The Case Against Using Scouts

[TW_Honorius]

I see the benefits of building scouts first:

ruins
city states
barb camps
natural wonders
other civs
terrain

but I do not think a Scout is worth building to achieve these. Ruins go pretty fast, your starting warrior can find 2-3 before there all gone, so why waste a scout to find 1 ruin maybe none?

City States bring 30 gold if your the first, 15 if not, so why rush to find them when you may only get 1 to 2 anyways with your starting warrior?

barb camps: losing a scout to a barb is painful, so why risk it?

natural wonders: sure they bring happiness, but you would need open borders to find them all in game, so why waste the 50 gold from open borders to increase happiness.

other civs: yes, we know all the ai is dumb and you can defend pretty easily from an early war, but the warrior can find all nearby civs before the scout has to do much.

terrain: by the time you get your scout out, your warrior has been able to achieve lots of map searching that the scout has to go a long ways to see new land. plus you aint going to settle a second city anytime soon so your warrior can search enough land to find a good second city.

Can people post stories on why the almighty scout plays an important role in the early game compared to the warrior versus other production uses (worker, monument, etc)

 

[snarzberry]

My two cents...

Early scout is so good that I almost always open with 2, if I'm playing pangaea I'll open with 2 scouts 100% of the time.

The most compelling reason to build scouts early is one not listed by you and that is understanding the big picture of the game world and where you fit in it. This information is what drives your grand strategy and if you haven't scouted sufficiently then you don't have it and are more likely to make mistakes in overall planning.

At the end of games you've lost you might be searching for reasons why, look to early scouting as a prime suspect. You might find yourself saying 'if only I'd have known x,y or z I'd have chosen to take this path, or that, instead'. Scouting contributes on the macro level, not just those other strong bonuses like science, culture, gold from various sources.

And, anecdotally, I personally noticed an increase in winning games percentage when I switched from building one scout to two. Some difficulty levels you are less required to be thinking of the big picture from the outset, so perhaps it wouldn't make as big of a difference depending on difficulty level. On deity continents/pangaea, ruins on, scout first is mandatory. Second scout, optional.

 

[woodshadows]

I agree entirely. I think certain strategies gain popularity on these forums amongst players and they don't necessarily display optimal advantages over less popular strategies. I have found building a scout never provides any advantage over building a second warrior, linking up first and second warriors and taking out barbs is very useful early on and provides you with the beginnings of a veteran army that can be upgraded later to swords. I used to do a monument open but since you can take a second policy in tradition which provides free monument in first four cities I just go for that now instead. I also avoid an open of worker because generally I might only have one tech which can provide big advantages by the time the worker comes online, plus without that second warrior with the first warrior preemptively assaulting barb camps my capital is open to barbs prowling around, possibly stealing my worker, or forcing it to hole up in the city.

 

[woodshadows]

At the end of games you've lost you might be searching for reasons why, look to early scouting as a prime suspect. You might find yourself saying 'if only I'd have known x,y or z I'd have chosen to take this path, or that, instead'. Scouting contributes on the macro level, not just those other strong bonuses like science, culture, gold from various

I agree that having a knowledge of the layout of the world is very important, but gathering it super early isn't really necessary, not at the price of other options at least. Instead of two scouts why not two archers (I know not completely comparable build times, but not too different either)? Add one more archer and a warrior and you can take out a capital. A bit later in the game after some preliminary things have been built then you can afford to quickbuild a scout and get all the information you need on your neighbours.

 

[ColinTH]

On lower levels they are a must build, but on Deity I tend to agree with most of your points.

1 - Scout movement over rough terain.
2 - Cheaper to build/buy.
3 - They still work as a City garrison when some people think they are useless.
4 - You might be lucky enough to get an archer upgrade.
5 - Working in pairs with honor they can take out alot of barb camps.

