A question about few things.

[SleeperLv]

What means "to bridge a river" ??

Why ppl keep saying that archers are bad? For example longbowman seems much better then stupid and nearly useless medieval infantry. Its also cheaper to upgrade - meaning archer into longbowman cost less then warrior into swordsman into medieval infantry. Theyre cheap, they all bombard, they have attack power as good as it can get in any age - archer(attack 2) more then warrior equal to horseman, swordsman has 3 = 50% more then archers 2, but its also 50% more expensive. Then knights are like twice as expensive as longbowman, but same attack, medival infantry are same(4) attack as longbowman only dont bombard. Only thing problem i see with archers are lack of speed and mobility. But theyre redicilusly cheap... Horseman need more tech advance(=less posibility to make early timing attack, if youre familiar with this term), cost more and have same stats except for speed. So if you want to make a big, multi-frontal attack, or just capture some resource, archers+spearman+catapult(longbowman+pikeman+trebuchet) are the best way imo...

I had more questions but cannot say right now off the bat. I will update thread thou or make a new post once i remember them. Also i will try to find more things that are "in the game" but there isnt any explanation for it, so maybe other ppl can find it useful too. Also if anyone want you can ask your own questions about some named, but unexplained stuff in the game(like bridging rivers after invention technology)

 

[Northen Wolf]

What means "to bridge a river" ??

Means that your units can move over rivers, without wasting one turn. IF both sides (tile where you move from and where you move to) are 'roaded'. It only takes then 1/3rd of movement points (moving on road tile takes 1/3rd of unit movement points.

Example: If you move horse(2movement points) from roaded tile to other, over the river, without researching "Invention" (if that is the tech what gives you ability to cross bridges) it takes 1 movement point, Your horse has 1 movement point left.

Example2: If you move horse after learning "Invention" across the river, from one roaded tile to another, it will cost 1/3rd of movement, Your horse will have 1 1/2 movement points left.

Example3: Your horse stands on tile or is moving to tile that is not "roaded", it will cost one movement point and does not matter how if you have researched Tech that allows crossing rivers. Your horse will have 1 movement point left.

Why ppl keep saying that archers are bad? For example longbowman seems much better then stupid and nearly useless medieval infantry. Its also cheaper to upgrade - meaning archer into longbowman cost less then warrior into swordsman into medieval infantry. Theyre cheap, they all bombard, they have attack power as good as it can get in any age - archer(attack 2) more then warrior equal to horseman, swordsman has 3 = 50% more then archers 2, but its also 50% more expensive.

They have no defense (def=1) compared to Medieval Infantry (MI for short). Horses have 2 movement points and "retreat" ability. Sure, swords are more expensive but that 1+ attack in ancient age is WORTH it. I personally use 4 archers 1 spear combo for my attacking stack, sometimes add catapults(cats for short) to the stack tpp.)

Spoiler Archers stats: :

2 offense/ 1 defense/def bombardment(1)/1movement point. costs: 20 shields.

Spoiler Longbow stats: :

4 offense/1 defense/1 movement/4? def bombardment. costs: 40 shields.

Spoiler Swordman stats: :

3 offense/ 2 defense/ 1 movement/ requires IRON. costs: 30 shields.

Spoiler MI stats: :

4 Offense/ 2 defense/ 1 movement/ Requires Iron. costs: 40 shields

That one extra defense point for sword, makes up for 10 shields you save building an archer, because you need to drag defensive unit with archer.
At the cost of 40 shields, Longbow and MI are equal in cost per unit, but MI are better because of defense point.
1 Defense point matters a lot this early in the game and usual out-weights the "defensive bombardment" -bow units have. You have to "drag" defense unit with your -bow units, to make up for lost defense.

Not bad having defense unit to secure newly captured cities tho.

Then knights are like twice as expensive as longbowman.

Knights have 2 movement points and 2 more defense points than longbow. But you can produce 1 treb and 1 longbow/MI (If I Recall it correctly) for the cost of one knight(70 shields).

