Discussion in 'Civ4 - General Discussions' started by Ramesses-Rules, Oct 31, 2011.
In Warlords, a Berserker gets a 50% bonus against macemen. Is that not true in BTS?
They get 50% versus melee, same as a regular mace.
In regular BTS a maceman gets a 50% bonus against melee. Since a maceman is a melee unit, they get the same bonus as a Berserker towards macemen. Thus the Berserker is not getting anything that it doesn't already have in that department.
For medieval war either Trebs should be the backbone, or Knights if the AIs are behind in techs.
But you'd have to hurry up on IMM to make good use of them.
There are some special tactics like Chokos with the Chinese or super x-bows with SB (Philo is great to get there faster), you don't really need any other units besides some mounted protection which is easily covered.
Playing Ragnar first time and yeah FIN stands out for sure of course. And if you’re gonna start with Fishing, might as well be a FIN leader, since lakes or coasts with food can be a helpful commerce kickstart right out of the gate. Getting the most out of one or two squares early while you build workers/settlers with food is critical. Especially on Marathon.
AGG is not my fave as a peacemonger but so far it’s helped hugely with barbs (since I lacked copper and spearmen started showing up). Most other traits I’d prefer to AGG, but I was doing random, so to come out with a FIN leader of any type is still more win than not.
Rags is one of the leaders I normally struggle to play as (along with other "offensive" leaders like Boudica, Brennus, Shaka, Monty, whether they are actually AGG or not....and Willem for some reason ). Of the ones I've participated in, his (most recent) Noble's Club game was the first one I lost and had to try again :O
I think he makes a great case for how important starting techs can be. Fishing/Hunting is just not great, you're slow to BW and Cottages/Granaries, you aren't even compensated with early roads or Monuments/SH fail-gold/fast path to Masonry.
My point is that otherwise he seems decent, AGG/FIN lacks synergy between the traits, but neither trait itself is bad if you know how to get the most mileage out of them (AGG especially gets underrated a lot I feel). But that tech problem can sneak up on you and bite you in the posterior if you just tunnel-vision on the traits. It seems to always happen to me!
Ragnar's great strength is that he can prepare Amphibious Berserkers to upgrade into Grenadiers with City Raider I and II, and quickly transport them to a juicy overseas target using transports with +1 movement thanks to his UB. Anyone who's AGG can get Amphibious melee/gunpowder units right out the gate, since free Combat 1 -> Combat 2 -> Amphibious with only 5xp, but only Ragnar can upgrade his Berserkers to get Combat 1 Amphibious City Raider I and II grens. And get transports with a free +1 movement promo if you build his unique Lighthouse UB. Needless to say, it makes Ragnar slightly better at the whole "naval invasion" deal.
Of course Ragner's big weakness is his starting techs giving him a slow start, and the fact that not every map is going to be a fractal map where you can sail across the high seas and descend upon rich neighbours with a fleet of doom.
It's a weak combo, but does have an advantage in consistency. FIN also feels like a decent insurance policy. But the combo aggressive+hunting is one that I've always disliked. Trading your warrior for a scout have always been a questionable deal, but trading a C1-warrior to a scout? That's frustrating and feels like you take away one of the few perks Aggressive offers.
^Oh good point. It undercuts the early synergy for sure. And yeah early on that extra 10% from Combat 1 is really felt. Perhaps the game weighs scouts more heavily for their goodie hut bonuses, but seems like most people turn those off. Usually I just level it to C1 & Medic 1 for an early mobile healer. Meh.
Separate names with a comma.