Why is Egypt considered low tier? I do great with them.About to win....

[bhavv]

Actually I didn't mean to defend that they are low tier, far from it.

They are a mid tier Civ, but its just that mostly any leader as I mentioned can get ahead of them when building wonders, and gain an advantage with building other things too, so the UA is kind of redundant.

 

[Vitruvius]

Can't just look at the UA while assessing a civ. Egypt may have a mid low UA but a top UB and a mid high UU that can be used with devastating effect.

Think about Ethiopia who has a mediocre UA and UU, it is still a top civ just by having Stele.

 

[JimBobV]

Can't just look at the UA while assessing a civ. Egypt may have a mid low UA but a top UB and a mid high UU that can be used with devastating effect.

Think about Ethiopia who has a mediocre UA and UU, it is still a top civ just by having Stele.

I wouldn't call their UU anything near the top. First of all, chariot archers have a very short time span in which they can be used, and aren't much of an improvement over archers. Their mobility doesn't help them very much, as you use all points when entering rough terrain, and most of the time you'll be sitting in one spot picking at enemy units until you have to move. Instead of using war chariots, it would be better just to pick up
construction and build some composite bows.

 

[Princeofnigeria]

I wouldn't call their UU anything near the top. First of all, chariot archers have a very short time span in which they can be used, and aren't much of an improvement over archers. Their mobility doesn't help them very much, as you use all points when entering rough terrain, and most of the time you'll be sitting in one spot picking at enemy units until you have to move. Instead of using war chariots, it would be better just to pick up
construction and build some composite bows.

My thoughts exactly. Since chariot archers don't have move after attack it seems like their mobility is utterly pointless. I don't think Egypt is bad, but I don't understand it when people defend the war chariot/ chariot archer. If the extra move carried over like with the Comanche rider I think it would be decent, but since it doesn't...

 

[tetley]

Chariots still move before attack, and they pillage. They can go further to take on the "targets encampment" CS quest, which means guess who's helping me in my next war...

 

[Ryika]

Nobody, because the city state is probably on the other side of the map and doesn't do a damn thing.

 

[Vitruvius]

My thoughts exactly. Since chariot archers don't have move after attack it seems like their mobility is utterly pointless. I don't think Egypt is bad, but I don't understand it when people defend the war chariot/ chariot archer. If the extra move carried over like with the Comanche rider I think it would be decent, but since it doesn't...

There are many great UUs that looks great on paper but you won't even get to use them. Chariot archer is one of the few units that can win you a domination victory single handedly. (Horse archers can't move after fire either)

The whole point of a UU is for you to use during the timeframe while it is superior to gain an advantage over your opponent. This is especially true on multiplayer because your units die so fast you won't get to accumulate promotions anyway. The war chariot comes at a time you are most likely to war regardless of your preferred victory condition. You need it to destroy forward settling AI or even take out an AI altogether because they are too close.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk

 

[Calouste]

I wouldn't call their UU anything near the top. First of all, chariot archers have a very short time span in which they can be used, and aren't much of an improvement over archers. Their mobility doesn't help them very much, as you use all points when entering rough terrain, and most of the time you'll be sitting in one spot picking at enemy units until you have to move. Instead of using war chariots, it would be better just to pick up
construction and build some composite bows.

Egypt has IIRC a no forest/jungle starting bias, so there is usually quite a bit of flat land to move your War Chariots around.

 

[shaglio]

Egypt has IIRC a no forest/jungle starting bias, so there is usually quite a bit of flat land to move your War Chariots around.

What exactly does a starting bias entail? Does a desert starting bias mean that you have a high chance to start with a certain # of desert tiles surrounding you? Or can a single desert tile suffice?

If the latter, then Egypt can start on a flat tile, but still be surrounded by forest/jungle (or hills and/or marsh which will also bog down those chariots).

