madscientist
RPC Supergenius
Bah, Stalin is a Jerk anyway. No class, he deserves to be left off!
Best Aggressive Leade *Fixed*
- Thread starter The Almighty dF
- Start date
Bah, Stalin is a Jerk anyway. No class, he deserves to be left off!
plasmacannon
Emperor
That's what I thought about the Aztecs.
One sweet building, but, it's not getting my vote based on just that. The UU loses to almost anyone it fights, and Spiritual isn't the best 2nd trait one could choose.
Surely, FIN, ORG, CRE, IND would all be better 2nd traits for an AGG leader.
I went with IMP, because, of its fast early rush capability.
Worker, Barracks, Warrior, worker, Warrior, Warrior...
Chop quickly.
Or with with 2-3 settlers, you are doing well.
Shaka.
Traits? AGG boosts both the Zulu UU and the UB. Combined with EXP, it allows you to build cheap Ikhandas/Granaries, which are early buildings that can go in every city.
The Impi can be used for a rush, or it can be stacked with mounted units and keep up with them.
The Ikhanda is a common building, boosted by the AGG trait, that also lowers maintenance. Most people agree this is good.
Genghis and Monty are good, too.
Traits? AGG boosts both the Zulu UU and the UB. Combined with EXP, it allows you to build cheap Ikhandas/Granaries, which are early buildings that can go in every city.
The Impi can be used for a rush, or it can be stacked with mounted units and keep up with them.
The Ikhanda is a common building, boosted by the AGG trait, that also lowers maintenance. Most people agree this is good.
Genghis and Monty are good, too.
Higher Game
National Socialist
The thing is, if you do have iron you want to crank out axemen anyway if you're aggressive; iron working is useful if you lack bronze or have jungle. Swordsmen aren't so great. The jaguar might just save you if you lack both bronze and iron, and it's useful in some tactical situations anyway. It's below average but it can be respectable at times.
Spiritual isn't bad. You probably don't care for slavery/caste switching with Monty, but switching in and out of nationhood is still a go. It's diplomatically useful, too.
I think AGG/IMP is overkill. Kublai is my favorite Khan.
revengeofmakno
Eclectic Enigma
I chose Genghis as with him you can't even be tempted to do anything but go on the attack from the start and he is well set-up to do it and he has a great fast unique unit that you can get into action relatively early.
Some of the others are good but give you reasons to try an approach other than aggression and that can sometimes lead to a confused approach that has one falling behind.
Some of the others are good but give you reasons to try an approach other than aggression and that can sometimes lead to a confused approach that has one falling behind.
plasmacannon
Emperor
If one lacks both copper and Iron, then, it is a bad game setup.
Any normal axeman can beat a Jag, so, the Jag will lose most city seiges.
Anyway, I spoke of warrior rush, which doesn't require copper or Iron.
When I get my copper, I think my AGG axeman can beat your woods Jag, in his Capitol city.
And IMP is overkill for a conquerer ?
Who else can build settlers and barracks faster, then, go straight to combat units?
Answer: No one.
And, the GGs will make his next units even stronger.
Ghenghis makes the AGG trait useful, not, less important.
Then, his UB and UU follow up with the GG bonuses.
Strong combination of melee and mounted units.
Any normal axeman can beat a Jag, so, the Jag will lose most city seiges.
Anyway, I spoke of warrior rush, which doesn't require copper or Iron.
When I get my copper, I think my AGG axeman can beat your woods Jag, in his Capitol city.
And IMP is overkill for a conquerer ?
Who else can build settlers and barracks faster, then, go straight to combat units?
Answer: No one.
And, the GGs will make his next units even stronger.
Ghenghis makes the AGG trait useful, not, less important.
Then, his UB and UU follow up with the GG bonuses.
Strong combination of melee and mounted units.
Higher Game
National Socialist
Horse archers, catapults, and jaguars can work (assume the AI uses spearmen, enough to rule out a horse archer war); jags will stop spearmen and horse archers stop everything else. If you lack bronze, iron, AND horses, it's time to restart.
plasmacannon
Emperor
I won't lack both copper AND iron.
