Recent content by sschmalz

First off, you are assuming that the entire map has been revealed to you on turn 0 and that you have met all these scientific CSs. In some games you might still be meeting CSs on t200. In the time that it has taken you to find these scientific CSs, AI players might be up on you 13 techs...

I'm kind of surprised that the Netherlands got almost no love in this thread for their Sea Beggar. Sea Beggar starts with coastal raider I, coastal raider II, prize ships, and supply. It might be the most powerful UU in the game. Build them in a city that has a barracks and armory and...

Are we being teased? I definitely didn't know this... For me it's really as simple as how much of a land grab needs to occur. If I think I can settle 3 or 4 decent locations near my starting location then I go tradition. If I have neighbors right on top of me then I go liberty.

It would change the game by making immortal and deity difficulties unplayable, and all those players would make the switch to Candy Crush.

Well I read most of it and thought it was good, especially for someone first posting on here. Are you new to the forum? I'm always a bit impressed with deity players who didn't use these forums to get to that level. Just a couple things to add to this... For one, you didn't give as much...

Raging barbarians is the exception, I think most people would suggest opening honor in that case

I love that the OP called it a "trilemma" However I think coastal should have been added to the conundrum making it a "quadlemma"?

Personally I feel like the game is pretty complete. A patch would be great, but I can hardly imagine adding too much more to the game. For me, this game is so good as it is that I'm not even thinking about DLC or even Civ 6 for that matter. It's hard to comprehend the game getting better...

I actually really like honor. It's fun. However, I agree completely with your understanding of the general consensus. The general school of thought against honor is: 1. tradition/liberty are too powerful to ignore 2. combat is already easy if you're doing it correctly 3. it doesn't...

Yeah, I kind of knew I was going to take heat for #7 no matter how I worded it. Had I elevated one above the other I would have taken even more heat. In fact I'm taking enough flak for not putting Honor on the same level... I started this with the idea that some folks might have other...

You disagree that tradition is good for tall empires and/or that liberty is good for wide? I've been in some of those discussions, and you're the first I've seen to disagree with this generality. As for that and all your other disagreements, I wouldn't even make an attempt at something...

Looking through these threads I can't help but wonder what strategies could be listed out and generally accepted by most. There is a lot of debate about a lot of things, but surely there are a few things that can be carved into stone to help newer players or players looking to improve...

Good enough for me. That's a pretty great rule of thumb. Thanks for referencing

First observation in this article is that ranged units (incl siege?) have significantly higher defense against ranged attacks than their combat strength suggests, and I assume that stands for city bombardment as well. In other words, if the 3:1 ratio is applicable to melee units for example...

Is this true? I've never paid close enough attention. Is this to say that a 9 strength unit at full health in range of a 30 strength city can die in one turn of city bombardment?