Assyria: worthwhile or complete trash?

Redaxe said:

One question if you get given a city as part of a peace-negotiation deal will you still get a free technology or do you have to physically conquer the city? I ask that because it seems like most people will weaken an AI by destroying their military & use diplomacy because you don't get the diplomacy penalty.

Click to expand...

I've heard that it will trigger for city gifts, but have never tested it.

I do think that Assyria's UA is odd, is there any evidence that they really invaded other civs to take their technology?

Click to expand...

There was an interview with the designer of the civ (which may have been Beach, I can't recall) who mentioned that - as the UA name alludes to - it's intended to reflect the fact that the Royal Library of Nineveh was supposedly a repository for works taken from peoples the Assyrians had contact with, including those they conquered. As with most 'technology'-related effects, it's very abstracted - the Assyrians were compiling literature and learning, not science, and weren't developing technology from what they captured.

At least as explained this way, it makes a lot more sense than Babylon's arbitrary science theme, which bears no relation to the civ at all.

Learning a free Ancient to Renaissance era technology should be given as a bonus to any civilization that conquers a foreign city

Click to expand...

In all previous Civ games techs could be stolen by capturing cities (though from recollection it was a chance in most cases, not an automatic tech - and at least in some versions you sometimes got more than one). With BNW it would be a good time to bring this back to the series, since war does have meaningful penalties it didn't in vanilla or G&K, and the post-G&K tech tree is long enough to justify it (the vanilla one arguably wasn't).

You do not get the free tech if you receive a city in a peace deal -- only physically conquering a city gives the tech.

Assyria is a CB rush super-power.

1) DoW relatively early, as you would normally with a CB rush, around t50 or when you get Construction, whichever comes first.
2) Level up your CBs until you get mathematics, at which point, walk a siege tower over there and voila, your composite bows just turned into crossbowmen.
3) Proceed as usual, doing 50% more damage with your CBs than other civs, getting a free tech with each capture... your siege tower easily capturing most cities, sometimes even with 50% health left. This works best on high difficulty level. Otherwise you'll be #1 in tech too soon.
4) Make sure to get as much XP as possible with your siege tower, because he'll need cover 2 to survive as you hit the later cities. Sometime around t120 he'll be a one-shot kill otherwise.
5) Don't promote him. Unless I'm remembering this wrong, once he becomes a trebuchet, he doesn't give the +50% bonus to surrounding troops.

Also, build libraries to store the works you steal. #winning

The Assyria UA is annoying in the fact that it always gives me the tech I am teching, thus it causes me to either wait for my tech is done or tech something a bit more expensive if I am close to taking a city.

Taking city states do give you free techs as well.

Doing as Cromagnus explains above, using mainly CB:s and the siege tower for the +50% combat strength is probably the way to go. Using mainly siege towers will get you a few cities on deity, but once you taken a civ or 2 the other civs will have strong enough units to deal with them usually and then archer types comes into play.

Assyria feels like a replacement for the Mongols as an AI option, hyper offensive.

If the UA gives you whatever you are teching, then should a player switch what he's researching to a new technology right before taking a city? IIRC you can switch back afterwards and your progress on the first tech will be saved.

Assyria is very strong. Also love the Writing slot on the libraries.

LoneRebel said:

If the UA gives you whatever you are teching, then should a player switch what he's researching to a new technology right before taking a city? IIRC you can switch back afterwards and your progress on the first tech will be saved.

Click to expand...

It just gives you the cheapest tech possible. I think they're designed for bottlenecking your research and letting the UA fill in the gaps as you go. Go for construction, mathematics, philosophy, education, dynamite and get everything else from your UA. Bottleneck enough and the UA always works even when you're number one in tech, except on maybe the lowest difficculties.

I like to play tall and any time some one settles nearby sack their cities until they're willing to pay for peace. Then let them stupidly expand near you again and start all over. Those new cities fall so fast it's almost effortless.

When BNW was out,assyria was first civ which i tried and i played it on immortal/marathon and i think i took 3 CS with 2 archers,one siege tower and one spearman.Later i had 3 siege towers and that was enough to take care of other civs in game(it was polland,brazil and one more).And yes siege tower does'nt contain bonus dm if you upgrade it to trebuchet,so later they become some sort of "great general".Only potencial problem with them is if you play on lower dif,then there is no tech to steal since you will outrank other civs in science anyway,so minimum dif to play with them should be immortal unless you dont have problem with that.In shortly,best civ for early warmorgering if you ask me.

Cromagnus said:

Also, build libraries to store the works you steal. #winning

Click to expand...

For some reason I was never compelled to play Assyria until now... This is just sooo bada**, never thought of it.

I tend to avoid Assyria for the same reason I avoid the Maya - it's a one-trick pony that you more or less have to play a certain way. That said, if you want to play a game as a warmonger and beeline war techs, they do it very very well.

