The Babylonian issue

[Crossphazer]

It seems that in every game that either requires or encourages you to capture Babylonia (i.e. Carthage, Persia, etc), I just can't seem to capture it fast enough to win the UHV. The worst is Carthage. It is impossible to get any further than Sur and Jerusalem. I am able to capture all of the Roman territories, but I can't take anything from Hammy! (see screenshot)

Maybe something could be done to prevent him from building a lot of defenses, because I find that Persia almost never takes Babylon, which is not really historically accurate (even though I don't much care for historical accuracy)

 

[Lone Wolf]

I find that Persia almost never takes Babylon

AI sucks. The AI ancient civs except China only exist to be destroyed by barbs or collapse.

 

[blizzrd]

The tech path that Babylon takes makes a big difference to the ability of Persia to conquer them. Those UU bowmen are quite a different proposition to warriors. After rolling many starts, it was quite variable whether Babylon teched for Archery early or not. About 50/50 from my most recent experience.

 

[BurnEmDown]

Instead of conquering Rome and Greece you should focus all of your cities on building enough military units to take over Babylon, that's the key for UHV victory.

 

[Cethegus]

Instead of conquering Rome and Greece you should focus all of your cities on building enough military units to take over Babylon, that's the key for UHV victory.

One thing I'd like to point out: they have a Mercenary-oriented UP for a reason.

 

[AnotherPacifist]

Conquering Egypt is a must, but I find that Greece has become more defense-oriented (i.e. keeping their precious phalanges in cities rather than wandering around and teching archery more often than not). If you have Greece, though, you can definitely churn out enough troops for Babylon.
Rome will declare war sooner or later, but just build enough triremes and they'll not bother you after you sink theirs--they have barbs to worry about. (That is, if you didn't build Rome yourself first)

 

[Tiberias]

This isn't a perfect answer to your concern, but I found that the best route is to hit Egypt hard very early; you may be able to grab a city on the jump with just your horsemen. After that, recruit mercenaries like mad and take just enough cities to open the way to Jerusalem. Take out Jerusalem, take a breather while you build a few catapults (you'll need them to take out Babylon), then hit Babylon with everything you have; horsemen, catapults, and as many mercenaries as your money can buy. Ship your workers over so that you can build the plantations the second Babylon falls.

Persia is a bit of a different story; as Persia, you have to hit Babylon with everything you start with. Focus on the city and the civ will fall once the city goes down.

Granted, the AI typically does not have the ability to take out Babylon until the Barbarian camel archers show up, who are typically the ones that take them out. But for a human player, it should be relatively straightforward, if a bit costly in terms of lost units.

 

[micbic]

The voice of eccentricity there:
You don't need to capture Babylon. Just go for Yerushalahim, Sur and Hattusas, pop a GA and culture bomb somewhere in the two latter. Dyes are yours.

 

[AnotherPacifist]

That's a good way IF you can get code of laws in time (to get the GA), because aesthetics and drama take too long to research for you to get artists; OR having Stonehenge built in Egypt already. More often than not, Egypt goes for Pyramids and Babylon goes for Stonehenge.

The city that can support running artists will have to be in Egypt since Carthage doesn't grow that quickly, unless you can get Athens or Constantinople. You also have to transport the GA to Sur or Hattusas which may take too long.

 

[NerfCothons]

I've found the key to a swift Babylonian collapse is a strong Persia (yes, luck) and a lot of spearmen/high-xp-mercs to keep him off of your dye.

 

[Tigranes]

For some reason I never tried Carthage I thought there is a dye in Normandy (which as it turned out appear much later than 200 AD). When I read this discussion, I tried Carthage on Emperor. To collapse Babylon Persia needs two things: lot's of flips from former barb chariots/immortals, and Babylonian Shush. On the flip Babylonia declares war, Persia gets even more units, takes Nineveh, Babylon collapses. But than you have a strong Persia to deal with. They got the north dye, I got the south one. Plus the other one in Livia. So when I was about to declare on Persia, they had a dye available for trade. Pillage your dye, give them fish, rebuild your dye plantations and you start your golden age exactly on 200 AD -- this was my experience on the first try

 

[Walliard]

Yeah, the English and French dyes don't appear until 450 AD for exactly this reason.

