Rome Strategy

[Carl5872]

I tried a game out as Rome last night on Emperor. Played a huge map on Marathon. I thought I would try the tradition 4 city opener, and then go on a conquest with legions/balistae. Social policy wise I chose tradition and honor. I started by invading my nearest neighbor, the Ottomans. Then the Huns invaded me, conquering Istanbul. After a while I reconqured it, and then took out most of the Huns. (leaving both Attila and Suleiman with a city each after making peace. Next I invaded Korea, taking their capital and one other city, but still left them with a few cities. It was getting late techwise with my legions and I had only time for 1 more invasion before they were obsoleted. I decided to invade Denmark, leaving them with a few cities but taking their capital.

I noticed that my empire was spread out and not very well connected with roads. The map was pangea so there were only a few lakes but the rest was all land. I mosty had the top third of the map with the remnants of a few other civs interspersed. I did not take the time to connect them because I wanted to operate under the strategy that I had a brief period for war to use the 2 UU's, and after that I could be peaceful and build to a science victory using the UA for the rest of the game.

Soon after my Danish war, Inca (#2 score) invaded me with a coalition of 2 or 3 other civs, and I was barely overrun. (hindsight if I used better military tactics I could have held him off) but regardless, I think my game could have been played much better.

Point of this post is what SHOULD I have done, and what is the general strategy for Rome? ie. victory condition, social policies etc.

 

[chazzycat]

the strategy that I had a brief period for war to use the 2 UU's, and after that I could be peaceful and build to a science victory using the UA for the rest of the game.

sounds to me like you had the right idea, but maybe just pushed a bit too far. As a result you were overextended...not having roads means your troops cant get to the front in time to defend. since legions can build roads, between them & workers you should be able to slap a rudimentary network down pretty quickly and not slow you down too much.

 

[Carl5872]

I forgot to mention that outside the 4 cities I built which did have roads, the other cities I conquered were spread out very far and Im not sure if it would have been worth the maintenance to build the roads.

 

[manu-fan]

Maybe you were too strict in sticking to just 4 cities. Maybe you should have built a few more as stepping stones to connect up the spread out ones.

Just a thought.

Cheers.

 

[chazzycat]

its not necessarily the lack of roads that is the problem, it's the over-extension. Not having roads just exacerbates the situation.

it's hard to say much more without seeing the map, but that's what it sounds like to me. You just didn't have enough troops to defend the entire space you conquered. With roads you can get away with fewer defenders because they can get to the right location much quicker, so that might have helped. Building more defensive troops obviously would have worked too, but those units have a cost as well.

 

[Matthew.]

If you invade and conquer that many cities, you are going to get the warmonger tag, and all the AI's will team up against you. If you go that route, it is best to stay on that path and just clear the whole map.

Going tall for science with puppet support from UU's is possible, just don't overdo it. Take your neighbors capital and key cities, then make peace. If another civ DoW's at a later point in the game, use that opportunity to take some more land, but don't go seeking it out.

 

[Maxym]

Soon after my Danish war, Inca (#2 score) invaded me with a coalition of 2 or 3 other civs, and I was barely overrun. (hindsight if I used better military tactics I could have held him off) but regardless, I think my game could have been played much better.

Point of this post is what SHOULD I have done, and what is the general strategy for Rome? ie. victory condition, social policies etc.

Do you have a save from the time Incas invaded you? If so can you post it. I think i will be able to help you out and offer some pointers. A screenshot would also be nice for everyone to see what was going on. If you dont kow how, just post the save and i'll do the screen.

 

[Carl5872]

Do you have a save from the time Incas invaded you? If so can you post it. I think i will be able to help you out and offer some pointers. A screenshot would also be nice for everyone to see what was going on. If you dont kow how, just post the save and i'll do the screen.

I saved over it. How do you post a save so the next question I have, I will be able to show it?

 

[Browd]

I saved over it. How do you post a save so the next question I have, I will be able to show it?

One of the Additional Options when you are creating a forum posting is Attach Files (the paper clip on the ribbon bar). Click Manage Attachments and go from there.

 

[Maxym]

Reading your post it sounds like a perfect strategy for Rome. Kick ass early with UU and then tech with UA. You can try rushbuying in cap to make it even more effective. Once UU become obsolete, upgrade them. Also have some CBs in your mix so ur not stuck with only siege and melee later on. I connect all my cities even if initially it cost money. It cuts down my response time as I am light on units most of the time.

 

[RedRover57]

I almost always go for Liberty with Rome, if there is room to expand on the map. Going for a wide empire fits well with their UA. And it is easier to connect and to defend if the cities are closer together (ICS-style).

 

[Carl5872]

One of the Additional Options when you are creating a forum posting is Attach Files (the paper clip on the ribbon bar). Click Manage Attachments and go from there.

Thanks, I'll remember that

 

[Carl5872]

I almost always go for Liberty with Rome, if there is room to expand on the map. Going for a wide empire fits well with their UA. And it is easier to connect and to defend if the cities are closer together (ICS-style).

So what order would you go with using tradition, liberty and honor, or would you even use all 3?

 

[Browd]

I can't see any situation where you would complete all three trees. By the time that is relevant, there are too many other attractive policies to justify staying with the Ancient era policies. Also, the finisher for Tradition and Liberty are sufficiently compelling to make completion of those trees too useful to ignore. So, for a REX/early domination start, Liberty with a policy or two in Honor can make sense. If you're going all-out domination, completing honor may be the way to go. For a taller, defensive start, Tradition, and maybe the honor opener if barbs are driving you nuts (I don't usually do that, but it can make sense). Some will open Tradition (for the border expansion and to make Legalism available later), then open and complete Liberty, and then move on to honor or other useful trees (rationalism, commerce, etc.). Most important is to think through what you're trying to accomplish.

 

[chazzycat]

yeah generally you want to stick to one of the three early choices, not mix & match too much (with some exceptions). The "finishers" for each policy branch are quite strong so you want to get there sooner rather than later, then move onto better branches available in later eras.

 

[OmniPotent42]

Sort of ironic, as Rome IRL fell because they overextended their empire.

 

[Lordleoz]

So what order would you go with using tradition, liberty and honor, or would you even use all 3?

I mostly ignore Tradition but Liberty is always my first choice (the second is probably Commerce). The free settler, worker and extra production are really nice early bonuses. With the Glory of Rome, new cities could run up so damn fast. A free GE is also quite helpful. If playing more aggressively, Honor could take place of Liberty.

 

[Carl5872]

I guess it doesnt really make sense to take tradition as rome since you should have many cities. I used to think that building up the capital would let the capital fuel the rest better, but now I may just buy important buildings in Rome and let the other cities reap the benefits.

 

[Lordleoz]

Exactly. The free GE from Liberty could also be used to build a manufactory near Rome to increase its production. Rome needs to develop every city well, not just the capital, so Tradition doesn't make sense at all.

 

[Traejun]

I guess it doesnt really make sense to take tradition as rome since you should have many cities. I used to think that building up the capital would let the capital fuel the rest better, but now I may just buy important buildings in Rome and let the other cities reap the benefits.

I often do that if I'm racing to a meta-wonder before building new cities or annexing a high-pop/developed one. I seem to do this with markets and universities in every Rome (plus a few other) games. National Treasury and Oxford are pretty strong when placed in the right cities.