Open game - Charadon, patch n edition

[Monkeyfinger]

I beat this game, domination win. Finished Jonas, took a bit out of Auric for those last few percentage points. Not much to discuss besides a backstab from alexis during which she took back a city, then had her invading force of CR3 Moroi tied down by a Ratha till Chalid could get over there and massacre it. 12 extra turns of stalling vs. Jonas, whoopee.

Stephanos hit the scene and quickly got smashed to a pulp by the Illian army.

Advantages to Charadon:

Aggressive meant I needed quite a few less beastmen for my early rush, both because they were more effective and because less (none) of them died while scouting/heading for Cevedes. (Better odds vs. animals, no need to fight barbs)

I never had to commit units to escorting workers or settlers, because barbs don't attack them.

Because I did not need to protect backline cities against barbs, I could spare almost my entire military to fight Rhoanna. This was big, because I was stretched completely thin at the end of that war.

Disadvantages:

Without raider, I couldn't get to Alexis's core cities before she could build/move up new defenders. This made prespur much, much, much more costly to take. Alexis's Moroi were tough. I had to declare peace after that, with Mahala I might still have had some momentum.

I lost the pact race because of inferior tech speed, yeah. That also would have been a big help vs. Alexis. As would cheap upgrade costs.

The last wars would have gone more smoothly if Chalid had come right out with commando. I wouldn't have had to be so careful of assassins. I still won them handily though, so eh.

With Ingenuity, I could have massed sons of asena and upgraded them for cheap. That's too costly as charadon.

 

[Zechnophobe]

This is interesting reading. What I really would like to know, for those playing this, is how much of a difference Charadon vs. Mahala has on your game. What is easier, what is more difficult? What strategies did you use that were particular to Charadon? Could you have used the same strategy with Mahala, but even better?

As an example, in Monkeyfinger's game he was beaten to Pact of the Nilhorn by 4 turns. If he was playing Mahala, he likely would have been able to get the wonder, as he'd have the tech a little faster. That's one point where Mahala would be more effective.

If those who are doing writeups would take a little time to point out which elements of their strategy were impacted by the choice of Charadon vs. Mahala, I'd be very interested in reading it.

I didn't finish my game, since I bailed when 'o' came out to play games using it.

However, I have played as both Mahala and Charadon in the past.

In the early game, Charadon is significantly better. Aggressive trait starts lucian off a good deal stronger, and you can get your conquer-on with much less guys. Barbarian, however, seems to be almost completely bad. Not *having* to fight barbarians also means not *getting* to fight barbarians. Further more, once roads start all over the place, commando becomes better than aggressive. You get the jump on people more, and can pillage more.

In the same vein, the combination of pillaging lands for double benefit, and upgrading troops at half cost, is pretty darn noticeable. The war engine for a slavery based mahala moves very quickly.

Charadon really misses out on all of this.

 

[vale]

Just a heads up about that free great bard event. There is no reason to consider rejecting it. The choices are essentially between accepting the free great bard and immediately popping it for an revolt canceling culture bomb or accepting the free great bard and living with the revolt to use him for a different purpose.

If you have one of the non AV disciples in or near the city you can culture bomb the problem away with that instead.

 

[PotatoOverdose]

Played the map on deity to domination win on turn 353.
Just some comments on Charadon/Mahala.
-Charadon starts with aggressive which, when combined with Beastmen, gives a wopping 40% against cities from the off. Really sweet.

-The barbarian trait allows you to commit a significantly lower amount of troops to defense in the early game. Another useful thing about the barbarian trait is that when the horseman start showing up (and the avatar of wrath+ira if you get that far), you have nothing to fear from them and they can soften up (possibly decimate) your enemies. I used this to beat up the Lanun and Illians quite effectively. Also, one could theoretically hire troops from goblin forts which could be quite nice in getting a big stack very early (though this was not an option on the current map).

While in theory Charadon can't use the Doviello upgrade mechanic as effectiveley, I didn't really notice any major difference. I had enough gold to maintain a 90% research rate throughout and upgrade all captured workers/slaves. Actually, playing this game made me appreciate Charadon a lot more overall.

 

[Smakemupagus]

If those who are doing writeups would take a little time to point out which elements of their strategy were impacted by the choice of Charadon vs. Mahala, I'd be very interested in reading it.

There are some very nice features for Charadon, I was able to grab copper with my third city without being harrassed by barbs, and mobilize a bigger force early against the Hippus because I didn't have to defend against Orthus or other orcs. After the fall of the enemy capitol my beastmen had woodsman or Shock, thanks in part to aggressive, so at that point they were practically untouchable for many turns. All these advantages are small but they sum up for a really substantial boost.

Of course in the mid part of the game Charadon's disadvantages relative to Mahala start to kick in, but at least on this map you could put yourself in a great position in those first ~150 turns.

 

[phoulishwan]

Also, one could theoretically hire troops from goblin forts which could be quite nice in getting a big stack very early.

I'm pretty certain that is a Clan only feature althuogh I do think it should be a general barb trait feature, considering the penalty from being Barbarian is pretty large this compensates for it nicely if you have the funds for it. However I do think buying units from gobbo forts is a tad overpowered, you can buy unlimited amounts in a single turn and have them attack on that same turn...unlimited of course excepting how much gold you have, but a stack of 10 of these horsemen costs 600g, and will net you an entire civs worth of cities with minimal losses if you're still facing warriors.

 

[Grey Fox]

No, it is a barbarian trait feature (as long as you are at peace with the barbarians anyhow).

 

[phoulishwan]

Well that's odd, I've never managed to get any recruiting from them unless I'm playing the clan though. Has anyone else?

 

[civ_king]

I did as Charadon...

 

[heisenberg]

With the barb trait you can buy goblins for 30 gold from the forts. With further techs unlocked such as Archery or Trade you could buy Scorpion Archers or Chariots iirc.

 

[JFSebastian]

Well that's odd, I've never managed to get any recruiting from them unless I'm playing the clan though. Has anyone else?

Is it possible you didn't have enough gold? The option will be greyed out if you don't have enough to buy one.

I think I like Charadon more than Mahala. He can unleash the early whoopass a lot easier than she can. I need to start a couple more games as her though to make sure. I've been having too much fun planting Charadon's first settler as close as possible to my unsuspecting 2nd city. This doesn't work quite as well with Mahala, especially if the target is on a hill.

 

[MacMoney]

Well that's odd, I've never managed to get any recruiting from them unless I'm playing the clan though. Has anyone else?

Any leader with the Barbarian trait can hire them. However, Mahala doesn't have it so she isn't able to. You sure you haven't been playing the Doviello with her?