Screw Scouts - build Warriors

[_hero_]

FWIW, smart tactics can make scouts a viable option on the offensive as well. They can get +1 health/turn with their first upgrade via survivability. Now, if you know how to work the rather idiotic AI, you can get the Scout to be the target of city bombard, perpetually healing to no loss (assuming your on rough terrain). This in turn gives your warriors free access to the city without fear of getting bombarded down. Finally, you're scout can attack the city if need be. Using this tactic, I've successfully taken a city with just a scout and 2 warriors.

As for the barbs, I've found my scouts are great at taking down weakened barbs, or weakening the barbs so that my warriors can finish them.

The issue isn't really that scouts are worthless, because they aren't. The issue is that there is no upgrade chain for scouts EVER outside of a goody hut upgrade. The easiest solution is to mod in, or DLC/expansion in a unit chain. If not, scouts should at least be allowed to upgrade to gunships late in the game.

Otherwise, I'm in favor of a scout>explorer>???>partisans (from civ 2) chain.

 

[Rylune]

I love an early scout. They are great for scouting (obviously) and after I've checked out my area I have him run with my warrior and flank and help with barbarians. Brutes are quite a bit tougher on higher difficulties so your warrior cannot always do it himself. That bonus can make all the difference. In addition, you can get the scout +1 movement and he can check out islands and other continents when you get the naval techs.

Even though relying on an advanced weapon ruin is not a great idea, it does happen. And when it does that scout becomes an amazing unit later in the game.

So here is how I use them:

Send warrior one way and scout the other.
Extra speed means I find more city-states, civs, scout good spots for new cities faster, more ruins, etc.
After I am finished exploring my continent, I have the scout stick with the warrior. The two of them go and kill off all barb encampments that were too hard for the warrior alone. If scout gets an upgrade then I use him and warrior to pick a fight with a civ.
After I get going and can embark in oceans I use that scout with 3 movement to check out the rest of the world.

Seems like a good unit to me.

 

[taltamir]

I have never been blindsided by barbs with horses. (do they even spawn horses? ive logged about 5 games through and i havent encountered them)

Horses are from AI empires, not from the AI barbarians... notice my other examples involved sieging cities... barbarians have neither horses nor cities. I am not the guy who said barbarians kill your scouts. I agreed with those saying that warriors are better at taking a barbarian camp, which provide a vital boost to early gold.

This plain wont work most of the time. forget it on high levels- AI probably has several chariot archers pop out.

1. no, strategy doesn't have to cover every single difficulty level.
2. the AI just pops chariots archers on max difficulty right away? it doesn't need to research prereqisite techs? sounds like the old "the AI is a cheating bastard" trope.
I play on prince, where neither me nor the AI gets production / research / gold bonus. I don't like it when AIs rely on cheating, nor do I like cheating myself.

 

[Brawndo]

Scouts that hit a lot of ruins have a good chance of getting upgraded to a better unit while still retaining their movement abilities. I once had a Scout turned into an Archer, which I upgraded into a Crossbowman that could run through all kinds of territory

 

[Daniel D]

Which brings me to another point, who are these stupid players losing their scouts to barbarians early in the game?

I've lost a few due to bad luck...usually because of another unit that isn't visible to me due to terrain until after I've used my scout to attack a barb in the open. Scout seems like more of a roll of the dice to me compared to warrior for standard or smaller maps. I might get lucky and pull an archer promotion or an extra hut. I might have bad luck and get surprised by another unit before it gets promoted...or I might have to spend so much time healing from necessary combat that the scout ends up covering less ground than a sturdier warrior would have...or there might be so much open space on the map that the scout's extra move isn't as useful.

Build choice is highly situational. Scouts are worthwhile for certain maps, world sizes, and game speeds...but they aren't always the best early game unit.

 

[Udey1]

Horses are from AI empires, not from the AI barbarians... notice my other examples involved sieging cities... barbarians have neither horses nor cities. I am not the guy who said barbarians kill your scouts. I agreed with those saying that warriors are better at taking a barbarian camp, which provide a vital boost to early gold.


1. no, strategy doesn't have to cover every single difficulty level.
2. the AI just pops chariots archers on max difficulty right away? it doesn't need to research prereqisite techs? sounds like the old "the AI is a cheating bastard" trope.
I play on prince, where neither me nor the AI gets production / research / gold bonus. I don't like it when AIs rely on cheating, nor do I like cheating myself.

I re-read your posts only to find myself more disappointed in them. You give out brash advice to others (mostly about conquering the AI instantly) as if anything else was poor strategy. Fact is that doesn't translate to most levels. You are automatically trying to conquer your neighbor on your difficulty so of course warriors work better than scouts for you. Once again. This doesn't translate.

my horse comment was purely an aside- not part of my argument against you. (as indicated by the -BTW)

HAHA to number 2- it is obvious that you are not familiar with high level AI production bonuses beyond a theoretically knowledge that they exist.
For number 1- if your going to claim something works- and what you claim is just bad advice at a certain point in difficulty level. Then you should include a disclaimer.

