Spoiler: Ancient and Classical Rome.

[phoulishwan]

The real question is what you need those horses for. We've got praetorians. The enemy has phalanxes. The only thing my horses archers were really good for was giving them the medic promotion and using them as a mobile medic corps. And even there ny troops tended to stick together so a praetorian with medic would have been just as good. I suppose they could be used as pillagers, if Alex actually bothered to build anything to pillage.

My most damaging wars were conducted against the greeks with an early warrior worker grab followed up by Axemen offense to pillage his copper/iron resources and wrest control of 2 Greek cities, namely Sparta on the hill near the silk and Corinth on the coast next to Athens, stealing his Iron Supply with a culture bomb. Due to this Praetorians were never needed, if you beeline to horses you can lay on so much more devastation in much shorter time with Chariots, to the point that Horse Archers will solely be fighting Archers which is a decent match up for you (the best part of this is it works for ANY civ)...they're not overpowering and you will suffer losses, but when you can control an enemy civ to this point Praets are icing on the cake not the means to the objective.

I'd rather be in a position, to use Praets as a superior decoration than as a needed piece in my war arsenal, especially in this game due to the greek Phalanx. I saw many people were assaulted at their Iron supply, some lost it whereas others defended well, my point is: relying on any UU to overpower your neighbor is not always going to be an option. The key to this war was never being in a position where Alex could pose a threat on any level, but to keep him expanding in your direction so you could focus on other objectives (like infrastructure) rather than building settlers. In all Alex managed to build 3 Axemen, 3 Phalanxes and 1 Swordsman in my game, I didn't destory him until 1100ADish...everything else was archers and warriors. Making my wars with him much easier to control and suffering light casualties with some very well promoted troops.

 

[DaviddesJ]

More comments about my game:

1. If you have to explore the coast to get a trade connection, I think that would explain why my stone city didn't connect. I'm pretty sure that I've been able to trade with foreign civilizations along paths I haven't explored, but, I'd guess only one or the other player has to explore it. It's too bad I didn't know that at the time, as I could have probably explored the coast more easily than building the road.

2. I seriously considered researching Code of Laws, and that probably would have been wise. But Currency gives me 11 gpt for no extra work at all. By comparison, building courthouses is quite expensive, and I wanted to build many other things, too (workers, wonders, granaries, libraries). I was hoping that I could rush to Optics, and then contact someone and trade for Code of Laws around the time I would be ready to build the courthouses. I won't say how that worked out since it's beyond the scope of this thread.

3. In 450 AD, at 60% research, I'm producing 154 beakers/turn and collecting 76 taxes/turn. Spending: unit cost 2, unit supply 4, city maintenance 58, civic upkeep 5, inflation 4. Note that I ran at 100% research for quite a while on the money from the incomplete Pyramids and Great Lighthouse. Producing wonders where you have the 2x production bonus, and having all the production converted to cash, is a really good way to raise money.

4. I chopped forests for settlers, workers, granaries, and libraries. Not really for barracks or praetorians; I built all of those in a big surge in my first two cities. Both Rome and Antium have several hills nearby, for mines, and bonus food resources too, so blasting out a bunch of praetorians was pretty fast. In hindsight, I could easily have defeated Greece with 7 or 8 praetorians, instead of 11. But the delay also gave me time for two of the early praetorians to get their 5th XP from a barbarian, and then heal for the main attack.

5. There simply aren't any horses, cows, or sheep near the Roman starting location. If I had had any, then I certainly would have researched Animal Husbandry sooner. But I just didn't need it. I researched it as soon as I took the Greek cities, in order to develop the tiles near their cities. (But I only had one captured worker down there, and it took me a while to get a second, and then I needed to chop for libraries to expand the culture to get access to resources, so it was still quite a while after the conquest before I had any occasion to build a pasture.)

6. Not going for the Oracle is just naivete about the game, I didn't realize it would be so easy and useful. I haven't played Civ IV much yet (and what I have played is at higher difficulty levels where you can't get the wonders so easily).