Horseman -} Knight -} cavalry is also good upgrade path for your units.
1 movement point can mean win or loss of entire game. Also Knight and Cavalry are UU's for many civilizations: China, Ottoman, Japan, Arabia. (for an example Shipah instead of cavalry for Ottoman empire)

Horseman need more tech advance(=less posibility to make early timing attack, if youre familiar with this term), cost more and have same stats except for speed.

One more movement point can save or crush entire empires, catapults are slow to drag with and many players prefer blitzkrieg(spelling?) tactics, meaning advancing through enemy empire cities quickly, before AI or human player can organize any resistance. Also, Horses "make up" for "lost time" by good "upgrade path", better "survival rates"(thanks to "retreat" ability) and speed.

Early Archer Rush is common strategy(take a look at my first SG( Myth01), but archers usually die fast if they have to attack fortified spear, swords have much higher chance to succeed. (You can equalize the odds by adding catapults to the archer stack.).

So if you want to make a big, multi-frontal attack, or just capture some resource, archers+spearman+catapult(longbowman+pikeman+trebuchet) are the best way imo...

Everyone has their own strategies, I for one do not like using catapults (I use cats only on higher levels, like emperor and above) as AI cannot use them.

Sure 2 archers save you one spear "cost" (2*20=40 shields, 20 shields for 1 spear and 2 archers but 2*30= 60 shields for 2 swordman, but swordman functions same as spearman and has 1 higher attack.

Also if you go "over allowed troops limit" you have to pay for any troop that is over the limit, and with spearman+archer+cat combo you are more likely to go "over the limit".

I had more questions but cannot say right now off the bat. I will update thread thou or make a new post once i remember them. Also i will try to find more things that are "in the game" but there isnt any explanation for it, so maybe other ppl can find it useful too. Also if anyone want you can ask your own questions about some named, but unexplained stuff in the game(like bridging rivers after invention technology)

We got Quick Answers / 'Newbie' Questions thread for asking one or two questions.

Sorry if my English is poorly understandable, I'm not native speaker but I want to improve, so could someone correct my mistakes? (I'd be thankful for your assistance!)

 

[vmxa]

It reads fine to me NW. Basically bring the right tool for the job. Some times you only have a poor selection of tools and must use what you have at hand. Archers can do the job, but cannot do many jobs well.

Upgrading is not always an option, for everyone in every game. So you tend to not upgrade archers as you already know how to make MDI. You don't build longbow all that often.

Again a LB can kill units as well as MDI, but you are already making MDI. You may in fact not have the tech for LB right away either. If my enemy is bring knights, I want to have knights, not LB or MDI.

IOW there are plenty of games were archers will have to do and they can. That said, I prefer to not make them or only make a few. I prefer to not upgrade to LB, but I may.

 

[Snarkhunter]

Sure 2 archers save you one spear "cost" (2*20=40 shields, 20 shields for 1 spear and 2 archers but 2*30= 60 shields for 2 swordman, but swordman functions same as spearman and has 1 higher attack.

Sorry if my English is poorly understandable, I'm not native speaker but I want to improve, so could someone correct my mistakes? (I'd be thankful for your assistance!)

That's 2 higher attack for the sword over the spear. And your English is as good or better than many native speakers, so don't worry about it! The only thing that might strike someone--and it is subtle--is a tendency not to use definite or indefinite articles: a, an, the.

Blitzkrieg was coined by a journalist in the '30s to describe German operational SOP (standard operating procedure); the Germans never used the term themselves. But it's a legitimate German coinage, and in English, foreign words can be absorbed and used freely (thought they might not stick around if you don't get other people to use them). If so, their plurals get used with them, or they can be anglicized; we say "data", not "datums" although either is legit, technically. And if you do use foreign words in English then you gotta pronounce them either completely as the native tongue would, or completely anglicize them--no halfway measures!

I used to teach composition; I still remember this stuff

Edit: should have known vmxa would jump on this!

kk

 

[Northen Wolf]

Spoiler off-topic :

... is a tendency not to use definite or indefinite articles: a, an, the.

I do not know when and how to use "a" and "an" and "the" I either skipped these lessons or did not listen at school, I know it is common mistake I make, Trying to improve and learn using "proper" English instead of l33t sp33k etc.

That's 2 higher attack for the sword over the spear.

