Leaders U Hate

[Um the Muse]

I can't speak of MGR's experience, but I for one would be interested in seeing Keshik maneuvering. It seems to fit them well historically. I just have next to zero experience in using tactics in Civ ("bring siege" is about the extent of my knowledge, and that's really more logistics than tactics ).

 

[plasmacannon]

The problem with the Keshik is that it's not any better than a HA. The Ger is ok, but even then, you won't ever manage early level 4 HAs.

--I don't have problems with Kublai. He has AGG melee plus a UU HA with bonus xp from his UB, add to that he is CRE so, as he captures cities, he can use the land sooner.

As for HA rushing, the Carthaginians are several times better...

--I think you will find, most on here will disagree with you on that. The NC has a 5 base attack vs. the 6 base LBs, with City Def, they don't stand a chance.
NC are like dogs and Jags, Great at harassing workers and units outside a city, but, their diminished strength makes them worse at attacking cities. More seige will be needed.

To play as, Mao is fine, though he's better at Marathon/Huge. He's also not a particularly unpleasant AI.

--I'll grant you, that, he isn't as unpleasant as others. As for playing as him, he isn't that good. He is PRO (we already know that's the worst trait) and he's EXP. EXP can be good mixed with ORG or FIN, but, in the long term, it's benefits to granaries and harbors are mostly for the early part of the game. Harbors, you can't even build on interior cities, and I usually don't have a problem getting health resourses.

Charlie is among the worst to play because he lacks any good starting techs. His UU is bad, IMP and PRO are the two weakest traits, and his only redeeming quality is his UB. You're pretty much forced to get archery at higher difficulty levels, but that means you're not getting something else that's important, like BW or AH.

--I would prefer Charlie to Mao myself. My cities would be started sooner and I would have better units with all of those GGs. His starting techs may not be the best, but, all it takes is a GS to pop a tech, and trade for the ones you don't have.
Again, I am not saying Charlie is Great, I think his plentiful GGs will give him better melee, mounted, seige units than say Mao.

I probably should have added Saladin. But despite his tendencies to turtle, he's pretty pleasant as an AI if you're the same religion. In this respect, he's like Isabella.

--Fighting against him, isn't too bad, it is playing as him. His PRO/SPI traits and his UB don't do much for adding Gold to his coffers.

Some of these might not have met your criteria for "worst", if, you are referring to leaders that build huge SoDs and attack your cities, then, no leaders like Saladin wouldn't fall into that group. They would fall into the "worst to use as a player", group. So, it depends on your definition of the word "worst".

 

[LeftAdjoint]

I think you will find, most on here will disagree with you on that. The NC has a 5 base attack vs. the 6 base LBs, with City Def, they don't stand a chance.
NC are like dogs and Jags, Great at harassing workers and units outside a city, but, their diminished strength makes them worse at attacking cities. More seige will be needed.

Numidian cavalry are weaker on emperor and below, and possibly immortal as well. But I think that AbsoluteZero has demonstrated pretty conclusively that they're better on deity, since the ratio of metal units to archers gets quite large.

If you're attacking significant numbers of longbows with horse archers, something has gone very wrong in any case.

 

[Nick Carpathia]

Numids get murdered by regular HAs, especially if the fight ends up in unroaded flatlands.

And a Numid still has bad odds against a spear.

 

[mtr12]

IMO, out of all the warmongers Kublai is the strongest since Creative synergizes well with Aggressive: you can take land and not have to worry about Culture, and cheap Libraries help in getting up Scientists to get you through the earlygame.

 

[Gwynnja]

IMO, out of all the warmongers Kublai is the strongest since Creative synergizes well with Aggressive: you can take land and not have to worry about Culture, and cheap Libraries help in getting up Scientists to get you through the earlygame.

Do you mean as an AI or for the player? In my experience Shaka is the best AI warmonger followed by Mehmed. Mehmed isn't as much as a psycho as Shaka but he is a 40 unitbuildprob and has a ton of cheap, useful buildings.