 

[DaviddesJ]

This is probably the wrong place to have a discussion about this, but let me just say that I very much hope that the next GOTM is at a higher difficulty level. Monarch would be best IMHO, then Emperor for GOTM3.

I assume/hope that GOTM2 will be Prince and GOTM3 will be Monarch. Sure, these are easy to win, but that's ok. You have to give people some time to climb the learning curve. Emperor is going to be very, very hard for most participants: it will take a while to get up there, and you'll probably have to give the players an extra-good start (which would be consistent with the way Civ3 GOTM was run---the start positions were usually better than "random" starts).

I do agree that I don't want to do Noble difficulty again.

 

[Gato Loco]

My most damaging wars were conducted against the greeks with an early warrior worker grab followed up by Axemen offense to pillage his copper/iron resources and wrest control of 2 Greek cities, namely Sparta on the hill near the silk and Corinth on the coast next to Athens, stealing his Iron Supply with a culture bomb. Due to this Praetorians were never needed, if you beeline to horses you can lay on so much more devastation in much shorter time with Chariots, to the point that Horse Archers will solely be fighting Archers which is a decent match up for you (the best part of this is it works for ANY civ)...they're not overpowering and you will suffer losses, but when you can control an enemy civ to this point Praets are icing on the cake not the means to the objective.

I'd rather be in a position, to use Praets as a superior decoration than as a needed piece in my war arsenal, especially in this game due to the greek Phalanx. I saw many people were assaulted at their Iron supply, some lost it whereas others defended well, my point is: relying on any UU to overpower your neighbor is not always going to be an option. The key to this war was never being in a position where Alex could pose a threat on any level, but to keep him expanding in your direction so you could focus on other objectives (like infrastructure) rather than building settlers. In all Alex managed to build 3 Axemen, 3 Phalanxes and 1 Swordsman in my game, I didn't destory him until 1100ADish...everything else was archers and warriors. Making my wars with him much easier to control and suffering light casualties with some very well promoted troops.

Relying on horses to overpower you neighbor isn't always going to be an option either. Iron working was the fourth tech I researched, so praets were the first unit type I built other than warriors. Given that iron was easier to come by on this map than horses, it's the horse archers that end up being an unnecessary detour. I guess the cost of IW can be an issue in getting it early, but that's why we were given gems in the starting location. I also think the difference here is in our warfare styles. I never made any early attacks on Alex, so as not to provoke him while I was still weak and expanding. I generally prefer to out-build an enemy and come in with overwhelming force, in this case level 3 theocratic praetorians. Since I was shooting to kill rather than cripple, I didn't pillage anything other than the copper mine (he never connected his iron!). City raider II praets are almost 12 strength vs. cities, making them fully capable of attacking an axeman or phalanx in a +20% city on a hill, and of squasing anything in the field. After the first few turns, Alex simply stopped trying to mount any sort of offensve whatsoever. He did send a lone axeman toward my iron city near the beginning. A lone axeman.

In any case, this game is not realy a test of one's war-fighting capability. I suspect that as long as you don't take too many losses, it really doesn't matter how or when you fight Alex in terms of score or victory date. He wasn't much of a threat and there was plenty of room on the continent to expand without fighting him early. I chose to fight later to minimize my losses. You chose to attack early to let your axemen act as settlers.

 

[phoulishwan]

I guess I also over estimated Phalanx's perhaps. Which is why I fought a few short wars to prevent him from ever building up too many forces. My only point was simply you shouldn't discount other options simply because you have Praetorians or any other powerful early UU. Although, at the same time I guess if you got them you may as well use them if you got the resources After all that's half the point of playing that civ.

I'm bias to horses myself because my initial force usually is on sentry duty to keep the fog of war clear, as I'll typically play with Raging Barbs...and horse units are great for this, 1 promotion to get Flanking 1 and the second Promotion to get Sentry with + 1 LoS they keep the barbs at bay very nicely.