Actually it is just "1" higher attack, you do not use spear to "attack", usually. (I'm counting out SPARTA-Fanatics.)
You cannot "combine" attack points.
But swordman "3 attack" vs 2*1.5= "3 defense" of fortified spearman has higher chance of winning than 2 attack points vs 3 defense points.

Blitzkrieg - Attacking through enemy front lines, usually ignoring enemy "border defense", used to capture towns and/or surround enemy. Also causes confusion in enemy ranks and usually makes it harder to "organize" good defense against attacker.

In civ - advancing fast through enemy lands, sometimes in straight line, capturing smaller cities or not-so-important towns later or simply ignoring them. Taking out bigger tows will result AI not being able to produce new defenders/attackers so fast and/or so well. Or is forced to move "in your lands", giving you an advantage. Less advanced towns will not be able to produce many offense/defense units so you have less units to fight with. You can also use roads and/or railroads to move troops faster through enemy territory to "secure"/capture more enemy towns.

With cavalry and RR I managed to destroy entire civilization in 1 turn, using that tactics (secure one town, railroad, move stack-of-death there, secure another town continue.) with this tactic I took 23 mongol towns. destroying their entire civilization. (moving on railroad does not cost movement points and cavalry can attack one town in same turn, as it can move 2 tiles on opponent territory and then attack.) had around 80-90 cavalry units and MAAAAAAAAAny slaves... They were last civilization on Eurasia continent, almost entire South-Africa was secured with same tactic (rainforests slowed me down there tho).

 

[SleeperLv]

Omg guys, looks like you have your own local speech here Its not that any of you have bad english, its just posts are so long and you keep repeating same things and its hard to follow what exacly are your trying to say And also a lot of new information

Just for some content - post contains 2 parts, first is about responses in general and second is horses vs longbowman combo calculations

Northen wolf - if you want help to improve i guess i can give some constructive criticism:

1)Try to not repeat stuff other player already said(your spoilers about defence, attack and shields of each unit) and even if you do dont do it sooooo long;D On my resolution those 4 "spoiler" thingies takes 1 full screen.
2)Try to build a plan in your mind, and if very long post, maybe you even want to write down points of plan. This is required to minimize repeating(and remarks) and orginise thoughts as elegant as possible. For example:

I want to say this thing from myself as introduction and short answer to question
reply to some particular post.

Then i will say some in-depth analysis based on facts(and/or my theories)

Then i will try to predict future outcome in possible situations.

With this i want to finish.

Dont get me wrong, you have some of that, much better then a LOT of people, but its hard to figure out where something starts and where finishes. And then again those people dont dare to write so long posts i guess Kinda feels that everythings blurred together and stuff is repeating.
And also i know what you will say lalala i do that myself, but at least my post wasnt so big, it was only like 1/3 of my screen;D
You know what i just gave myself some pointers lolx Anyway lets move on.

3) When you say something as an answer(in this case) try to not state only the obvious(that the archers have no 1 defence), but instead give some reasoning with it, i'd rather say something like:

"Archers have 1 defence and therefore they cant do this and that. They also have only 1 movement speed, so they cannot do this and that. So i would always choose horses and MI over archers",

instead of making it long post as a:

"Archers have 1 defence, as opposed to Medieval infantry who have 2 defence. And horses have 2 movement speed as opposed to archers who have only 1. Horses are better because of that movement speed. And Medieval infantry is MUCH better cos of their 2 defence. I dont want to say anything bad but i think archers sux."

Understood what i'm trying to say?

Its not that i try to say that you suck with your post, i am not sure if its true, maybe my point of view is the bad one. What i'm trying to say is that with my point of view its very hard to follow what exacly is your point(s).



So back to the topic Thanks a lot for info about bridges. There are probably a lot of cases where Knights would be much slower without "Engeneering" tech, since usually theres a LOT of rivers on map. Also i wonder if extra speed works on neutral territory as well as your own after engeneering? I'm guessing that it doesnt have effect on enemy territory...

Upgrading is not always an option, for everyone in every game. So you tend to not upgrade archers as you already know how to make MDI. You don't build longbow all that often.

