots of wars and expand like crazy early on but adopt a peaceful build-up strategy after that ;) And don't worry about not utilizing the Mausoleum if you're not fighting in the late game. It's percisely because of the +2 happiness that they're worth building even if you're not planning to fight anymore.

Don't forget he's going to be playing with the patch, meaning he cannot make a military academy before Education, and that it gives +4 Culture and a 50% military unit production bonus. I find this pretty useful for my non-HE production power-house...having two cities who can pump out Tanks at 2-3 turns a pop is pretty nice:goodjob:

As for whose next...stick to Asoka now, but definitely go back and play Brennus. He's like the new Monty....nice traits, and a UU that is(IMO) maligned to an unfair extent. Hannibal though....he really is as good as he was predicted to be, but that's up to you. I'm sure you haven't played him, and it is the ALL Leaders Challenge....

Hannibal though....he really is as good as he was predicted to be, but that's up to you. I'm sure you haven't played him, and it is the ALL Leaders Challenge....

But Sisiutil did say he'd skip leaders that are too popular, IIRC.

Pedant mode on

But Sisiutil did say he'd skip leaders that are too popular, IIRC.

I believe the idea of ALC was to play the less popular leaders.

/pedant mode off

:)

I believe the idea of ALC was to play the less popular leaders.

And? Too popular = not less popular.

All of this sounds like it's intended to deal with the various CS slingshots. You need another prerequisite tech, the civic costs more (possibly offsetting the commerce boost in the capital until later when its cottages are more mature), and the last item sounds like a Great Prophet may pop for Masonry before CoL and/or CS--can anyone confirm?


Yes. Masonry will be lightbulbed if it has not been discovered.

Well, the idea was to skip the leaders that are popular because they are, in some way, arguably overpowered. Thus I have avoided Catherine, Elizabeth, Washington, and Caesar. I had already played and won games with them--and I still do, off-line; they're my favourites, after all. (Though I see poor Cathy and George have been nerfed in Warlords, as have the Redcoats and Cossacks.) As a result of the ALCs, I just win even more handily with them now. :D

I am a former teacher and I see the purpose of the ALCs as educational, both for myself and for others. And one of the key words in the title is "challenge". Thus, while I'm attracted to playing as a leader with a great trait combination and awesome UU off-line, he/she becomes a lower priority in this series.

On top of that, I'm anal retentive. I'm going through the civs in alphabetical order--which ensures that I'm using the leaders who may be overlooked otherwise. I may not get to all the leaders before Civ V comes out (!); all the more reason to play with the underutilized ones.

Anyway, I will start the game thread with the opening position tonight. I actually started the game just before hitting the sack last night, and the opening position is sure to engender, as per usual, a LOT of debate.

Anyway, I will start the game thread with the opening position tonight. I actually started the game just before hitting the sack last night, and the opening position is sure to engender, as per usual, a LOT of debate.

:goodjob:

Awesome. I'm hopping to actually get involved in this one despite my disdain for Asoka and the color purple. ;)

:goodjob:

Awesome. I'm hopping to actually get involved in this one despite my disdain for Asoka and the color purple. ;)

The movie? Or the actual color?

If you have stone you should go for the GW. Not having to worry about barbs is great, and eventually you will pop a GE and be able to rush another wonder. It is nice wonder to have early.

If you have stone you should go for the GW. Not having to worry about barbs is great, and eventually you will pop a GE and be able to rush another wonder. It is nice wonder to have early.
I'll definitely consider it, even without stone, especially if I find myself with a lot of tundra in my back yard. However, other wonders such as Stonehenge may be a higher priority.

I'll definitely consider it, even without stone, especially if I find myself with a lot of tundra in my back yard. However, other wonders such as Stonehenge may be a higher priority.

i think many of us are expecting you to build both..and probably several more. :) but if you could only do one, would it be better to get the GW and an early religion to expand borders and move toward an Oracle slingshot? side bonus of a shrine possiblility too. no barbs would be so choice..

the thing is, this game you have to slingshot to something other than CS because Civil Service requires Math now:sad:

the thing is, this game you have to slingshot to something other than CS because Civil Service requires Math now:sad:


Math is a pretty quick tech to grab though if you get writing, put up a library or two and run a couple of specialists.

For me, the priciple reason to not go for a too-early Bureaucracy is its high cost barely (if at all) being offset by the capital bonuses.

For me, the priciple reason to not go for a too-early Bureaucracy is its high cost barely (if at all) being offset by the capital bonuses.

There are only two early legal civics you can switch to, which are vassalage and Bureaucracy both of which are high upkeep, most of the time I'll switch anywayz... because there nothing else to switch too unless my economy is suffering badly.

Plus I'm more inclined to switch if I'm Spritual or Organised, Spritual because I can switch out of it if my economy starts to suffer and Organised is pretty obvious so for Asoka wouldn't be a bad thing. Heck I'd still go for Bureaucracy just for the Hammer's bonus so I can Qucikly build an army to run over the AI, I don't need 7XP units unless I'm Charismatic.

The game thread is now underway HERE (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=4716138). Go to it, gang! :D