Alexis VS Flauros

Who's more powerful?

  • Alexis

    Votes: 15 20.3%
  • Flauros

    Votes: 53 71.6%
  • they're equal

    Votes: 6 8.1%

  • Total voters
    74
In an unmodded game I'd probably say that Flauros is better, but I always let Philosophical leaders build Academies without Great Sages (200 :hammers:, at Arcane Lore) which makes Alexis more appealing.


I'm also liking Thessa of the Calabim, which I made an option after giving her to Alexis in the Splintered Court scenario. Arcane Vampiric Archmages are quite nice (Vampiric Archmages in general are quite nice, but Arcane ones are also easy to get), as is the health bonus.

I also made Rivanna a Calabim leader after giving her to Alexis, but despite boosting the production speed of Governor's Manors from Organized she still didn't seem so good because of having only 1 trait. I decided to give her Summoner too, which is nice as it also boosts the duration of her Vampire's Spectres. Unfortunately as Melee units they don't get the Summoner promotion from the new version of the trait, so the patch t change this combo is not as strong.
 
aristocracy is good. you can just spam them everywhere and get tons of food and a nice amount of commerce. great synergy with financial.
 
Aristocracy is great, its really great. But lately I've started to really love cottages, at least in a few cities. Though the two are not mutually exclusive.

Aristocracy farms are more useful in MP too, since they don't hurt as much getting pillages as Towns do. But if you can keep them safe, towns + farms, beats only aristo farms.
 
yeah, it all comes down to if you can effectively defend your improvements in the end. farms are easy to rebuild, while towns take lot of time and give lots of cash to your opponent when pillaged.
 
Grey Fox, were the tender ministrations of my Battlemasters not sufficient to teach you of the power of Aristo farms? When the Doviello are maintaining tech parity with a Phi civ, there must be a reason!
 
Grey Fox, were the tender ministrations of my Battlemasters not sufficient to teach you of the power of Aristo farms? When the Doviello are maintaining tech parity with a Phi civ, there must be a reason!

I'm not saying Aristo farms isn't powerful. It's just that cottages are better. If you can protect them and if you can get them to mature (i.e. you need to have the food/pop to work them). Aristo farms are also a much quicker way to get a good economy going, financial or not.

But when you research Code of Laws in 1 turn and Engineering in 5-6 cause you invested in some cottages early is just yummy!
 
Civ isn't about what is "better", its about what is first. Its more important to be quick than to be big. In a maptype suited for early-mid war with generous quantities of fresh water (Pangaea, Lakes, Inland Sea) this will always be Aristo. Otherwise, it'll be mostly Aristo with a transition into hybrid types.

The old City States/Cottage is dead.
 
Some people actually like to play games that last longer than 200 turns ;-).
 
Where does this "Philosophical is a late-game trait" come from?

Philo rocks precisely because you can get its benefits so early - 1 tech, 1 building, and start cranking out GPs. There are no lack of early game specialist slots. 50 turns into the game a settled GP is a huge boost to the economy. A philo leader that gets Mysticism early can run 2 specialists with one tech, both of which produce highly useful early game GPs. "First GP at turn 50 and a second at turn 70? Yes, please!"

A settled GP the equivalent of roughly 2 pop, without any maintenance. 5-6 commerce will support an entire city early in the game. That's huge when everyone else only has 3-4 cities.

Phi/Agg is one of the best trait combos in the game for an early warmonger. Settle those GP and use Aggressive to rush your neighbors. You'll be twice the size of any other civ by turn 100, with two capital sites and a functional economy. After that, the question of aristo farms or towns is purely academic.

It works for Alexander in vanilla, and vanilla takes much longer to get good specialist slots up and running than FFH.


If anything, Philo is an exceptionally poor late game trait. The GP costs aren't linear, so the value of Philo (the effective speed boost) drops with each GP that pops. You can take any civ, build a GP farm reasonably early, and come close to catching up in GP production with a Philo civ that starts ASAP. The point of Philosophical is to get those GPs 15 or 30 or 50 turns earlier.
 
@nealhunt, I don't argue that Philo isn't good, it's actually one, if not the, favorite trait of mine. But Alexis can't build Elder Councils, so she can't get as early sage as many others can.
 
Philo rocks precisely because you can get its benefits so early - 1 tech, 1 building, and start cranking out GPs. There are no lack of early game specialist slots. 50 turns into the game a settled GP is a huge boost to the economy. A philo leader that gets Mysticism early can run 2 specialists with one tech, both of which produce highly useful early game GPs. "First GP at turn 50 and a second at turn 70? Yes, please!"
You do realize that Alexis can't build elder counsels?

Also most of the time it is far better to bulb a religion with a great priest than to settle him ;). Or save him up to build a shrine (gold+free mana).
 
You do realize that Alexis can't build elder counsels?

Yes, I realize that. That post was about Philo in general, not Alexis in particular.

Also most of the time it is far better to bulb a religion with a great priest than to settle him ;). Or save him up to build a shrine (gold+free mana).

I disagree. 5 gold from a settled Prophet nets more income than a shrine will in the early game plus you get hammers. That's more unit support and hammers to build them. Mana is irrelevant in a warrior rush.

You're a Phil/Agg warmonger. You don't build holy cities. You conquer them.
 
The impact of a shrine all depends on the size of the map : I play large/huge maps, and it's quite common to have shrines pump 20 to 30 gold per turn, just by letting the religion spread on it's own. Sure it comes later, but Ooomph.
 
IMHO the lack of elder council isn't really a problem for Alexis, what matters in an aggressive early game is :gold: and :hammers:. Both of which are provided by the priest/prophet/god king combo.

It seems the reason why people think Flauros is better is because most people want Vampires ASAP before they start conquering. Whereas Alexis kicks butt with Moroi already, in which case Vampires can wait awhile longer.
 
IMHO the lack of elder council isn't really a problem for Alexis, what matters in an aggressive early game is :gold: and :hammers:. Both of which are provided by the priest/prophet/god king combo.

It seems the reason why people think Flauros is better is because most people want Vampires ASAP before they start conquering. Whereas Alexis kicks butt with Moroi already, in which case Vampires can wait awhile longer.

I can't speak for anyone else, but by the time I have axemen, or Moroi in this case, my economy and strategy plays a lot bigger role than slightly better troops. So any Aggressive powered rush needs to be with warriors.

Alexis gets slightly better troops, which only really matters for Bloodpets. She also gets to cripple her early economy by building Pagan temples and start generating GP early.

With Flauros I get the strong economy needed to research and keep conquered cities from the start. With Code of Laws, double production for Governors Mansion gives the hammers to mass produce troops.

Come to think of it, Alexis becomes increasingly worthless as Vampires come online. Aggressive disappears under the weight of feasting. Philosophical is a non-trait from the beginning. So Alexis is the leader to chose if you wan't to play the Vampire civilization, but not have to deal with all those Vampires...
 
Top Bottom