Statue of Zeus vs. Knights Templar

[AznWarlord]

Which one is a better bargain? Personally like the Statue of Zeus better since the cavalry are pretty useful, but then again you need ivory to build it. The Knights Templar is easy to build, but when you get to the point where Crusaders are just annoying, you just want to research steam engine.

 

[Sashie VII]

Statue of Zeus is good if you can get it, Horsemen that hits as hard as a sword with additional hitpoint is very useful. Useful up to the point you get knights.

Knights Templar OTOH, isn't really worth it IMHO. Crusaders are 5.3.1, strongest attackers till cavalry show up. But they're slow. Even if I were playing in total warmongering mode, I'd go with knights.

 

[Norton II]

SoZ, hands down. ACs are as good as Gallic swordsmen (better, in fact, thanks to the extra hit point) but don't require iron or 40 shields. Crusaders aren't much better than maces, aren't really any better if you have plenty of cats/trebs and some pikes, and in any case you might want to skip chivalry entirely and just head straight for MT and cavalry. Once you've got cavs, crusaders are useless.

 

[Sashie VII]

Oh, and SoZ is 200 shields vs 300 for Knights Templar

 

[Aabraxan]

SoZ without a doubt. It's not hard to dominate the AA if you get the SoZ built early enough.

Edit: Not hard at the level I play at . . .

 

[AznWarlord]

you might want to skip chivalry entirely and just head straight for MT and cavalry.

Actually I don't really like the idea of not having knights to upgrade to cavalry.

 

[Aabraxan]

I skip chivalry and beeline MT with some regularity.

 

[Desertsnow]

Advantages of Statue of Zeus:

• Early availability, producing powerful units good for early war
• Horse-mounted units that don't require Horses or the Horse-riding tech

Disadvantage of Statue of Zeus:

• Requires a resource (specifically, ivory) connected

Advantages of Knights Templar:

• 5/3/1 units, devastating on the offensive, and equivalent to Pikes for defense
• Relatively cheap to build; a switch from Hanging Gardens or Sun Tzu's often results in single digit number of turns to completion

Disadvantage of Knights Templar:

• Comes at approximately the same time as other useful military Wonders--decisions, decisions!

Personally I like both, and to have both means having a potentially massive military advantage, but given a choice, I lean slightly toward SoZ; I have fast units with 3 attack strength in case I need to push my frontier in the early game with 'pointy-stick' settlers.

 

[Norton II]

Actually I don't really like the idea of not having knights to upgrade to cavalry.

You can often trade for chivlary along the way; also, cavs only cost 10 shields more than knights.

 

[Aceman101]

I like soz. I don't really like those slow crusaders.

 

[WaterDragoon]

the problem with trrading for chivalry is that the AI will hardly ever research chivalry. There are not to many non required techs that the A>I does research.

 

[Delphi456]

I skip chivalry and beeline MT with some regularity.

I got this tip from Norton II way back when I was a Monarch level player. It's one of the top 10 tips I've ever gotten. IMO, building knights is as foolish as building temples.

 

[Sashie VII]

building knights is as foolish as building temples.

Hey, I build temples. After the wars.

But Knights are not cost-effective to build from scratch, I agree.

 

[WackenOpenAir]

Knights definately are cost effective when you build them.

It just happens to be a lot more cost effective to build horses, conquer Leo's and upgrade those horses.

If however you could not upgrade horses, knights would often be the best thing to build.

 

[Sashie VII]

It just happens to be a lot more cost effective to build horses, conquer Leo's and upgrade those horses.

Just what I was thinking of with the post.

Knights are good, but then when my cities are producing them at 5,6 turns apiece my patience grow thin fast. I want war now!

I usually don't connect iron immediately for the purpose of horsemen->knights upgrading later on

 

[gmaharriet]

I skip chivalry and beeline MT with some regularity.

So do I unless my UU requires it...riders, samurais.

 

[Aceman101]

This is the first time I heard someone say knights aren't worth it. IMO knights are expensive but they're worth it. Cav's are still almost a full era away. By that time you could have 30 knights. And if you've got enough gold, you could upgrade them to cav's. Just like I upgraded 20 trebuchet's to cannons because cannon's cause craters . So all you need is some gold and fast producing cities.

 

[madviking]

I usually play with a cav UU civ (Ottos, Rusks, etc.) and skip chivalry.

Back on topic...

SoZ if I can get ivory.

 

[Aabraxan]

So do I unless my UU requires it...riders, samurais.

Absolutely. In fact, if I research chivalry at all, it's usually for this very reason.

 

[Capt Cook]

Advantages of Statue of Zeus:

• Early availability, producing powerful units good for early war
• Horse-mounted units that don't require Horses or the Horse-riding tech

Disadvantage of Statue of Zeus:

• Requires a resource (specifically, ivory) connected

Advantages of Knights Templar:

• 5/3/1 units, devastating on the offensive, and equivalent to Pikes for defense
• Relatively cheap to build; a switch from Hanging Gardens or Sun Tzu's often results in single digit number of turns to completion

Disadvantage of Knights Templar:

• Comes at approximately the same time as other useful military Wonders--decisions, decisions!

Personally I like both, and to have both means having a potentially massive military advantage, but given a choice, I lean slightly toward SoZ; I have fast units with 3 attack strength in case I need to push my frontier in the early game with 'pointy-stick' settlers.

One thing you forgot to mention is that Crusaders have the ability to build Fortresses.
This can come in very handy when you need to hold certain areas while waiting for reinforcements. It also keeps your workers safe from attack on the front lines.
I keep them around for quite some time, they work really well for fortifying a stack of troops, especially wounded ones in no-mans-land!