Gandhi - Pangae - Stone/Gold/Pigs/FPs

I never understood how there can be anybody who does not value them high, they are done really fast with stone or Ind leaders, and benefits last for the full game. They boost research and war, like FlyinJ said..oh and happy too.
 
pepe26 said:
Mylene, you seem to value the mids a lot while some players like AZ for example think of them as very situational. How come you are this fond of them?
Click to expand...

I would say that the only situational part is whether or not you actually have a realistic shot at getting them on Diety. It's tough without stone and/or being Industrious, and it's also hard to justify the risk unless you are getting those bonuses to the fg.
 
Won late diplo while going for space

Spoiler :

Got a decent, but not great, MT Lib and made really quick work of SB. Moved on towards Qin who was big with 11 or 12 cities and a lot of land. I beat him down to 5 cities but he peace vassaled to Inca. I had a feeling it might happen, but Inca didn't like me so i couldn't figure out how to prevent it. That was a big blow to my progress, and i had to regroup and start teching.

I think i could have picked up like Assembly Line and Artillery and taken out some people, but i decided to be lazy and go for space. Peter spent most of the game fighting England and Inca and i bribed him on Capac a couple of times to keep Inca out of my hair and keep Peter from getting too advanced.

I was getting pretty close to space when Qin broke free from Inca and peace vassaled to Peter. Qin switching sides gave me enough votes to win the UN election. It wasn't a very pretty win, but it was my 2nd win since moving up to Diety so I'll definitely take it.
 
In my game Peter has become an unstoppable monster. He vassaled England, then Joao and Huayana (who has the game's major shrine) peacevassaled to him. He's friendly with me, though. I'm not too familiar with AP voting mechanics, does this mean he will vote for me? And his vassals will vote as he does?
 
ben-jammin said:
In my game Peter has become an unstoppable monster. He vassaled England, then Joao and Huayana (who has the game's major shrine) peacevassaled to him. He's friendly with me, though. I'm not too familiar with AP voting mechanics, does this mean he will vote for me? And his vassals will vote as he does?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure, I've never really used the AP for that. If it was the UN you would be running against him. I think it's safe to say that his vassals will vote as he does though.

Spoiler :
Peter was on the verge of running away in my game too. I had to buy him off of England twice to keep Vicky from caving. Inca was really the only thing that kept him in check. Capac capitulated Joao, got China via peace vassal, and also founded a colony that resulted in Lincoln as a 3rd vassal. At one point i think he had 12 cities and 3 vassals, but Peter really got the better of him in their wars. By the end of the game Peter had 18 or 19 cities and Inca was down to 7.
 
Hi, i also tried the map.
The start looks sweet, but this map is quite hard(at least for me).
Missed both GW and Mids and had huge barb issues even with horses in the BFC.
Wonder building on this map is a gamble for sure and the diplo situation can be a problem, too.
Maybe it's better to just take the failgold from the mids and don't even bother trying the GW and start building tons of chariots right from the start XD
I'll give it another shot.

@Pepe: I'm doing a lot better on that pericles map with quadruple gold that you posted ~2 months ago :cool:
 
GW should not be too risky if you research Masonry right after AH and whip into it as soon as the stone is hooked up. On two plays of this map I got the GW with no problem, though I did lose the mids very early on the first try.
 
I found all AIs on this map teched rather slowly, to include wonders. I.E., as I'm attacking England in 1000 AD they still only have LB/Swords. I grabbed Mids (1280 ish), MoM and Parthenon (in the 375-400 range) and TGL slightly after that. In regards to barbs.......2 barb cities spawned relatively early......so that in conjunction with neighbors made barbs a complete non-issue. So at least in my game TGW would be a no go and save hammers for other stuff. I actually got a warrior and chariot to level 4 very early. Diplo was rather easy too because the map was a Budah love fest (China early too) except SB. Anyways, given the leader, stone, gold, and other good sites this map was on the extreme easy side. Felt like playing Immortal.
Spoiler :
115.jpg
18.jpg
 
Mylene said:
I never understood how there can be anybody who does not value them high, they are done really fast with stone or Ind leaders, and benefits last for the full game. They boost research and war, like FlyinJ said..oh and happy too.
Click to expand...

