aelf
Ashen One
Why not from barracks?
Anyway, sorry for seeming to neglect this thread, guys. Busy this week and I have to divide my Civ time between this and EMC4. Thanks for the continuous stream of ideas coming in!
A comprehensive UU guide (the updated thread)
- Thread starter aelf
- Start date
Why not from barracks?
Anyway, sorry for seeming to neglect this thread, guys. Busy this week and I have to divide my Civ time between this and EMC4. Thanks for the continuous stream of ideas coming in!
johnny_rico
one more turn addict
Just finished a couple of Ottoman games. I'd have to say I'm not overly impressed with the Janissary. Primarily because the short lived technology gunpowder which allows their creation.
I mean 25% of 9 is 2.25, yielding them unpromoted as 11.25 vs melee, archery, and mounted units. An unpromoted grenadier has a 12 combat value, thus they are better. For the most part, I am usually researching gunpowder to quickly obtain chemistry.
On the flip side, the janissary does cost 20 hammers less but by this stage in the game, 20 hammers is a mere pittance for my HE city.
I could see the janissary being really useful in a couple of situations. 1. Being under heavy attack and teching gunpowder to get a defensive edge. Again, as the AI blows at war, it's not needed. 2. Nationhood - they can be drafted which means you can get several very fast but the cost isn't worth it unless circumstances are dire, which is unfortunate if they are.
For the short time they are useful, they are very useful provided you're on the offense as they make wonderful stack protectors and excellent garrisons of freshly conquered cities. But this is a short window. Honestly, I'd rather have the musketeer and the 2 movement points.
Perhaps this UU shines in multiplayer but I wouldn't know, it's not my bag.
One other scenario where I think the janissary would be excellent is in marathon games. Obviously their window of usefulness would increase here and if you have a tech lead, I think they would make your defenses impenetrable.
This is certainly the most disappointing UU I've found since the Cho-ku-nu. Perhaps I haven't used them properly in the games I played, but they weren't missed.
I mean 25% of 9 is 2.25, yielding them unpromoted as 11.25 vs melee, archery, and mounted units. An unpromoted grenadier has a 12 combat value, thus they are better. For the most part, I am usually researching gunpowder to quickly obtain chemistry.
On the flip side, the janissary does cost 20 hammers less but by this stage in the game, 20 hammers is a mere pittance for my HE city.
I could see the janissary being really useful in a couple of situations. 1. Being under heavy attack and teching gunpowder to get a defensive edge. Again, as the AI blows at war, it's not needed. 2. Nationhood - they can be drafted which means you can get several very fast but the cost isn't worth it unless circumstances are dire, which is unfortunate if they are.
For the short time they are useful, they are very useful provided you're on the offense as they make wonderful stack protectors and excellent garrisons of freshly conquered cities. But this is a short window. Honestly, I'd rather have the musketeer and the 2 movement points.
Perhaps this UU shines in multiplayer but I wouldn't know, it's not my bag.
One other scenario where I think the janissary would be excellent is in marathon games. Obviously their window of usefulness would increase here and if you have a tech lead, I think they would make your defenses impenetrable.
This is certainly the most disappointing UU I've found since the Cho-ku-nu. Perhaps I haven't used them properly in the games I played, but they weren't missed.
carl corey
Deity
I won't have time for a proper post about Janissaries until next week, but right now I played a game in which I put down only 3 cities (Monarch diff.) than beelined like mad toward Gunpowder. The huge advantage afterward is that the Janissaries can take out pretty much anything the AI has by that time with very few losses. I had a lot of Great Generals, very few casualties, and took over my whole continent without a problem. I did use some Grenadiers in the late stages of those wars, but the Janissaries were still very, very effective. I guess it's all about how committed you are to getting them. Early enough and you've got the equivalent of the Roman Praetorians, nothing can stop them.
johnny_rico
one more turn addict
That's interesting. I suppose in both games I played, the continent was fairly peaceful, at least with me. In both games I went the diplomatic victory while only eliminating one civ to gain a little more land on my home continent.
I'm curious at what year you finished gunpowder.
Wodan
Deity
Well, Chemistry takes, what, 5 techs that Gunpowder doesn't. True, one of them is Construction and if you're planning on conquering cities you'll want Cats. But the others still are a beaker count of about 10,000 or so.
Wodan
Wodan
johnny_rico
one more turn addict
And I don't know the techs. What I do know is that whenever I research gunpowder, chemistry is not far away and it is never other pre reqs in the way of me researching it.
