Who is the better warmonger?

[Babri]

Buffalo Spearmen have three movement, resistance against ranged damage and a bonus against mounted, so they can get around the advantages of ranged pretty easily. I ignored your turn 11 scenario because you're assuming he's upgrading a warrior to a ram which is entirely based on luck. Shaka will have his army out faster than Attila if you don't reload until your warrior walks onto an upgrade ruin.

Horse archers aren't vulnerable to spear's cavalry bonus, move faster than buffaloes & don't require 3 freaking promotions to become useful. You can get 1 promo from barracks but for the other 2 you have to fight & survive, a thing which is kind of difficult against a ranged based army of horse archers which can simply focus on your units & destroy them. Horse archers also have higher strength than normal chariots & starts with accuracy I so they can beat the crap out of the spearmen even 1 on 1.

Assuming your three promotions scenario, HAs can also get pretty badass promotions which can quickly lay waste to most armies. I am saying this because I've literally streamrolled half a dozen AIs with a couple of HAs & rams in a short time. Zulus while they are great at fighting armies, don't have much advantage against cities other than the cover bonuses their promotion gives.

 

[SemperFi2382]

Assuming your three promotions scenario, HAs can also get pretty badass promotions which can quickly lay waste to most armies. I am saying this because I've literally streamrolled half a dozen AIs with a couple of HAs & rams in a short time. Zulus while they are great at fighting armies, don't have much advantage against cities other than the cover bonuses their promotion gives.

This was why I went with Attila. I've steamrolled many more civs early game with a bunch of HAs and Rams, made even more evil with a well timed Statue of Zeus and Terracotta Army.

While it was great fun with the Zulus, I felt it took too long to get the same momentum. However, late game, a bunch of Infantry that retained the special promotions can be nasty.

 

[qemist]

Assuming your three promotions scenario, HAs can also get pretty badass promotions which can quickly lay waste to most armies.

I've never found the Hun AI to be a difficult opponent, but you are right about the HAs in human hands. Be careful with them until they have logistics and you will be kiting well into the renaissance.

HAs kind of suck on maps that are mostly rough terrain though.

 

[GhostSalsa]

HAs kind of suck on maps that are mostly rough terrain though.

The beauty of liberty - bring workers along to chop the whole battlefield flat while you war.

 

[Babri]

I've never found the Hun AI to be a difficult opponent, but you are right about the HAs in human hands. Be careful with them until they have logistics and you will be kiting well into the renaissance.

HAs kind of suck on maps that are mostly rough terrain though.

AI doesn't use technical units well. Keshiks for example is considered the best UU in ciV but AI hardly uses them properly.

And terrain always make a difference especially for cavalry units & siege units. So mostly I go for non-hilly terrain first & once I am done & can organise a larger & more powerful army, then I go for hilly civs.

Sent from my HTC One V using Tapatalk

 

[Antarion]

u should still invest in liberty then, because 1 turn repairing, 1 turn chopping are worth it. dont forget with pyramids the 1 turn roads. and for the exploiter 1 turn repair in forgein land for 25 health.


attila is not that strong in MP because of rams you find in ruins its because of high early production and a composite bowman on steroids. the ram is only small addition vs city states, for bullying or for the tradition developed capital which need siege.

im really suprised that the majority thinks shaka is stronger. imho the best warmonger civs from the beginning on are germans, aztecs, songhai or huns.

 

[Antarion]

Just wow! How many units do you have close to your city at turn 11??? Generally people send warriors for scouting.

And civ combat system heavily favours ranged attacks. So Horse Archers can easily kick the crap out of those buffaloes... err I mean buffalo spearmen.

the biggest mistake u can do with huns on the field. i would call this in ALL IN strategy for the scouting player.

if you want to do it safe way stay close around your capital with your warrior until you know where the huns are or are not.

 

[Silverman6083]

Mongols beat both

 

[BUDISMYBUDDY]

I've never found the Hun AI to be a difficult opponent, but you are right about the HAs in human hands. Be careful with them until they have logistics and you will be kiting well into the renaissance.

HAs kind of suck on maps that are mostly rough terrain though.

true. I don't think people understand how powerful Horse archers and rams are. HAs are basically early keshiks and every1 knows what keshiks are capable of. Rams basically equals any city you want.

 

[Plumfairy]

true. I don't think people understand how powerful Horse archers and rams are. HAs are basically early keshiks and every1 knows what keshiks are capable of. Rams basically equals any city you want.

Actually, HAs are significantly worse than keshiks. The reason that keshiks are so devastating is because they can move after firing, which allows them to move in, fire at a city, and then move out of range, all in the same turn. HAs don't have that ability, so they can't take out cities like keshiks can & they don't harass melee units as well either.

Don't get me wrong; they're still very nice. But they're no keshik.

 

[GhostSalsa]

HAs don't have that ability, so they can't take out cities like keshiks can & they don't harass melee units as well either.

HAs can move after fire as soon as they get the Logistics promo as mentioned.

 

[Babri]

HAs can move after fire as soon as they get the Logistics promo as mentioned.

And HA's already start with accuracy I so they can reach higher tier promotions earlier than most other units.

Sent from my HTC One V using Tapatalk

 

[BUDISMYBUDDY]

^^ yes to both above

 

[GhostSalsa]

I wonder if a lot of people would rethink the Huns after realizing that bit about Horse Archers with Logistics. In my opinion the Zulu are still way better for a human player and a lot of that has to do with the current game balance, and how conquest is overly penalized.

