Multiplayer early rushes

[inthesomeday]

I was just in a game on multi wherein a player as Egypt decided to all in rush me around turn 60. He'd built no expands and had a perfectly fine start, and was Egypt, a civ with some non-war bonuses.
I understand there are many reasons for early rushes, but I personally don't see the point in going all-in on one with an infrastructure bonus civ and with only one city. Based on his abilities at war, I'm guessing he wasn't a new player or anything, and because I was in a relatively defensible position with a walled hill expand surrounded by a ring of hills and then flatland I made the mistake to neglect building military besides a few chariots and comp bows.
Am I just crazy in thinking that he wasn't making good decisions by going all-in with lowest tech and low crop yield and manufacturing? Because I didn't have a lot of military he pretty quickly managed to roll through me, but even after he took my cap his demographics weren't great, because I was starving my cities down and selling my buildings.
I just don't see the point in rushing like this, especially with a perfectly alright start and a civ like Egypt, for whom not all of the bonuses favor early war. Was he just trolling, or did he use some master strategy I didn't know about, or was he simply a subpar player deceiving me with moves he learned off YouTube?

 

[Chum]

Well, he beat you, didn't he?

He must not be doing too badly.

 

[Aea]

Beating everybody matters more.

Can't say I've ever seen such a rush (usually it's at least two cities into a mad dash), but, if he can convert your captured capital into something useful faster then building more expands it's perfectly valid.

 

[The Disciple]

Beating everybody matters more.

Can't say I've ever seen such a rush (usually it's at least two cities into a mad dash), but, if he can convert your captured capital into something useful faster then building more expands it's perfectly valid.

Which might be the case if it would give him four unique luxury resources.

 

[alex15]

I find 3vs3,4vs4 games more fair than so called FFA, because in FFA some ppl are secretly teamed up (cas they could be IRL friends or in-game "friends") it was the same during Civ3 multiplayer and Civ4 multiplayer

Im playing civ with 2-3 IRL friends myself sometimes but we dont "cheating" like this.

The point of early rush is screwing some one else economy a bit to make his allys have bigger chanse to win.Some ppl doing early rushes just for fun and not because they are secretly teamed up with some one ofc

 

[Browd]

Moderator Action: Moved to Multiplayer forum.

 

[komodowaran]

well if he get' 2 set's of land early enough it's worth it for him

and if he had bad land so that he was not compeditive with out war i can see why he would use Egypts ability for infinit chariot spamm

 

[Klesko]

I made the mistake to neglect building military besides a few chariots and comp bows.

I'm glad you pointed out your own mistake. Realizing and understanding your mistakes is the first part of learning from them and that's a big part of what this game is - learning.

Am I just crazy in thinking that he wasn't making good decisions by going all-in with lowest tech and low crop yield and manufacturing?

I wouldn't call you crazy but I do feel obliged to point out the fallacy in your logic in pointing out your opponent's decision making instead of turning that finger back around at yourself. Your opponent clearly made good on his military campaign in which he captured your capital after devoting his resources to building an army.

even after he took my cap his demographics weren't great

In case you weren't aware, a newly captured city doesn't produce anything of any sort for several turns thereafter, hence there would be no reflection of a gain in demographics other than perhaps territory owned.

Additionally, cities lose infrastructure and population when changing hands through conquest (anything other than trade) and therefore take time to become as productive as they were before. Conquest of cities play more into a long term stratagem.

I just don't see the point in rushing like this, especially with a civ like Egypt, for whom not all of the bonuses favor early war. Was he just trolling, or did he use some master strategy

Egypt is actually a fantastic civ to take into early war. Egyptian chariots make for a very viable early raiding force. In fact, Egypt rates near the top of the list for early game rushes.

I'm not sure what you mean in your phrase "was he just trolling"... I feel like your opponent put together a military plan and executed it well enough (based on your description alone of the game that took place). Crippling your nearest neighbor while further enhancing your own empire has always been among the top strategies of veteran Civilization players and far from some "master strategy"

I hope you use that particular match as a learning experience for later games! This game takes a lot of patience and failure to truly master and with each game played you'll become better and better at shaping your strategies and sharpening your decision making while also better understanding that some games you simply will have to adapt to whatever your opponents around you are doing instead of following some formulaic strategy time and time again. Best of luck to you my friend!