 

[LoneRebel]

Not contesting that the War Chariot certainly isn't the best UU in the game, but it is good for one specific strategy - early rushes. Some of you have probably seen that thread on this forum about the T75 Egypt domination victory. Only two civs could do that - the Huns and Egypt.

 

[Vitruvius]

Archer:
40 Hammers
7:5 Range:Strength
2 Moves in Open
1 Move in Rough
Tech Required: Archery

Composite Bows
75 Hammers
11:7 Range:Strength
2 Moves in Open
1 Move in Rough
Tech Required: Archery, Animal Husbandry, Mining, Masonry, Wheel, Construction

War Chariots
56 Hammers
10:6 Range:Strength
5 Moves in Open
1 Move in Rough
Tech Required: Archery, Animal Husbandry, Wheel

There is no contest. I can build 3 Chariots for 2 Composites, and require 3 less techs which allows me to beeline philosophy to build my burial tombs and NC. Not saying that the chariot is a Keshik, but its utility in the early game is immense.

 

[Tabarnak]

There is no contest. I can build 3 Chariots for 2 Composites, and require 3 less techs which allows me to beeline philosophy to build my burial tombs and NC.

Hammers for hammers i agree. But you forget the idea of upgrading archers to CBs which is less hammer costly. Since that a CB rush is mostly done between the turn 52 and 60 on standard maps we can always compare at that point.

Can we build as much as HAs than CBs when it comes to rush a civ? Surely not. But if you don't need to rush a civ i can buy your analysis.

 

[JimBobV]

Archer:
40 Hammers
7:5 Range:Strength
2 Moves in Open
1 Move in Rough
Tech Required: Archery

Composite Bows
75 Hammers
11:7 Range:Strength
2 Moves in Open
1 Move in Rough
Tech Required: Archery, Animal Husbandry, Mining, Masonry, Wheel, Construction

War Chariots
56 Hammers
10:6 Range:Strength
5 Moves in Open
1 Move in Rough
Tech Required: Archery, Animal Husbandry, Wheel

There is no contest. I can build 3 Chariots for 2 Composites, and require 3 less techs which allows me to beeline philosophy to build my burial tombs and NC. Not saying that the chariot is a Keshik, but its utility in the early game is immense.

You're not taking into account several factors. First of all, If you're looking to warmonger then you'll need to improve some luxuries to insure you don't dip to far into unhappiness, meaning you probably won't be going straight for the chariots. Second of all they're easily combated by spearman, and in this case being in flat terrain won't help you for a couple reasons. Since you can't move after attacking, and since they only have two range, then in flat terrain this means spearman will instantly be able to reach you from the city you're attacking. If you're in rough terrain the reason you built them in the first place, early rushes, will be useless as you will lose all mobility. Finally, its much harder to war before around T80, as without siege weapons it'll take many more units to bring down a city. This means that if your opponent has any military at all, it'll probably be a losing battle.

Overall, mediocre unit, better to wait that extra 30 turns to start warring, as you'll be more developed then. If it could just move after attacking, then that would tip it over the edge into a higher tier unit, but as it is it stands easily defeated.

 

[Vitruvius]

You're not taking into account several factors. First of all, If you're looking to warmonger then you'll need to improve some luxuries to insure you don't dip to far into unhappiness, meaning you probably won't be going straight for the chariots. Second of all they're easily combated by spearman, and in this case being in flat terrain won't help you for a couple reasons. Since you can't move after attacking, and since they only have two range, then in flat terrain this means spearman will instantly be able to reach you from the city you're attacking. If you're in rough terrain the reason you built them in the first place, early rushes, will be useless as you will lose all mobility. Finally, its much harder to war before around T80, as without siege weapons it'll take many more units to bring down a city. This means that if your opponent has any military at all, it'll probably be a losing battle.

Overall, mediocre unit, better to wait that extra 30 turns to start warring, as you'll be more developed then. If it could just move after attacking, then that would tip it over the edge into a higher tier unit, but as it is it stands easily defeated.

