Early Expantions and defenses

[Zelig]

It's much better to have 2 move attack units. With the barb bonuses a non-vet chariot will kill a veteran fortified phalanx 50% of the time, and we probably won't have veterans for a little while.

 

[TheViking]

Originally posted by CivGeneral
With the Barb bonuses on attacking, I plan on having two Phalinex (I would like to call them Hoplites ) in each city to fend off the Barbarian attack.

The problem I see with this is that since barbarian archers/chariots can kill phalanxes fairly easily our cities can get reduced in size from barbarian attacks unless we have city walls which are very expensive to build early on. Having two high-attack units with a movement of two is better than two phalanxes IMHO, and one high-attack unit is often sufficient (whether it is sufficient depends on geography plus various other factors). And of course a few diplomats are always very nice to have since noone can resist a fistful of $$

 

[Zelig]

Originally posted by TheViking

The problem I see with this is that since barbarian archers/chariots can kill phalanxes fairly easily our cities can get reduced in size from barbarian attacks unless we have city walls which are very expensive to build early on. Having two high-attack units with a movement of two is better than two phalanxes IMHO, and one high-attack unit is often sufficient (whether it is sufficient depends on geography plus various other factors). And of course a few diplomats are always very nice to have since noone can resist a fistful of $$

That's what I meant to express, however, rereading my post I see it doesn't say that.
Until chivalry even 2 horsemen will by sufficient to defend a city from barbs most of the time.

 

[Leowind]

Okay, I'm learning some things about Barbs on Deity and the early game here I still like Phalanxes over Warriors for defense because you won't have to upgrade them later, but they do take longer to build. The case for two-move attack units and diplos as defense makes good sense to me. The problem is that no-one is voting for HBR in the science polls, so where do these 2-move units come from?

And perhaps not in the early game, but I have regularly seen barbs land and attack in the same turn. Not as often as when they land and give you a chance to attack first, but it does happen.

 

[Zelig]

Originally posted by Leowind

The problem is that no-one is voting for HBR in the science polls, so where do these 2-move units come from?

Well, it looks like writing is winning as alternate tech, from hut units, hut techs and bribed barbs, we should be able to get some 2 move units.

 

[Shahadet]

With some luck huts will provide us with some chariots and/or horsemen. 1 or 2 hut units should be sufficent to guard the empire against barbs in the early game. Later on we should have discovered writing so as to bribe units and reduce the cost by capturing leaders. If at all possible the tech advances should not be bogged down with advances like horseback riding until absolutely necessary. However this depends ultimately on what game strategy we will be going for. Is it a total war of AC landing game?

 

[Zelig]

Bloodlust isn't turned on, so we have our options. We can eliminate everyone or win by spaceship. In the first game we won by spaceship and in the las game we won by conquest.

 

[Jayne]

We won by conquest last time!

 

[Zelig]

Originally posted by Jayne
We won by conquest last time!

There, post edited.
I was only here for the first game, and I thought we won the last one by spaceship too for some reason.

 

[Shahadet]

Is it not aa good idea to focus on one or the other? Should a decision not be made now as to what way we are going to win this game?

 

[funxus]

I think it pretty much depend on. E.g. how well we are doing in science compared to the AI, or how strong the AI is militarily. Last game, we would've been able to do both IMO.