As the huns you can take over a neighbor early on but what does that get you? Increased science costs vs puppets not outputting any science or gold, when you could have just made some caravans instead and leached gold and science from the same neighbor.

In my Huns game I was able to halt a Greek expansion and nab two cities in ok spots, and only needed to build a 5 unit army - it's nice that I was able to win them at all, when AI Greece builds cities right next to my capital I usually lose the game - but still, I got no science and no gold from them, not like before BNW when I would have been strong - I was lagging all the way into Industrial.

The Zulu excel at the kind of precise strikes the game forces you to make now. Medieval conquest is ideal because other civs haven't been met yet. The maintenance discount lets you keep a sizeable army of cheep Impis at the ready, and their 3-movement promo lets you, you know, move - you can swoop down on whoever builds Forbidden Palace or Notre Dame even if they are on the other side of your continent and already have muskets, and take them before they get any stronger. This is exactly what I used them for in my game.

 

[qemist]

Mongols beat both

Can mongols field N keshiks before huns can field N HAs with logistics? Probably depends on how large N is. Of course the HAs are useful before they get logistics but the keshiks are no good until you've built them.

 

[tat501]

As the huns you can take over a neighbor early on but what does that get you? Increased science costs vs puppets not outputting any science or gold, when you could have just made some caravans instead and leached gold and science from the same neighbor.

In my Huns game I was able to halt a Greek expansion and nab two cities in ok spots, and only needed to build a 5 unit army - it's nice that I was able to win them at all, when AI Greece builds cities right next to my capital I usually lose the game - but still, I got no science and no gold from them, not like before BNW when I would have been strong - I was lagging all the way into Industrial.

QUOTE]

Why didn't you just raze them? That's the other part of the Huns UA.

 

[GhostSalsa]

Why didn't you just raze them? That's the other part of the Huns UA.

Because they were ok cities, not bad ones - actually one was coastal with 3 grassland silvers and built Prora later - and because I needed them as forward base to keep harassing Athens until Ethiopia (ha) came in and conquered him in late Renaissance. If the new warmonger penalty would have allowed me to conquer Athens I could have raised the less-great city and that would have put me in a stronger position... But that's why Medieval conquest is better, get to be picky.

The real point is that as puppets, they just don't act as the same passive gold- and science-machines like before BNW. Eventually I annexed both. I conquered Inca and Ethiopia in Industrial, had all the wonders but like six, and liberated Athens haha. That game (Immortal) could have been a win if I replayed the end a few times to ally all of Ethiopia's former CSs, as it played out I lost to Korea on spaceship by two turns haha.

 

[Babri]

Because they were ok cities, not bad ones - actually one was coastal with 3 grassland silvers and built Prora later - and because I needed them as forward base to keep harassing Athens until Ethiopia (ha) came in and conquered him in late Renaissance. If the new warmonger penalty would have allowed me to conquer Athens I could have raised the less-great city and that would have put me in a stronger position... But that's why Medieval conquest is better, get to be picky.

The real point is that as puppets, they just don't act as the same passive gold- and science-machines like before BNW. Eventually I annexed both. I conquered Inca and Ethiopia in Industrial, had all the wonders but like six, and liberated Athens haha. That game (Immortal) could have been a win if I replayed the end a few times to ally all of Ethiopia's former CSs, as it played out I lost to Korea on spaceship by two turns haha.

But there is no point of keeping an OK city which would currently hamper your science & warmongering abilities. I would rather burn it to the ground & found a new city at that spot later on if it is a really good location. You can always go for honour + tradition as Huns. Raze all cities (except capitals of course) and you'll have a good sized empire up & running in no time.

Early conquest is a killer only because of the huge science penalties, you can negate that problem if you only keep capitals till you are economically strong enough to maintain other cities.

Sent from my HTC One V using Tapatalk

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

Early warfare is about covering grounds more about pure conquest, it can be the difference of be able to get 20 usefull cities or 5 usefull ones + your opponents are either dead or so crippled they basicly have a CS chance of any victory.

I can't think of anyone that do very early warfare better then the Huns.
Attila can get HA tech very quickly and rams is only two tech away and allow easy capture of a capital.
The HA swarms kills everything they can throw at you, keeps them from expanding and working any improved tile, if they have to camp behind their capital walls they are basicly dead.
Meanwhile you can settle the lands without any worries at all from them.

Shaka don't get this early advantage as Attila, while he may be stronger at his peek Attila hit very early then your millitary is probably very weak, same with Mongols.

Attila Control I would say the best pure warfare civ, only because he can do the best early warfare I know of which is more important in my opinion then beeing able to warfare later on.
Attilas early map Control will allow him to settle large amount of land, he don't need to conqure cities, it could be a reson why Huns cities take the name of the other civs to look like that they was gained by conquest

 

[tat501]

There's no reason why Shaka can't raze as well - but for the earlier part of the game razing at double speed is very effective for Atilla to impose "control" of the map as stated. Instead of crippling yourself by taking cities, razing them just cripples the AI who are left with whatever city you leave them - with their workers/settlers immobilized whilst you do whatever you will/build cities wherever you want.

I think that's quite an effective strategy.

Shaka - focuses on getting a few cities to turn into Impi factories and then just spams the crap out of them. By that point however there are usually a lot more enemy cities to wade through - and although Impi's make short work of enemy units they have no advantage against cities. Shaka lacks the ability to control the early map with a super early rush and thus although better suited to a domination victory early/mid game might be in a position where it is difficult to win by the time he gets there!