 

[yatta77]

Kublai/Keshik: I agree on good leader to play / extremely valuable UU (but it's likely just me ranking mounted units and mobility in general very high)
AI Shaka: I agree on him being the best (ehm... with the meaning of worst ) warmonger to face. When he surprises declaring on you (I mean DoW you weren't waiting for or considering probable, and ready to face) it is usually bad news. Some others leaders DoW, also if by surprise, often doesn't do nothing as bad. I hope this makes sense in English

 

[Ataxerxes]

Do you mean as an AI or for the player? In my experience Shaka is the best AI warmonger followed by Mehmed. Mehmed isn't as much as a psycho as Shaka but he is a 40 unitbuildprob and has a ton of cheap, useful buildings.

I have never seen an AI warmonger to compare to Shaka. Admittedly I see him more than Mehmed. Shaka often seems to have some sort of judgement as to who and when to attack. Edit: I think this is what Yatta meant - Shaka has a tendency to attack at the worst times with the best military. A lot of psychos just provide GG points (late game Monty is awesome for this) but Shaka hurts.

For the player, Shaka and Kublai are both fairly good aggressive leaders. I rank Exp and Creative about equal. Both have a good UU that requires a little finesse to use to best advantage. I like Ikhanda more than Ger and Shaka's AGG trait gives you 20% less city maintenance real early and cheap. Besides, if I'm Shaka he won't be in the game.

 

[Gwynnja]

I have never seen an AI warmonger to compare to Shaka. Admittedly I see him more than Mehmed. Shaka often seems to have some sort of judgement as to who and when to attack. Edit: I think this is what Yatta meant - Shaka has a tendency to attack at the worst times with the best military. A lot of psychos just provide GG points (late game Monty is awesome for this) but Shaka hurts.

For the player, Shaka and Kublai are both fairly good aggressive leaders. I rank Exp and Creative about equal. Both have a good UU that requires a little finesse to use to best advantage. I like Ikhanda more than Ger and Shaka's AGG trait gives you 20% less city maintenance real early and cheap. Besides, if I'm Shaka he won't be in the game.

I think you're right on the money about the traits and UBs. The only thing I don't completely agree with is your assessment of the UUs. The impi is nice but hardly game breaking while the Keshik is among the top 5 UUs in the game and the synergy between the Keshik and the Ger improve both.

 

[yatta77]

^^___
I agree. Impi are good for many good reasons, but their limits is taking cities set them back a little.

 

[Nick Carpathia]

Yeah, there is something terrifying about 2-movers that ignore terrain and will happily fork your cities and exploit weaknesses in your defenses.

 

[mtr12]

I have never seen an AI warmonger to compare to Shaka. Admittedly I see him more than Mehmed. Shaka often seems to have some sort of judgement as to who and when to attack. Edit: I think this is what Yatta meant - Shaka has a tendency to attack at the worst times with the best military. A lot of psychos just provide GG points (late game Monty is awesome for this) but Shaka hurts.

For the player, Shaka and Kublai are both fairly good aggressive leaders. I rank Exp and Creative about equal. Both have a good UU that requires a little finesse to use to best advantage. I like Ikhanda more than Ger and Shaka's AGG trait gives you 20% less city maintenance real early and cheap. Besides, if I'm Shaka he won't be in the game.

I meant for the player lol. I dunno, I just like Kublai. I guess Shaka is pretty good, possibly better.

Honestly, you're right that Ikhanda >>> Ger, but I think Keshik > Impi, since Spears are just there for stack protection, but it's actually a feasible strategy to use HA's or HA/Cat as your main fighting force.

 

[MarigoldRan]

--I don't have problems with Kublai. He has AGG melee plus a UU HA with bonus xp from his UB, add to that he is CRE so, as he captures cities, he can use the land sooner.



--I think you will find, most on here will disagree with you on that. The NC has a 5 base attack vs. the 6 base LBs, with City Def, they don't stand a chance.
NC are like dogs and Jags, Great at harassing workers and units outside a city, but, their diminished strength makes them worse at attacking cities. More seige will be needed.



--I'll grant you, that, he isn't as unpleasant as others. As for playing as him, he isn't that good. He is PRO (we already know that's the worst trait) and he's EXP. EXP can be good mixed with ORG or FIN, but, in the long term, it's benefits to granaries and harbors are mostly for the early part of the game. Harbors, you can't even build on interior cities, and I usually don't have a problem getting health resourses.



--I would prefer Charlie to Mao myself. My cities would be started sooner and I would have better units with all of those GGs. His starting techs may not be the best, but, all it takes is a GS to pop a tech, and trade for the ones you don't have.
Again, I am not saying Charlie is Great, I think his plentiful GGs will give him better melee, mounted, seige units than say Mao.