By this argument, one could bee line to gunpowder and use musketmen as a powerful force. You'll take a few more lumps than with the janissaries but they'll mop up pretty well also. I'd have to review the tech chart, I wonder if one could bee line to gunpowder faster than some civs get to feudalism. Janissaries vs. archers. I imagine a beeline to gunpowder also have some offsetting economic costs.
Religion + gunpowder = assimilate or die
Wodan
Deity
I think people tend to get "stuck in a path" or maybe 2 or 3 typical research paths. That doesn't mean there aren't other ways to go about things.
A while back I realized that I pretty much always went for the Liberalism freebie tech. When I realized that it occurred to me that there's a price I paid for that freebie tech, a price of opportunity and possible enjoyable styles of play that I was totally missing out on. Anyway, I'm not trying to toot my own horn.
Basically the idea here is that the techs to beeline Gunpowder are pretty cheap, and some of them can easily be lightbulbed. The result is that you get Musketmen (Janissaries, Musketeers) way early, and also "Chemisty is not far away" isn't true any more.
Yes, right. It's actually a pretty fun game. Janissaries (and Musketeers) have their own benefit, but it's also not too shabby doing the Musketmen rush using a Protective leader, or Aggressive, or someone with interesting dynamics with a UB or Traits.
Wodan
johnny_rico
one more turn addict
Interesting stuff wodan.
I am definitely of the 'stuck tech path'. Usually, and I'm not certain we should be spamming aelf's thread but there is some relevancy with the 'power' of janissaries here, I go for:
Metal Casting slingshot via the oracle
Alphabet and go trade happy backwards with MC to anyone and everyone
Code, CS, Math, construction, engineering, then work toward Liberalism for Astronomy as I usually play continents. After that, things go different routes but playing on monarch, the game is won and always won.
Since the AI usually follows certain tech paths consistently (financial civs follow a space race path, aggresive follow a military path), based on my opponents I usually follow a tech path that yields me the best trade value. Since I know what they'll have, I have a pretty good idea of what I should go get, all the while forming a plan based on what techs I acquire.
However, as I've stated, this pattern or style yields a 100% victory chance on monarch. Each game presents a little variety but for the most part the pattern is similar. I haven't yet made the jump to emperor, though I should.
Anyway, these most recent posts have been an eye opener. Even before settling into my ways, I found that most new things attempted worked well. It's simply a means of identifying the progression of making a single aspect of the game very strong with a few side benefits along the way. I too am a liberalism junkie and miss out on things like a gunpowder beeline not to mention hordes of other things not yet discovered. Have you read the new 'bigger is better' challenge thread here. what some of those players accomplished is quite impressive and seems the games are quite winnable even though they were perfecting an oddball objective.
Appreciate the comments wodan. I feel enlightened.
Apologies aelf if your thread feels hijacked. Still, I find this oddly related in the fact that while a particular UU may seem underpowered, there is a particular angle where they can excel.
I am definitely of the 'stuck tech path'. Usually, and I'm not certain we should be spamming aelf's thread but there is some relevancy with the 'power' of janissaries here, I go for:
Metal Casting slingshot via the oracle
Alphabet and go trade happy backwards with MC to anyone and everyone
Code, CS, Math, construction, engineering, then work toward Liberalism for Astronomy as I usually play continents. After that, things go different routes but playing on monarch, the game is won and always won.
Since the AI usually follows certain tech paths consistently (financial civs follow a space race path, aggresive follow a military path), based on my opponents I usually follow a tech path that yields me the best trade value. Since I know what they'll have, I have a pretty good idea of what I should go get, all the while forming a plan based on what techs I acquire.
However, as I've stated, this pattern or style yields a 100% victory chance on monarch. Each game presents a little variety but for the most part the pattern is similar. I haven't yet made the jump to emperor, though I should.
Anyway, these most recent posts have been an eye opener. Even before settling into my ways, I found that most new things attempted worked well. It's simply a means of identifying the progression of making a single aspect of the game very strong with a few side benefits along the way. I too am a liberalism junkie and miss out on things like a gunpowder beeline not to mention hordes of other things not yet discovered. Have you read the new 'bigger is better' challenge thread here. what some of those players accomplished is quite impressive and seems the games are quite winnable even though they were perfecting an oddball objective.
Appreciate the comments wodan. I feel enlightened.
Apologies aelf if your thread feels hijacked. Still, I find this oddly related in the fact that while a particular UU may seem underpowered, there is a particular angle where they can excel.