My biggest frustration with Assyria came with the fall patch. The warmonger penalties are so stiff for taking cities that unless you're going for Domination it's always preferable to take them in a peace deal. This nerfed Assyria.

weregamer said:

I tend to avoid Assyria for the same reason I avoid the Maya - it's a one-trick pony that you more or less have to play a certain way. That said, if you want to play a game as a warmonger and beeline war techs, they do it very very well.

Click to expand...

I once won an OCC Immortal game as the Maya, and Assyria can play culture with the extra writing slots (as long as it has a way to get extra works of writing - but then, isn't that what hidden antiquity sites are for?). It can also do what any early or moderately early warmonger can do, and use its UU and UA to claim an early city or two (and in Assyria's case, associated tech), and then build up a more peaceful game. They have abilities that help in war - that doesn't mean they have to be at war all the time. In most games there will be some wars, and you will want to capture some territory, whatever your victory condition.

Cromagnus said:

My biggest frustration with Assyria came with the fall patch. The warmonger penalties are so stiff for taking cities that unless you're going for Domination it's always preferable to take them in a peace deal. This nerfed Assyria.

Click to expand...

I'm increasingly convinced this is a myth. Someone did a breakdown of the various penalties and found that the warmonger penalty was far from the major cause of conflict where it applied. It's also only going to apply to civs you've met, which actually benefits early warmongers like Assyria since, by the time you meet most civs, the ones who dislike your warmongering ways are gone or no longer relevant, and you don't need to go to war with anyone else immediately. I took two cities in the early game in one game - it made me unpopular, due to Extreme and Major penalties, but now that all civs do will denounce you and won't go to war unless really, really pressed, even that wasn't much of an issue; after all, you can still trade with them. Plus the warmonger penalty wears off over time.

PhilBowles said:

after all, you can still trade with them.

Click to expand...

WHAT. You mean like sell a lux for 3GPT? You can't get luxes from the AI once they hate you.

GhostSalsa said:

WHAT. You mean like sell a lux for 3GPT? You can't get luxes from the AI once they hate you.

Click to expand...

No, I mean establish trade routes - you know, the game's major source of foreign income? If I can get 20 gpt from a cargo ship with someone who hates me, why do I care if he might offer 4 gpt less for a lux trade than he would if he liked me?

This is the fundamental issue: As with any Civ game, Civ V lacks meaningful sanctions other than warfare - the worst that will happen as a result of diplomatic penalties is war. If someone can't or won't go to war because they need trade income, or aren't strong enough to beat you (which is quite likely if you've conquered enough cities to cause them to hate you in the first place), they can rant and rave all they like but they have no meaningful way of causing you problems, so just ignore them until they cool off.

Oh baby, its turn 105 and I have 6 cities (all coastal within cargo range of my cap) with royal libraries and an NC on the way, two natural wonders being worked with the pantheon for extra faith on top of them- enabling me to snatch pagodas and get another prophet planted, 4 workers stolen, a bunch of luxs, a farmed up squad of units... and only one civ angry with me that will fall shortly and has 4 wonders built up just for me <3. This might be my best start ever. Early warmongers are so fun.

Thanks for turning me onto Assyria, Cromagnus!

Hehe no problem.

Only one left? Continents? Assyria works best on that map IMHO because you can usually clear your start continent before you lose the early advantage siege towers give, and avoid the diplo penalties that would normally cause problems. The tech steals make up for the early warmongering, and you're good to go! But on Pangaea it can be pretty tough to hang in there after people hate you... On deity anyway. I pretty much won't play Assyria on Pangaea deity anymore. Aggressive warmongering in the classical era is so heavily penalized unless you can sweep the table... And that's right when you'd want to cap cities to take advantage of siege towers at their peak... So you're punished for it for the whole game by lost trading opportunities for using your UU to best advantage... assuming you don't just get chain dow'd. Less of an issue on Immortal or below... /shrug

Glad you enjoy it though. I think they're really fun. Something about that free tech that makes me grin every time I take a city.

Ya I am on a continents map. I am not good enough to clear a pangaea with the early warmongers, and there is something really satisfying about being a super civ with an entire continent to yourself. It also reminds me of being able to snowball off of early conquering in previous civs.

Ok, after reading all the responses to my OP, I figured I would give Assyria a shot, and....I'm officially sold on this Civ

T128, I control 3/8 Capitals (including my own), and, frankly, the warmonger pen. has not been too bad. This may be in part because I also have Hiawatha on my continent, and he has also been a super-expansive warmonger.

This is one of the most fun games I've played, and I am loving Assyria (gotta love those seige towers!)

Seige towers take cities so easy. The seige towers to cities are like a hot knife on butter. Except when there are melee units nearby.