How do you play Ragnar?

[Ramesses-Rules]

Rags sucks. The only thing he has going for him is financial. Terrible starting techs. His UU is crap. The UB is ok if you're into water maps, but water maps are a pain-in-the-arse.

I guess if you want to play Ragnar you should lay down some cottages and go for macemen, not because beserkers are any good, but because they look cool. On immortal the AI probably gets macemen around 600 AD or so. If you know what your doing you can definitely get maces earlier then 1 AD.

Try oracling -> CoL and then going -> math -> currency -> civil service and run a cottage bureaucracy capitol to get to machinery.

Make sure you get a GS and build an academy in your capitol also. You should do this around 1200 BC at the latest.

I am going to try this approach today. Why is the UU crap? If I can get Berserkers before the AI gets gunpowder, shouldn't the Beserkers be dominate in a Middle Ages war? That has been my assumption. Thanks for the suggestions. Appreciated.

 

[Mylene]

^^ Cos Maces are overall not a good war unit.
It's hard to rush them. If you have Jumbos, it's pointless to go all the way to CS/Machinery.

If not a water map, going to Curs is better usually if you want to build up first.
So berzerkers are in between, no early rush and no overhelming and fast moving late rush.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

I am going to try this approach today. Why is the UU crap? If I can get Berserkers before the AI gets gunpowder, shouldn't the Beserkers be dominate in a Middle Ages war? That has been my assumption. Thanks for the suggestions. Appreciated.

It isn't. It just isn't very good outside of water-option maps and is not nearly as good in SP as multi.

Berserkers won't dominate medieval war however because xbows, opposing maces, CG II (or more, or hill) longbows, etc can all cause grief. Knights beat them in the field also.

On water maps with amphibious, however, they are actually scary. I actually like his UB a bit more as it confers an obnoxious advantage on a low cost and oft-needed building.

 

[Rubio]

I haven't played Rag above Monarch yet, but on Monarch, you just promote the Berserkers along the CR line. You park your Galleons (fast moving) right outside the enemy's cultural borders, declare and in the same turn swoop in and take the cities totally unprepared. In a land war you usually lose 3 turns while you march up to that first city meanwhile the enemy is whipping units like mad and so you face a sizeable stack in that first city for sure....

Even better to have spies in the enemy cities, so you'll know exactly what you'll be facing (remember you get to attack the MOMENT after you declare, the enemy can't do ANYTHING), and you can use the spies to incite revolt and eliminate the culture defenses. From there's it's almost too easy... I've even been able to take 2 cities with just one galleon full of Berserkers..

And once you have a nice big army of Berserkers then you upgrade them and they keep all their promotions... so the Amphib assault continues indefinitely...

 

[uat2d]

How can someone hamper himself so much by only playing with the same guy?

 

[Ramesses-Rules]

It isn't. It just isn't very good outside of water-option maps and is not nearly as good in SP as multi.

Berserkers won't dominate medieval war however because xbows, opposing maces, CG II (or more, or hill) longbows, etc can all cause grief. Knights beat them in the field also.

On water maps with amphibious, however, they are actually scary. I actually like his UB a bit more as it confers an obnoxious advantage on a low cost and oft-needed building.

How about the combination of Berserkers+Knights+Cats in a Middles Ages war. Would that not dominate? Is that feasible on a standard map (i.e., not water-heavy). That is what I want to achieve, but it may be nearly impossible at Immortal from the comments I am getting.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

^

If you like spending 5 turns of bombardment constantly and watching the AI with massed bonuses swell up a big stack in every city such that you have to eat extra war weariness and catapult attrition, then cata/knight/berserker is fine yes . Or does warlords not have castles?

TBH you will probably be better-served by an axe rush in most cases, especially pre-BTS where the AI is not as good about whipping to defend (but has higher raw bonuses).

 

[Ramesses-Rules]

^

If you like spending 5 turns of bombardment constantly and watching the AI with massed bonuses swell up a big stack in every city such that you have to eat extra war weariness and catapult attrition, then cata/knight/berserker is fine yes . Or does warlords not have castles?

TBH you will probably be better-served by an axe rush in most cases, especially pre-BTS where the AI is not as good about whipping to defend (but has higher raw bonuses).

Yes, Warlords have castles. So the trick is to launch the attack before they get to engineering and build castles. I am still not sure how feasible that would be at Immortal on a standard map. Any opinion?

 

[Rubio]

On a land map, Berserkers are just Macemen, nothing special.... the big advantage is the free amphib promotion, which is otherwise hard to get.... combined with the extra moving speed of the ships... allows you to catch your opponent with her pants down

 

[jdros13]

1. Generate 2 GG's early if possible.
2. Settle them in your best military production city.
3. Run Vassalage and Theocracy while building CR3 Berserkers and teching to Rifling before your opponent has Grenadiers
4. Win circumnavigation to have an obscene naval advantage
5. Promote Berserkers to Rifles (or Infantry if you wait longer)
5. Conquer coastal cities

 

[Ramesses-Rules]

On a land map, Berserkers are just Macemen, nothing special.... the big advantage is the free amphib promotion, which is otherwise hard to get.... combined with the extra moving speed of the ships... allows you to catch your opponent with her pants down

Wait a minute. Berserkers get 50% combat advantage against Melee units and a 10% bonus against cities. That's pretty special (I hope), because I am counting on it if I can ever get into the Middle Ages in this #$%# game!

 

[jdros13]

Wait a minute. Berserkers get 50% combat advantage against Melee units and a 10% bonus against cities. That's pretty special (I hope), because I am counting on it if I can ever get into the Middle Ages in this #$%# game!

