Easy Conquest Victory Strategy on Emperor

[chrmarker]

If you are struggeling to win on emperor and need a morale boost, then here is my strat for en easy conquest victory on emperor (warlords)

I am struggeling to win conquest victories on emperor, on continent maps, but this strategy always seems to work. Even if you get a bad starting location.

Settings:
small terra map. 5 civs all start on same landmass.
Augustus Ceasar. Praetorians.

Build 2-3 cities.

Beeline for Ironworking and hook up iron. When youre 1. praetorian is build you have basicly won because they beat all other units until they meet macemen/crossbows.

Conquer the nearest enemy capital + 1 or 2 cities.

Wait until you have Civil service and can build couthouses. Then you can afford war again. It is valid to beeline to construction for catapults, declare war and research CS. Time it so that you can whip courthouses in the captured citys.

Conquer and vassalise the next civ. The one with the capital closest to you.
Beeline to Chemistry.

Upgrade youre veteran units and build grenadiers as fast as you can and conquer/vassalise the rest of the AI civs at leisure.

Tips:
Dont build the pyramids. Wait and see who builds it and make conquering that city 1. priority. Run representation with the pyramids and use alot of scientist.

Use the 1. GE, if you get one, to build the Great library.

Try to get a Great Prophet. Theres always a holy city you can use him in.

10 turns before you plan an invasion, bribe another AI into war with youre target. After 10 turns most of his offensive units is gone or tied up elsewhere.

Steal workers if possible at the start of wars.

Vassalise AI's. They make great techtrade partners.

 

[obsolete]

small terra map. 5 civs all start on same landmass.

With settings that skewed, it really wouldn't feel as satisfactory as winning without all those alterations on the defaults.

In fact, you wouldn't need romans for that matter either.

 

[chrmarker]

With settings that skewed, it really wouldn't feel as satisfactory as winning without all those alterations on the defaults.

In fact, you wouldn't need romans for that matter either.

Skewed?? There is no alteratons on the settings at all. 5 civs is default on small maps and it is default that all civs start on the same continent on terra maps. There is another continent on terra maps but only barbs live on it until someone settles it after astronomy. The other continent is like "the new world" (america) of real life.

 

[InFlux5]

Settings:
small terra map. 5 civs all start on same landmass.
Augustus Ceasar. Praetorians.

No need to read any further.

 

[Breunor]

I think it always comes down to what it means about 'beating' a level. To me, 'beating' a level usually means playing on a standard sized map with a random leader against random opponents. Obviously, there are different script map choices, but this is the idea. So, I'm currently breaking into Emperor (although with BTS I'm sure this will change), I'm viewing that I'm an Emperor player if I win a reasonable percentage (30% - 80%) under these settings. If I win more than 70% - 80%, I'm movving up, and if I am less than 30%, I'm moving down. (Right now I'm at about 0%, but I am trying to move up!)

chrmarker, I think the objection here is saying that 'winning' on a level just doesn't mean that much if you take the random components and put them all in your favor. For instance, winning at high level on a duel map isn't really that hard.

So, I may be able win on Immortal with your settings, but I still don't feel that means that much.

Breunor

 

[chrmarker]

Well, Im not saying that you master emperor level if you win on small terra maps. Im just saying that its very easy to win with the settings and strategy that I describe.

I rarely play std. size maps anymore because the game on my PC do not handle std. size maps very well when I get about halfway into it, it slows down and it gets annoying . I also find small maps more enjoyable beacause they can be finished in less time and thus dont drag out to long.

Im not sure If small maps is easier than std. size. I wonder what the genereal opinion is on that matter? I think that small maps is harder than std. size beacause theres a good chance that you end up on a continent with only one other civ and its not that uncommon to end up with an "alone on a continent" start, especially with the Inca civ. The last 2 times a startet with Inca, I ended up isolatet...I wonder if it is scriptet that Inca have a higher chance of starting isolatet?

What matters most is the map type. The more isolatet you are, the higher the difficulty is, after my opinion.

I consider it "beating" emporer level if I can win consistently domination/conquest with small continent maps. To me, space race, diplomatic or cultural win is not that satisfactory in terms of "beating the level" because I often feel that the AI could have won if it decided to invade me in a reasonable way. It can still be bery fun and enjoyable though.

 

[chrmarker]

I think it always comes down to what it means about 'beating' a level. To me, 'beating' a level usually means playing on a standard sized map with a random leader against random opponents. Obviously, there are different script map choices, but this is the idea.
Breunor

What kind of map type do you consider the right one to "beat" the level on?

 

[obsolete]

You know, there really isn't much difference between a man who beats monarch on marathon, as compared to a man who beats prince on quick speed. While the strategies may differ by a lot, the tuffness in itself does not.