 

[snarzberry]

The reason that you want to get that info as early is possible is because on high levels it's not advisable to dither around just developing your civ ho hum, so to speak, and then reaching about turn 75 and begin to think about what you're going to try to achieve in this game. All of your early builds and early decisions, the effects of which snowball over time, should be aimed at certain short, mid and long term goals which are driven by the information that your scouts give you.

The benefit of a culture hut, bonus gold and the science bonus from meeting other civs are also more powerful the earlier you receive them.

And I've not taken any enemy capitals with 2 archers and a warrior lately...

 

[woodshadows]

What i meant was, two archers in place of two scouts, add in another archer and a warrior, include in this your initial warrior, and you can "easily" take out a capital or city state.

Also, what advantage to my 'long game' does it provide me to know that Alexander has some nice hills near his capital on the other side of a big continent? As for my immediate neighbours, who generally are never very far from me, I can get to their borders with my initial warrior(s), who will generally serve as my initial invasion force, nicely promoted through barb busting. When I take my neighbours cities then I'll gather lots of information about their territory, including having control over what is built on that territory.

Leave scouting for the birds, if you want land build arms.

 

[Smokeybear]

The benefit of a culture hut, bonus gold and the science bonus from meeting other civs are also more powerful the earlier you receive them.

Pardon my noobiness, but what is this science bonus you receive, just from encountering other civ's representatives? Is it some kind of instant bonus that I wasn't aware of, or are you just referring to the eventual ability to have RA's with them?

 

[vexing]

known techs cost slightly less beakers to complete. you have to have met the civ that knows the tech for this to work.

 

[donlep]

i believe you get a discount on techs, for each civ you find that already have that tech.
on deity the AI starts with 4 techs, so every one you meet before researching those, will definatly give a discount

 

[Strategist83]

I don't even know why this is still being discussed. Scouts only cost 25 hammers which is considerably less than anything else. That fact comes in addition to the wide range of benefits scouting gives you.

 

[The Pilgrim]

I don't even know why this is still being discussed. Scouts only cost 25 hammers which is considerably less than anything else. That fact comes in addition to the wide range of benefits scouting gives you.

Me neither. It's the topic of the day, I guess.

 

[Silverfuturist]

What i meant was, two archers in place of two scouts, add in another archer and a warrior, include in this your initial warrior, and you can "easily" take out a capital or city state.

Also, what advantage to my 'long game' does it provide me to know that Alexander has some nice hills near his capital on the other side of a big continent? As for my immediate neighbours, who generally are never very far from me, I can get to their borders with my initial warrior(s), who will generally serve as my initial invasion force, nicely promoted through barb busting. When I take my neighbours cities then I'll gather lots of information about their territory, including having control over what is built on that territory.

Leave scouting for the birds, if you want land build arms.

You are bringing up good questions for people who are trying to learn. But they should be aware of what level the poster is at... please tell us what level you play on, what % you beat it, and how long your games last.

Snarzberry (sp?), for example, smashes every level of the game, and when I found out he was a Deity-destroyer I read all of his posts (and a crew of others) before I became a Deity-crusher myself. Dave McGraw, who wins game-of-the-month often by large margins, talks about opening with two scouts.

I play primary multi-player; in multiplayer the players who don't build scouts are pretty much the first ones to get taken out.

But anecdotal evidence is not strong enough, if you have points that sound reasonable they should be addressed.

 

[vexing]

I don't even know why this is still being discussed.

cognitive disequilibrium.

 

[woodshadows]

You are bringing up good questions for people who are trying to learn. But they should be aware of what level the poster is at... please tell us what level you play on, what % you beat it, and how long your games last.

I play about 80% of the time Emperor 20% Immortal. I haven't and won't be trying Deity. So, with this in mind all of my ideas/opinions are meant more for Emperor or Immortal level, I don't claim to know any specialised strategies or what works best for Deity.