 

[Torisen]

I expanded east and west first, then reached for the stone to the southwest to help with wonder production. Exercised my early praetorians against the barbarians, and tried to head down to conquer a barb city at the south end of the west river. The turn that I approached the city, the Greeks took it! Grrr. Three wars with the Greeks later, I was alone on the continent. I built up to over 20 cities; I wanted a city in every spot that would get at least 6 productive spaces, and coastal cities look good for research & income, especially since I snagged the Colossus. Didn't save the game until my first session was done, well after initial contact with another Civ - so I'm afraid I don't have any screen shots to share..

By the way, don't forget that the new patch means you don't see the horses that may be right under your nose; they only appear with Animal Husbandry, so you can't use a lack of visible horses as a reason not to learn this tech!

 

[MeteorPunch]

Going for slow Conquest or Domination.

Founded Rome 1S of start.
Made Rome and Antium "major commerce" cities.
Neopolis and Sparta are minor science cites, the rest will be for units.
Conquered Greece in 820AD

An Ironic Mistake: In the pregame thread I mentioned that I probably wouldn't go for Religions. Well, I founded 4 of them and could found a fifth (Islam) if I wanted. In retrospect, since I am going for a military victory it would e better to found 1 religion, and then let other civs have the rest so they will start religious wars with each other. As it stands now, the other civs could all be Hindu for all I know (best buddies).

Most difficult decision: Civil Service. 40 hammer Praetorians or 70 hammer Macemen? No-brainer there, but I might want beauracracy and irrigation spreading.

1050AD China contacts me. Pic from nearest save:

 

[Shillen]

An Ironic Mistake: In the pregame thread I mentioned that I probably wouldn't go for Religions. Well, I founded 4 of them and could found a fifth (Islam) if I wanted. In retrospect, since I am going for a military victory it would e better to found 1 religion, and then let other civs have the rest so they will start religious wars with each other. As it stands now, the other civs could all be Hindu for all I know (best buddies).

I would prefer if they were all living peacefully together if I was going for a military victory. The AI's in this game seem to either go really light on military or really heavy. As soon as they wage a war they have a ton of troops. But if they're peaceful most of the game then they have very weak militaries. All that said I'm not sure founding that many religions is a good idea unless you were prioritizing those techs for some other reason than the religion.

 

[akots]

Settled on the starting place and tried a balanced approach to the game. The idea was to conquer the world with praetorians and may be some catapults. Don't know how it will turn out, have not submitted the game yet. Movement of ships and troops is a very tedious task.

I was rather lucky by popping 5 huts getting 33g, Wheel, 2 times experience and a warrior. No trouble with barbarians but I heavily scouted the fog with 4 warriors. Research path was BW-Mysticism-Pottery-Priesthood-Writing-IW (got CoL from Oralce built in 1680BC) and then straightforward to Optics keeping Astronomy and Construction in mind with Calendar as a priority to get some cash going. I think I placed too many cities and very poorly but they were fairly productive focusing mainly on hammers and praetorians as the main output of the Roman civilization. Alexander had been a rather uncooperative neighbor not willing to trade anything. So, Roman armies marched straight to Athens and were able to eliminate Greece around 540AD after extorting some techs for a peace treaty earlier. Rome have adopted Confucianism, Castle system (which came often times rather handy in case of excessive growth) and Hereditary Rule while settling around the continent building granaries, courthouses and barracks followed by Praetorians and catapults with occasional galleys for upgrade. I've been able to make a rather balanced budget steadily researching at about 70% rate and made first contact with other civilizations around 1000AD. These maps are really large, I'm not sure how well the conquest idea would work.

I'm also experience very poor performance with this gotm and even had a crash around 200BC for unknown reason. May be, I've built too many units though.

 

[akots]

... I.i.r.c. there should be 2 horses on the isle. ...

IIRC, there are 3 sources of horses, 3 of copper, and 2 of iron.

 

[DaviddesJ]

IIRC, there are 3 sources of horses, 3 of copper, and 2 of iron.

There are only 2 copper resources on my island. Maybe you randomly discovered an extra one when you built a mine somewhere.