Their big bonus is Amphibious. 10% city attack isn't terrible but also not gamebreaking.

Their other big bonus is that they can be rifles or infantry with CR promotions which is somewhat gamebreaking if you can time it right.

 

[AbsoluteZero]

I am going to try this approach today. Why is the UU crap? If I can get Berserkers before the AI gets gunpowder, shouldn't the Beserkers be dominate in a Middle Ages war? That has been my assumption. Thanks for the suggestions. Appreciated.

Beserkers don't dominate the middle age warfare, no maceman does. The only way to dominate with macemen is to get them before middle age warfare ( longbows / xbows ). Hard to do and usually you don't have a really large window of use even if you do manage it. For example, I just played a game as Tokugawa and did a samurai rush with 14 samurais at 75 AD. By 300 AD my opponent had longbows which pretty much wasted my advantage. This was on immortal.

The beserker itself is only slightly better then a regular macemen, and I'd argue is inferior to a maceman with a charismatic leader.

As a rule I don't attack over rivers / water, because it's generally a dumb thing to do. So take away the amphibious promotion for beserkers and you have the +10% vs city bonus. Not that impressive, samurai are much better ( problem is toku sucks, but that's another thread ).

Beserkers are fun for roleplay purposes, but not what I'd call a useful unique unit. Fast workers, war chariots, quechua, praetoreans, chokonu's, immortals, numidian cavalry, those are useful unique units.

 

[Mylene]

, praetoreans, chokonu's, immortals, numidian cavalry, those are useful unique units.

Newbie alert!

 

[cgo2]

Ragnar is AGG/FIN. Use the FIN trait to your advantage. Water heavy maps mean that GL and Colossus are very helpful. Try to find a nice river city and spam cottages (prefereably on flood plains). You can fund a great military if you leverage Rag's traits well.

Is the Colossus really worth it, especially when you rush for Astro? I'm wondering because I tried Ragnar on Archipelago after reading this thread, and I have the feeling I lost a lot of precious turns researching and building it, and it became obsolete pretty fast. (I didn't have copper though).

 

[AbsoluteZero]

Is the Colossus really worth it, especially when you rush for Astro? I'm wondering because I tried Ragnar on Archipelago after reading this thread, and I have the feeling I lost a lot of precious turns researching and building it, and it became obsolete pretty fast. (I didn't have copper though).

I wouldn't go out of my way for the colossus, unless you are on a water map and have no good cottage space, then you could make a case for it.

The problem, as you point out, is it obsoletes at one of the key techs for water maps.

I almost never build it. I definitely would not build it without copper to speed it up.

 

[Ramesses-Rules]

Beserkers don't dominate the middle age warfare, no maceman does. The only way to dominate with macemen is to get them before middle age warfare ( longbows / xbows ). Hard to do and usually you don't have a really large window of use even if you do manage it. For example, I just played a game as Tokugawa and did a samurai rush with 14 samurais at 75 AD. By 300 AD my opponent had longbows which pretty much wasted my advantage. This was on immortal.

The beserker itself is only slightly better then a regular macemen, and I'd argue is inferior to a maceman with a charismatic leader.

As a rule I don't attack over rivers / water, because it's generally a dumb thing to do. So take away the amphibious promotion for beserkers and you have the +10% vs city bonus. Not that impressive, samurai are much better ( problem is toku sucks, but that's another thread ).

Beserkers are fun for roleplay purposes, but not what I'd call a useful unique unit. Fast workers, war chariots, quechua, praetoreans, chokonu's, immortals, numidian cavalry, those are useful unique units.

Based on your experience, I am just going to scrap my whole Ragnar project now. I had this fantasy that Berserker's bonuses against Melee units and cities would beat Middle Ages cities that didn't have castles and knights (TMIT's caution).

So, in your opinion, which leader is best to choose if my goal is to be dominant in the Middle Ages (before gunpowder)?

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Based on your experience, I am just going to scrap my whole Ragnar project now. I had this fantasy that Berserker's bonuses against Melee units and cities would beat Middle Ages cities that didn't have castles and knights (TMIT's caution).

So, in your opinion, which leader is best to choose if my goal is to be dominant in the Middle Ages (before gunpowder)?

Justinian . 12 str knights. Pretty sure he's BTS though.

Nobody jumps out as giving a huge edge. China is probably closest but only if you bulb for machinery (warlords doesn't have trebs right?). I'd say w/o trebs and with AI bonuses it's probably the worst era to fight, but it's been so long since I've played warlords.

 

[AbsoluteZero]

I had this fantasy that Berserker's bonuses against Melee units and cities would beat Middle Ages cities that didn't have castles and knights (TMIT's caution).

You do realize that beserkers are also melee units so they are weak to other macemen and xbows? You sound like you think they are non-melee

So, in your opinion, which leader is best to choose if my goal is to be dominant in the Middle Ages (before gunpowder)?

Middle age warfare is really not about individual units. It's about stacking a lot of different units together and having a lot of them.

However the best medieval unit is probably the cataphract as TMIT mentioned. Cataphracts are at least even with everything on flat land ( and maybe ahead because of the stables promotion ). The byzantines also have a nice UB, and justinian is an ok leader. ( edit* non bts I don't know about )

 

[InFlux5]

I would have to say you are putting too much weight on which leader/civ you are playing. The differences aren't so great that you should have to completely re-adjust your play.

Research in the beginning based on what surrounds your capitol. After that decide based on the terrain and/or civs further out. This is what "play the map" means, and it also means that your leader traits and unique builds are not everything.