I do actually I always use medival infantry only for some insurance. Mostly army consists longbowman or knights, or i just skip that tech completely if i am playing cultural war or space race.

If my enemy is bring knights, I want to have knights, not LB or MDI.

Why not? It feels comfortable with me.

I usually have 2 stacks of Longbowman/Musketman or Pikeman/Trebuchet sieging some strategically critical opponent cities(for purposes of roads, to make other troops get to destination faster, or some city with good wonder in it, theres very rarely a chance of cutting off valuable resource with this strategy).

Then i have some Horses to secure perimeter(usually 2 packs, one at the most far side of my kingdom and one at the place where opponent could retaliate, since longbows lack speed and cant catch counter-attacks)

But i have those in very good(imo) precenteges - about 60% offencive army 15-20% horses and 20-25% defenders. It all also depends on situation of course. Precentages change if i'm surrounded from all sides on Panagea map. Usually have more horses and more defences(well it sux anyway to be in the middle i guess unless you take out some of the sides out early).

Point of all this over knights myself is - i have much more cost-effective army. Slower, but i have few casulties. I have trouble to explain it better, so i'll just give a situation:

"I have 20 Longbows 6 musketman and 12 trebuchet divided into two stacks, attacking two enemy cities simultaniously. Opponent have like 3-4 defenders in each city. I bombard as much as possible, and attack with longbows. Usually casulties are 1-2 longbowman per city."

After taking first city Opponent(AI) will attack with his knights and try to take out my longbows, they are protected by 3 musketman and by the time i take city i add 1 knight for additional 3 defence.

Now the main question is: how many knights will he have???

I estimate around 10-15, since they are really expensive and he isnt as good prepared for war as i am because he didnt know i would attack him, so i should have slight advantage in these terms.

So lets go with say number 12. Usually he have 2 options eather attack with 6 knights one stack and with other 6 other stack or do something like 10-8 knights to one stack and 2-4 knights test luck to other stack, i find it very rarely that AI can mobilise whole army on one stack. Lets go with worst case scenario and say he attacks with 10 knights(of which not all might be veterans but lets say they are).

So he attacks with 10 knights pack of 3 fortified musketman+terrain bonus and a lot of trebuchet - roughly that makes 3 knights against each musketman.

So
1) Each musketman have 1 more hp then knight(or maybe even 2 more hp since horses tend to retreat on last hp) that makes 2 horse hp against 4 musketman hp. That reduces odds from 3/1 to 1.5/1, or if they might not retreat then to 2/1.

2) Fortification gives 50% more defence, so from 4/4 - attack/defence it makes 4/6=musketman are 50% more effective.

3) Terrain bonus, i usually try to be on jungle or forest, if possible on hill. Usually its 25% or 50% more bonus. Now i'm not really sure how that calculates but i'd go with 50% from fortification and 50%*50%=25% more from terrain, or 50%*25%*=12.5%. So rougly it gives something like 0.7-1.2 more defence value.

CONCLUSION:

MATH: 4*3(three knights) offence against 4*1(one musketman) defence + [4*1.75(fortified*hills)] * 2(bombard+retreat)=12 against 14 odds. NOTE: its if theres 9 knights, 10 knights should about even the odds.

IN WORDS: In best case scenario its 50/50 that 3 musketman will take out 10 knights.
Worst case scenario if you have only 10% grassland bonus and maybe stack is split, due to needed musketmen mobilization to newly captured city(and since trebuchet moves very slowly), and there would be left 1 musketman and 1 newly added horse or just random medieval infantry for insurance, odds would go down twice, meaning there would be 25/75 chance that 1 musketman and 1 something will take out 10 knights(until 1 hp). Or it might make something like 10/90 if knights dont run away and fitht till end. So from attack of 10 knights you will usually lose defencive units and maybe 2-3 longbowman.