Now finally- lets move to your second sentence in your reason 2: Do you not realize the AI gets bonus free techs on high levels- so it basically has those units to start? Obviously you do not as you argued against it and turned it into a slighted personal attack on me. Look me up in CIV4 forums then, i'm not complaining about cheating.

Its obvious that your not worth any further argument- I'll leave you with this- please stop posting your specific strategy as if it applies to all situations and not just your game. And don't argue over information you are not familiar with.

 

[taltamir]

I re-read your posts only to find myself more disappointed in them. You give out brash advice to others (mostly about conquering the AI instantly) as if anything else was poor strategy. Fact is that doesn't translate to most levels. You are automatically trying to conquer your neighbor on your difficulty so of course warriors work better than scouts for you. Once again. This doesn't translate.

At prince and any level below it works wonders. I have yet to test it at higher levels, but since the AI supposedly gets massive bonuses, it should work as well (because you get to deprive it of its massive per city bonus). And I have seen no indication from anyone that it doesn't. I am allowed to post playing advice without playing on immortal, its not like I hide the fact that I play prince (at the moment, I started lower and increased the difficulty with each game).

HAHA to number 2- it is obvious that you are not familiar with high level AI production bonuses beyond a theoretically knowledge that they exist.

thats... an awfully derisive way of putting it. But yes, I admit that.

you argued against it and turned it into a slighted personal attack on me.

I never personally attack anyone.

Its obvious that your not worth any further argument-

oh, thank you for that judgement on my worth.
Also for the love of all that is holy and just...
You're = You Are. EX: you're a genious, you're a madman, you're late to a meeting, you're not worth any further argument.
Your = Something you own. EX: Your intelligence, Your house, Your strategy, your habit of personal insult is not conductive to a mature debate.

 

[Ahriman]

At prince and any level below it works wonders.

At prince and any level below, just about *any* strategy works wonders.
That doesn't mean any strategy is a good strategy, worthy of a strategy thread.

I bet I could win a game without building any non-bombardment military units on Prince. That doesn't mean its a good idea.

 

[Show]

I don't think you can conquer the AI with warriors on high difficulty settings, it's not strong enough and will be obsolete the moment you reach their territory, they have archers and a second city before you even have your first unit out(they most-likely spawn with them on day 0 along with their gazillion scouts) and seem to just pop their units out of thin air, your best bet is probably to beeline to horseback riding and abuse the fact that they don't use cavalry units(other than chariot archers), you can weaken spears with archers, they are so weak even with bonus vs mounted.

However, I will admit that I have only tried a warrior rush once(deity)... went pretty badly.

 

[SirBeegus]

This warrior strategy can all crumble if you end up with limited iron - you'll have paid upkeep for all these warriors, and won't be able to upgrade them all since you only get 4 iron units/iron source.

 

[Mac2411]

This warrior strategy can all crumble if you end up with limited iron - you'll have paid upkeep for all these warriors, and won't be able to upgrade them all since you only get 4 iron units/iron source.

I've found multiple iron sources that provide 6 units. Is this 4 unit limitation something that sets in at the higher difficulty levels (which I have not yet played)?

 

[Mutineer]

Number of iron depends on age.
In ancient it is only 2 I believe.

 

[Show]

Number of iron depends on age.
In ancient it is only 2 I believe.

you can't see iron during ancient... and if it's like horses, it's just random.

 

[Ahriman]

Number of iron depends on age.

I don't think this is correct.
Some strategic resource tiles provide 2, others 4, others 6.

It is not era dependent.

 

[Udey1]

edit: not worth the effort

 

[caracarnn]

I sometimes camp my scout in a CS with a medic warrior accompanying him, and perhaps an archer for backup. Then I start a war with the CS and have their city bombard my scout until he get a few levels - makes them a whole lot better even tho you loose some turns.

 

[Mrdarklight]

I always build a scout, and I almost never lose them to barbs. They can always withstand the first assault, and can almost always get away afterwards. At the end, when you've explored everything, disband them or send them home and disband them for 10 gold.

 

[tibbles]

You probably got 6 because it was from a city state and you have the policy that boosts the gift by +50%.

 

[cembandit]

prince is supposed to be the balanced level, no?

still, if you think warriors over scouts for exploration, your doing it wrong.

 

[Show]

prince is supposed to be the balanced level, no?

still, if you think warriors over scouts for exploration, your doing it wrong.

Depends how you define balanced, prince is the point where the AI is bound by the same rules as you, however to stand any kind of realistic chance against a human being, it's pretty much a necessity for the AI to have advantages otherwise it's just too easy.

It's like handicap for golf, in a sense it balances the fact that one player is better than the other so they can compete.