Fending off barbarians

[faipalgugus]

Fog busting is great but close to useless in a huge map if nobody is around, unless you build 30 warrior. It's very hard as well when you're close to an area full of ice. In immortal, your economy would crush.

 

[Pisskop]

Well, at least bust areas you plan to expand into.

 

[capnvonbaron]

Well, at least bust areas you plan to expand into.

Yep. Nothing quite like having a barb city full of archers spring up on a HILL two tiles from that AWESOME gems city you had mapped out.

 

[Drakarska]

Yep. Nothing quite like having a barb city full of archers spring up on a HILL two tiles from that AWESOME gems city you had mapped out.

No kidding. And while your busy whip/building a force to take said city, up pops a barb axe or two, making things even more interesting.

 

[Mr.Keene]

Fog-busting lets you deal with barbs with only Warriors.

Barbs can only spawn in the fog of war, or tiles that you don't have vision of. They also cannot spawn within a 5x5 square of other units. This means that you can position Warriors in such a way as to prevent barbs from spawning at all.

Let x be any tile, and w be a unit. Using two Warriors, you've created a 10x5 space where no barbs can spawn. Pretty effective!

x x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x x
x x w x x x x w x x
x x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x x

You can use any units for this, and AI units, other barbs, and AI culture also reduce the tiles that can spawn barbs.

This is also useful for limiting barb Galley spawns before you have Triremes to deal with them.

Perfectly explained, and said.

 

[capnvonbaron]

No kidding. And while your busy whip/building a force to take said city, up pops a barb axe or two, making things even more interesting.

No -- typically multiple civs from halfway across the map pile up archers, chariots, and swords and one eventually takes the city for themselves... and of COURSE they keep it

 

[Drakarska]

Gah, I hate that. Had that happen in a RI game awhile back.

 

[Jeros]

I always assumed the barb cities I found were ones they captured, I had no idea they spawned their own.

That said, the island I found full of them once may well have been once a civ, I think I was missing a civ on the landmasses from the number I set in startup in that game If I recall.

 

[Drakarska]

RB on will do that to AI civs quite often. Nothing like seeing the Russian civilization has been destroyed coming over the events notification, then finding out that there quite a few barb cities in that region.

 

[Pisskop]

Especially if its a large landmass and the civ under-expands like some tend to. Or if they get the dreaded attila the hun event. Nothing like a stack of horse archers to ruin your day . . .

 

[reddishrecue]

Fending off barbarians is fun stuff especially if you do it early. Starting with scouts warriors and archers to hunt for animals like bear wolf and lions usually lead to stronger barbarian cities with advanced cottages. Its like if another player was making a city for someone.

 

[Lennier]

I once had a game where Hamurabi spawned in isolation. His achievements were founding his Capitol, building Stonehedge, building the Oracle to slingshot CoL (founding Confuciasm), popping a Great Prophet and building the shrine, and then getting destroyed by barbs. (Regular barb setting, not raging.)

The barb cities that appeared on that mini continent were Confuscian!

 

[Willem]

This means that you can position Warriors in such a way as to prevent barbs from spawning at all.

Overall you're much better off using Archers for that purpose however. Even if you fog bust, Barbarians can wander into your territory from elsewhere, especially if one of your neighbours managed to build the Great Wall. An Archer on a hill, especially if it's wooded, can be more than a match for anything that might come your way though. Even more so once it gains a level or more of Guerrilla. Of course they aren't quite as useful on flat land, but even still they have a higher hit point count than Warriors, and there's nothing early on that gets a bonus against. If a Warrior meets a Barbarian Axeman though, he's guarenteed to be toast.

 

[Pisskop]

Warriors are warm corpses. If I had a dollar for every warrior that cost me a city, I'd . . . I'd remake Civ V!

 

[Willem]

Warriors are warm corpses.

Pretty much. They're useful for early exploration but that's about it. Except to upgrade to something more useful.

 

[King Pluto]

Overall you're much better off using Archers for that purpose however. Even if you fog bust, Barbarians can wander into your territory from elsewhere, especially if one of your neighbours managed to build the Great Wall. An Archer on a hill, especially if it's wooded, can be more than a match for anything that might come your way though. Even more so once it gains a level or more of Guerrilla. Of course they aren't quite as useful on flat land, but even still they have a higher hit point count than Warriors, and there's nothing early on that gets a bonus against. If a Warrior meets a Barbarian Axeman though, he's guarenteed to be toast.

I wouldn't argue that, if you know there's an area from which you can have a Barb influx, it's a good idea to have Archers or a strategic-based unit. However, fairly often you can stop Barb spawns entirely with Warriors, thus saving the hammers or beakers needed for more advanced units or techs, respectively. If I'm not in the middle of a continent, or I have neighbors close by, I usually get by with only Warriors. There have been plenty of Immortal games in which I never encountered Barb Axes or Spears due to good fog-busting with Warriors and expanding neighbors.

If I don't have Hunting resources, even Archery can be a waste. I need the 150(?) beakers for Hunting/Archery, plus 25 hammers for an Archer. I can build 2 Warriors for 30 hammers, stack them to hold ground against barb Archers, and save the much needed early game beakers. This holds even more if I have no AH resources and don't want to look for Horses too early.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Pretty much. They're useful for early exploration but that's about it. Except to upgrade to something more useful.

??

They're the cheapest unit for HR garrison in the game.

 

[Willem]

??

They're the cheapest unit for HR garrison in the game.

Yes, but they die too easily so they typically end being wasted Hammers. The only unit worse than Warriors in that regard are Scouts. An Archer might cost a few more Hammers to build, but they stand a far better chance of surviving for awhile, making that Hammer investment far more cost effective. One Axeman and the Warrior is toast in no time, but an Archer might have a chance of surviving the encounter. If it's on a wooded hill, it most likely will. I recall one game where I had an Archer on a hill and it managed to survive attacks by about 6 or so Barbarians of various types. He gained enough XP to get a couple ranks of Guerrilla in one turn alone, making him even tougher after that. There's no way a Warrior would have been able to hold out like that.

 

[Kallikrates]

Is the barb acitivity very different between the add-ons, patches and settings?

I have been plagued by Barbs (Warlords, Monarch/Emperor), but usually only warriors and archers. They can be handled without archery, because a fortified warrior on hill/forest/jungle has a very decent chance against an archer. I do not think I ever encountered barb axes before I had myself either axes and/or chariots, so the very few later barbs were usually far less of a problem than (sometimes) the early archers. Often the map is so crowded that with quickly expanding AIs there will not spawn to many barbs.

 

[Willem]

Is the barb acitivity very different between the add-ons, patches and settings?

That depends on what you mean by settings. If you select the Raging Barbarians option in the Custom Game screen, that certainly is quite different. Also, the difficulty level has an effect. Barbs will be more numerous, and spawn earlier, at Emperor level than they would at Chieftain.