well, the point is that the opportunity costs of not putting the mids hammers into settlers and workers is higher than the gains from the mids (thats at least what i have picked up from reading comments and watching AZs and Phils youtube channels)

I think AZ scolded me in an earlier thread fro getting the mids on immortal although i had stone. he said something like "i hope you got the mid haphazardly in one of the outlying cities and mainly for the fail gold. its a huge loss to not put the hammers into settlers and workers"
 
AZ is my favorite youtuber but there's still quite a few things he says which I completely disagree with, this being one of them. You'll quite often here "Land is power" and the more you have the better it is but that's simply not true, even on Deity. Imo one of the most important parts of my game play is accumulating a large number of military units which starts the snowball effect of grabbing more land, resources, research, power, etc.

Which leads to another important part of every game; balancing your surrounding land, neighbors, and your traits into a direction that will benefit you most. For my own personal preference, in the vast majority of the games I play, if stone is present and the map is moderately food friendly and has some nice production via lots of hills and or forest then I'd much rather have the Mids and fewer cities.

Why? Because with my playstyle I can consistently outperform even myself, when I have more cities and no Mids. So imo the combination of REP/PS are just that strong.
 
Small but efficient empire powered by representation was also a staple of Obsolete's style. More land is great, but only if the land is actually good and you can get the commerce required to keep yourself out of the hole on deity. Slavery can turn food into hammers very efficiently, building wealth or research can boost your research but is inefficient, only rep can turn food directly into beakers (and to a lesser extent gold) efficiently.
 
Yeah, I think expanding slows down your research a lot more in the short and medium term than some people realize. At least it does in my case. I certainly win liberalism more easily the less I expand, but unfortunately soon after that, the limitations of a small empire start to really kick in.
 
babar said:
Yeah, I think expanding slows down your research a lot more in the short and medium term than some people realize. At least it does in my case. I certainly win liberalism more easily the less I expand, but unfortunately soon after that, the limitations of a small empire start to really kick in.
Click to expand...

Luckily that's right around when your empire is supposed to get really big really fast :goodjob:
 
Four I can do maybe, but I struggle with only 2 or 3. I remember Obsolete doing it with two. I should try harder.
 
not everything is about lib, tho, if youre this small, you have no flexibilty what so ever to wage war earlier, because you just lack the land/food to whip together a strong army... with people like stalin or shaka or monty or whatever on the map, who threaten to take a lot of land early und vassal up like crazy, a 4-city lib rush just ain't gonna cut it.

(again, i'm not speaking from experience per se but from combining stuff i've picked up from top players and youtube videos...)
 
not everything is about lib, tho, if youre this small, you have no flexibilty what so ever to wage war earlier, because you just lack the land/food to whip together a strong army... with people like stalin or shaka or monty or whatever on the map, who threaten to take a lot of land early und vassal up like crazy, a 4-city lib rush just ain't gonna cut it.
Click to expand...

This isn't true Pepe. I love seeing those aggressive leaders in my game because it's easy to bribe them and keep the map in war. And you don't need tons of land to whip a strong army. That's only one way to get units, and imo, a slower way (most of the time). My preferred way is to generate a large number of HAs, Jumbos, Mace, or Cannon and use 2+ GMs to upgrade.

My personal game style and time frame usually gets me 24-30 Cuirs in the Mid 700 AD range, or 30+ Rifles in the 850-950 AD range. Now Imo this is more than enough units to conquer you way into a land lead on Deity in the majority of your games. So how do you get the units? I typically build them myself from 2-4 cities, during help of GAs (using mines/ws').
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

AcaMetis
Nobles' Club 377: Gandhi of India
2 3 4
Replies
67
Views
6K
Tecumseh1
Tecumseh1
AcaMetis
Nobles' Club 385: Wang Kon of Korea
Replies
6
Views
881
Henrik75
H
AcaMetis
Nobles' Club 382: Lincoln of America
2
Replies
23
Views
2K
Implo
Implo
AcaMetis
Nobles' Club 383: Isabella of Spain
Replies
11
Views
1K
CarpoolKaraoke
C
AcaMetis
Nobles' Club 384: Kublai Khan of Mongolia
Replies
17
Views
1K
chinemol
chinemol
Back
Top Bottom