Multiplayer FFA: Early War is Costly. Wonder Rushers always win

wc3promet

Warlord
Joined
Nov 28, 2005
Messages
147
Multiplayer FFA: Early War is Costly. Wonder Rushers always win

Just lost to a Catherine Player. I was sure that I had more cities than Catherine but she seems to outtech me. I had Musketmen while she already has Infantry.

Even though I was using the Pyramid-Representation + Generating Great Scientists. Okay my research suffered for like 30 turns because of War.

Catherine had the Oracle and Hanging Gardens.
 
Isn't the Pyramids more expensive than Oracle and Hanging Gardens?

Sounds like you're the wonder rusher, so why aren't you winning?!
 
The price for an early rush is that if it doesn't work and/or involve everyone in the game you have lost if anyone went for building infra. To counter this either go infra route youself or make sure every other player is involved in a rush that takes an equal or longer time than yours.
 
Oggums said:
Isn't the Pyramids more expensive than Oracle and Hanging Gardens?

Sounds like you're the wonder rusher, so why aren't you winning?!

I took the Holy City along with the Pyramid from another player.
 
So the Pyramid wonder rusher lost?

Now I'm even more confused! I thought you just said they always won.
 
War is only costly if you loose. The early game is the best time to make war as you have the most to gain and defences tend to be weaker. If you want to win in ANY multiplayer game you basicaly have to kill your neighbor and steal his empire as soon as possible, cause if you don't someone else will.

I don't think you've played very much multiplayer.
 
Little off-topic, but I've been meaning to ask some folks anyway, so maybe some of you could give me some advice.

I've been thinking of joining some multiplayer games online, but I'm really wondering if they are all just quecha and praet rushes? Sounds pretty boring, honestly. Not saying I am against conflict in games, but if every multiplayer game is going to break down into who can rush who first, I might as well go play StarCraft again. Am I wrong in my perception of what MP is like?
 
i play with my own friends online so our mp games often go 4 hours or longer and its not all rush
 
You don't have to rush, but you do have to build a defense. In general, an army half the size of the rusher is enough to survive.

To be safe against a 100% rush, you must spend 50% of your economy on military.
 
DaveMcW said:
You don't have to rush, but you do have to build a defense. In general, an army half the size of the rusher is enough to survive.

To be safe against a 100% rush, you must spend 50% of your economy on military.

50% could be a bit low. It's important to scout what you are going to be rushed with. It can save you a lot of production, at which point the 50% can be accurate. It can also totally screw you if someone else rushes you with units countering your defense!
 
Cicer0 said:
Little off-topic, but I've been meaning to ask some folks anyway, so maybe some of you could give me some advice.

I've been thinking of joining some multiplayer games online, but I'm really wondering if they are all just quecha and praet rushes? Sounds pretty boring, honestly. Not saying I am against conflict in games, but if every multiplayer game is going to break down into who can rush who first, I might as well go play StarCraft again. Am I wrong in my perception of what MP is like?

Every multiplayer game I've been in has lasted a long time. If you want a little slower game play on a continents map, or a larger map, etc. Fast games are the pangea small maps with lots of civs.
 
If you want to avoid rushing, I can recommend playing Mali. Those Skirmishers are a great deterrant.
 
How does mail play work? It seems like playing by mail would take years since everyone has to e-mail their turns.
 
All wonders are counted the same in points. This makes the Hanging Gardens a very powerful wonder, because not only do you get the points from the wonder but from also the 1 free person in every city. Same goes for the Oracle free points from the technology.

Also if you have more cities, it could be that you lost because the other person's cities had more population (very probable with HG).

When you are at war don't be afraid to be creative. The same boring stack from the same place will always lose if it doesn't win the first time. Make your first attack count, don't try and send units in 1 by 1 expecting to do anything...
 
Tearin said:
How does mail play work? It seems like playing by mail would take years since everyone has to e-mail their turns.

We're playing one with a few friends right now and it is pretty slow. I'd suggest starting with a later age (which we did) and a smaller map if you're going to try out PBEM.

One person takes a turn, then when they end the turn, the system automatically saves it. That person emails the saved game to the next person, who loads it, takes their turn, and it auto-saves. Rinse - repeat.
 
wc3promet said:
Multiplayer FFA: Early War is Costly. Wonder Rushers always win

Just lost to a Catherine Player. I was sure that I had more cities than Catherine but she seems to outtech me. I had Musketmen while she already has Infantry.

Even though I was using the Pyramid-Representation + Generating Great Scientists. Okay my research suffered for like 30 turns because of War.

Catherine had the Oracle and Hanging Gardens.


That's a very blanket statement to make without knowing all the settings. Early wars have their uses on Pangaea and Team battleground type maps under quick settings. If you are playing continents epic then sure you should probably go for peaceful building. It seems like you are making a lot of judgments of the multiplayer game based on your play against some random people you find on gamespy. That is probably not your best representation of what the good players are doing. Of course to find good players you most likely will want to play ladder games and those tend to be very limited in scope where building early wonders will kill you faster than anything.
 
I've always done well if I rushed early. If you are the one who dictates the war then in most cases you will win. Only times I have lost was when my partners tried to exapand and didn't help. What usually happens is I lock one player down or completely wipe them out, only to worry about the other who obviously out-tech'd me.

In 1v1's I have never lost when I dictated the rush.
 
Now i don't like the OP, but i've got to give him this : a lot of you either don't know what FFA means, or don't read posts before replying to them.

I would indeed expect that in FFA, attack should be less important and defense moreso.

However, i love the comment that someone made about the wonder rusher being the first one eliminated. The OP should really stop making sweeping, generalized statements that undermine his credibility.
 
Top Bottom