Minor Calvary Exploit

[kniteowl]

I just realized the Cavalry don't require Guilds to be produced, which I find a little bit strange because don't you require the ability to build Knights first, before you can build Cavalry?

I Don't mind being able to beeline to MT and ignore Guilds then Unleash my Cavalry Power, but for the purposes of historically Accurate and Game Balance I believe Cavalry should require Guilds (It's always Modable) but until Civ4 BTS Fixes it or it's changed in the Patch, You guy can use this minor exploit to beeline to MT for Cavalry without the need to research Guilds.

 

[oyzar]

what does the guild system have to do with cavalery? O_o. This is perfectly reasonable.

 

[kniteowl]

what does the guild system have to do with cavalery? O_o. This is perfectly reasonable.

LOL that's not What I meant, My question is don't you need Knight First, before you can build Cavalry?

Like you should have Axes/Swords before you can build Maces and You should have Maces before you can Build Grenadiers (When I mean Have I mean the ability to build them before you can build the upgraded/future unit)

 

[oyzar]

No that is not how it works... What techs needed for a unit have nothing to do with what techs are required for previous units. What does a cavalery guy have in common with a knight that he doesnt have with a horse archer? nothing.

 

[nullspace]

You don't need archery or the wheel to build cavalry, so you can skip knights, horse archers, and chariots if you really want to.

 

[Mutineer]

You don't need archery or the wheel to build cavalry, so you can skip knights, horse archers, and chariots if you really want to.

Incorrect, horse back riding requed for cavalry.

It has nothing to do with historical accuracy, as not every nation had history of knights (havy armored Mounted units), so it is very accurate to have ability to skeep it.

 

[Ray Patterson]

Incorrect, horse back riding requed for cavalry.

well yes, but horse archers also require archery, that was nullspace's point. Intruiging that you don't need the wheel. I love civ IV's tech tree, it just keeps surprising you!

 

[sylvanllewelyn]

You don't need guilds th ride horses to battle. Guilds is only necessary for a very specific form of heavy cavalry, one that required a lot of support in equipment.

 

[Mulholland]

It'll take a looonnng time to get to cavalry without banking anyways.

 

[kniteowl]

It'll take a looonnng time to get to cavalry without banking anyways.

Not Really... Get the Great Library to Pop some GS to lightbulb techs all the way to Liberalism, Pick up Nationalism as Free Tech, and Research Gunpowder and Military Tradition (Make sure to research/Trade for music) and you should get them by the time your Opponents get Maces.

 

[aelf]

Well, in the real world, some nations did not have knights, but they did have cavalry.

 

[Quagga]

I often bypass Guilds. I don't usually build many knights, sometimes none. The AI loves this tech, so if I want it (health reasons?), I usually trade for it.

The comment about it taking too long to get to MilTrad without Guilds->Banking doesn't hold for me either. I guess the point is that you can adopt Mercantilism to get the research benefit from specialists. Otherwise, the benefit of grocers and banks to research is indirect, if any, because the slider has to be lowered to get it. I usually prioritize Education/Universities over Banking/Banks.

That said, I usually don't spend much effort going for MilTrad either. Yes, if my UU is cavalry-based, otherwise probably not. I prefer to build lots and lots of cannons (prioritizing Steel) and use them to wipe out huge invading stacks and/or AI cities (in combination with Grenadiers, of course). In the game I'm playing now, I welcomed an invading stack of cavalry, grenadiers and cannons that contained over 60 units. Cannons and grenadiers from my nearby cities reduced the stack to nothing in just three turns.

 

[csar508]

Well, in the real world, some nations did not have knights, but they did have cavalry.

i.e. the united states

 

[Sovetskysoyuz]

Same thing happens w/ battleships; you can get them with industrialism, which I end up getting before combustion. Being able to build a battleship before you can build destroyers, transports or oil wells makes very little sense.