 

[wh00ps]

I think I've gotten off to a fairly slow start. I had started expanding westward to take some good city spots, and by the time I figured out where the Greeks were, they had already expanded quite a ways in my direction. Oh well, just a little more work for my unstoppable Praetorians to do!

I somehow managed to found Hinduism, and later, during the war, Confucianism. Once I got IW, sent my next settler over to snap up the iron east of the starting location. From there, it was nothing but Praetorians coming off the assembly line, 1 every 2 turns. After building up a stack of about 5 or 6, I declared and plunged into Greek territory. After taking 2 cities, I backed myself into a corner where I had lots of wounded Praetorians around, and the Greek counterstrike was on its way. Signed a peace treaty to protect my gains.

This is actually my first game ever going for an early war like this, and I learned a few lessons the hard way. For instance, the lesson of watching your back, as my troops were busy pummeling away at the Greeks, suddenly a ship shows up and dumps a couple of units right next to my city by the iron. EEK! I had some units guarding my border south of that city, but they couldn't get back in time to save it. That city changed hands 4 times in 4 turns as wounded and battered troops repeatedly beat each other down for ownership. Finally the last Greek unit was wiped out, and that little offensive was over with.

Once I had built up a sufficient force again, got all my Praetorians healed up, and had some longbows now being added into the fray, I declared for the second and final time, and stormed through the rest of the Greek cities. I kept the majority of them, and razed a few in the south central part of the continent that didn't fit in with what I had already built in the southwest. I must say that I had some unbelieveable rolls on some battles. There were several instances where I sent my Praetorians on suicide charges, only to have them live. I must've pulled just the right seed for the RNG in this game. Makes me want to go for a conquest or domination victory, if I knew that kind of luck would hold up...

The war did put a strain on my economy, however. I was down at 50% tech for quite some time, and after concentrating on building some infrastructure, I'm back up to 60% and back in the green.

It's now 1600AD, finally got optics about 15 turns ago and churned out some quick caravels to take my Hindu missionaries across the seas. Met several of the other civs, and am now just exploring and building up my continent for a possible eventual push across the ocean. So compared to some of the other posts, I'm a ways behind. Back to the game to make up for it!

 

[Monthar]

My preatorians can't take one of Alexander's cities from a lowly warrior, yet his swordsman can take my cities from the axeman guarding it every F'n time. Doesn't matter what the defense rating of the city in question is either.

This is in the GOTM btw, so ya know the settings it has.

 

[Efexeye]

What are the promotions of the units in question? City Raider can be pretty powerful...

 

[Monthar]

I forgot to mention that. From what I was seeing the AI chose strength promotions as did I.

 

[Masquerouge]

Looks like you got unlucky.

 

[Kolyana]

It can be frustrating at times, but sometimes the luck will swing your way. Last night I had a Keshik with Strength 1 WALK THROUGH 2 of my rifle units without losing *any* strength. I was so mad ... but ultimately it's just bad luck.

A few turns later, one of my grenadiers beat a longbowman with promotions, fortified inside a city, so the pendulum swings both ways.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

Yep, reminds me of the MP diplo game I played at the weekend, where it just felt like the barbarians could swat me away like a pesky fly-whilst he could take my cities with ease. Then when I looked at things like the promotions he had, and the conditions he was fighting in, I realised that my problems were either the result of (a) poor planning, (b) poor luck or (c) a combination of the two! It might be worth, BTW, taking a look at the combat odds to see just how badly matched you currently are!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[salty]

I think a longbow took out my helicopter once. Helicopter was already wounded (maybe 80% healthy) but still. Of course you can get lucky sometimes too, but you don't notice because you usually aren't insane enough to send a spear against a tank.

 

[Vindicator7]

I had a similar problem in my latest game. The AI was defending a city with 1 archer, I attacked twice in a row and the power level was even, I did .6 damage to the archer. The next turned he healed back to full and another of my units died in a even match, I did .6 damage again.

So sometimes it is just flukey.