A callout to the experts! A basic for n00bs...

Only in settler factories. Avoid them if your city is going to need an aquaduct.

Kinda. Having thirty warriors numerically is as good as fifteen spears, but will cost a lot more to support. It is case dependant... but mostly I build spears until horses are available for attack units (warriors have a terribly short upgrade value in vanilla unless you're persian... in which case its still not great)

 

1. Yes, but in the early ages most of your cities should be settler/worker factories on rivers.

2. If you build more than 20 warriors/spears then you are not building enough settlers or researching the wrong techs. I tend to get the middel ages having only 10-15 warriors defending my empire. If the AI ever attacks, you can always build more units and walls. Mind you I only play c3c...

 

oh -- right, I misread that, I think. Yeah I don't build a lot of units in the AA either, generally just wait until knights/pikes are available. I confess, I still build spears tho, just for the upgrade value.

 

I consider myself to be very talented if infastructure is mostly in tacked

 

i find that spearman, if properly upgraded and in packs of 2 - 5, can take out any barbarian uprising. I once killed 13 barb horsemen with 4 spears and a sword and only lost the sword and one spear

 

Your attacking/defending strenght against Barbarians varies depending on what level you play.

 

I don't build knights...whats the point. In a few extra turns you could have Cavalry instead!

And whats this lark about building units in early game?! Especially defencive ones.

The best form of defence is to scare the sh*t out of your opponent with lots of attack units. I've never had an AI declare war on my with 10 sws on his border.

 

I have. Frequently.

kk

 

They are great for taking out civs whom lack iron. Better to take them out now instaid to wait, and maybe discover they do have powder.

 

Maybe I should be moving up a difficulty level if I am frequently getting Cavalry when the other civs are getting Chivalry.

 

Sounds like you're playing below your skill.

 

One question I have is about the "food is King" concept. if you have tons of food and no shields all you have is a bunch of whiny citizens and you can't empty the excess without shields to build workers or settlers. I agree that a city that grows quickly is good but only if it can support production.

What am I missing in this discussion? The highest level I play is Regent so cranky citizens at that levels gives me the heebie jeebies about trying it at a higher level. (not that that is going to happen )

 

The best situation is having land that is both food and shield-rich (obviously). If you have a very shield-rich environment, but very little food, you may not have enough citizens to utilize the high-shield tiles. OTOH, if you have a very food-rich environment, but not very much food, you can still rush builds to make up for the lack of shields.

In the very early game, 1 extra food makes the difference between "growth in 10" and "growth in 7." That's 3 extra turns with one more citizen over an AI that gets "growth in 10." That means that the next scout/warrior/settler/whatever arrives just a little early and you can increase that 3-turn advantage over time.

 

Hmm, try to see it like this. More food means sooner growth. Which means additional citizens that can produce additional shields and additional commerce. And don't be afraid to give away that additional commerce to keeps your citizens happy.

 

what is the optimem way of getting a tech edge

 

3 turns seams like a narrow margin for error

 

on the higher difficulty levels, the ai will say screw this and just attack. Three turns only goes so far. Those three turns and growing should be used for infastructure like libraries and grainries. In theory if you are good you don't need that three turn boost to build essentials like military and settlers. So use it on infastructure in places you are lagging.

 

Republic, roads, & research horizontally, and trade so that you get multiple techs for 1 that you trade away.

This sounds like it's directed at my post above. Perhaps I wasn't very clear, so I'll try to clarify: When I wrote that post, I was thinking about the very beginning of the game. At that point, 3 turns is a significant boost because you can continue to increase that margin over the course of the game. If you're building a granary that early in the game, having that extra citizen come along 3 turns earlier still works out to your advantage. If you can repeat that mechanism over and over (as with an agri civ and fresh water), it's very powerful.

 

that sounds fair enough. nice strategy

 

Absolutely.

In my experience, the most rewarding play is had when you go at a level where the AI remains tech competitive, meaning you have to out-maneuver them in terms of military prowess, expansion, and resource/luxury control. In most regent level games I play, and almost all monarchs, I see swordmen hovering at my border before I have anything more advanced than horsemen and spears built. If war is started, I'm going to be in trouble -- but because I have better city layout, a better gov't, and the ability to rush/upgrade to pikes/swords if the need arises, I can at least defend myself.

Since I build a better infrastructure starting in the early game, I can concentrate on techs in the latter stages when they start getting expensive, and usually by the mid IA, I'm several techs (or even a full age at regent) ahead of the AI. On top of that, I can produce nearly as many units as the AI, put them to better use (ie, stack+artillery) and since my losses are 1-to-3 with the AI when defending and 1-to-2 (generally) when attacking with equal units, I come out ahead in every engagement after the early MA.

Now, granted some people aren't as patient as me and produce nothing but military from the get-go, but I tend to like a longer game... I usually try for space-race or culture victories... of if those don't look plausible, modern armor make domination a breeze