BTS: do you think early rush was nurfed?

[PericlesOfAthen]

I've played three games now with BTS on Prince and I was wondering if others have had similar experiences. I can't early rush . . . copper or even iron has been very inaccessible such that I can't Axe rush my neighbors. I've also noticed that in general there are a lot less copper and iron resources. Chariot rush didn't work either since one time I didn't even have horses! ( First time I ever beelined for feudalism. ) The other two times my neighbors, of course, had copper or iron so they had spearman before I could blink. I was playing as Pericles then Gandhi and now Lincoln. None of them are really war mongers so I wonder if that was a factor in my capital's placement since it seemed the aggressive civs did tend to be near copper or iron ( current game Caesar got iron easily and marches halfway across the continent to attack me, luckily my shock elephants took care of those prats easily ). I've also noticed though that maintenance costs seem more manageable for early expansion so it's not as dire as it would be in Warlords. Has anyone else noticed this or were my three games flukes?

P.S. ( I played Big and small, Continents, and now Terra, Prince, Epic )

 

[mice]

I can't say I've noticed less occurence of metals. no horses was common before and still happens.

Actually i think the rush is better off. You can get agreat spy from GWall and drop the defenses of your neighbor without building an axe. It is more or less over powered.

There is a rush unit - the Vulture, a no resource unit - the dog soldier.

Added to this is the new AI's tendancy to unit spam after 1 AD. You spend a lot more hammers taking a civ after 1AD than you do before it. It's more worthwhile to do the rush now , hammerwise.

 

[Ruler]

I don't know about resources but I'm so glad they removed AI's extra settlers it was so freaking annoying to get boxed soon after you find your capital or second city.

 

[frob2900]

I haven't played enough BtS to make up my mind, but I can say this:

If the BtS AI is indeed using the full BetterAI code to make its decisions, then yes, early rushing should be nerfed simply due to the much larger numbers of defenders (the AI keeps larger armies and whips emergency defenders)

 

[mice]

I don't know about resources but I'm so glad they removed AI's extra settlers it was so freaking annoying to get boxed soon after you find your capital or second city.

True. And this means if you're near a rival city, it can often be the capital. all the more reason to rush it.

 

[bokaj]

I'm currently playing the Maya and as soon as my first worker was built I started to spam the UU and rushed to the first civ I explored (Monty!). I finished him off really quickly. He could only build two or so Jaguar warriors before he was history.
I still find an early rush very managable - for the right civ.

 

[cabert]

Early rushing is a bit nerfed by the fact that the AIs don't spam settlers like they used to do.
Now IMHO the most efficient way to expand is to actually build settlers .
I'm still in a learning phase though, and can be missing the mark a bit (for example, later in the game, I have to cut down on the catapults now, and build more melee units, habits die hard).

Anyway, I have the feeling BtS (without aggressive AI) is a lot easier than warlords, what do you all think?

 

[mice]

Anyway, I have the feeling BtS (without aggressive AI) is a lot easier than warlords, what do you all think?

One thing I see, although I'm playing at Prince level, is that the Apostolic victory is quite gettable, and in fact i often purposely don't win that way so I can keep on going with the game.
Regarding war, I first thought it was tougher because of the AI's ability to whip defenders. At Prince, I'm coming round to the opinion that is will just take some practice with the new features, like sabotaging key resources with spies before the war.

Regarding early expansion, I've had more games than not with a map that begs for peaceful filling up.

I like it. Builderish, then a solid war, then plenty of diplo and espionage.

I haven't yet used a modern war unit.

 

[budweiser]

Anyway, I have the feeling BtS (without aggressive AI) is a lot easier than warlords, what do you all think?

I find it much easier. I win by culture almost every game, standard monarch hemisphere.

It feels more like civ or civ II to me.

As long as you remeber to put real units in your coastal towns, then the cheesy invasion that comes every game wont be an issue and you can play pretty much however you want.

 

[Percy]

I think that Aggressive AI was put in for those players who find themselves cruising through the game easily and getting their desired peaceful victory conditions.

Do you play with this checked?

 

[Carnage04]

Early rushing is a bit nerfed by the fact that the AIs don't spam settlers like they used to do.
Now IMHO the most efficient way to expand is to actually build settlers .
I'm still in a learning phase though, and can be missing the mark a bit (for example, later in the game, I have to cut down on the catapults now, and build more melee units, habits die hard).

Anyway, I have the feeling BtS (without aggressive AI) is a lot easier than warlords, what do you all think?

My first two games.....both Pangea on first Prince and then on Monarch....I was just playing around with the new game mechanics, aiming at new wonders/buildings/techs rather than REALLY trying to win the game. I basically sleep walked into easy victories both times...so I thought the same.

The next two games I played, both Monarch, I was actually TRYING and got absolutely stomped. I had some really bad starting positions but more importantly, was entirely unprepared for the massive stacks the AI sent at me.

In All three games, I had to hunt a little bit for Copper and Iron. I had to settle a tundra/ice city to get Iron one of the games.

 

[futurehermit]

REXing > rushing in BTS *unless* you have an AI *right* on your doorstep and you have copper and/or a strong early UU.

The AI techs horribly and builds piles of units so you're better off outteching them and attacking them when they're backwards.

Plus there seems to be sufficient land to settle now as the AI doesn't REX as fast (in my experience)

 

[icantdrawanime]

I think the AI still REXes really fast...

I've actually seen both. AI REXing and AI military buildup. Its less predictable now. Which is definitely a good thing

 

[PericlesOfAthen]

I was playing Monarch on Warlords which was challenging for me so I dropped to Prince for BTS but I agree that BTS prince level seems easier than Warlords Prince. Maybe I'll have to try the aggressive AI or move back to Monarch. I also agree that expanding without war early is a lot easier on BTS. You are not hedged in as much.

 

[futurehermit]

I love the fact that you can rex early without HAVING to go to war. I love the peaceful option. I really, really enjoyed my one Dutch game where I built 25 cities peacefully and won by space without ever going to war. It was quite enjoyable (although I do love a military victory as well...I just won domination with Mayans using tanks then modern armor with gunships and stealth/bombers and jet/fighters.)

 

[dankok8]

Just a few days back, I played as Darius and couldn't do an immortal rush as I had no horses nearby.

 

[Blue_Lines]

I find it is quite a bit easier in this game to both rush and expand quickly. In Warlords I would really struggle to get wins on emperor, whereas now I can get wins almost easily on immortal (still got crushed on deity though).