--Fighting against him, isn't too bad, it is playing as him. His PRO/SPI traits and his UB don't do much for adding Gold to his coffers.

Some of these might not have met your criteria for "worst", if, you are referring to leaders that build huge SoDs and attack your cities, then, no leaders like Saladin wouldn't fall into that group. They would fall into the "worst to use as a player", group. So, it depends on your definition of the word "worst".

Pro Cho-Ko-Nus are really, really good in medieval wars at slower speeds and larger maps. People like to avoid medieval wars, but at Marathon/Huge you don't have much of a choice. Most of your important wars will be in that era.

Cho-Ko-Nus are versatile: excellent defenders, and more importantly, decent attackers thanks to collateral damage and tons of first trikes. They come early, and their only direct counter are knights and possibly elephants, but you can always protect your stack with a few pikes, and knights and elephants fare poorly as city defenders.

Also, IND is a very strong trait at Marathon/Huge.

Finally, the Chinese start with Agri/Wheel, I think. Compared to Charlie, who is Myst/Hunting.

 

[Lewarks]

People like to avoid medieval wars, but at Marathon/Huge you don't have much of a choice. Most of your important wars will be in that era.

I seldom play low speed or huge map but: why ?
Medieval time is always an era where I try to return the best of the land I grab in the ancient time. I also find it is the worst era to go to war (just my feeling).

 

[AJ11]

I seldom play low speed or huge map but: why ?
Medieval time is always an era where I try to return the best of the land I grab in the ancient time. I also find it is the worst era to go to war (just my feeling).

Medieval is when the AI starts going nuts with both walls and castles, making lightning wars dangerous at best. Until you hit the Renaissance with its gunpowder units, you are generally looking at stacks and stacks of siege weapons to break cities. In the Classical Era, you have a chance to nail people before walls become a big issue.

That is my gut feeling as to why people tend to avoid Medieval wars. It is the convergence of factors of the first era with massive defence possibilities and the last era before you get something that makes those defences obsolete. So, wait just a little while longer and things become so much easier. And people do.

 

[Lewarks]

Oh, yes I knew that. But still, thanks.
I was just playing the stupid me, asking why this would change on low speed/huge map. I would even think that on huge map, you still have land to settle during medieval time.

I just can't figure out why you would/have to go on war during medieval time on low speed/huge map, as MarigoldRan said.

Btw, sorry if my english sounds "false", it's not my mother tongue, but I'm doing my best

 

[AJ11]

Oh, yes I knew that. But still, thanks.
I was just playing the stupid me, asking why this would change on low speed/huge map. I would even think that on huge map, you still have land to settle during medieval time.

I just can't figure out why you would/have to go on war during medieval time on low speed/huge map, as MarigoldRan said.

Btw, sorry if my english sounds "false", it's not my mother tongue, but I'm doing my best

Nah. Your English is better than some native English speakers I know. I guess the reason for a Medieval war in a marathon speed game is that you'd be in the Medieval era for a lot longer. People and the AI just get impatient.

 

[Mylene]

To catch them while they expand, and don't have well guarded cities yet or went into war mode themselves after being done settling.
Since on marathon everything is a lot slower, except the units who move at normal speed, your army will be useful for a long time to slow down the closest AI. I guess you don't have to do this, but it probably is a missed opportunity with these settings

 

[LeftAdjoint]

I just can't figure out why you would/have to go on war during medieval time on low speed/huge map, as MarigoldRan said.

His posts make a lot more sense if whenever you see a statement like "you must do X" you just read it mentally as "I do X".

On marathon units are 2/3rds as cheap, and move/heal 3 times as fast relative to the the tech pace, so going to war earlier and more often makes perfect sense. Also, I believe that the AI gets 3 times as many war checks, so it's that much harder to maintain good diplomacy.

Still, bulbing to Liberalism is always going to be strong because of the sheer efficiency of the to conversion. The AI's tendency to suicide gigantic stacks against promoted hill city longbows is often adequate protection against undesirable wars.

 

[Army of Scouts]

Zara yacob is down right annoying. he's the only one way behind me in tech that bumrushed liberalism when he didn't have basic mideaval techs and beat me to it because I was reseaching military techs in the late rennasaince. His death was both swift and sweet. Thanks for the church of nativity man