If you are taking a city, it doesn't matter what speed they are.
If you're using your chariot to capture workers, pillage the land, capture cities with only a couple of defenders, it is.
If you are taking a city, it doesn't matter what speed they are.
If you're using your chariot to capture workers, pillage the land, capture cities with only a couple of defenders, it is.
True, but what if you only have horses but lack copper and iron? Those chariots are the only things you can use in that case (ignoring UU's which don't need resource like jaguars).
The Early Rush:
A Civilization IV Strategy Guide to Conquering your Nearest Neighbour for Fun and Profit before the BCs become the ADs
Version 1.0 - September 19, 2007
Thanks for that! I haven't done a lot of Quechua rushes, but I know some players swear by them.The worst scenario I have come up against is Mansa Musa. I would write him off as being practically impossible to Quechua rush with success, so turn your attention elsewhere. In a city with 20% defence and no terrain bonus it takes roughly 7 Quechua's : 1 Skirmisher to take a city. So even if you manage to build all the Quechua's you need and take the city you will probably find yourself in a severely crippled position that leads to you getting anhialated quite soon after. There may be other UU that I haven't come up against that give a similair scenario.
It depends on how many civs are around. A lot of players play huge maps but leave the number of civs low because they like room to spread out. Well, right away, your purpose in playing the map that way is contrary to the early rush. However, if you load up a huge map with civs (which is another way many players like to play), then an early rush is certainly viable, even called for. 2 or 3 civs can and will expand more quickly than 1, so if you don't rush at least one of them you could find yourself with no room to peacefully expand very quickly.Would a larger map size be a significant not to do the early rush? Like a Huge map?
2) If your capital has a food resource, I think it's usually best to get the tech to improve it (Ag, AH, Fishing) before going to BW. Get your best tiles under cultivation as soon as possible. The added growth will more than pay for itself.
Well, you're right... I missed that you've already specified in the guide that it can be done with any leader....
I'm very sorry![]()
VoU suggested something along those lines as well. I'll be adding a "When NOT to Rush" section to the first revised version of the guide.![]()
![]()
![]()
.... and what about my second observation?
In Beyond the Sword I would say the other Civ that would present a formidable UU obstacle to the Quechua rush, besides Mansa, would be Hammurabi. His Bowmen replace Archers and have a +50% bonus versus melee units, which includes Quechuas, of course. Heck, Bowmen fortified in a city on a hill are painful even for Praetorians. They are, however, more vulnerable to Chariots than Skirmishers are. Hint, hint.
Yes, I had a look through the BtS UU's and the Babylonian Bowmen definitely appear to be the other early opponent that you don't want to use a Quechua rush on.