Any game is winnable they said...

[joshua43214]

Do you guys think every early-rush scenario is defensible? For example, Japan comes at you with 14 ancient era units and you are defending with 4, or 18 with some CompBows mixed in and you have 6. You have two cities on the coast next to each other and they would split their forces and attack both cities simultaneously. You can reduce their forces by half but my units are basically gone and they will take over the cities. Except for a few forests (I was playing the Celts), not a lot of defensive terrain. They never wanted a DoF, nor could you get them to war on anyone else and you didn't do anything towards them except to exist.

A coastal city with Oligarchy and a CB can defend itself from an unlimited number of ancient era units provided you settled a hill or have walls on a flatland, for no other reason than the AI can not get a proper surround. Even there you should be able to defend the city even if its not coastal provided to target the right units in the right order.

 

[Buccaneer]

A coastal city with Oligarchy and a CB can defend itself from an unlimited number of ancient era units provided you settled a hill or have walls on a flatland, for no other reason than the AI can not get a proper surround. Even there you should be able to defend the city even if its not coastal provided to target the right units in the right order.

I think that's the key - knowing that they will be coming and you have prepared for it. Normally your scouts will be elsewhere doing what they should be doing; your archery units and warrior would be fighting barbs near city-states, as they should be doing; you would not have chosen oligarchy as the second policy, assuming you even went tradition; and you would not have enough gold to buy walls in one city let alone two or even build them over units or growth.

 

[joshua43214]

I think that's the key - knowing that they will be coming and you have prepared for it. Normally your scouts will be elsewhere doing what they should be doing; your archery units and warrior would be fighting barbs near city-states, as they should be doing; you would not have chosen oligarchy as the second policy, assuming you even went tradition; and you would not have enough gold to buy walls in one city let alone two or even build them over units or growth.

I think our difference in play styles shows right here. Imo, the last place your archery unit and starting warrior should be is chasing halfway across the map killing barb camps. If I even have a range unit early, I build for defensive reasons and I am not going to send the thing off. The starting warrior always comes home before T30 to protect my worker from barbs.

Once I have produced a few range units, I set them on watch ~8ish tiles from by borders in all directions. If a CS quest barb camp spawns near one I will kill it, otherwise I guard my borders.

If I am settled next to a rapid expander, a warmonger, or any AI that took liberty or honor, I need no other special knowledge to inform me that I need to put a range unit available to defend my city. If I send my units off chasing CS quests then I either have to build more units or not defend my cities.

I very often choose oligarchy early because I use the diplomatic window and knowledge of AI behavior to tell me that it is prudent to do so. I very often build walls first in new cities for the same reason, or keep 400g available to rush them.

Any time I settle a new city even remotely toward an AI that might take even small offense to it, I make sure there is a range unit that can spot an incoming army and get back to the city in a few turns.

 

[stii]

Do you guys think every early-rush scenario is defensible? For example, Japan comes at you with 14 ancient era units and you are defending with 4, or 18 with some CompBows mixed in and you have 6. You have two cities on the coast next to each other and they would split their forces and attack both cities simultaneously. You can reduce their forces by half but my units are basically gone and they will take over the cities. Except for a few forests (I was playing the Celts), not a lot of defensive terrain. They never wanted a DoF, nor could you get them to war on anyone else and you didn't do anything towards them except to exist.

The OP didn't even have comp bows when the attack came and was researching drama. That is a long way from saying he did everything possible and this was just impossible

 

[goodolarchie]

Yeh, tough one. I tried it blind and did not permeate his borders quick enough to meet Iroquois.. then read through the comments to find others bee-lined for Hiawatha, smart move! He came at me with 12 legions and 8 catapults, 1 GG on turn 68.

I have always found Caesar to be a menace, and being locked on a peninsula means you pretty much HAVE to meet a neighbor or two and instigate a war. Even if he DOW you, his army is split and a handful of CB can mop him up.

Also this land is gross, no good hill for second city. I may try again with the pre-req knowledge

 

[goodolarchie]

I think our difference in play styles shows right here. Imo, the last place your archery unit and starting warrior should be is chasing halfway across the map killing barb camps.

There can be situations where it's absolutely useful to chase barb camps as a defensive strategy given by three criteria:

1. Proximity to the "front line" - is it past T40 and are your units so far that they cannot make it back in time?
2. Is the city-state in a buffer position between you and AI? Putting that buffer between you and them is guaranteed to either split their forces or draw them entirely.
3. Is there anything additional you can do beyond the 40 favor camp quest? i.e. the fire "barbs in our territory" or a stolen worker. 500g is a lot to give up at this stage.

#2 is the clutch, and in this save Valetta is too far west so definitely not worth pursuing after T40..