Seems like the general strategy, NC or expand, always starts with either a warrior or a scout first, followed usually by a worker. So, what influences you decision either way?
Scouts are obviously better for looking around, with the double movement on hills and forests. But they're weak, and will often die to barb brutes if you happen to stop on flatland.
Warriors are stronger, but take an extra couple turns to finish. They don't move as well, but a team of 2 warriors can fairly easily take down any barbs you see running around.
So, assuming a "normal" map setup (small or standard map, continents, barbs on, city states on, normal speed, for example), which do you go for? What influences your decision (ie. do you normally build a scout, but opt for the warrior if you have a stronger initial tile to work)?
Scouts are obviously better for looking around, with the double movement on hills and forests. But they're weak, and will often die to barb brutes if you happen to stop on flatland.
Warriors are stronger, but take an extra couple turns to finish. They don't move as well, but a team of 2 warriors can fairly easily take down any barbs you see running around.
So, assuming a "normal" map setup (small or standard map, continents, barbs on, city states on, normal speed, for example), which do you go for? What influences your decision (ie. do you normally build a scout, but opt for the warrior if you have a stronger initial tile to work)?