AG4 - OCC Conquest (regent)

Aggie · Mar 16, 2004

OCC on conquest. Should be a fun game :hammer:

We naturally don't HAVE to be at war. The end result however should be a conquest victory for us. I haven't determined anything yet, but I like to suggest:

- Pangaea on a small map
- The Iroquois as a civ (because of the fast UU)

Other insights are very welcome!

GAME RULES
AI Aggression: normal
Opponents: 5 random AI's (or 7, depends on the map).
Rules: Standard, all standard single player victories enabled
Barbarians: Roaming
Level: Regent
We will use the RBCiv rules regarding exploits.

3 players are already in the roster, but 2 more are welcome. I'd say that you should be comfortable to play emperor level.

EDIT: roster is full

ROSTER
Aggie
Melifluous
CarlosMM
Nad
yoshi74

Nad · Mar 16, 2004

Ooh....can't resist! Please sign me up, Aggie, this should be crazy!

Aggie · Mar 16, 2004

Nad, you are welcome

Nad · Mar 16, 2004

Some thoughts:

1) The smaller the map the easier the game. I'm quite happy with small map, standard map would be more of a challenge so that too is fine with me.

2) Early UU would be good. Mountie and immortal stand out but both require resources...that could be tricky if we don't have them in immediate reach, and making a custom map with resource laid out is a bit too cheesy for my liking. So maybe a resource-less UU would be good?

3) Militaristic would be a good trait, as would scientific and expansionist.

4) My first choice would be Zulu, though I'm ahppy to go with whatever. Also worth mentioning: Aztecs, Carthage, Babylon, Rome, Iroquois.

yoshi74 · Mar 16, 2004

Sign me up, i have too much experience in peacefull OCC's, time to try something new

I think a peacefull start to get colossus and mousoleum would be fit good, if only for the extra tourist cash. Could be real fun :hammer:

[edit] regarding nad's thoughts: a very early war could be quite hard. We will have a VERY limited income and can't support many units. Every unit counts. Also killing someone early just opens space for someone else to grow big. With one city i don't see a military bigger than 10 units for quite a long time.

Aggie · Mar 16, 2004

Sounds interesting. Do others have comments? I like a good discussion before we decide...

Aggie · Mar 16, 2004

yoshi74: welcome. That makes our team complete!

Nad · Mar 16, 2004

IMO, we have to attack as EARLY as possible! We have to win by conquest, the later we leave it the harder it will be. It's well and good starting peacefully and building a wonder or two, but that will just give the AIs more time for more cities and more units. At the start of the game we are closest to the AIs, every turn that passes the AIs become relatively stronger than us. I would, quite literally, start with barracks and then just start cranking units! The only buidlings I would stop for would be: harbour (trade route) and marketplace (more cash), if non-river then aqueduct too. That's IT for buildings, IMHO

.

I would research a few techs at the start to get what we need, maybe a philosophy run, and then have zero research for the rest of the game, using pointy stick for advancement.

yoshi74 · Mar 16, 2004

This leaves us with the problem that our early resourceless UU will be outdated real fast. While hoping for iron somewhere near can doom us, a gallic swordsman would be much longer usefull.
Also how we intent to stop other nations from settling the open space we leave? Declaring war on everyone who settles close could turn out our game in an OCC AW real fast

At least it will be a real challenge

Aggie · Mar 16, 2004

Regarding early game: It all depends on the starting spot, but the Colossus for extra cash surely won't hurt us. I have my doubts regarding other wonders though.

Nad · Mar 16, 2004

For sure, if we are coastal then Colossus would be an excellent wonder since more cash would give us more support. On regent we would have no trouble getting it too.

I wonder what we'll do with MGLs though

. What can they rush? We can't get any small wonders, can they rush units?

Nad · Mar 16, 2004

Actually another civ that would be good to try: the Maya! It would be fun to test out the javelin thrower for good in an OCC, and the free labour would surely help in building lots of roads and colonies to resources? I'd still favour the Zulu as my first choice, Maya is my 2nd choice.

yoshi74 · Mar 16, 2004

But how long can we do any damage with the 1 attack of the impi. And we to attack a lot. the aztecs with their jaguar would be the better choice, because we can make the double number. Still i think we need some more bang for the upkeep.

