| General | Hosted Sites | Civ5 | CivRev | Civ4Col | Civ4 | Civ3 | Civ2 | Civ1 | Misc | Marketplace |
![]() |
|
|
Welcome to Civilization Fanatics' Center. You are currently viewing our site as a guest which gives you limited access to our site features. By joining our free community, you will be able to participate in the discussions, search the forum, send private messages, vote in polls, upload your own screenshots to the gallery, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so sign up today! If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact support. |
|
|||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
|
#1 |
|
Chieftain
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: US
Posts: 35
|
Anybody "enjoy" playing Mongols?
They seem kind of useless, and he's ugly too. Expansionist/Militaristic combonation don't seem like much either.
The UU seems like kind of a joke. Ohh boy, gets to move fast on mountains, woo hoo. Just wonder if anybody has played them and enjoyed them. Maybe even perhaps ended up putting that UU to good use. Just installed/started ptw. Was planning on playing all the new civs at least once. Not looking forward to playing "The Mongols" (I'll do it though). |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
BOB DYLAN'S ROCKIN OUT!
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Hipster-Authorland, Brooklyn (Hell)
Posts: 19,213
|
They are last on my new civs cycle. I'm currently doing a REALLY fun game with the Vikings. Oh, its so great to crush England with Beserks. Makes it feel like real history!
Anyway, on topic. I really think the Mongols just aren't a good civ. I would have liked, say, a horseman with 3 move maybe, or a knight with 2 move, all terrain as roads. But the Mongol UU? Ick. CG
__________________
"Where can we hide in fair weather, we orphans of the storm?" |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Chieftain
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: US
Posts: 35
|
They are last on my list of "civs to play I haven't played yet", that's for sure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Emperor
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Illinois, USA
Posts: 1,835
|
Yeah, I doubt I will ever play as them too much. The traits more or less suck and with a UU thats not that good either.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Deity
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Kapolei, HI
Posts: 2,704
|
You missed the "all terrain as roads" part
Edit: Yzman changed his post making mine useless, go ahead and delete mine too please.
__________________
gamertag: CaNick |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Emperor
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Illinois, USA
Posts: 1,835
|
Yeah I noticed that so I changed my post. Heh thats what I get for trying to read a post too fast.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
übermensch
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Lake Vänern
Posts: 541
|
Well, nothing can really be done about the traits, can there? Can you think of a single civ that would be more fitting with "expansionist/militaristic" ? I sure can't. If they had been given a more attractive combo, there'd only be a loooong thread about how stupid Firaxis's historians must be.
I do agree that the new UU doesn't look all that attractive thoug. And what's the deal with being able to cross mountains easily, but not hills? How the hell can that be? It doesn't make any sense! I think it got all wrong whith incorporating the Mongols into the Chinese civ from the beginning. Hell, they even had Genghis Kahn as a great leader in vannilla civ3. I think that the Chinese raider was supposed to be some kind of Mongol raider style thing. But now that we have mongols, it doesn't make any sense to give the Chinese three moved raiders and not the Mongols. IMO they should give the Raider back to the Mongols and give China a new UU (some kind of Crossbowman perhaps?) |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Trickster Reincarnated
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Missing The Harem
Posts: 7,608
|
I agree 100% Vetinari. No question in my mind the "Riders" are an attempt at simulating the Mongols, and that China needs a new UU. I like the crossbowman idea. And the Keshik could be much beefier - the mongols did ride them all the way to the gates of Europe and the Middle East. Sure they crossed mountains but you know what, also hills, jungle, the works.
And while I have heard, Grohth, that you mustn't call the leaderheads ugly in a thread, you are right - they made him (and several other leaders) extremely ugly, something I sorta take offense at.
__________________
"It may help to understand human affairs to be clear that most of the great triumphs and tragedies of history are caused, not by people being fundamentally good or fundamentally bad, but by people being fundamentally people." - Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett, Good Omens |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 | |
|
Chieftain
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 42
|
Quote:
I think by they should change the Keshik's the movement to "treat all FLAT ,OPEN terrian as road" (i,e grassland, Plains, Desert, Tundra), it makes more sense then the defaut one. The keshik will match or out menuvere a Rider, as long as they are in the open.. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Moderator
![]() Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 23,550
|
Same here. The Mongols are last on my "Civ Cycle" too.
__________________
"Never trust an Aztec with nukes!" (Civ1 - unknown) | 2nd user of the Ancient Style. South America (based on El Mencey's Map) | N & S America (based on El Mencey's Map) | C3C Scenario: 7,000 Turns Civ2 Earth for C3C | Old Style Civ3 for C3C | "Future is Wild" map How to upload multiple files to a post | File Upload | Paint Shop Pro 3.11 shareware (screenshot util - doesn't expire) | Chieftess' Culture Flip Calc | Don't wind up like this AI! | ![]() ![]() resource icons file To download a patch: Select "Advanced" from the main menu, and go to "Check for Updates". || My Web Journal (yes, it's a "blog")
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Yumbo? Yumbo!
