J-man
Deity
Correct if I'm wrong, but can't you just only airlift one unit in a city?
The most important tech: Flight
- Thread starter The Snug
- Start date
Correct if I'm wrong, but can't you just only airlift one unit in a city?
If the destination city possesses an airport, you can airlift multiple units into it. I've never actually maxed out the limit, but I believe it's 10 units. Should do a WB test, but my pc is too slow.
thadian
Kami of Awakened Dreamers
i played non-stop from Civ CTP then Civ3 (which i can beat on sid with my eyes closed) and when i first did 4, i had to worldbuilder myself unfair advantages, or re-located starts. Then about 3 months after BTS came out, i moved and lost my play disc, so i just uninstalled it altogether.
About a month ago, i found my disc and re-installed vanilla and BTS and decided to NEVER use worldbuilder again unless it is to study the AI (which i only do after the game ends)
About a month ago, i found my disc and re-installed vanilla and BTS and decided to NEVER use worldbuilder again unless it is to study the AI (which i only do after the game ends)
You don't need to like early rushes nor does it make you a bad player.thadian said:
In some situations (other leaders, high difficulty) it is even nearly impossible. Several players believe warfare before the renaissance era on deity is strictly not adviseable.
study the AI? What, like learn strategy or tactics from them
lol. I suppose that he means that to study your enemy is to know your enemy. And that if you know your enemy, if you know his mannerisms and his habits, then you will know how to kill him.
thadian
Kami of Awakened Dreamers
i am also referring to a turn-by turn analasys of WHY they make the play mistakes they do, what types of pawn movements are better than others (lately marines are my favorite pawns) and what i can do that will cause the AI to make a misplay. (like letting me choke them instead of using backup forces to follow the workers).
I also study the AI relations with each other, how the AI fights other AI in wars, what methods they use and what methods they are not so good at. I also study what causes them to behave how they do. sometimes i have ZERO ARMY and never get attacked even with less than optimal diplomacy. other times, i get DOW'd when im fairly high in the power rankings.
Other times, i see an AI war and one AI capitulates without a single battle of any kind.
I like to study these things, learning WHY they do what they do, and what causes them to respond differently.
I also study the AI relations with each other, how the AI fights other AI in wars, what methods they use and what methods they are not so good at. I also study what causes them to behave how they do. sometimes i have ZERO ARMY and never get attacked even with less than optimal diplomacy. other times, i get DOW'd when im fairly high in the power rankings.
Other times, i see an AI war and one AI capitulates without a single battle of any kind.
I like to study these things, learning WHY they do what they do, and what causes them to respond differently.
thadian
Kami of Awakened Dreamers
it was once said by a good friend of mine who plays Magic: The Gathering with me. I think it also applies to Civ on board control, as it did to Axis and Allies.
"When making a threat, and controlling your opponents responses the metagame has one fact always present: There is no such thing as a bad threat, only a bad answer. Therefore, i want to be the one asking the questions, so i can respond to your answers and over the course of time, establish a control-position that locks you down so that your time wasted in looking for answers equals my time spent looking for more questions to ask and more ways to ask them."
Therefore, i am studying how the AI responds, what questions it asks me (in terms of threats) - how i need to respond, and how i can turn their threats into their own problems to control how they move, and what units they build so that i can always make the right play and force mistakes on my opponent.
"When making a threat, and controlling your opponents responses the metagame has one fact always present: There is no such thing as a bad threat, only a bad answer. Therefore, i want to be the one asking the questions, so i can respond to your answers and over the course of time, establish a control-position that locks you down so that your time wasted in looking for answers equals my time spent looking for more questions to ask and more ways to ask them."
Therefore, i am studying how the AI responds, what questions it asks me (in terms of threats) - how i need to respond, and how i can turn their threats into their own problems to control how they move, and what units they build so that i can always make the right play and force mistakes on my opponent.
Thanks for the detailed answer.
I don't think I'd enjoy that type of game...but that's personal preference, not a value judgement.
thadian
Kami of Awakened Dreamers
thank you for your feedback 
It has a lot of frustrating moments, but the fun for me comes from the tensions of barely clinging on and being in 5th place out of 11, and all of a sudden... BOOM.
It is a different way to play, thats for sure - i have tried other methods but none of them do for me what flight does, when i use my builder strategy. I would like to experiment with other means of flight abuse and compare it to abuse of other things. Recently there was a thread about Izzy and her citadel being the worst UB because of it's short lifespan and not being able to get economics. Recently, i took some advice to keep it alive longer and it was incredible. i didn't realize Machine Guns were Siege, and now i am working on breaking the artillery and mobile artillery with it, but i don't know how that will fare.
As i am learning how to use different tech paths, and how to use different leads to actually stay ahead - the more important i find flight to be, if for nothing else, being able to airdrop spies to keep my opponents behind.
Too bad spies don't gain EXP! (If they do, i am unaware of it)
It has a lot of frustrating moments, but the fun for me comes from the tensions of barely clinging on and being in 5th place out of 11, and all of a sudden... BOOM.
It is a different way to play, thats for sure - i have tried other methods but none of them do for me what flight does, when i use my builder strategy. I would like to experiment with other means of flight abuse and compare it to abuse of other things. Recently there was a thread about Izzy and her citadel being the worst UB because of it's short lifespan and not being able to get economics. Recently, i took some advice to keep it alive longer and it was incredible. i didn't realize Machine Guns were Siege, and now i am working on breaking the artillery and mobile artillery with it, but i don't know how that will fare.
