Tactics for dealing with a human opponent

Jake

Chieftain
Joined
Dec 27, 2000
Messages
7
Location
Minneapolis, MN USA
In the last year or so I've played two games with one friend and started another recently. Playing once or twice a week for a few hours at a time, each game lasted about six months. It's fun because you can make new sorts of treaties. We banned nukes and using spies to ruin city improvements / production. In the second one we had no AI opponents and banned Wonders of the World (to make it even) except for obsolete ones. (hey, they look good on the top 5 cities list).
My opponent liked to defend with a scorched earth policy, leaving no forts or defensive terrain within one square of his cities. I like to leave units two deep in forts all over.
We use bombers to protect stacks of units in forts or battleships on the ocean. That way the other person has to have fighters just to attack. I'll stack a couple battleships, aegis cruisers and a bomber on top of a transport on the ocean even though there's no fortress - it still takes 10-20 fighters to kill a stack like that, and you break even. If your opponent doesn't have enough fighters the wounded can retreat and opperate at quite a profit.

I've been using the pacific ocean strategy the allies used during WWII. I go after my opponents small islands and seemingly unimportant isolated cities, they're usually lightly defended.

Last game we both built highways and railroads almost the whole way around both poles. I used this highway to land darn near every unit I could build each turn in unpredictable places. My opponent prefers to fight on one or two fronts, I like attacking and defending lots of places at once.

What strategies do you use on your human opponents?
 
Hit em fast, Hit em hard.
thats all I can say!

------------------
The people in my cool book
1.Thunderfall
2.Stellar
3.SunTzu
4.Blitz
5.Håkan
6.Warlord56
7.scorch
8.vladmir_illych_lenin
 
Hey Jake would you mind emailing me the whole WW2 Pacific Strategy i know what it is but it would be a good addition to the War Academy

------------------
A.K.A Gregorius_Luxius
http://www.civfanatics.com Staff and forum moderator

<IMG SRC="http://www.homestead.com/house_of_lux/files/suntzu1.gif" border=0>
 
Originally posted by Jake:
I've been using the pacific ocean strategy the allies used during WWII. I go after my opponents small islands and seemingly unimportant isolated cities, they're usually lightly defended.

What strategies do you use on your human opponents?[/B]

I agree with Jake. An opponent's small island can be extremely important in his strategy. Taking it over can be a hard blow to him. and can help you a lot.
goodwork.gif


 
My favorite tactic against human players in all games is to have them drink more alcohol than I do.

------------------
Gauis Mucius Scaevola Sinistra
Pontificator Pedanticus
Older, richer, and wiser than you.
 
When playing against human players i try my very best at getting Leo's Workshop. That way the archers and stuff i built at the start gets upgraded to rifleman at the end. It saves alot of time updating your troops and gives a nice advantage
 
Originally posted by Cunobelin Of Hippo:
Yeah, but then they lose their veteran status, which sucks.


Yeah, but wouldn't Sun Tzu's Academy take care of that problem?

------------------
"I would not mind you in my head" said Lews Therin, "if you were not so clearly mad."
 
It's all about head games and intimidation. Tactics that don't work against the computer. Play yourself up at every chance and say anything that will waver your opponents confidence. If you're playing with an intelligent opponent, one who takes calculated risks, something like that might throw them off enough so you might soon be able to live up to what you've just told them.

Of course, if you're so far ahead of your opponent, such tactics are not necessary.

Oh, another hint: if you're militaristic and conquest is your only goal, don't worry about your reputation and being honorable just to keep your human opponent happy. Use any means necessary to win a war (but don't cheat).

------------------
Have you ever thought about your soul and can it be saved?
Or perhaps you think that when you're dead you just stay in your grave.


[This message has been edited by drake (edited January 10, 2001).]
 
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Cunobelin Of Hippo:
Yeah, but then they lose their veteran status, which sucks.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by LordOfTheMorning:
Yeah, but wouldn't Sun Tzu's Academy take care of that problem?

SunTzu's Academy only gives veteran status to newly made units and units that have fought a battle and won. Since your Veteran Archer changed into a Rifleman, he becomes a completely different unit and looses his Veteran status.

------------------
<FONT face="tahoma">
<IMG SRC="http://24.88.239.81/theworld/icon18.gif" border=0>-PaleHorse76-<IMG SRC="http://24.88.239.81/theworld/icon18.gif" border=0>
All rights reserved, all wrongs avenged.
</FONT f>

[This message has been edited by PaleHorse76 (edited January 10, 2001).]
 
Has anyone calculated the net return on investment for upgraded units from Leonardo's Workshop?
Huh?
confused.gif


I mean ...

LEO'S BENEFIT:
- Instantly upgraded units with more attack/defense/firepower/whatever than your former units, or the enemy's (assuming you got the upgraded tech first).

- Upgraded units worth more shields, so when disbanded could better help create a new identical veteran unit (in city w/ Barracks or w/ SunTzu, whatever). What else were you going to do with the old units? [I'm usually playing Dem gov't so I keep # units low, replacing one for one. Without Leo, I get new tech and disband old unit for LESS shields.]

LEO'S DRAWBACKS:
- Older, less powerful unit loses veteran status.

So how much diff is there between and veteran unit A and a non-veteran unit B? And if you're facing another veteran A and you step into my transmogrifier and come out a non-veteran B, are you still more powerful, or more vulnerable?

Then factor in the shield worth of the unit. Does it come out to be of little overall benefit for cost of Leo, or a lot? Anyone know or have a sense?

Spiff
scan.gif
 
Originally posted by SpacemanSpiff:
Has anyone calculated the net return on investment for upgraded units from Leonardo's Workshop?
Huh? <IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/confused.gif" border=0>

I mean ...

LEO'S BENEFIT:
- Instantly upgraded units with more attack/defense/firepower/whatever than your former units, or the enemy's (assuming you got the upgraded tech first).

- Upgraded units worth more shields, so when disbanded could better help create a new identical veteran unit (in city w/ Barracks or w/ SunTzu, whatever). What else were you going to do with the old units? [I'm usually playing Dem gov't so I keep # units low, replacing one for one. Without Leo, I get new tech and disband old unit for LESS shields.]

LEO'S DRAWBACKS:
- Older, less powerful unit loses veteran status.

So how much diff is there between and veteran unit A and a non-veteran unit B? And if you're facing another veteran A and you step into my transmogrifier and come out a non-veteran B, are you still more powerful, or more vulnerable?

Then factor in the shield worth of the unit. Does it come out to be of little overall benefit for cost of Leo, or a lot? Anyone know or have a sense?

Spiff <IMG SRC="http://forums.civfanatics.com/ubb/scan.gif" border=0>


basically what you saying is
is a non veteran musketeer better than a verteran archer?
is a non veteran rifleman better than a veteran musketeer?

But more importantly for conquest
is a non verteran calvary better than a veteran dragoon?



------------------
I am disrespectful to Dirt! Can you not see that I am serious?
 
Back
Top Bottom