Not on balanced maps.
It will be somewhere nearby, even if, it isn't in my BFC.
You have to research IW to get your UU, I only need BW and (a worker to connect my copper if in my BFC) or (a settler, which I produce faster, and place it on the copper resourse for 2nd city).
Not to mention, if you have catapults, I will have catapults, and you would again lose any units on a copper mine.
Assuming, I didn't build my 2nd city on my copper mine, making it impossible for me to not build axemen with Combat1 and shock, which Jags cannot beat.
That city couldn't be taken by Jags/Spear/Cats.
Moderator Action: done.
TheMeInTeam
If A implies B...
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2008
- Messages
- 27,995
I'm having a hard time deciding between diplo abuse + whip god monty and super-opening shaka.
Higher Game
National Socialist
plasmacannon
Emperor
Join the dark side.
Or the other side: Genghis wants you!
Join us, and we will conquer those puny Jaguars.
Those poor excuse for a swordsman.
Fleme
Obey the Kitty!
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2003
- Messages
- 1,205
I voted for Montezuma. I don't know why exactly because in the end comparison I would much rather play Shaka than. Even Ragnar I'd prefer to Monte on most occasions.
But talking about best? Well, Montezuma obviously isn't as excellent early on as the other guys are because Jags are inferior to swords but atleast he has the makings of a supermedic with easy access, needing only 5 promotions to reach wm3/m3. That said, it's not the aggressive part in him that compells to me but the synergy between the altar and spiritual. That's what it boils down to and that's why Monte is great. Sure, you need to play civic micro a lot more to make his combination reach it's full potential but when you do, it really is great. This is why I voted him as the best.
In reality though, I don't much care for said micro and as such I would rather play the aforementioned Shaka, Ragnar or Boudica even. Heck, giving Toku a spin every now and then is a good way to relax.
But talking about best? Well, Montezuma obviously isn't as excellent early on as the other guys are because Jags are inferior to swords but atleast he has the makings of a supermedic with easy access, needing only 5 promotions to reach wm3/m3. That said, it's not the aggressive part in him that compells to me but the synergy between the altar and spiritual. That's what it boils down to and that's why Monte is great. Sure, you need to play civic micro a lot more to make his combination reach it's full potential but when you do, it really is great. This is why I voted him as the best.
In reality though, I don't much care for said micro and as such I would rather play the aforementioned Shaka, Ragnar or Boudica even. Heck, giving Toku a spin every now and then is a good way to relax.
NihilZero
WHEOOHRNY
This is quite difficult.
Aggressive is better than it gets credit for, in my opinion. The problem is, Aggressive does not exist in isolation but comes packaged with everything else, and in most cases the packaging is somewhat lacklustre.
Firstly, a lot of AGG leaders are handicapped with bad techs. Monty, Boudica, Ragnar, Alexander, and the Khans to a lesser extent. In fact, the only AGG leader with a top tier pair of techs is Hammurabi. To a lot of players this doesn't matter, but if you play above Emperor starting techs can make or break your game all by themselves.
Then there's uniques. The only really great ones among the AGG leaders are the Ikhanda and the Altar. A couple of the other UBs are pretty poor. A lot of the UUs are also sorely lacking, which is rather unjust when you have a trait that requires active warring to get use out of it. Toku has among the better uniques overall of any AGG leader, and we all know about his problems (starting techs are serviceable, not great).
The Khans obviously have strong (if rather specialised) uniques, but the AGG trait does nothing to help them so there is no synergy there.
In short, AGG leaders who don't have something bad about them are rare. Shaka probably has the fewest drawbacks, there's nothing glaringly bad about him and the UB is legitimately decent.
Hammurabi is probably the best, due to ORG and excellent techs. If only he had a UU that wasn't a complete waste of space. With cheap barracks and CI warriors, teching archery is usually a mistake.
I also like Stalin. Reasonable techs, and I have a thing for Industrious.
In the end I voted Hammurabi, but damn that Bowman, damn him to hell.