There are many similar issues like this due to default-changing, and while a person is free to alter things in his favour as he sees fit, one who believes in the fallacy of (a level is a level is a level) is well, believing in a fallacy and kidding themselves.

 

[Dirk1302]

Well can you win consistently on emperor yourself then,Obsolete? If not you might shut that big mouth of yours down a bit, if you did, tell us about it.

Try Invisable stalks's isolated Frederick start and we'll talk further. I don't mind if you read all the spoilers there. Just win it, not that easy.

 

[Breunor]

What kind of map type do you consider the right one to "beat" the level on?

Its a personal choice, I usually try small, regular, and large. I find large the hardest and small the easiest. For the script, I randomize the maps, I LOVE the different map scripts.

Generally, I think continents is the easist I have tried. Highlands I find pretty difficult.

When I think of beating a level, though, I'm usually thinking of the random choice, which does give you a bit of a choice but obviously doesn't include everything.

Breunor

 

[Infantry#14]

Terra is pretty easy for conquest, as the ai have smaller land area. Also, instead of using the Romans, you can probably win w/ Eqypt, Persia and Inca.

 

[chrmarker]

Its a personal choice, I usually try small, regular, and large. I find large the hardest and small the easiest. For the script, I randomize the maps, I LOVE the different map scripts.

Generally, I think continents is the easist I have tried. Highlands I find pretty difficult.

When I think of beating a level, though, I'm usually thinking of the random choice, which does give you a bit of a choice but obviously doesn't include everything.

Breunor

If you find small continent maps the easiest, then I would like to see a save game with a conquest win and know what strategy you used because then you are clearly a bettet player than me and then you could teach me a thing a two.

If you randimize the map type, then you also "risk" to end up on the easy terramap. Nothing wrong with that, but do you then "reroll" because its to easy?

 

[chrmarker]

Terra is pretty easy for conquest, as the ai have smaller land area. Also, instead of using the Romans, you can probably win w/ Eqypt, Persia and Inca.

Yes, I agree. But if you are new to emperor level then you might find it challeging.

 

[chrmarker]

You think small terra maps is easy for conquest?

Please let me know if you got a have a better score then 136058 and please share youre strategy.
If you saved/loaded in the game, then it do not count.

 

[Breunor]

If you find small continent maps the easiest, then I would like to see a save game with a conquest win and know what strategy you used because then you are clearly a bettet player than me and then you could teach me a thing a two.

If you randimize the map type, then you also "risk" to end up on the easy terramap. Nothing wrong with that, but do you then "reroll" because its to easy?

Nah, I don't reroll.

I actually find terra harder than continents. But I don;t get conquest wins, I almost always win by spaceship. I find on Monarch that I can win by spaceship by winning two wars. On continents, I end up avoiding the 'gang up' problem. On terra, I can't avoid trying to settle the other contonent so I often find yself with good continents and get beaten up!

I doubt I'm that good a player; I suspect I'm a pretty good builder. So, its best for me to not have to fight too many people at once. On Terra, with everyone next to each other, I have trouble conquering.

Archi is also hard becuase it is HARD to get the conquests you need. So, my best record is with continents.


It would be an interesting question to ask people the easist map based on how they try to win.

Best wishes,

Breunor

 

[futurehermit]

Why play with Romans and Incans all the time? Just play down a skill level with a regular-power leader

I think it always comes down to what it means about 'beating' a level. To me, 'beating' a level usually means playing on a standard sized map with a random leader against random opponents.

amen to that

 

[InFlux5]

We don't need to have a certain score on small Terra to claim that it's an easy conquest map. It's blatantly obvious, perhaps even to someone who had never played such a map. In fact it may be even easier than Pangaea, which everyone knows is an easy conquest map.

I play on Monarch. It's the right level for me because it's basically a toss-up whether I will win each time - well, usually. Recently I drew Augustus Caesar, and I was on a Pangaea map. It was like I had gone down 1 or 2 difficulty levels. I could've marched my Praets all over that landmass in my sleep. I won domination before I could achieve conquest. It was so easy it wasn't even fun. (I.e. if I wanted to play on Prince I would.)

So your personal best for a Terra conquest is irrelevant - except that it kind of proves the point. I believe the "Old World" landmass is smaller than a Pangaea of the same size would be, so that's why I suspect Terra may be even easier than Pangaea. Is it just a coincidence that your highest scores are conquest victories where everyone starts on the same landmass?

It's just common knowledge that Pangaea is the easiest map; sort of how it's common knowledge that starting in isolation makes things difficult. Play as the Romans with their game-breaking UU and you've stacked the game heavily in your favor.