As i am learning how to use different tech paths, and how to use different leads to actually stay ahead - the more important i find flight to be, if for nothing else, being able to airdrop spies to keep my opponents behind.
Too bad spies don't gain EXP! (If they do, i am unaware of it)
I'm having a hard time with this one. The pro-flight camp seem to be citing a pacifistic nature... until flight rolls around? Build, Build, Build, Build, Build... Abandon pacifism! Air strike! Invade! Air lift! All in the name of "I don't believe in pre-flight wars." I'm a pacifist too, until I have 6 Quechuas built, or 6 War Chariots, or 6 Immortals, or 6 Praetorians, or 6...
thadian
Kami of Awakened Dreamers
Thats your preference, Gwynnja. I hate early-rushes. i like the thrill of the prolonged game followed by the suspense of survival and seeing the planes do their trick. I like to how you say... "Win when i choose to", and flight gives me this option. it also allows the most flexible espionage ever, and for aggro players who like to wait for the industrial/modern era it is wonderful to tell someone to close borders with your impending victim and airlift in your army a few turns before the naval strike so they empty the troops they WOULD counter a navy strike with to deal with the force you flown in.
I do not like early wars, i think more interesting things happen later on. By the same measure, i can say anyone who disagrees mostly likes the early rush or siege rush. how about flying siege units into their territory to keep your navy on your own shores?
I am a pacifist who hates cultural and space-race victories. Odd, huh? I like to fight when i know i have 0 chance to lose, and flight does this for me. I could change positions and say that Rifling is better because it can end the game. Can it end a game if you have yet to see a single war that involves your own offensive? I guess i should reword myself.
"I am a defensive-control player who likes to win on my own terms, so i use early pacifism to achieve victory when the AI is hopeless to respond. I begin war-mongering only when i have either a superior navy tech lead, or flight unless i have an aggressive neighbor i am forced to subdue. To this, i accept that my stance has a weakness that i only fight when i feel that i can not lose - i choose only battles i can win. It is this technique that causes me to be successful."
I do not like early wars, i think more interesting things happen later on. By the same measure, i can say anyone who disagrees mostly likes the early rush or siege rush. how about flying siege units into their territory to keep your navy on your own shores?
I am a pacifist who hates cultural and space-race victories. Odd, huh? I like to fight when i know i have 0 chance to lose, and flight does this for me. I could change positions and say that Rifling is better because it can end the game. Can it end a game if you have yet to see a single war that involves your own offensive? I guess i should reword myself.
"I am a defensive-control player who likes to win on my own terms, so i use early pacifism to achieve victory when the AI is hopeless to respond. I begin war-mongering only when i have either a superior navy tech lead, or flight unless i have an aggressive neighbor i am forced to subdue. To this, i accept that my stance has a weakness that i only fight when i feel that i can not lose - i choose only battles i can win. It is this technique that causes me to be successful."
The only thing that strikes me about the 'flight crew' is that it must be a bit boring. If you only use this strategy, though its a challange and every game is different to some degree, have you mastered the game or just a single route through it. Ages ago someone on here said many people can move up to higher levels with a well practiced strategy and a leader to suite but how good are they actually if they can't win diplo or with an unfamiliar leader, or simply without using the same old tricks.
we can all get a bit stuck iinto what works, especially if it works on a new hard level, but isn't it more fun to then try something different. I am on the Wonder economy now from the rifling beeline and don't often early rush like I always used to. I am playing lots of different leaders on Monarch in the hope such a rounded eduction will serve me well if I move up again, arn't these the players who can win more consitently as if the plan goes astray they know just what to do..
isn't such variability also just more fun...
we can all get a bit stuck iinto what works, especially if it works on a new hard level, but isn't it more fun to then try something different. I am on the Wonder economy now from the rifling beeline and don't often early rush like I always used to. I am playing lots of different leaders on Monarch in the hope such a rounded eduction will serve me well if I move up again, arn't these the players who can win more consitently as if the plan goes astray they know just what to do..
isn't such variability also just more fun...
lol. Just bcz I say that Flight is the strongest, most unbalancing tech, doesn't mean I don't know how to use rifles or Infantry or Axemen. Just bcz I don't like early rushes doesn't mean that I haven't been pulled into an early war that required an early axe rush. At one point or another, I've used all of the strategies advocated here, it's simply that my experience has shown Flight to be the strongest of them. 6 months ago, I believed rifles to be the most unbalancing unit, but now my experience has shown otherwise.
There are many "jumps" in combat that can lead to overwhelming and effective victory, but flight is the greatest of those jumps.
Wolfshanze
CFC Historian
I fully agree with sirsnuggles in this thread. 
That's why space race is stupid.
Rusty Edge
Deity
Heh I'd like to be pulled in an early war that required an axe rush
Usually axe rushes are planned and executed by the player.
Usually axe rushes are executed against me by the barbs
thadian
Kami of Awakened Dreamers
Your exactly right, but im not so linear. I am still mastering the flight path, and i am slowly learning others. i already knew the early-rushes - i was introduced to it the hard way in MP when i was going for cultural victories (no im not the guy in that war guide), but i was stuck using only that. Then i learned one day what your talking about - i finally mastered the early rush and my games were spent dredging in misery. Finally, i decided "to hell with it, i am a peacemongering builder who only wants war on my terms" and i have been excited in each game, to work a different method of my flight plans. i have done it in many different ways and sometimes i am unable to relish in its exclusivity because some AI will research it along with me.
I really enjoy trying to create new strategies, i have also been working on a mesh of religion for the early economy, and founding them all except for divine right which i never actually research, i have a bumpy road but the bumps are funner than the wins sometimes.
Similar threads