Aggressive is better than it gets credit for, in my opinion. The problem is, Aggressive does not exist in isolation but comes packaged with everything else, and in most cases the packaging is somewhat lacklustre.
Firstly, a lot of AGG leaders are handicapped with bad techs. Monty, Boudica, Ragnar, Alexander, and the Khans to a lesser extent. In fact, the only AGG leader with a top tier pair of techs is Hammurabi. To a lot of players this doesn't matter, but if you play above Emperor starting techs can make or break your game all by themselves.
Then there's uniques. The only really great ones among the AGG leaders are the Ikhanda and the Altar. A couple of the other UBs are pretty poor. A lot of the UUs are also sorely lacking, which is rather unjust when you have a trait that requires active warring to get use out of it. Toku has among the better uniques overall of any AGG leader, and we all know about his problems (starting techs are serviceable, not great).
The Khans obviously have strong (if rather specialised) uniques, but the AGG trait does nothing to help them so there is no synergy there.
In short, AGG leaders who don't have something bad about them are rare. Shaka probably has the fewest drawbacks, there's nothing glaringly bad about him and the UB is legitimately decent.
Hammurabi is probably the best, due to ORG and excellent techs. If only he had a UU that wasn't a complete waste of space. With cheap barracks and CI warriors, teching archery is usually a mistake.
I also like Stalin. Reasonable techs, and I have a thing for Industrious.
In the end I voted Hammurabi, but damn that Bowman, damn him to hell.
The Ikhanda and the Sac Altar are two of the best for any leader though. The UBs here are quite strong on average I think.
I agree about the UUs though. The only one definitely above average is the keshik, and AGG is pretty useless in a keshik rush. Samurais would be awesome if they didn't have to live in the longbows + castles era.
I think Kublai is the most convenient warmongerer.
1. Fast setup undoubtedly with creative (see recent poll)
2. Captured cities need culture and defense, here we go with 2+ from the start
3. How are you gonna research with a huge number of cities and pressing upkeep. Cheap library+scientists.
Concerning synergy: Agg gives cheap baracks + shock axe and spear are quite good city defense
1. Fast setup undoubtedly with creative (see recent poll)
2. Captured cities need culture and defense, here we go with 2+ from the start
3. How are you gonna research with a huge number of cities and pressing upkeep. Cheap library+scientists.
Concerning synergy: Agg gives cheap baracks + shock axe and spear are quite good city defense
Higher Game
National Socialist
The bowman is above average for an aggressive UU. Many of them come at a bad time, or give highly situational terrain benefits. The bowman is consistently helpful at a crucial time.
ethemenanki
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2010
- Messages
- 39
Shaka. Not only fun to play, also a pain in the ass frequently. And the only AI that overrun my defensive stack of a dozen city defender infantry with elephants. So many elephants.
Blacklanner
Chieftain
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2010
- Messages
- 82
Shaka.
#1 if you're shaka, the ai isn't
The ub is excellent, cheap, and fits with using most of your cities to unit pump as you crush all your neighbors in ancient/classical warfare.
Plus every time i play shaka lately, i end up fighting one of the khans in the jungle. Which makes me love the impi so much. I used to think it was lackluster but i've gained a new respect because its so good vs an ai with horse and no metal, or either of the khans. Also excellent for a pillage stack, and i imagine its even stronger in multiplayer.
Everything shaka has comes together to make him a powerhouse for garbing a large empire early, and the ub is just enough to keep the economy up while you swallow the world.
#1 if you're shaka, the ai isn't
The ub is excellent, cheap, and fits with using most of your cities to unit pump as you crush all your neighbors in ancient/classical warfare.
Plus every time i play shaka lately, i end up fighting one of the khans in the jungle. Which makes me love the impi so much. I used to think it was lackluster but i've gained a new respect because its so good vs an ai with horse and no metal, or either of the khans. Also excellent for a pillage stack, and i imagine its even stronger in multiplayer.
Everything shaka has comes together to make him a powerhouse for garbing a large empire early, and the ub is just enough to keep the economy up while you swallow the world.