I have never lost a game since moving up from King, which is the level on which I learned all the game dynamics and made a lot of early mistakes when I first got the game, leading to some disasters I haven't experienced on Emperor or Immortal. How long my games last really depends on map type and victory type I'm aiming for so there is large variance there and I'm not sure how informative it would be to try to discuss.

I am a very aggressive player however and use war to gain advantages, so someone who is not as interested in early wars may not benefit as much from an initial warrior build as much as a scout.. altho even this I would hypothesise would be more useful, having a warrior to bolster your soldier demographic to avoid early rushes from more aggressive neighbours. I really don't understand people building two scouts tho, just how much scouting do you want to do? I'll build scouts later on when I've established myself a bit and can afford the wasted hammers/build time.

 

[Tabarnak]

I play about 80% of the time Emperor 20% Immortal. I haven't and won't be trying Deity. So, with this in mind all of my ideas/opinions are meant more for Emperor or Immortal level, I don't claim to know any specialised strategies or what works best for Deity.

Think about it : If you think that deity doesn't need an early scout because almost all ruins will be found before, do you think an early scout can be useful at lower levels? More you drop a level, more the scout is strong. Especially for extreme early selling borders + cs found focused strategies like for HoF and GOTM games. He has higher chance of survival and you can go through land before their culture block most parts.

That's why 2 scouts is better for emp+ and/or raging barbs enabled. You really want at least a scout upgrade to an archer or simply have higher chances of survival in this whole jungle for more opportunities.

 

[woodshadows]

Think about it : If you think that deity doesn't need an early scout because almost all ruins will be found before, do you think an early scout can be useful at lower levels? More you drop a level, more the scout is strong. Especially for extreme early selling borders + cs found focused strategies like for HoF and GOTM games. He has higher chance of survival and you can go through land before their culture block most parts.

That's why 2 scouts is better for emp+ and/or raging barbs enabled. You really want at least a scout upgrade to an archer or simply have higher chances of survival in this whole jungle for more opportunities.

As I said, I make no claims for Deity, I have't/don't/won't play it. For Emperor/Immortal I find the Ai has multiple scouts which quickly gather any ruins that aren't in my close proximity, meaning by the time I get a scout I won't be finding any ruins that my warrior hasn't already found, lying close enough in my proximity that the AI hasn't gotten to already.

I think on lower levels it's possible a scout could be more useful, you could potentially get to more ruins than a warrior could and before the AI can. How low do you have to go in difficulty for this to be the case? I don't know.

 

[TW_Honorius]

the reason why i started this thread is because the poll had half of the people build a sout and the other half something else. The reasons for building a scout do not seem that advantageous to me versus something else. Now that I am reading a scout opening depends on what diff u play on, which is hardly discussed, so finding out why people swear that a scout is the best opening move will help me understand why its so important to build.

 

[Optional]

I find scouts also handy in melee, as I already posted in that other thread. Move + fortify to invite a warrior attack or to frustrate their movement. This is when faced with an early war and you call in all the troops you can find.
Because a scout ignores terrain, it can make a move + fortify move when no other unit would be able to. Protecting a worker, giving cover to an archer, a scout can do it.
What the scout also has, and other land units not, is the vision upgrade. Also this can be handy in war. Have a scout with vision hovering on the side of the battlefield can give you a good view behind the frontline of your enemy. This makes it much easier to decide whether a warrior can safely attack a hurt opponent or should just hold ground.

The scout's vision upgrade can also help determine if there's more land out there beyond the coastal borders of your continent.

This is just adding to what other players already said. For some things I find another unit just as good.

For pure scouting I'm happy with a warrior as well, most of the time at least, plus a warrior has a bit more ease in taking out a barb camp with an already hurt barb defender. It's just that a scout is much easier to get out there at 25 hammers.

I normally only build one scout, as I easily seem to get into unit support problems, but for 25 hammers it has to be one of the most cost effective builds in the entire game.

 

[carbontaxes]

100% to OP. If you're going to waste the time building a scout, you may as well build build anything else under the sun.