I agree in most cases it would be safer to just wait and war. But against a good player in multiplayer, those 30 turns could mean life and death.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk

 

[Syailendra]

I agree in most cases it would be safer to just wait and war. But against a good player in multiplayer, those 30 turns could mean life and death.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk

have to say that war in mp and sp is two different beasts, in mp, chariot archer is great unit, you have mobility to outmaneuver your opponent, also you don't need to mind about upgrades as war in mp cost a lot of units on both sides.
But in sp, your war will be 80% defensive, your unit stays on some defensible tile and wait those stupid ai suiciding all its units to your trap. Even later, when you want to attack cities, the mobility is also useless as you better wait for your meatshields before closing to a city, and by the time you can get extra range, its already time to upgrade them to knights, sigh!

 

[Nick Carpathia]

Mobility of chariots is incredibly valuable in MP. Chariots are guaranteed to get the first strike in combat, and having the initiative to pick and choose when to engage is invaluable. And in MP, you don't want to wait for a war, you find your timing window and exploit the hell out of it. Waiting just gives more time for your opponent to react.

Say a simple scenario, completely flat land, 6 compbows vs 8 chariots. Let's be conservative and say it takes about 4 shots to kill each unit, their strengths ratios are similar enough. Chariots will get the first strike, and due to their high movespeed, they're more likely to be able to maneuver to a position where all of them are able to fire. Bam, 2 compbows dead. Let's just assume the compbows are in a tight blob so the 4 remaining compbows can all retaliate, 1 chariot dead. Chariots fire back, kill 1 compbow, redline another. Compbows no longer have a critical mass to kill any individual chariot, and the chariot can always retreat back to heal, while compbows can be run down.

Team compbow has been defeated. Chariots are nice inside their timing window, and war chariots are just nasty.

With some rough terrain, team compbow can probably find some situations to force more favourable fights. Chariots can't move into rough terrain and fire. But then again, neither can compbows. And entrenching in rough terrain can end up conceding the initiative

Finally, Chariots aren't considered horse units, they're considered archers (just like Keshiks), so spears don't get an additional bonus against them.

 

[qemist]

YSecond of all they're easily combated by spearman, and in this case being in flat terrain won't help you for a couple reasons. Since you can't move after attacking, and since they only have two range, then in flat terrain this means spearman will instantly be able to reach you from the city you're attacking.

I have never warmonged as Egypt but I think you don't know how to use their UU correctly. As I see it they are fast weak mounted archers so I would use them similarly. You don't go one on one against spearmen. You have to work them together as a pack. That means staying out of reach until you can maneouvre to bring a whole bunch of them to bear against one enemy unit and kill it in one turn. You can wage a war of attrition against the enemy army this way until they get logistics. Then they are basically invincible.

 

[bhavv]

By the time you get logistics on the UU, they will be obsolete. The problem with chariot archers is that they lack a ranged upgrade, not that they themselves are a weak unit.

I would rather always build archers because they can at least be upgraded up to crossbows and beyond.

 

[Vitruvius]

By the time you get logistics on the UU, they will be obsolete. The problem with chariot archers is that they lack a ranged upgrade, not that they themselves are a weak unit.

I would rather always build archers because they can at least be upgraded up to crossbows and beyond.

It is fine to be a player who doesn't like to build chariots but its another thing to not appreciate its value to other players.

 

[JimBobV]

I have never warmonged as Egypt but I think you don't know how to use their UU correctly. As I see it they are fast weak Keshiks so I would use them similarly. You don't go one on one against spearmen. You have to work them together as a pack. That means staying out of reach until you can maneouvre to bring a whole bunch of them to bear against one enemy unit and kill it in one turn. You can wage a war of attrition against the enemy army this way until they get logistics. Then they are basically invincible.

Although what you said is true, you miss a crucial couple points. First, no upgrade path that improves range, and logitics will take to long. Secondly, they can't move after attacking, which is very important for most mounted units.