 

[onedreamer]

AI sucks. The AI ancient civs except China only exist to be destroyed by barbs or collapse.

Persia existed in the middle ages, unlike Babylon. It shouldn't be there just to collapse.
Carthaginian starting units suck especially versus Asharittu Bowmen, not the AI, and they have NO resources at start to build any decent unit. They have to relay solely on mercenaries and this is too much of a gamble.

 

[onedreamer]

The tech path that Babylon takes makes a big difference to the ability of Persia to conquer them. Those UU bowmen are quite a different proposition to warriors. After rolling many starts, it was quite variable whether Babylon teched for Archery early or not. About 50/50 from my most recent experience.

Archery isn't really a problem in this scenario. Persian Immortals have a bonus against them that will ensure conquest of Babylon, while Niniveh might be harder (50% more strength for archers there).
The variables that will really make a strong difference are:

1- Susa is Babylonian and Babylon declares war to Persian on flip: this will spawn additional immortals and ensure early war. Babylon is toasted, unless:
2- Babylon researched Bronze Working and built axemen and spearmen (the AI in RFC much prefers these 2 units for defense than archers, and it is of course correct given the entity of barbarian or foreign civ threat, and cost of units).

Note that the second point also applies to Carthage. There's no chance Carthage will be able to take Babylon with its strong % defense and axemen and spearmen defending. It would need too many mercenaries.

 

[AnotherPacifist]

Carthaginian starting units suck especially versus Asharittu Bowmen, not the AI, and they have NO resources at start to build any decent unit. They have to relay solely on mercenaries and this is too much of a gamble.

Agree about the first part, but the second part is easily remedied by the copper in Egypt and the iron in Greece, i.e. you have to go for one of them before Babylon. Egypt is usually easier but they build more axemen and spears nowadays compared to before, while Greece needs to be taken by surprise and you have to learn iron working to reveal the iron, and your priority should be math/construction.

 

[onedreamer]

they still have no resources at start. Having to conquer foreign civs land (outside of historical land too) doesn't count for my definition of resources at start . By that account, it would be much safer and easier to just settle western africa for iron and elephant -at least it's in the historical area, but as you said they don't have iron working, nor construction (for elephants), which still means no resources at start.

 

[Tigranes]

In my current Carthage game Greece really amazes me. I already had two unsuccessful sieges of Athens! My 3 initial Numidians took over Sur, Jerusalem, Babylon, entire Egypt, always alive, always promoted. I landed with a Cat, mercenaries and my horses -- they attacked me first! At the end of the siege I was left with one Numidian (the last one out of the initial three) with 20 HP, and Athens was defended by the last Spearman 10 HP. Reminds me of 300 . I asked for peace -- Alexander demanded my French Utica. I gave him Meditation instead to focus on Barbs.

By the way, want to ask you guys-- would you consider firing a mercenary in Sur and hiring it again the very same turn as an exploit? This was the only way to save Carthage. I could whip only a Scout in my capital against 2 Camel Archers. No mercenaries were available for hire and all my troops were on the East. So, to teleport defenders back to my capital from the East I did what I said I did Should I feel guilty?

 

[blizzrd]

By the way, want to ask you guys-- would you consider firing a mercenary in Sur and hiring it again the very same turn as an exploit? This was the only way to save Carthage. I could whip only a Scout in my capital against 2 Camel Archers. No mercenaries were available for hire and all my troops were on the East. So, to teleport defenders back to my capital from the East I did what I said I did Should I feel guilty?

In my opinion, no.

If you hadn't fought any barbs to that point though, a single Scout should have been fine against your first couple of encounters.

 

[onedreamer]

Should I feel guilty?

yep. Especially for leaving your capital undefended to barbs. You need War Elephants asap.

 

[Tigranes]

3 Camel Archers and 2 War Elephants attacked me out of nowhere almost at the same time, when I was busy with the 300 Greek heroes Anyways, I have already collapsed -- left with a Carthage and a huge Ethiopia as my vassal. Feels so funny -- to be left with one capital and a colony of Ethiopia with 6 cities which can't break away, since they vassalized voluntarily when my Empire was in it's prime