Mongol vs Huns

Mongolia has bonus against city states, mounted units get +1 movement point. They have strong horse UU as well as very good unique GG.

Huns can raze all cities faster and get access to horse at turn 1. 2 UU's for early war, one is another horse, the other is battering ram.

These 2 civs are very similar who focus on aggressiveness and horses. Who do you think is better civ for war?

the huns just raze every citie except capital and win domination I know I will do that

First capture some early cities to get some good land trhen go domination

Glassmage said:

Mongolia has bonus against city states and strong horse UU as well as very good unique GG.

Huns can raze all cities faster and get access to horse at turn 1. 2 UU's for early war, one is another horse, the other is battering ram.

These 2 civs are very similar who focus on aggressiveness and horses. Who do you think is better civ for war?

Click to expand...

To fully utilize the civ players are going to have to be aggressive out of the gate - I am used to playing defensive and building wonders until the keshik era units.

The question is which civ is best for war at a given time in the game. All civs have strengths that may lead you to fight your battles at different times.

My guess is that the Huns will become the favorite civ for most of the aggresive players on MP. Be prepare for being wipe out on turn 15...I dare say that some Hosts will ban the huns.

I dont play many MP games and I like to take my time when playing single, so I will not play the huns more than once I think. But I can see they become the most annoying AI civ ever.

Fabiano79 said:

My guess is that the Huns will become the favorite civ for most of the aggresive players on MP. Be prepare for being wipe out on turn 15...I dare say that some Hosts will ban the huns.

I dont play many MP games and I like to take my time when playing single, so I will not play the huns more than once I think. But I can see they become the most annoying AI civ ever.

Click to expand...

Yea its why I don't play many duels and prefer continents in multiplayer. Rushing is deterred because if you do have a war vs a somewhat competent player it could stretch out for a long time and let players on opposing continents get too much of a lead over you. Takes much more planning.

Yea, I understand that Huns will mostly likely best war civ for Ancient and Classical Eras, while Mongolia will dominate when Medieval Era hit.

MaximusK said:

To fully utilize the civ players are going to have to be aggressive out of the gate - I am used to playing defensive and building wonders until the keshik era units.

The question is which civ is best for war at a given time in the game. All civs have strengths that may lead you to fight your battles at different times.

Click to expand...

If you just sit back as the huns in the early game you will mostly lose

So they are 2 different playstiles huns direct agression mongols sit back build up and go on a killing spree

I am playing as Mongolia now and in the current game destroying or attacking city states is not a good idea due to the diplo penalties that come with it. Mongolia is going into battle with one arm cut off in CiV vanilla. Their UA is rather useless. Unless the fact is that you can destroy a CS or two early without penalty? I am not sure if this is true, because I have not tried it. Let me know if that is the case. Even without their UA the Mongols are tough in my book.

Now with Gods and Kings as Mongolia, city states had better watch out. The fact is you may gather up diplo penalties for attacking CSs, but you can work things out later on, although you will have to work harder to gain influence back. City states will band together against aggressors and they will work on a war weariness system, which will reduce your influence with the ones you are at war with and their buddies, to a negative default value.

As far as the Mongols vs. the Huns. I would say the Huns have the advantage through the classical era. If the Mongols get into the medieval era the keskiks will stomp them. Still it could go either way, it would be an interesting battle. Especially with the new combat rules, and if Mongolia can gather up an early Khan.

In a direct conflict against Mongol vs Huns,I bet on Mongol,because their UA is also avaliable to horseman,which means they can hold the Huns . When they got Chivalry,the Huns' player will probably quit .

In vanilla the keshik is useful for a hundred turns of destruction, and never becomes worthless. Do we know how many move points the horse archer has? Probably 4? With its weaker attack it may obsolete quickly, but then again the changes to combat may obsolete the keshik early also. We just don't know how good these units are until we get our hands on the new system. Huns sound very easy to play, that's for sure. Doesn't take a genius to work out optimal strategy.

GenjiKhan said:

In a direct conflict against Mongol vs Huns,I bet on Mongol,because their UA is also avaliable to horseman,which means they can hold the Huns . When they got Chivalry,the Huns' player will probably quit .

Click to expand...

It would be a fight for who can gather up horses first. Both sides should get 4 horses around their capital. Then its horsemen, and chariot archers vs Horse archers.

Glassmage said:

Mongolia has bonus against city states and strong horse UU as well as very good unique GG.

Huns can raze all cities faster and get access to horse at turn 1. 2 UU's for early war, one is another horse, the other is battering ram.

These 2 civs are very similar who focus on aggressiveness and horses. Who do you think is better civ for war?

Click to expand...

I've noticed the AI usually plays Genghis Khan for diplomacy rather than domination, and the CS bonus makes sense in this context - Mongols aim to gain diplomacy victory by actively capturing votes from the enemy.

So there's less overlap than you might think in the intended direction of the two civs, if one assumes the AI is programmed to play the civ with a bias towards the victory condition the designers had in mind for it.

nokmirt said:

It would be a fight for who can gather up horses first. Both sides should get 4 horses around their capital. Then its horsemen, and chariot archers vs Horse archers.

Click to expand...

the question will olso be will horsemen actualy be usefull? Because swordsman now have 14 strenght

Oooooo Mongolia vs Austria is pretty cool too. Capture all CS's fast before Austria can expand and absorb them.

I would much prefer the Huns because I enjoy razing cities but the huge unhappiness hit that takes so long to go away often makes it not worth razing the city. On the other hand, I have never enjoyed the Mongols that much because I enjoy using city-states to my benefit and rarely do I want to take their cities. I'd rather take rivals' cities than neutral city-states' cities.

We should make this thread into a civ matchup thread. Olds civs versus new civs. How about the Greeks vs. the Huns? Phalanx and Companion Cavalry vs. Horse Archers could be pretty cool, especially with composite bowmen thrown in.

nokmirt said:

We should make this thread into a civ matchup thread. Olds civs versus new civs. How about the Greeks vs. the Huns? Phalanx and Companion Cavalry vs. Horse Archers could be pretty cool, especially with composite bowmen thrown in.

Click to expand...

Huns vs Babylon. Lets see if Attila's Battering Rams can get through Babylonian Walls while under fire from Bowmen.

Hey guys can someone please explain to me what are the benefits of having ancient era UUs as is the case with the Huns on standard speed.If you try to do some kind of rush won't they go obsolete too fast?

In my current game I'm playing as Greece on King and did the standard build with GL and NC to be on pace with science and I attacked my closest neighbour-England as soon as I could with 3 hoplites, an archer, a warrior,which I upgraded into a swordsman, and a catapult.As soon as i attacked Lizzy's first city i saw a couple of pikemen near it.I still crushed England though.

So can anybody explain the benefits of early UUs like the Huns have ?

Nowadays,early UU would only be useful on Epic/Marathon speeds,because of the lazy design of the tech tree,which allows the player to get Pikeman before Spearman .

Belcho, you can estabilshed yourself as the major power of your continent very quickly and them go for any kind of victory. Other civs will still be fighting each other while you are focusing on science, for example.

The secret is forgeting everything else and just build your military units, this is the strategy that many AI uses against us, the infamous warrior rush. For sure you already saw that. Now, imagine that instead of warriors, the units are a fast horse and a powerfull battery run...scary.