@ Whitefire:
I played with your Bab Archer strategy once, and decided to leave Babylon to the AI. I was too tempted to grab a huge chunk of land too quickly.
@Spearthrower:
Regarding the Bab Archer, I'd like to suggest that they act like a protective civ in terms of their UU as per vanilla civ 4. Meaning, ok, give them the +1 str, but rather than the +15 vs. cities, give them the city garrison and drill 1 promo. This makes them a strong city defender, but also a potential conquest unit, but just less effective then as built now. Is this doable?
Regarding England and Stonehenge:
I agree, but only in the context of the Huge Med map scenario. (I think that's the instance you were discussing anyway.)
Personally, it's hard for me to consider playing this mod outside of the pre-made maps. I never get a random game that approaches the fun factor associated with the pre-made maps.
Concerning BtS:
I agree with doing away with the Great Wall when this moves to BtS. However, I would love to keep the espionage and corporate elements (if possible-Rome, Greece, and the Phonecians all used some early form of corporations in managing their economic empires...and we all know that spies and assassins were running around in the classical era.)
Concerning the AI:
On Monarch level, the AI does indeed rush for Spearmen for city defense in my games. I have even seen some civs go for Chariots as an active defense approach. I believe that some civs tend to make better choices than other civs, regarding their military. Phonecia, for example is like 9/10 times likely to play itself like a builder, and hence usually is slow going on defensive units. All that keeps me from taking them out early is the impact to my economy. Hittites love their chariots, but on the flip side, they don't put spearmen in their stacks to protect them. Greece seems to act appropriately.
I wonder if the AI isn't too focused on their hero unit? I also wonder whether BtS will fix some of the above issues.
for Flax.