 

[kniteowl]

I often bypass Guilds. I don't usually build many knights, sometimes none. The AI loves this tech, so if I want it (health reasons?), I usually trade for it.

The comment about it taking too long to get to MilTrad without Guilds->Banking doesn't hold for me either. I guess the point is that you can adopt Mercantilism to get the research benefit from specialists. Otherwise, the benefit of grocers and banks to research is indirect, if any, because the slider has to be lowered to get it. I usually prioritize Education/Universities over Banking/Banks.

That said, I usually don't spend much effort going for MilTrad either. Yes, if my UU is cavalry-based, otherwise probably not. I prefer to build lots and lots of cannons (prioritizing Steel) and use them to wipe out huge invading stacks and/or AI cities (in combination with Grenadiers, of course). In the game I'm playing now, I welcomed an invading stack of cavalry, grenadiers and cannons that contained over 60 units. Cannons and grenadiers from my nearby cities reduced the stack to nothing in just three turns.

True most games I'd usually go through Chemistry and Steel, but in a different Game I was playing I made a Beeline to Gunpowder for my UU Musketeers, I picked up Nationalism as my Free-tech from liberalism, I had music and I realized I was only 1 tech away from Cavalry and a Musketeer/Cavalry Combination is quite powerful...so I might as well tech and Conquer the Nearby Civs with Speed, leaving my Musketeers to Defend my newly Conquered Cities.

 

[jeremiahrounds]

In some cases devs explicitly entertain alternative to reality technology trees if they believe they are feasible. So the first question you have to ask before invoking historical accuracy is the one of is it feasible as an alternate reality.

The point for example is rocketry having two potential ways to get to it was done on purpose.

 

[curtadams]

Same thing happens w/ battleships; you can get them with industrialism, which I end up getting before combustion. Being able to build a battleship before you can build destroyers, transports or oil wells makes very little sense.

The first giant armored warships were steam-powered so that's how it actually happened in the real world.

 

[Sovetskysoyuz]

The first giant armored warships were steam-powered so that's how it actually happened in the real world.

Still, you'd think that if you could build gigantic armoured warships (ie. dreadnoughts), then you could build dinky little unarmoured warships by shrinking some of the parts and getting rid of others.

 

[Sjaramei]

Point is... we need a kind of early light cavalry in the game. Romans had it, alot of other nations used it too. I think it's stupid that horseback riding only opens horse archers. (so even with no armored knights everyone could have this unit for a smoother transition)

It should have opened for a light cavalry unit (STR 7-8 maybe) to make HBR better to beeline for. I never research this tech so for me it's very sucky compared to how important horses was in history. But then i would have changed the combat system somewhat anyway. It got some flaws still and flanking/harassing huge armies is one of them.. and guess what unit was used for this?

 

[jeremiahrounds]

I was going to post that. Alexander the greats loved his calvary. And other armies had calvary. According to wikipedia in India Alexander faced off against 30,000 calvary, 38,000 infantry, and 30 elephants.

The idea of a mounted soldier is basically as old as armies. But I think the game encapsulates that in horse archers. Horse archers. But horse archers require recurve bows which was invented in like one spot by the mongols I think. ITs not a very common technology and comes unto the scene fairly late.

I guess chariots could be viewed as "ancient calvary" . Honestly if they renamed "chariots" to "ancient calvary" the stats would be about right so who cares right?

Now if tanks didnt have city raider promotions everything would make sense in this game! Tanks dont take cities! Infantry takes cities... Tanks kind of support by holding key areas. In the end though if tanks dont have infantry in a city they die. The soviet union learned this the hard way. The single most powerful modern city raider units in the world at the moment are mechanized infantry.

Oh wait longbow men and archers should have 0 defensive bonuses in forest and recieve -10% if attacking into a forest. That with armor not getting city raider should do it for meh realism! I mean come on how do your arrows blot out the sun when you cant see the sun due to a thick forest canopy?