FINAL CONCLUSION: YOU LOSE VERY FEW UNITS and TAKE OUT MOST OPPONENT ARMY ON HIS GROUNDS, with roads and everything, and also meaning that pressure is on opponent and risk if he loses is bigger then you lose your army. KNIGHTS thumbs down LONGBOWMAN combo

Have you tryed modern armor/radar artilery/mech infatry combo? If opponent is 1 tech behind you, say tanks and infantry, stack of 2 elite modern armor, 7 radar artilery and 3 mech infantry seems pretty immortal Tryed in one of my recent games, modern armors attack 3 times per turn on 1 hp infantry, from artilery NO LOSSES WHATSOEVER. TAKE OUT ANYTHING OPPONENT CAN THROW AT YOU MWAHAHAHADD

 

[Lord Emsworth]

Why ppl keep saying that archers are bad? For example longbowman seems much better then stupid and nearly useless medieval infantry.

Are you talking about Archers or about Longbows? Archers are just a provisionary solution until you have some resources availabe or the necessary techs availabe. I'd prefer iron over horses for intense games for AA warfare, as you can build cheap warriors first and then later upgrade AND rinse and repeat the process. Horsemen do not have that option, they all need to be handbuild pretty much. A little later, I'd build horses with upgrades to knights (or Riders ) in mind.

But back to Archers ... They are just a provisionary solution with which you can maybe take out a few AI towns, but you will run into serious problems once the AI towns become cities which all are well stocked with vet spears. Not to speak about conquering a real empire, on emperor or deity.

Its also cheaper to upgrade - meaning archer into longbowman cost less then warrior into swordsman into medieval infantry.

Upgrades costs are determined by the shield cost of units. So, for upgrading an Archer to a Longbow you need to buy 20 shields, while for a Warrior to Medieval Infantry upgrade you need to buy 30 shields. It is absolutely no surprise that the latter is more expensive - it buys you more shields.

On the flip side, the Archer to LB upgrades you have to provide 20 handbuilt shields, while for Warrior to MI you only need to provide 10 handbuilt shields.


If you are really in for upgrading units, then the bigger the difference in shield cost, the better. It is also desirable, if you are out for such tactics, that your upgrading is not a once only affair. Almost ideal cases for upgradings are Warrios to Swords in the AA, or Horsemen to Knights or Cavalry in the early or late Medieval respectively. Just pillage your iron (saltpeter) and build cheap horses or warriors for upgrading later.

Archers to Longbows is a once only affair, where the number of shields bought by upgrading is fairly small. (Strictly speaking the number of bought shields is the same as for Warrios to Swords upgrades, but Warrios to Swords happens in the AA where the productivity of your empire is overall much lower.)

 

[TheOverseer714]

A stack of 8 Longbows will probably be attacked on the IBT by any units the AI has, including Warriors. The same 8 Maces/MI/MDI will possibly not be attacked unless the AI has Cavalry or Knights, and have a better chance of surviving. Besides that, Maces come with an earlier tech, so can be built sooner. I prefer Maces if I can build them.

 

[SleeperLv]

i'm guessing maces are from civ 4 right?

 

[The Professor]

i'm guessing maces are from civ 4 right?

Nope. Maces are a nickname for Medieval Infantry.

 

[SleeperLv]

hate maces. extremely stupid unit... Okey not extremely but really i prefer longbows, cos of bombard and no need for iron...;/ Only thing where MedInf might be useful is if opponents territory have a lot of mountains(+100% def) then i can fortify him there for probably like 5 defence(250% from 2 def). Archers can only for 2.5 that makes a little difference, but thats about it;/

Yeah actually its thread about a questions lol and i'm stating statements. Well i guess i just had enough answers heh=]

 

[Aabraxan]

I kind of like maces. If I'm building a stack of "plodders" (slow units) to go on the march, I'll usually include a few LBs for the defensive bombard, but maces will usually be my primary attackers. LBs are nice for not needing iron, but (and what follows may be entirely composed of cognitive bias) I seem to have a much better kill ratio with maces.

 

[The Professor]

The big problem with longbow's is that, while they have the defensive bombard, once that's done with, they are basically dead men on defense. And, since they are 1-move units, you are probably going to have to leave them in the open before (and probably after) they attack. So, if you have no iron, you have to bring along spears to protect them. The medieval infantry has at least a chance to defend itself, so you don't have to bring along as many defenders.

 

[vmxa]

While I am not a big fan of LB, you need iron to make MDI.

 

[The Professor]

While I am not a big fan of LB, you need iron to make MDI.

Good point.