Expansionst Trait + Goody Huts = !!!!!!!

[RX2000]

Last night I started a game on Regent level as the Americans. Huge map, continents, 7 other civs. I started out on a HUGE continent with just the French who were far enough away for me to not have to kill them early on. (I am a pacifist. )

I built a couple scouts and proceeded to explore the entire continent, getting every goody hut I came to. I ended up getting about 5 warriors, and pretty much every single ancient tech!! I got enough techs from huts to put me in the Middle Ages by about 200 BC. I think thats excellent for a Regent game. Also, that was with me not trading any techs (the French never had anything I didnt have) and only producing my own techs like every 30 turns or so. I did have Barbarians on sedentary though, so I think that might make them give more techs, but still, is this usually how it goes for expansionist civs? I usually play as the Babylonians for their good culture, I just recently started doing expansionist. If this is the way it always is, I dont think I'm going back.

Its now like 1500 AD or so, and I still havent relinquished my tech lead. Even when I found the other 4 civs on another continent, I was waaaaaay ahead of all them in tech. (By like 5-6 techs.)

 

[Bamspeedy]

Expansionists are awesome on the larger maps, especially pangea maps. On smaller maps, and island maps, you won't get as many goody huts. Expansionists NEVER get barbarians from goody huts. It doesn't matter what barbarian level you have it set to, but with anything other than sedentary, your scouts will have to watch out for those wandering barbarians or the barbarian camps. There have been some that can get out of the ancient era before 2000 B.C.!! if playing on a good map. But you need to pump out quite a few scouts to do that, and hope you don't start next to some other expansionists civ that grabs all your huts from you.

 

[punkbass2000]

Ideally, I would play as the Iroquois on a Huge Pangaea map, without Zulus, English, Russians or Americans. I imagine you could hut yourself into the industrial age like that.

 

[Allemand]

I usually play as the Americans on huge maps, and the expansionist trait is very good. In one Monarch game I got 14 settlers from the huts plus all the Ancient Era techs. I prefer the Americans over the Iroquois because the industrious workers are awesome.

I've played three Regent games recently as the Babylonians and been a little disappointed. Slow scouts (warriors), slow workers, and in the three games I only got one settler from the huts. It takes a while to get going with the Babylonians. On the plus side, the cheap buildings are nice, especially the temples, and I like the red color they have now.

Some people claim the Babylonians produce more culture, but I think the Americans beat them in culture. The Babs may get a head start, thanks to the cheap temples and libraries, but the Americans will have more cities and will catch up in good time.

 

[Catt]

Originally posted by RX2000
Last night I started a game on Regent level as the Americans. Huge map, continents, 7 other civs.

I built a couple scouts and proceeded to explore the entire continent, getting every goody hut I came to. I ended up getting about 5 warriors, and pretty much every single ancient tech!!

. . . is this usually how it goes for expansionist civs? (. . . .) If this is the way it always is, I dont think I'm going back.

You've inadvertantly (or deliberately ) set up your game conditions to be able to exploit the best of expansionist trait. With a huge map but less than 16 civs, an expansionist civ is going to get a lot of tech discoveries. If you try it with huge map and 3 other civs you may even get to the middle ages by 2000 BC!

If you ever play smaller maps or random settings, I think you'll find that expansionist can be a really lucky trait or a really unlucky trait (finding yourself as expansionist on an achipelago map with maximum water for instance!).

 

[Bamspeedy]

I usually play as the Americans on huge maps, and the expansionist trait is very good. In one Monarch game I got 14 settlers from the huts plus all the Ancient Era techs. I prefer the Americans over the Iroquois because the industrious workers are awesome.

Are you still using the v1.17f patch? In the first version of that patch, there was a bug that allowed you to get alot more settlers from huts that you normally would get. If you ever get armies from huts, then you are playing with that patch. I have played probably close to 100 games with the new patch and never get more than 1 settler. Except once, when I never built a settler from my capital, and just kept pumping out scouts. I ended up getting 3 settlers from huts .

Ideally, I would play as the Iroquois on a Huge Pangaea map, without Zulus, English, Russians or Americans. I imagine you could hut yourself into the industrial age like that.

You can't get any middle age techs from huts. Once you enter the middle ages you no longer get techs. Hint: be researching a required tech so the huts give you the government techs before that last required tech.

 

[Allemand]

I was playing the 1.17f patch when I got the large numbers of settlers. Played the Babylonians on 1.21f and got very little.

I might go back to 1.17f again. But it has some bugs. That looks like the only improvement in 1.21f, less bugs.

 

[Bamspeedy]

If you go back to v1.17f, you still won't get as many settlers. Unless you have the patch saved somewhere. There was 2 versions of the v1.17f patch. The first one that you got, was only released for a day or two when they realized that bug, removed it and released the second v1.17f patch (called the v1.17g patch at the apolyton site).

Babylon isn't expansionists so that decreases you odds of getting a settler. Expansionists civs have better odds of getting a settler. Non-expansionist civs have more odds of getting barbarians, or just free units.

 

[Allemand]

No problem, I've saved all the patches in a neutral directory.

The "bug" giving more settlers is not a real bug, it's an "opportunity" which I like. Admittedly, it gives you too much of an advantage making the game too easy, and I would prefer the old odds which yielded two or three settlers for an expansionist civ.

I'll try the Americans in 1.21f and see if it works out that way.

 

[kring]

If you have the original 1.17f first day patch, you may find other goody huts improvements. I managed to acquire 4 Leaders, 2 each in 2 different games through the huts. I had heard about it before, but was pleasantly shocked when it happened to me. I have heard of other people getting Armies and other things from the huts using the original. I patched to the 1.21 when it first came out, so those days are over, unless I want to reinstall the old patch.

Also, on the subject of getting stuff from goody huts, Scouts and any other non warrior (Workers, etc) types do better than the warrior types, based on both my own personal and other persons' experiences.

 

[bobgote]

Expansionist can be handy, but Americans? bleargh. Try iroquois or zulu methinks

 

[God]

Actually Americans can be really useful. Disregarding their UU, they have 2 really good traits. They only lack the cheap culture. Industrious is generally viewed as one of the best traits and expansionist is really good too. They would be a great civ on a huge map.

Check out Ronalds HOF monarch game. He played as Americans.