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Snack Food Capital of the World
Posts: 7,687
|
The Mongols weren't my first choice (Vikings!), but after playing them I have to say they do not suck. Expansionistic is perfect for them. This gives them the ability to expand rapidly in the ancient age with a horseman attack strategy. The horsemen can then be upgraded to the keshik in the middle ages. They are decent units. A little weaker on defense, but cheaper. The treat mountain as grassland is a little wierd, but useful (especially on an Earth map where there are major mountain ranges in their neighborhood). Why they didn't include hills too, I don't understand.
__________________
"Perfection is attained, not when no more can be added, but when no more can be removed." The opinions expressed herein are my own personal opinions and do not represent my employer's view in any way |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 | |
|
BOB DYLAN'S ROCKIN OUT!
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Hipster-Authorland, Brooklyn (Hell)
Posts: 19,213
|
Quote:
CG EDIT: I have a question. If a Keshik is attacked on mountains, does it get the 100% defense bonus?
__________________
"Where can we hide in fair weather, we orphans of the storm?" |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Yumbo? Yumbo!
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Snack Food Capital of the World
Posts: 7,687
|
In the editor help it just says it ignores unit movement cost, so I'll 'assume' that they get the bonus still.
__________________
"Perfection is attained, not when no more can be added, but when no more can be removed." The opinions expressed herein are my own personal opinions and do not represent my employer's view in any way |
|
|
|
|
|
#14 | |
|
Chieftain
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: US
Posts: 35
|
Quote:
I'll probably get some verbal warning for that statement. ![]() I'm playing against the Mongols right now and they are doing pretty freaking good. Maybe because they got a good layout of land. He already declared war on me (started next to the freaking warmonger). Kind of a rough battle going. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Emperor
Join Date: May 2002
Location: The Castle Aaaaaaaargh
Posts: 1,491
|
Firaxis seems afraid to back out of several bad Civ III choices in PTW. Why not redistribute the elephant cavalry to Carthage, given that Hannibal's march into Italy is by far the most remembered Carthaginian accomplishment. The Chinese should have the Shaolin Monk, something like the Samurai, but needing no resources to build and replacing the mideval infantry. And why not recognize the uselessness of the Man-O-War and F-15 and pick something else? The English longbowman could have an even better attack rating. Plenty of American suggestions have been made in these fora.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Chairman and CEO
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: the land of milk and honey, Canada.
Posts: 359
|
A great way to make the Keshik a lot better would be to have them ignore all movement penalties for all terrain. They have 2 movement, right? Then let them move those 2 squares whether crossing mountain, hills, jungle or forest. THAT would make them a really unique UU.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
OBJECTION!
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: On the West Coast
Posts: 2,111
|
Actually I was thinking of giving Keshiks a 5/1/3 rating, and the ability to retreat earlier or something. Because when the mongols swarmed into Europe, they did strike hard, and when counterattacked, they retreated leading the european knights into an ambush. That would make the keshiks quite useful.
I agree changing the Chinese UU, and making longbowmen crossbowmen, then making the English UU a longbowmen. I dont know about the American UU though. |
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Whatchoo lookin at?
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Kalamazoo, MI
Posts: 194
|
I haven't played with the Mongols yet and I probably won't unless it's a MP where civs are randomly distributed. I will say that they are really fun to play against, though.
If handled right you can have a war dog at your side. Mongols (in my few games so far) seem to be at least mid level in the tech race and are always up for a fight. If you can get them on your side, which isn't at all hard, you have a pretty powerful ally. |
|
|
|
|
|
#19 | ||
|
Trickster Reincarnated
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Missing The Harem
Posts: 7,608
|
Quote:
Quote:
Dead on with England and USA too. England ought to have the longbowmen you suggest. America ought to have either "Minuteman" a mobile musketeer type, or "US Marines" a hyped up marine unit capable of actually defeating Mech Infantry. If they don't fix the problems of boats/planes/artillery there is no reason to make these classes of UUs.
__________________
"It may help to understand human affairs to be clear that most of the great triumphs and tragedies of history are caused, not by people being fundamentally good or fundamentally bad, but by people being fundamentally people." - Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett, Good Omens |
||
|
|
|
|
|
#20 | |
|
Chieftain
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 31
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
|
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Real 'Near Future': "Mechs","Super Tanks","Super Soldiers","Space Elevator",Etcetera | Wade. | Civ4 - General Discussions | 89 | Jul 15, 2009 08:20 PM |
| Why can't I enjoy the "one more turn" post-game? | Mojotronica | Civ4 - General Discussions | 4 | Dec 09, 2008 02:32 PM |
| Any way to "practice" or "enjoy" this game? | MrBleeble | Civ4 - General Discussions | 17 | Dec 04, 2005 04:28 AM |