warrior rush = borderline exploit?

[Johnpecan]

So I play on normal time mode, prince difficulty. I thought it would be fun to play Montezuma and wage some early war. I was planning to take out 1-2 civilizations in the ancient era. So I met the Chinese and opened borders who lived very close to me and said hi. I already had writing because I was beelining alphabet because it was on a Pangea map and wanted the first hand on trading techs.

I noticed he had 1 itty bitty warrior sitting in his capitol. I looked at the 2 warriors I had (one with the free aggressive promotion). I built a 3rd warrior and moved my 3 warriors two squares diagonally away from his base. Then I DoW'd him moved in my 3 warriors. The next turn, the Chinese were no more and I had an amazing 2nd city.

So obviously the counter to this strat is to build a 2nd defensive warrior which might have screwed over my start. Also it puts me at slight risk of being invaded my barbs. But overall, it seemed to work really well.

It seems against the AI this is almost too easy of a way to take out a non-aggressive neighbor that's very close to you. Anyone else try this out or think it's a little too easy? Just curious what the general consensus of an early warrior rush is in the Civ community

 

[The Rook]

Welcome to Prince. Perhaps try Monarch next time.

 

[Johnpecan]

I have been curious on the differences between the upper levels (like how much of it is increased intelligence vs just computer cheats). I will have to try it out

 

[The Rook]

No increased intelligence I'm afraid, but Monarch is the first level where the AI starts with Archery, so you won't see any Warriors. Of course, you can still rush with the controversial Quechuas.

 

[Johnpecan]

Starts with archery? lol hax. Well I guess that's the simplest way to deal with that AI exploit. Anyone know of a sticky guide somewhere that summarizes the differences between the difficulty levels?

 

[The Rook]

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=236346

Standard version, p74 summarises the differences.

 

[Morgrad]

That's exactly why HC is so tough on Monarch - Quecha rush beats starting archers. A really-really close neighbor dies quick.

 

[oyzar]

Anything under monarch is just not funny when you realize you can just build 4 warriors to start with and suddenly you start with 2 capitals and a worker...

 

[hellwitch]

I made some Quechua rushes on immortal. Didn't try it on diety but it could work there too - i have to try it because the AI will have more workers and 2 towns.

 

[cabert]

Welcome to Prince. Perhaps try Monarch next time.

Each level has it's own abuses.
On the higher levels, you need to abuse the computer to win.
Yes I mean it.
Diplomacy is a kind of abusing the computer, isn't it?

I made some Quechua rushes on immortal. Didn't try it on diety but it could work there too - i have to try it because the AI will have more workers and 2 towns.

Since the deity line of the HoF is filled with huyna capac, you can tell the quechua rush works well on deity too.
Play a duel sized map, and enjoy a very early win .
Once.

After that, it's just not funny anymore.

 

[madscientist]

Yes, I did a few warrior rushed or even early archer rushes againt AI capital manned with warriors playing Warlords Prince level games.

At Monarch the AI starts with Archery but interestingly not all start with hunting. I noticed this in a game against Hammarabi where I could see his research via espionage. He was running Bowmen all over the place yet teching hunting. I understand giving the AI archery but this is a bit odd.

 

[qwertz]

well, you can also ab(use) the internet to get a tech witout having the prerequests, so it isn't really that odd to give the AI archery witout hunting

 

[Willem]

It seems against the AI this is almost too easy of a way to take out a non-aggressive neighbor that's very close to you. Anyone else try this out or think it's a little too easy? Just curious what the general consensus of an early warrior rush is in the Civ community

I've done this myself a few times and it's a crap shoot. You have to hope they haven't been beelining for Archery or that they pop it from a hut. Otherwise you've just wasted the production of those Warriors. And you were very lucky to do it with just three of them BTW. I usually go in with 6 just to be sure I have enough. And it can also backfire against certain civs if they get a chance to get their early UU's going, which they generally try to do. There you are with a lightly guarded capital and they start pumping out their UUs in order to get their revenge.

 

[hellwitch]

Well yes Quechua rush work very good on Diety too - on standard pangea i've manage to take 2 AI's and only the Dog Soldiers(they don't require metal) of native americans save them. In fact my start position was quite bad but it has forest all around which is great for ~ 20 chopped quechas (1 chop=2 of them) And with 10+ you can take every AI which don't have strategic resource.

 

[oyzar]

Going for any more than 4 warriors(3 + starting warrior) is a huge risk as the AI will obviously have way more time to tech and produce archers... Any civ that start with hunting is way more likely to get archers early and hence worse to archer rush.

 

[OTAKUjbski]

Anything under monarch is just not funny when you realize you can just build 4 warriors to start with and suddenly you start with 2 capitals and a worker...

/nod

Just as not funny and abusive below Monarch is the ridiculous amount of life a stack of Chariots can have when every city is defended by nothing more than Warriors and Workers for half the Ancient Era.