Early War Strats on Emperor Difficulty

[PurpleTurtle]

I have been playingon Emperor for a while now with inconsistant results. I generally find that I need to fight an early war in order to have room to expand. I also find that if I am successful I can wriggle my way back into the game. The problem I am having is that it always seems these wars are neccessary before the invention of construction or civil service and must be fought out with swordsmen at best. The ultimate result is that a mixed stack of crummy units performing human wave attacks is the only way to clear a city with a wall and culture defended by an archer. Should the city be on a hill it gets much worse. What I would like to know is, am I missing something? Is it supposed to take three units for each archer? Is there a strategy that can mitigate some of this pain?

 

[shivute]

What I find on emperor is that losing units can really hurt your civ's development not just short term but also long term because you need to replace them.
I also go to war (or are declared on!) before catapults and normally before swordsmen. What I do is avoid the cities on the hills, with high culture and walls. I also try and avoid cities with a highly promoted archer unit.
The early war at this stage is really only to gain 2 or 3 more cities or city sites, not to eliminate civs.
Those crummy units need to be taken care of as they will gain promotions and can be upgraded as and when necessary. City raider level 3 on swordmen or axeman and then upgraded to gunpowder units via macemen are superb.

 

[voek]

Although axemen have become less superior in Warlords they are often still strong enough to use for the early war. It just means you need to defend them a little better (against chariots). When I choose my first target, it depends on various conditions:

1) Resources (do I have bronze?)
2) Distance to next civs (the longer the distance, the less useful an early war becomes).
3) Which neighbours I have got (agressive, creative, protective, early UU are less favorable)?
4) What are the dilpomatic consequences for me for attacking that civ? (trading/religion)
5) How many city's does he have on top of hills? (Like you said your self, it will cost more units)
6) How much room do I have to expand? (am I realy boxed in, or can I wait)

I am missing some, but I prob. will have support from other players.

These circumstances have a big impact on the decision if you attack with axes or wait. If it's going to cost me more then I would gain, I would for swords.

Most of the time I war in waves.
Warrior (worker stealing, has become less viable in Warlords)
Axes (if possible)
Swords
Swords+cats
Maces
Trebuchetes
Cavalry
Riflemen+grenadiers
etc

The point is, you shouldn't always attack with axes. Pick your target carefully. Don't waste hammers on suicide units.