WeirdoJoker
King
Crap. Memory's the second thing to go...No, the dromon has lethal bombardment, not enslavement. Personally, I prefer the lethal bombardment.
Crap. Memory's the second thing to go...No, the dromon has lethal bombardment, not enslavement. Personally, I prefer the lethal bombardment.
Or decline tribute and let the AI send sacrifices your way....
I started with the 1000 BC save, and from what I can see, I don't really need to go back to the 3000 BC save.So here is the save from restart. I used archers to attack in stack as was recommended since I was military and industrious. I think I am stronger....
Handy hint: The AI knows where all the resources are, even when you can't see them. This will sometimes drive its settlement. If you see the AI sending a unit halfway around the world to settle a 2-tile desert island, and it does it repeatedly (as in after you've destroyed its city there), there's a reason....Interestingly AI (Portugal and Hittites both) place a city next to Beijing same place each time and then they get annoyed with me....
Colony, not Outpost, but yes to everything else.You have horses and spices hooked up and a worker roading the iron. Note that if you roaded to your empire, you could then sacrifice a worker to build an outpost to claim the iron. It costs a worker, but it's instantaneous. Outposts are only available outside your borders, but if you build one, then settle next to it, the outpost disappears, leaving the resource roaded (I'm pretty sure).
That's what I get for posting before coffee.Colony, not Outpost, but yes to everything else.
Agreed on all counts. I just didn't know if @ArenE was even aware of colonies.In general, in the early game when Workers are still scarce, building Colonies is very situational, though.
It's usually preferable to obtain a resource by Settlement on that resource, or by roading through the tile and then Settling beyond it to get the resource inside your borders. So a Colony is really only worthwhile if for some reason you can't do that, e.g. for a coastal Mountain out on a corner of your continent, more than, say, one Cultural expansion away from your nearest town. You also need to consider how easily/ quickly you'll be able to replace the lost Worker, and/or get a new Worker out to where the old one was.
So I'd only consider dropping a Colony if I can replace the Worker in (significantly) fewer turns than simply roading to the resource-tile and Settling on/beyond it would have required, e.g. a Gems- or Iron-Mountain would require 1+9 turns to road (if not Industrious), so dropping a Colony on such a tile just beyond my borders might be sensible. But a Horse on a Plains tile would likely not be worth Colonising.
I will add that I would likely colonize the iron in this situation. Being able to quickly put a few swords into that stack of archers and spears would be awfully nice.....Colony, not Outpost, but yes to everything else.....building Colonies is very situational, though....
This is one of the reasons why I tend not to make war unless I feel at least moderately certain of victory. If evenly matched, I don't seem able to win many battles.It seems AI cheats a lot too. Please correct me if I am wrong. Ex. I had veteran swordsman (and Elite horseman) next to a Portugal city on a hill and yet it did not attack. When my elite Archer came closer to that city on a hill 1 turn away on another hill and when I moved veteran swordsman to cover my archer they attacked with regular swordsman against veteran with hill defense and easily destroyed him.
Lots of people have thought that the AI cheats in battle, so much so that there's a "spear vs. tank" smiley.Thank you all! I definitely did not know about colonies. That helps getting luxuries faster especially when they are so far away.
It seems AI cheats a lot too. Please correct me if I am wrong. Ex. I had veteran swordsman (and Elite horseman) next to a Portugal city on a hill and yet it did not attack. When my elite Archer came closer to that city on a hill 1 turn away on another hill and when I moved veteran swordsman to cover my archer they attacked with regular swordsman against veteran with hill defense and easily destroyed him.
Archer was on a hill with veteran swordsman on that hill. The swordsman 4 HP was destroyed. They did not attack the hill elite horseman + veteran swordsman but attacked when I moved veteran swordsman to cover the archer. I had moved Elite spearman to cover the elite horseman. Oh well. You might be very well right - it calculates the odds well. Makes sense about spear and tank. Use to happen in Civ 1 a lot (long time being played) warrior destroying battleship (if my memory has not completely failed me.)I'm not convinced that it cheats. It just calculates the odds well. Fight enough battles and you'll have a spear beat a tank, too. In your case, it was your elite archer (5/5, 1 defense (with a defensive shot?)) being attacked by a sword (3/3, attack 3). In spite of the 5 HP, it's not a huge surprise that he was destroyed.
The is it worth it do disband an army for shields?No. Loading a unit into an army is permanent.
I'm fairly convinced that, at the very least, it trolls. A pattern that I have noticed since playing again is that I always lose at least 1 HP in naval battles, no matter what. Cruiser attacking a Frigate? Cruiser takes damage. Every time. Submarine picking off a transport ship? Submarine limps away, victorious, but in need of a dry dock.I'm not convinced that it cheats.