Barracks, are they worth it?

Yes, they are really worth it. You will find vet units more valuable as you begin fighting mass battles. Every hp counts, esp for those more expensive units.
 
Originally posted by fephisto
check topic for question.

Are you mad? The Barracks is arguably the best building in the game (well, SZ is definitely better;) )!!!

Allright, sorry for the exaggeration. Roughly said, a barracks increases the power of the military units it produces with 25%. If you want to see it for yourself, check the combat calculator: http://www.civfanatics.com/civ3combatcalc.html
 
Because each fresh unit has the extra hp, is your power fractionally higher too?

I suspect it is but of course only when you have lots of units, each with the additional hp will it be significant. Then, other civs will treat you differently.

Also on the topic, I played a game where I had only warriors and spearmen defending my condensed "ICS" civ. I also had ONE archer. Now when I met the Indians, it turns out they feared my archer...lol

Even though they were ahead of me by 5 techs and had warrior code, I guess they had no archers?? It was a Diety game and I am new to those so maybe it is a known ploy to build at least one of each unit when you can...

BARRACKS are essential but only in your best production cities. Don't go bankrupt putting them in every city but if you can get them in your hostile frontier cities, do so. The healing power of the barracks is the most powerful weapon in a border dispute...

(Sun Tzu's is of course the best form of barracks since it gives a free barracks in every city no matter where it is...)
 
Also don't forget - barracks allows you to upgrade units as well - so you can upgrade rather than having to build new and disband obsolete units.
 
i never built barracks. I always wait untill Sun Tzu's Wonder & bang!! barracks all over the place..

Yes, that's great... But what if the AI beats you to it???

Barracks are great. Veterans are way more useful than regulars, especially for the more expensive units, as Knight-Dragon said
 
The difference between vet archers and non-vet and between vet horsies and non-vet in taking down spearman is absolutely critical in an early war.

In addition, vets are only one step from Elite which are only one step from .... Your chances of an early GL are much enhanced starting from vets.

Early barracks are essential in unit building cities and useful later near the front for upgrades/rapid healing.
 
Barracks are critical if you are to go to war ( and this game is full of war )

I try to get SZ if at all possible ( one of the best wonders by far ). However if War is likely before this I do like to have a few barracks in key cities before that. I like to have each "province" of my civilization to have its own barracks. Before rail this is key as each province can spit out vet units and upgrade.

If I expect a war to be long or fought on my soil I will also put barracks at the front line cities such that my units can heal in one turn.
 
In PTW, fast units may only retreat if they are veteran or better,
so in that sense.......yes barracks are good.
 
Barracks are key, most certainly. But they should be selectively placed. A few in the core, to assemble an initial rush. A few more on or near the front lines of a given war.
You don't need them in every city, in other words. Units can be ferried between cities for necessary upgrades/healing/concentration of defenses.
After that first batch of 4 or so, I try to limit my total number of barracks to roughly half my total number of cities. More than that, and I find that my anxiety about being attacked is interfering with non-military infrastructure-building.
 
An overwhelming response for yes I see, as for what I should put in my terriotorial corrupt cities I'll look at the topic in the general discussions, ty.
 
Is it me..or has a veteran unit got MUCH better power difference between vet and reg.
I have come to believe that vets or eiltes get better stats
 
Always be militiristic and Religious, why? Because of the Barracks and Temple. These two buildings are now cheap enough (in shields) to build in most of your cities and they set the prerequisite for Ancient Age War. Temple keeps people happy, expands your borders, increases your resistance to clutural flips and the "deposing" of newly captured cities, etc...Barracks upgrade units, heal them faster and most importently make them vetearn, being veteran is essiential when fighting that spearman, without it you WILL NOT win the war.

So to summarize: Build Barracks and temples (be militaristic and religious), conquer the other civs on the continent and now you have won the game, it is all a matter of time before you win. This strategy applies to all difficultiy levels.

P.S. It helps if you have a UU in the ancient age (therefore the celts is by far the best civ, they got it all to conquer civs during the ancient age). But if you don't, do the horseman rush, it works great, it is the best unit in the game next to the spearman.
 
im so glad to see that some besides me play militiristic and Religious civ's i allways play as the japs i love there leader
 
Originally posted by DaDrunkenFish
Is it me..or has a veteran unit got MUCH better power difference between vet and reg.
I have come to believe that vets or eiltes get better stats

The experience level (conscript, regular, veteran, elite) has no effect on the A/D/M values of the unit. Check the combat calculator at http://www.civfanatics.com/civ3combatcalc.html for the actual chances and modifiers that apply to combat.
 
Of course, having that 1 extra hit point gives that unit a chance of staying alive... which could be crucial if you're taking a city.
 
yes and it would be also crucial, CT to go to the PBEM forum and answer my RepGame FAQ question ;)

Yes Barracks are worth it
 
Back
Top Bottom