Aggie · Mar 16, 2004

How important is it to have a civ with Alphabet (Philo gambit)?

Aggie · Mar 16, 2004

CarlosMM, who can't post atm, says that he doesn't like the impi, javelin thrower or jaguar warrior for this game. It is an option, but he thinks that we won't attack soon. He favours the (EDIT: ) Iroquois UU.

Nad · Mar 16, 2004

Originally posted by Aggie
How important is it to have a civ with Alphabet (Philo gambit)?

On regent it is not very important, we can easily buy/pop/research it and still be first to writing/philosophy. The only possible pitfall is if another AI gets writing and then pops philosophy from a hut.

Originally posted by Aggie
CarlosMM, who can't post atm, says that he doesn't like the impi, javelin thrower or jaguar warrior. It is an option, but he thinks that we won't attack soon. He favours the Jag Warrior.

Jags are fine with me, although I have to put the case for the Impi...these guys are an utter torment in war, they can pillage, capture workers, backup attacks, protect your offense etc. They are so annoying to deal with, because the best offence in the ancient age (non UU) is 3, and with terrain/fortification/river bonuses impi can easily have defence 3, and they can retreat, so they are very difficult to kill and can take out a lot of units that attack them.

If we're playing OCC then pillaging will almost certainly be crucial, and the impi are awesome for this. Like I say, I'm happy to go with any choice, this is just a tuppence worth of opinion.

Aggie · Mar 16, 2004

My own view is a mixed bag. I DO think that we can attack quite soon in this game. When our first enemy is close, we could take it out very early on. It has been done before in a regent game

But -imho- the real battle will only start somewhat later in the game. I can understand that we must try to make the most of the early game, but we would probably get a despot GA with early UU's as well. I am not 100% that is a bad thing when most of the game is despot, but is that really true?

At this moment I favour:
-Iroquois: they are commercial (that didn't change did it?) so we have a shot at Philo at first. They also have a great UU which can be put into action at the moment we are Republic. Risk is that we don't have horses.
-Maya: great UU, great traits. But it's a slow unit that would trigger the GA very early.
-Celts: strong UU, but espensive.
-Persia: great UU, but slow
-Zulu: good early UU. GA very early as well. Which can be good with an impi every turn pillaging away.
-India: Commercial, and with a resource-less UU. But a late UU it is.

One of the things that make an early MA war possible is the Knights Templar. We should be able to get it.

So I have more questions than anything

Melifluous · Mar 16, 2004

Originally posted by Nad
I wonder what we'll do with MGLs though . What can they rush? We can't get any small wonders, can they rush units?

They most certainly can rush anything, except wonders. Are great for building "Big Things Now". Which is extremely nice when you only have a single city to build units with...

Check out my Vanilla Civ 3CC game HERE for an example of limited city war...

Melifluous

Aggie · Mar 16, 2004

OK, I will make a map in a few hours. I'm still undecided. For a good decision I like to discuss:

1. Do we want to avoid a despot GA?
2. What to do vs a civ with Zeus?
3. What if we don't have horses?

My answers would be:
1. Not at all costs. We would have a boost very early and would be able to get a lot of units (like impi).
2. We could pilage the improvements of that civ.
3. We'd be in trouble when we are the Iroquois.

All in all I tend to vote for the Zulu. They have another advantage: they are expansionist and could make early contact with good trade opportunities.

Please comment, I'm easily persuaded to choose another tribe.

yoshi74 · Mar 16, 2004

I really think india would be nice. The war elephant comes quite well, when we need bigger punch and also have to fight over a longer distance. Our first one or even two civs can possibly be crushed with archers, but when we are struck in the MA with longbow, weak UU, catapults and spears it could be impossible. The war elephant can really be the big punch we need.
We need something fast, most of the midgame - to endgame fights will be done on enemy soil, leaving us with a loooong way for reinforcements.

AG4 - OCC Conquest (regent)

Deity

Known Troublemaker

Deity

Known Troublemaker

Tourist from Mars

Deity

Deity

Known Troublemaker

Tourist from Mars

Deity

Known Troublemaker

Known Troublemaker

Tourist from Mars

Deity

Deity

Known Troublemaker

Deity

King

Deity

Tourist from Mars

Similar threads