I think that the Ottomans should not beeline to gunpowder through the lower path even though that is shorter. It is better to go for Liberalism via Paper and Education and then take Nationalism as the free tech. Then research Gunpowder and change civics to Nationhood and draft some Janisaries. All a conventional early drafting strategy up to that point.
But the key is to then ignore Chemistry and Cavalry and go all out for Rifling. Researching Printing Press, Replaceable Parts and Rifling takes about 8000 beakers on monarch, so that's 20 turns at 400 beakers / turn. This gives the Ottomans a very powerful additional boost just about when the Janissaries are running out of steam. The Ottoman UB is perfect for this prolonged double drafting strategy giving an extra +2 happiness in large cities to help combat drafting and WW unhappiness.
This is powerful for a cottage economy where production is low and Grenadiers and Cavalry need to be built the hard way with hammers and slavery. Slavery will be an expensive way to raise 100 hammers for a Grenadier but drafting only costs 1 pop. It should be possible to draft 20 Janissaries for the first war and then after 20 turns another 20 Riflemen or so.
Maybe even research on towards Infantry and draft some of those too
That takes it from a double drafting strategy to a triple draft and it is possible if planned for from the beginning by setting up several small drafting cities. Not something I've tried yet but a definite possibility for the Ottomans and French who have a good Musketman UU and also for the Japanese who have the deadly combination of agressive and protective gunpowder troops that can be drafted.
drkodos
Emperor
I think this is the nuanced crux that most people have not yet been able to embody in their strategic thinking on this matter.
Chemistry is 2,000 beakers (Normal Spd.), which means it is 2X the research expense than is Gunpowder. For the same amount of beakers that it takes to make that upgrade in techs in that one path, you could instead research both Divine Right (1,000 beakers cost, founds a religion and is a powerful trade tech), & Economics (1,000 beakers cost & gives a free Great Merchant to the 1st civ to research it).
These two techs have a nice symmetry with the Ottomans so that one can now build the Spiral Minaret and put the extra cash to use both trading in free market economy or running a higher science slider to get oher techs.
Why not? Because I completely spaced out and forgot Barracks give the +3 to all land units.
aelf
Ashen One
Good points on the Gunpowder beeline. The discussion you guys are having is actually very relevant to this thread in light of the musket UUs. However, I' m not sure what Wodan meant by beelining to Gunpowder. AFAIK, the Education route is actually the faster way, and Liberalism is good for grabbing Nationalism so that you can start drafting those musket UUs.
I'm also of the opinion that Chemistry does not necessarily follow Gunpowder quickly. I think if you've been doing proper beelining, Chemistry would take quite a few more turns to research compared to Gunpowder so, added to the fact that you probably have some techs to backfill, it might not be the best to get next.
I'm also of the opinion that Chemistry does not necessarily follow Gunpowder quickly. I think if you've been doing proper beelining, Chemistry would take quite a few more turns to research compared to Gunpowder so, added to the fact that you probably have some techs to backfill, it might not be the best to get next.
Welnic
Emperor
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2006
- Messages
- 1,057
A quick note on Quechuas in Warlords. In Vanilla Huayna Capac was aggressive, so you could make a Medic II unit with anybody if you had a barracks and theocracy or vassalage. Since in Warlords he is no longer aggressive this doesn't work anymore. But since the Quechua still starts with Combat I, you can do it with him. But you do have to pay attention since at some point you can't make those guys anymore, and that is probably not too long after you can run one of the extra experience civics.
Wodan
Deity
The "south" route, through Guilds.
What makes it so, in your estimation?
Sure, a good benefit. Not sure it's worth the effort from a speed standpoint but it's probably just as much fun.
Wodan
Mr. Civtastic
Prince
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2006
- Messages
- 488
Im playing a game with Spain, so I took a look at Conquistadors when I noticed this...
These two statements seem to contradict each other.
These two statements seem to contradict each other.
aelf
Ashen One
Wodan said:
This actually takes more turns to research.
Wodan said:
By pure number of turns
Wodan said:
It's a good strategic choice. Take it or leave it
aelf
Ashen One
Subtlety, my friend. It can be exploited in a winning way, but it's not invincible. Nevertheless, I will consider changing the two statements to avoid confusion.
kristopherb
Protective/Charismatic
Elephants are conquiesdors weakness so use them wisely.
aelf
Ashen One
I know this is long overdue. I've added the entry on Numidian Cavalry. I also cleaned up the bit on Conquistadors.
Next on the list is Impi. I'll try to write the entry tomorrow.
Next on the list is Impi. I'll try to write the entry tomorrow.
Wodan
Deity
Similar threads
